Skip to Main Navigation

Can Economics Become More Reflexive Exploring the Potential of Mixed-Methods (英语)

This paper argues that Economics can learn from Cultural Anthropology and Qualitative Sociology by drawing on a judicious mix of qualitative and quantitative methods to become more “reflexive.” It argues that reflexivity, which helps reduce the distance between researchers and the subjects of their research, has four key elements: cognitive empathy, the analysis of narratives (potentially enhanced by machine learning), understanding process, and participation (involving respondents in research). The paper provides an impressionistic and non-comprehensive review of mixed-methods relevant to development economics and discrimination to illustrate these points.


  • 作者


  • 文件日期


  • 文件类型


  • 报告号


  • 卷号


  • Total Volume(s)


  • 国家


  • 地区


  • 发布日期


  • Disclosure Status


  • 文件名称

    Can Economics Become More Reflexive ? Exploring the Potential of Mixed-Methods

  • 关键词

    ethnography; participant observation; development research group; access to public good; economic and social policy; in economics; village meeting; social scientist; Social Sciences; narrative data; data collection procedure; quantitative method; sum of money; social science research; productivity of land; use of information; data entry process; land tenure arrangements; management of water; mixed methods; social media; quantitative data; social class; field work; machine learning; survey data; ethnic group; survey methods; gender bias; previous work; gender norm; qualitative method; qualitative information; qualitative study; human behavior; theoretical model; large population; qualitative analysis; econometric analysis; news media; quantitative survey; newspaper article; black community; black men; ethnographic method; focus group; spiritual life; quantitative analysis; small sample; empirical economics; Public Goods; qualitative data; living standard; financial instrument; rational choice; cultural anthropologists; political science; natural experiment; Ownership Share Type; deliberative democracy; roll-call vote; black culture; econometric result; social distinction; rural employment; participatory appraisal; discourse analysis; social worker; economics literature; disproportionate impact; social structure; data gathering; transfer behavior; median voter; effective action; female sterilization; field observation; civil conflict; public space; local economy; several months; rural village; poor community; racial bias; village council; economic anthropology; quantitative approach; secure tenure; scientific community; economic efficiency; institutional factor; dominant group; linguistic community; social order; caste structure; external condition; ecological structure; striking similarity; systematic analysis; economic research; search engine; survey techniques; television show; gender discrimination; credit market; public discourse; representative sample; other application; social life; public issue; econometric work; credit payment; money management; narrative analysis; multiple choice; cultural anthropology; physical anthropology; genetic analysis; observational study; cursory look; primary focus; family size; field visits; applied statistic; economics research; discriminatory provision; collected information; grievance redressal; cultural distance; cultural background; understanding process; open access; development policy; poor household; outcome measure; Research Support; Cash flow; independent agency; life event; sociologist sees; disciplinary history; financial activities; household survey; gold standard; Public Spending; religious practice; common resources; development paradigm; empirical work; political scientist; african americans; social context; primary method; information asymmetry; industrial base; public health; white worker; Rural Poor; black family; hate speech; young people; rural area; working class; bonded laborer; Cultural Heritage; urban sociology; analytical categories