Scholarly Reflexivity, Methodological Practice, and Bevir and Blakely's Anti-Naturalism

REFERENCES

• Adcock, Robert. [2006] 2014. “Generalization in Comparative and Historical Social Science: The Difference that Interpretivism Makes.” In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, ed. Dvora Yanow and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Berkovich, Izhak. 2018. “Beyond Qualitative/Quantitative Structuralism: The Positivist Qualitative Research and The Paradigmatic Disclaimer.” Quantity and Quality: International Journal of Methodology 52(5): 2063-2077.
   Google Scholar
• Bevir, Mark, and Jason Blakely. 2018. Interpretive Social Science: An Anti-Naturalist Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brady, Henry E., and David Collier, eds. [1994] 2010. Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Brady, Henry E., David Collier, and Jason Seawright. [1994] 2010. “Refocusing the Discussion of Methodology.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, ed. Henry E. Brady and David Collier. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, John W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Feitlowitz, Marguerite. 1998. A Lexicon of Terror: Argentina and the Legacies of Torture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fujii, Lee Ann. 2018. Interviewing in Social Science Research: A Relational Approach. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Geertz, Clifford. 1983. Local Knowledge. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, Donna J. 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies 14(3): 575-99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harding, Sandra. 1986. The Science Question in Feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, Sandra. 1993. “Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What Is ‘Strong Objectivity’?” In Feminist Epistemologies, ed. Linda Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hawkesworth, M. E. 1988. Theoretical Issues in Policy Analysis. Albany: SUNY Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hawkesworth, Mary. 2016. Embodied Power: Demystifying Disembodied Politics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hiley, David R., James F. Bohman, and Richard Shusterman, eds. 1991. The Interpretive Turn: Philosophy, Science, Culture. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. [2006] 2014. “Making Sense of Making Sense: Configurational Analysis and the Double Hermeneutic.” In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, ed. Dvora Yanow and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. 2011. The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and Its Implications for the Study of World Politics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kessler, Oliver, and Benjamin Herborth. 2013. “Recognition and the Constitution of Social Order.” International Theory 5(1): 155-65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, Gary, Robert Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lampland, Martha, and Susan Leigh Star, eds. 2009. Standards and Their Stories: How Quantifying, Classifying, and Formalizing Practices Shape Everyday Life. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, Bruno, and Steve Woolgar. [1979] 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Yvonna S., and Egon G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• McKeown, Timothy J. 1999. “Case Studies and the Limits of the Quantitative Worldview: Review of King, Keohane, and Verba’s Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research.” International Organization 53(1): 161–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noorani, Tehseen, Andrew Charlesworth, Alison Kite, and Morag McDermont. 2017. “Participatory Research and the Medicalization of Research Ethics Processes. Social and Legal Studies 26(3): 378–400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onuf, Nicholas. 1989. World of Our Making. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ospina, Sonia M., Mark Esteve, and Seulki Lee. 2017. “Assessing Qualitative Studies in Public Administration Research.” Public Administration Review 78(4): 593-605.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, Theodore. 2006. “Speaking Precision to Power: The Modern Role of Social Science.” Social Research 73(4): 1273-1294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• QMMR Symposium. Forthcoming. “Engaging DA-RT: Critical Assessments from Public Policy and Political Theory.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 16(2).
   Google Scholar
• Rabinow, Paul, and William M. Sullivan. [1979] 1987. Interpretive Social Science. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schaffer, Frederic B. 2016. Elucidating Social Science Concepts: An Interpretivist Guide. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schatz, Edward, ed. 2009. Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, Joseph. 2014. “Resisting Exploitation of the Contingent Faculty Labor in the Neoliberal University: The Challenge of Building Solidarity between Tenured and Nontenured Faculty.” New Political Science 36(4): 504–22.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine. 2003. “Is This the Curriculum We Want? Doctoral Requirements and Offerings in Methods and Methodology.” PS: Political Science and Politics 36(3): 379–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, and Dvora Yanow. 2012. Interpretive Research Design: Concepts and Processes. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Seawright, Jason, and David Collier. [1994] 2010. “Glossary.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, ed. Henry Brady and David Collier. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Shames, Shauna L., and Tess Wise. 2017. “Gender, Diversity, and Methods in Political Science: A Theory of Selection and Survival Biases.” Political Science and Politics 50(3): 811-23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schütz, Alfred. 1967. The Phenomenology of the Social World. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Soedirgo, Jessica, and Aarie Glas. Forthcoming. “Towards Active Reflexivity: Positionality and Practice in the Production of Knowledge.” PS: Political Science and Politics.
   Google Scholar
• Stout, Margaret. 2013. “Preparing Public Administration Scholars for Qualitative Inquiry: A Status Report.” Public Administration Research 2(1): 1-28.
   Google Scholar
• Strathern, Margaret, ed. 2008. Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, Charles. 1971. “Interpretation and the Sciences of Man.” Review of Metaphysics 25: 3–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanow, Dvora, and Marleen van der Haar. 2013. “People Out of Place: Allochthony and Autochthony in The Netherlands’ Identity Discourse—Metaphors and Categories in Action.” Journal of International Relations and Development 16(2): 227-61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanow, Dvora, and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, eds. 2014. Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar