Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Rekonstruktive Forschungsmethoden in der deutschen Volkswirtschaftslehre: Eine explorative Erhebung zugrunde liegender Repräsentationsmuster

Contents:

Author Info

  • Lenger, Alexander
  • Kruse, Jan
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Die Zweckmäßigkeit qualitativer bzw. rekonstruktiver Forschungsmethoden ist in sozialwissenschaftlichen Fächern seit langem anerkannt, entsprechend wird diese Methodik in der Forschungspraxis umfassend eingesetzt. Im wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Feld hingegen spielen qualitative Methoden, wie z. B. leitfadengestützte Interviews oder teilnehmende Beobachtungen, praktisch keine Rolle. Vor dem Hintergrund, dass eine Mehrzahl deutscher Ökonomen Interesse und Kenntnisse in empirischen Forschungsmethoden für sehr wichtig halten, sollte es umso mehr überraschen, dass qualitative bzw. rekonstruktive Forschungsmethoden in wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Publikationen so gut wie keine Verwendung finden. Um uns diesem Phänomen auf empirische Weise anzunähern, haben wir eine qualitative Befragung unter deutschsprachigen Ökonomen durchgeführt, um mehr über den Stellenwert und die Repräsentationsmuster qualitativer Forschungsmethoden herauszufinden. Ursache für die systematische Ablehnung des qualitativen Forschungsparadigmas - so unser Befund - sind die unzureichenden Kenntnisse über die Logik und den Nutzen qualitativer Forschungsansätze, der fehlende Umgang mit qualitativen Verfahren sowie eine unzulässige Methodenfixierung auf quantitative bzw. mathematische Designs. Entsprechend gilt es herauszuarbeiten, welche Gründe und Entwicklungen für eine solch rigorose Ablehnung qualitativer Forschungsmethoden in der Volkswirtschaftslehre verantwortlich sind. Es ist das Ziel des vorliegenden Beitrags, die fachspezifische Einstellung und das allgemeine Wissenschaftsverständnis deutscher Ökonomen darzustellen sowie Aussagen über Bedeutung, Relevanz und insbesondere Potentiale qualitativer und auch rekonstruktiver Forschungsmethoden für ökonomische Fragestellungen herauszuarbeiten. -- The usefulness of qualitative research methods has gained much recognition in the disciplines of Social Sciences. Consequently, its methods are implemented frequently in the practical course of research. Contrary to this, in economics, qualitative methods, such as semistructured and group interviews or participant observation, have no significance. Considering the fact that a majority of German economists have a vast knowledge and interest in empirical research methods it is very surprising that qualitative research methods are not applied for research in economic publications. To become more familiar with these phenomena on an empirical level, a qualitative census with German economists is conducted, in order to find out more about the significant values and representational samples of qualitative research methods. According to our results, the cause of the systematic disaffirmation of the qualitative research paradigm is the result of insufficient knowledge on the logic and accounts of qualitative research appendage. Moreover, the cause is also due to the missing association with qualitative procedures as well as an existing fixation of methods of quantitative or mathematical designs. Consequently, the causes and developments being responsible for such a rigid rejection of qualitative research methods in the field of economics are elaborated. It is the aim of the paper to present the specific attribution of German economists and to lay out the potential of qualitative research methods for economic reasoning.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/67062/1/729524744.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by University of Freiburg, Department of Economic Policy and Constitutional Economic Theory in its series The Constitutional Economics Network Working Papers with number 02-2012.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: 2012
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:cenwps:022012

