dissertation in pdf-format - Aalto-yliopisto

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3 Research methodology reliable. Several items other than measurement instruments may also have influenced the validity of the study, including the following: the suitability of the main focus of the research the relevance of the approaches, methods, language and structure of the studies to the aims the aptness of the approaches, methods, language and structure of the studies for addressing the research hypotheses and/or questions the degree to which the units of analysis help to connect the findings to prior theory and possibilities to contribute to theory development Reliability covers the following issues (Tabachnik et al., 2007): 1. Are the variables chosen and measured trustworthy? 2. Are the variables used derived from theories and previous studies? 3. Is it possible to execute another research project in the same way and get the same results (possibility of replication). It should be noted that the concepts of validity and reliability are viewed differently by qualitative researchers. For example, the replicability of results does not concern them (Golafshani, 2003). Furthermore, while the terms validity and reliability are essential quality criteria in quantitative paradigms, in qualitative paradigms the terms credibility (qualitative concept of validity), confirmability (objectivity), neutrality, consistency, dependability (reliability), applicability and transferability (validity) are essential research quality criteria (Lincoln and Cuba, 1985). Mixed research strategies involve mixing quantitative and qualitative methods, approaches and concepts that have complementary strengths and non-overlapping weaknesses. It has been stated that mixed methods are characterised by the problems of representation, legitimation and integration (Onwuegbuzie and Johnson, 2006). Representation here refers to the difficulty in capturing animated experiences using text in general as well as words and numbers. The problem of legitimation refers to the difficulty in obtaining results and/or making inferences that are credible, trustworthy, dependable, transferable and/or confirmable. In many cases, these problems are exacerbated in mixed research because both the quantitative and qualitative components of studies bring their own problems of representation and legitimation that complicate integration. 44
45 3 Research methodology In one of the few studies on the topic of validity or quality criteria in mixed research, Teddlie and Tashakkori (2003) pointed out that inferences are made whether the associated interpretation is deductive or inductive in nature. These authors contended that the concept of inference transcends quantitative and qualitative research and they recommended that interference quality should be used as the term for validity in mixed research. They conceptualize inference quality as being associated with two research components: design quality and interpretative rigour. According to their integrative model of inference quality, design quality comprises: 1. Within-design consistency 2. Design suitability 3. Design fidelity 4. Analytic adequacy Within-design consistency refers to standards used for evaluating the methodological rigour of mixed method studies. Design suitability refers to whether the methods used are appropriate for addressing the research question(s) and the design is consistent with them. Design fidelity refers to whether procedures: are implemented with rigour and quality; are capable of capturing meaning, associations and/or effects; and the sampling and data collection procedures are implemented adequately. Analytic adequacy refers to the appropriateness of applied data analysis techniques for addressing the research question(s) (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2006). Interpretive rigour pertains to the overall standards for evaluating the validity of conclusions of the study. It consists of interpretative agreement, distinctiveness, interpretative consistency and theoretical consistency. Interpretative agreement means that people agree about interpretations, i.e. there is consistency of interpretations across people. Interpretative distinctiveness is the degree to which the inferences are distinctively different from other possible interpretations of the results, and rival explanations are ruled out. Interpretive and theoretical consistencies are connected to the inferences that closely follow from relevant findings in terms of type, intensity, scope, and multiplicity. Interpretive consistency refers to whether the inferences are consistent with each other, and theoretical consistency to whether the inferences are consistent with theory and current knowledge in the field, and whether meta-inferences adequately incorporate the inferences from quantitative and qualitative phases of the study (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2006). Onwuegbuzie and Johnson (2006) extended the model proposed by Tashakkori and Teddlie (2006) of the validity of mixed methods. They
Page 3 and 4: Aalto University publication series
Page 5: Author Tomi Heimonen Name of the do
Page 9 and 10: Acknowledgements This dissertation
