The process of completing any piece of empirical research requires that a large number of methodological decisions be made at each step in the undertaking. Some of these decisions are very clearly prescribed by conventional practice, while others allow for wide discretion. This paper discusses various kinds of discretionary decisions in applied research where special difficulties are necessarily produced by the requirement to speak to the needs of policy makers and other research users. Emphasizing the inevitable advocacy role of applied researchers, suggestions are provided for which kinds of discretionary methodological decisions in applied research should be encouraged and which should be condemned.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alwin, D.F. and M. Sullivan (1975) "Issues of design and analysis in evaluation research ." Soc. Methods and Research4.
2.
Baldus, D.C. and W.L. Cole (1977) "Quantitative proof of intentional discrimination in judicial and administrative proceedings." Evaluation Q.1 (February).
3.
Barnett, V. (1973) Comparative Statistical Inference. New York: John Wiley.
——— and A. Hartmann (1972) "Race and class differences in per pupil staffing expenditures in Chicago elementary schools, 1970-1971." Integrated Education (January).
6.
Berk, R.A. and P.H. Rossi (1976) "Doing good or worse: evaluation research politically re-examined." Social Problems (February).
7.
Berk, R.A., M. Hennessy, and J. Swan (1976) "Descriptive distortions in covariance based statistics ." Social Sci. Research (Spring).
8.
Cain, G. and H. Watts (1970) "Problems in making inferences from the Coleman report." ASR35.
9.
Campbell, D.T. (1975) "The experimenting society." Northwestern UniversityPsychology Department mimeo.
10.
——— and A. Erlebacher, (1970) "How regression artifacts in quasi experimental evaluations can mistakenly make compensatory education look harmful," in J. Hellmuth (ed.) Disadvantaged Child. New York: Brunner/MAZE .
11.
Champagne, A. (1974) "An evaluation of the effectiveness of the OEO legal services program." UAQ9 (June).
12.
Chernoff, H. and L.E. Moses (1959) Elementary Decision Theory. New York: John Wiley.
13.
Cook, T.D. et al. (1974) Sesame Street Revisited. New York: Basic Books.
14.
Cook, T.P. and D.T. Campbell (1974) "The design and conduct of quasi-experiments and true experiments in field settings," in M. O. Dunnette (ed.) The Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Research. Chicago: Rand McNally .
15.
Einhorn, H.J. (1972) "Alchemy in the behavioral sciences." Public Opinion Q.36.
16.
Houser, P.H. (1969) "On actionism in the craft of sociology." Soc. Inquiry39 (Spring).
17.
Gouldner, A.W. (1970) The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. New York: Basic Books.
18.
Kelman, H. (1968) A Time to Speak on Values and Social Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19.
Land, K. (1975) "Social indicator models: an overview," in K. Land and S. Spilerman (eds.) Social Indicator Models. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
20.
Lenihan, K.J. (1975) "Some preliminary results of the life project." Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Social Science Research . (mimeo)
21.
MacRae, D. Jr. (1976) The Social Function of Social Science. New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press.
22.
Moynihan, D.P. (1969) Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding. New York: Free Press.
23.
Rossi, P.H. and K. Lyall (1976) Reforming Public Welfare: An Evaluation of the New Jersey-Pennsylvania Income Maintenance Experiment. New York: Russell Sage.
24.
Wolfgang, M. (1974) "The social scientist in court." J. of Criminal Law and Criminology65.
25.
Zeisel, H. (1968) Say It with Figures. New York : Harper and Row.
26.
Zellner, A. (1971) An Introduction to Bayesian Inference in Econometrics . New York: John Wiley.
27.
Zimring, F.E. and G.J. Hawkins (1974) Deterrence. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
