 |
 |
Dear Danielle I have a similar dilemma in that I can only look at so many mechanisms/theories in my case study, and it is difficult to decide between choices because the evidence to back any of them up, particularly directly testing (in my case) gardening as an intervention for health and wellbeing, is relatively scant. I think realistically (there it is again...) one has to select some area to focus on in a case study because otherwise it will be too broad to give meaningful results for a single researcher in a limited time (and time, in your PhD, is terribly limited, as you will have realised :-)). But narrowing too much in a realist review is dangerous because it is a little pre-emptive and limits the understanding of the full picture. I think that Ray Pawson posted some advice on selecting and evaluating mechanisms to test a while back. I am almost wishing that I had carried out my pilot study at the start followed by the literature review, with as many measures as I could reasonable fit in to the appointments I made with participants, and then I would have had my own realist snapshot of what seemed (in my selected sites and participant group) to be most influential. I do know that this Realist methodology will make us highly adaptable and critical researchers if we can just get to grips with it. Kind regards and please let us know what you decide... Di On 19 December 2012 05:08, Danielle Nilsson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi all**** > > ** ** > > I’m hoping someone could provide some advice. I’m still deciding on how > to limit my Realist Synthesis as it is only part of my PhD and will act as > a precursor I might call it to my case study research. My case study > research draws upon some theories I am hoping to test which I picked up on > my initial reading on the literature. This involves a theory called Self > Determination Theory. More specifically I am looking at the role of the > different forms of conservation motivation (called autonomous, > heteronomous, amotivation) produced through varying incentives etc.**** > > ** ** > > From my readings I believe that these forms of motivation could be > classified as mechanisms as these types of motivation are a response to the > ‘activities’ or incentives so to say of the program.**** > > ** ** > > Therefore, as this theory is highly relevant in my remaining PhD work do > you think it would be possible to base my Realist Synthesis around this > theory? My goal would be to know in which contexts do these mechanisms > (based on varying forms of motivation produced) work or not work? I would > then limit my search to papers that demonstrate that one of these forms of > motivation were produced and therefore my paper would be limited to these > mechanisms. This would save a lot of time.**** > > ** ** > > Would this be limiting myself too much in that I’m not allowing further > mechanisms to be discovered? Am I wrong in assuming these can be > classified as mechanisms? Or does anyone think this might be possible and > is a good way of producing a mini synthesis to support and guide my > empirical research which is the main component of my PhD?**** > > ** ** > > Thanks very much**** > > ** ** > > *Danielle Nilsson***** > > PhD Candidate (Confirmed) | Geography, Planning and Environmental > Management**** > > Landscape Ecology and Conservation Group**** > > The University of Queensland**** > > Email: [log in to unmask] | Fax: 07 3365 6899**** > > Post: Level 5, Room 541, Building 35 University of Queensland Brisbane > Australia 4072**** > > _____________________________________________________________ **** > > CRICOS Provider Number: 000025B**** > > [image: Description: Description: Description: UQ_device_email_green]**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > -- from: Di Blackmore Kippen FK8 3DN 07778803148