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Kollegiengebäde II, Platz der Alten Synagoge, 79085 Freiburg
    Phone: +49 +761 / 203 2301
    Fax: +49 +761 / 203 2303
    Web page: http://www.wipo.uni-freiburg.de/
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: Qualitative Forschung; Rekonstruktive Methoden; Empirische Befragung; Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Feld; Methodologische Fragen; Qualitative Research Methods; Semi-Structured Interviews; Economic Field; Methodological Issues;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Jennifer Olmsted, 1997. "Telling Palestinian Women's Economic Stories," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 141-151.
    2. Sterns, James A. & Schweikhardt, David B. & Peterson, H. Christopher, 1998. "Using Case Studies As An Approach For Conducting Agribusiness Research," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IAMA), vol. 1(03).
    3. Coase, R H, 1988. "The Nature of the Firm: Origin," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 3-17, Spring.
    4. Steven D. Levitt & Sudhir Alladi Venkatesh, 1998. "An Economic Analysis of a Drug-Selling Gang's Finances," NBER Working Papers 6592, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 1999. "A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation," Munich Reprints in Economics 20650, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    6. Joseph Henrich, 2000. "Does culture matter in economic behavior? Ultimatum game bargaining among the machiguenga," Artefactual Field Experiments 00067, The Field Experiments Website.
    7. Achim Schlüter & Bjoern Vollan, 2011. "Morals as an incentive? A field study on honour based flower picking," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 38(1), pages 79-97, March.
    8. Blinder, Alan S, 1991. "Why Are Prices Sticky? Preliminary Results from an Interview Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 89-96, May.
    9. Alan S. Blinder & Don H. Choi, 1989. "A Shred of Evidence on Theories of Wage Stickiness," NBER Working Papers 3105, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Bewley, Truman, 2002. "Interviews as a valid empirical tool in economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 343-353.
    11. Stigler, George J & Becker, Gary S, 1977. "De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 76-90, March.
    12. Andreas Haufler & Johannes Rincke, 2009. "Wer trägt bei der Jahrestagung des Vereins für Socialpolitik vor? Eine empirische Analyse," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 10(2), pages 123-145, 05.
    13. Susan Helper, 2000. "Economists and Field Research: "You Can Observe a Lot Just by Watching."," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 228-232, May.
    14. Vanberg, Viktor J., 2005. "Market and state: the perspective of constitutional political economy," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(01), pages 23-49, June.
    15. Elizabeth Hill & Gabrielle Meagher, 1999. "Doing 'Qualitative Research' in Economics: Two Examples and Some Reflections," Open Discussion Papers in Economics 16, The Open University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Economics.
    16. Fabel, Oliver & Lehmann, Erik & Warning, Susanne, 2002. "Vorträge als Qualitätsindikator: Empirische Evidenz der Jahrestagungen des Vereins für Socialpolitik," Discussion Papers, Series 1 321, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
    17. Bruce Burton, 2007. "Qualitative research in finance – pedigree and renaissance," Studies in Economics and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(1), pages 5-12, March.
    18. Alan S. Blinder, 1990. "Learning by Asking Those Who Are Doing," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 297-306, Oct-Dec.
    19. Randall Westgren & Kelly Zering, 1998. "Case study research methods for firm and market research," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(5), pages 415-423.
    20. Bewley, Truman F, 1995. "A Depressed Labor Market as Explained by Participants," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 250-54, May.
    21. Dominik H. Enste & Alexandra Haferkamp & Detlef Fetchenhauer, 2009. "Unterschiede im Denken zwischen Ökonomen und Laien - Erklärungsansätze zur Verbesserung der wirtschaftspolitischen Beratung," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 10(1), pages 60-78, 02.
    22. Joanna Coast, 1999. "The appropriate uses of qualitative methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(4), pages 345-353.
    23. Samuel Bowles, 1998. "Endogenous Preferences: The Cultural Consequences of Markets and Other Economic Institutions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 75-111, March.
    24. Klaus Ritzberger, 2008. "Eine invariante Bewertung wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Fachzeitschriften," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9(3), pages 267-285, 08.
    25. Sudhir Alladi Venkatesh & Steven D. Levitt, 2001. "Growing Up in the Projects: The Economic Lives of a Cohort of Men Who Came of Age in Chicago Public Housing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 79-84, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:cenwps:022012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.