Page 11 and 12: CONTENTS PART 1: Overview of the di
Page 13: List of Articles This thesis is bas
Page 16 and 17: 1 Introduction Some scholars claim
Page 18 and 19: 1 Introduction In addition, the dur
Page 20 and 21: 1 Introduction Figure 1: Framework
Page 22 and 23: 1 Introduction factors that affect
Page 24 and 25: 1 Introduction 1.4 Key concepts and
Page 26 and 27: 2 Literature review and conceptual
Page 46 and 47: 3 Research methodology Constructivi
Page 48 and 49: 3 Research methodology and the meth
Page 50 and 51: 3 Research methodology The data use
Page 52 and 53: 3 Research methodology 3.4 Models a
Page 56 and 57: 3 Research methodology concluded th
Page 58 and 59: 4 Results, evaluation of the studie
Page 70 and 71: References Abetti, P. A. (2001). Ac
Page 72 and 73: References Bhide, A. (2000). The or
Page 74 and 75: References Creswell, J. W. (2003).
Page 76 and 77: References Golafshani, N. (2003). U
Page 78 and 79: References Leitch, C., Hill, F., an
Page 80 and 81: References Pellikka, J. and Laurone
Page 82 and 83: References Storper, M. (1992). The
Page 84 and 85: Appendixes Overview: Appendix 1: Ke
Page 86 and 87: Appendixes High growth When examini
Page 88 and 89: Appendixes profitability, liquidity
Page 90 and 91: Appendixes Appendix 1 Continued (Ke
Page 92 and 93: Appendixes Appendix 2 Construction
Page 94 and 95: Appendixes Appendix 2 Continued (Co
Page 96 and 97: not increased compared to Eastern F
Page 98 and 99: ___________________________________
Page 100 and 101: propensity for risk taking (Covin a
Page 102 and 103: 2. Former studies and derivation of
Page 104 and 105:
firm’s annual sales growth (Arund
Page 106 and 107:
H4. Firm success has an impact on t
Page 108 and 109:
other branches in which employment
Page 110 and 111:
and Rao, 2008). Because of the unev
Page 112 and 113:
Table 1. Characteristics of the dat
Page 114 and 115:
firms from other firms. The data in
Page 116 and 117:
Table 2. Logistic Regression analys
Page 118 and 119:
Public R&D funding was shown to inc
Page 120 and 121:
References Achtenhagen, L., Naldi,
Page 122 and 123:
Kanter, R. (1985), “Supporting in
Page 124 and 125:
Appendix 1. Corporate population ch
Page 126 and 127:
Appendix 3. Distribution of personn
Page 128 and 129:
12 Int. J. Business and Globalisati
Page 130 and 131:
14 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen we u
Page 132 and 133:
16 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen suff
Page 134 and 135:
18 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Glan
Page 136 and 137:
20 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen 3.2.
Page 138 and 139:
22 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen diff
Page 140 and 141:
24 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen sepa
Page 142 and 143:
26 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Tabl
Page 144 and 145:
28 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen All
Page 146 and 147:
30 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen 5.2
Page 148 and 149:
32 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Tabl
Page 150 and 151:
34 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen The
Page 152 and 153:
36 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Davi
Page 154 and 155:
38 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen Appe
Page 156 and 157:
40 T. Heimonen and M. Virtanen 100
Page 158 and 159:
___________________________________
Page 160 and 161:
412 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen “
Page 162 and 163:
414 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen gro
Page 164 and 165:
416 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen 6 f
Page 166 and 167:
418 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen Fig
Page 168 and 169:
420 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen The
Page 170 and 171:
422 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen the
Page 172 and 173:
424 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen 4.6
Page 174 and 175:
426 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen exc
Page 176 and 177:
428 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen Dav
Page 178 and 179:
430 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen The
Page 180 and 181:
432 M. Virtanen and T. Heimonen Cha
Page 182 and 183:
392 Int. J. Entrepreneurial Venturi
Page 184 and 185:
394 J. Siikonen et al. firms’ gro
Page 186 and 187:
396 J. Siikonen et al. generally re
Page 188 and 189:
398 J. Siikonen et al. determinants
Page 190 and 191:
400 J. Siikonen et al. 3.1 National
Page 192 and 193:
402 J. Siikonen et al. 2 the firm
Page 194 and 195:
404 J. Siikonen et al. 4 Results 4.
Page 196 and 197:
406 J. Siikonen et al. innovation a
Page 198 and 199:
408 J. Siikonen et al. the responde
Page 200 and 201:
410 J. Siikonen et al. activities i
Page 202 and 203:
412 J. Siikonen et al. Eastern Finl
Page 204 and 205:
414 J. Siikonen et al. Delmar, F.,
Page 206 and 207:
416 J. Siikonen et al. Oerlemans, L
Page 208 and 209:
418 J. Siikonen et al. Appendix 1 V
Page 211:
9HSTFMG*afacab+
show all

dissertation in pdf-format - Aalto-yliopisto

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?