IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/syspar/v34y2021i4d10.1007_s11213-020-09542-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Abductive Reasoning as the Integrating Mechanism between First- Second- and Third-Person Practice in Action Research

Author

Listed:
  • David Coghlan

    (University of Dublin, Trinity College)

  • Abraham B. (Rami) Shani

    (California Polytechnic State University)

Abstract

Action research has long adopted an integrative approach to research as incorporating three inquiries and voices: the first-person voice of individuals inquiring into their own thinking and learning, the second- person inquiry into the collaborative engagements between the actors as co-researchers and the third-person contribution to knowledge for a wider audience. Third-person theory seeks to integrate among the first- and second-person practices, linking the subjective dynamics of action and inquiry (within the first-person), the intersubjective collaborative dynamics of action and inquiry (between second-persons engaged with one another) and the outcome of actionable knowledge (among a collection of third-persons-and-things at a distance from and often anonymous-to-one another). Drawing on Peirce’s articulation of abductive reasoning this article explores how abductive reasoning serves as the integrating mechanism between first-, second- and third-person practice and informs both the theory of how theory is generated through first- and second-person practices.

Suggested Citation

  • David Coghlan & Abraham B. (Rami) Shani, 2021. "Abductive Reasoning as the Integrating Mechanism between First- Second- and Third-Person Practice in Action Research," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 463-474, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:34:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11213-020-09542-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11213-020-09542-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11213-020-09542-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11213-020-09542-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Macintosh & Jean Bartunek & Mamta Bhatt & Donald Maclean, 2016. "I Never Promised You a Rose Garden: When Research Questions Ought to Change," Post-Print hal-03147047, HAL.
    2. Eden, Colin & Ackermann, Fran, 2018. "Theory into practice, practice to theory: Action research in method development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(3), pages 1145-1155.
    3. Coghlan, David, 2016. "Retrieving a philosophy of practical knowing for Action Research," International Journal of Action Research, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 12(1), pages 84-107.
    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. Sarah Gerritsen & Sophia Harré & Boyd Swinburn & David Rees & Ana Renker-Darby & Ann E. Bartos & Wilma E. Waterlander, 2019. "Systemic Barriers and Equitable Interventions to Improve Vegetable and Fruit Intake in Children: Interviews with National Food System Actors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Parmjit Kaur & Ashley L. Carreras, 2021. "Hearing the Participants’ Voice: Recognizing the Dimensions of Procedural and Interactional Justice by Enabling Their Determinants," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 743-773, August.
    4. J. Vicente Tébar-Rubio & F. Javier Ramírez & M. José Ruiz-Ortega, 2023. "Conducting Action Research to Improve Operational Efficiency in Manufacturing: The Case of a First-Tier Automotive Supplier," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 427-459, June.
    5. Colin Eden & Fran Ackermann, 2021. "Modelling Stakeholder Dynamics for Supporting Group Decision and Negotiation: Theory to Practice," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1001-1025, October.
    6. Robert G. Dyson & Frances A. O’Brien & Devan B. Shah, 2021. "Soft OR and Practice: The Contribution of the Founders of Operations Research," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 727-738, May.
    7. Abuabara, Leila & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2021. "Surveying applications of Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) from 1989 to 2018," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1051-1065.
    8. Linus Osuagwu, 2020. "Research Methods: Issues and Research Direction," Business and Management Research, Business and Management Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 9(3), pages 46-55, September.
    9. Charis Vlados & Dimos Chatzinikolaou, 2019. "Business ecosystems policy in Stra.Tech.Man terms: The case of the Eastern Macedonia and Thrace region," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 15(3), pages 163-197.
    10. Ksenia Ivanova & Sondoss Elsawah, 2022. "Iterative Refinement of Multi-Method OR Workshop Designs through Boundary Critique: An Analytical Framework and Case Studies in Technology Utilisation," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 345-374, June.
    11. Stephen Harwood, 2021. "Introducing the VIPLAN Methodology (with VSM) for Handling Messy Situations – Nine Lessons," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 635-668, December.
    12. Michela Magliacani, 2023. "How the sustainable development goals challenge public management. Action research on the cultural heritage of an Italian smart city," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(3), pages 987-1015, September.
    13. Min Tao & Xiong Wang, 2023. "An Integrated MCDM Model for Sustainable Course Planning: An Empirical Case Study in Accounting Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-25, March.

    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:spr:syspar:v:34:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11213-020-09542-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.