IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cenwps/022012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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

Author

Listed:
  • Lenger, Alexander
  • Kruse, Jan

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Lenger, Alexander & Kruse, Jan, 2012. "Rekonstruktive Forschungsmethoden in der deutschen Volkswirtschaftslehre: Eine explorative Erhebung zugrunde liegender Repräsentationsmuster," The Constitutional Economics Network Working Papers 02-2012, University of Freiburg, Department of Economic Policy and Constitutional Economic Theory.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cenwps:022012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/67062/1/729524744.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jennifer Olmsted, 1997. "Telling Palestinian Women's Economic Stories," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 141-151.
    2. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    3. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2002. "Some Simple Economics of Open Source," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 197-234, June.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Viktor J. Vanberg, 2002. "Rational Choice vs. Program-based Behavior," Rationality and Society, , vol. 14(1), pages 7-54, February.
    7. Fabel, Oliver & Lehmann, Erik & Warning, Susanne, 2002. "Vorträge als Qualitätsindikator: Empirische Evidenz der Jahrestagungen des Vereins für Socialpolitik," Discussion Papers, Series I 321, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
    8. 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, May.
    9. 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.
    10. Joanna Coast, 1999. "The appropriate uses of qualitative methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(4), pages 345-353, June.
    11. Bewley, Truman F, 1995. "A Depressed Labor Market as Explained by Participants," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 250-254, May.
    12. Alan S. Blinder & Don H. Choi, 1990. "A Shred of Evidence on Theories of Wage Stickiness," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 105(4), pages 1003-1015.
    13. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Why Social Preferences Matter - The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition," IEW - Working Papers 084, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    14. Joseph Henrich, 2000. "Does Culture Matter in Economic Behavior? Ultimatum Game Bargaining among the Machiguenga of the Peruvian Amazon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 973-979, September.
    15. Steven D. Levitt & Sudhir Alladi Venkatesh, 2000. "An Economic Analysis of a Drug-Selling Gang's Finances," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 755-789.
    16. 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, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Coase, R H, 1988. "The Nature of the Firm: Origin," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 3-17, Spring.
    19. Vanberg, Viktor J., 2005. "Market and state: the perspective of constitutional political economy," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 23-49, June.
    20. Joseph Henrich, 2000. "Does culture matter in economic behavior? Ultimatum game bargaining among the machiguenga," Artefactual Field Experiments 00067, The Field Experiments Website.
    21. 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.
    22. Bruce Burton, 2007. "Qualitative research in finance – pedigree and renaissance," Studies in Economics and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 24(1), pages 5-12, March.
    23. Arild Vatn, 2005. "Institutions and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2826.
    24. Bruno S. Frey & Silke Humbert & Friedrich Schneider, 2007. "Was denken deutsche Ökonomen? Eine empirische Auswertung einer Internetbefragung unter den Mitgliedern des Vereins für Socialpolitik im Sommer 2006," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 8(4), pages 359-377, November.
    25. Achim Schlüter & Bjoern Vollan, 2011. "Morals as an incentive? A field study on honour based flower picking," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 79-97, March.
    26. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    27. 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, vol. 1(3), pages 1-17.
    28. 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.
    29. Etges Milena Susanne & Lenger Alexander, 2010. "Die Eingliederungsvereinbarung des SGB II. Eine kritische Betrachtung aus ordnungsökonomischer Perspektive," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 59(3), pages 329-356, December.
    30. 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.
    31. 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.
    32. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2002. "Why Social Preferences Matter -- The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 1-33, March.
    33. Klaus Ritzberger, 2008. "Eine invariante Bewertung wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Fachzeitschriften," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9(3), pages 267-285, August.
    34. Cawthorne, Pamela M., 1995. "Of networks and markets: The rise and rise of a South Indian town, the example of Tiruppur's cotton knitwear industry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 43-56, January.
    35. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexander Lenger & Stephan Wolf & Nils Goldschmidt, 2021. "Choosing inequality: how economic security fosters competitive regimes," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(2), pages 315-346, June.
    2. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    3. Martha A. Starr, 2014. "Qualitative And Mixed-Methods Research In Economics: Surprising Growth, Promising Future," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 238-264, April.
    4. Jeffrey Carpenter & Erika Seki, 2011. "Do Social Preferences Increase Productivity? Field Experimental Evidence From Fishermen In Toyama Bay," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(2), pages 612-630, April.
    5. Teck-Hua Ho & Xuanming Su, 2009. "Peer-Induced Fairness in Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2022-2049, December.
    6. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2019. "How Do Social Preferences and Norms of Reciprocity affect Generalized and Particularized Trust?," CLTS Working Papers 8/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 10 Oct 2019.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Martin Brown & Christian Zehnder, 2009. "On Reputation: A Microfoundation of Contract Enforcement and Price Rigidity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(536), pages 333-353, March.
    8. Brice Corgnet & Brian Gunia & Roberto Hernán González, 2021. "Harnessing the power of social incentives to curb shirking in teams," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 139-167, February.
    9. Stein T Holden & Mesfin Tilahun, 2021. "Preferences, trust, and performance in youth business groups," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-28, September.
    10. Michael T. Rauh, 2007. "Incentives, Solidarity, and the Division of Labor," Working Papers 2007-15, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    11. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    12. Cardenas, Juan-Camilo & Ostrom, Elinor, 2004. "What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-326, December.
    13. Drakopoulos, Stavros A., 2022. "The Conceptual Resilience of the Atomistic Individual in Mainstream Economic Rationality," MPRA Paper 112944, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Abhijit Ramalingam & Michael T. Rauh, 2010. "The Firm as a Socialization Device," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(12), pages 2191-2206, December.
    15. Abhijit Ramalingam & Michael Rauh, 2008. "Firms, Markets, and the Work Ethic," Working Papers 2008-04, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    16. Jonas Agell, 2004. "Why are Small Firms Different? Managers’ Views," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(3), pages 437-452, October.
    17. Andres Reeson & John Tisdell, 2007. "Markets, Motivations And Public Goods: Experimental Investigations On The Impact Of Institutions," Monash Economics Working Papers 22-07, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    18. Isabel Almudi & Julio Sánchez Chóliz, 2011. "Sustainable use of renewable resources: an identity approach," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 97-123, July.
    19. Philipp Schreck & Dominik Aaken & Karl Homann, 2020. "“There’s Life in the Old Dog Yet”: The Homo economicus model and its value for behavioral ethics," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 401-425, April.
    20. Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Aldo Rustichini, 2012. "Social Decision Theory: Choosing within and between Groups," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(4), pages 1591-1636.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Qualitative Forschung; Rekonstruktive Methoden; Empirische Befragung; Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Feld; Methodologische Fragen; Qualitative Research Methods; Semi-Structured Interviews; Economic Field; Methodological Issues;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:cenwps:022012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wffrede.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.