Action research: A paradigm for achieving social change

Small Group Research

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 17-27

  Bargal, David ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

Action research; Relationship between practitioners and researchers; Small group

Indexed keywords

EID: 38949146688     PISSN: 10464964     EISSN: 15528278     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1046496407313407     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison.
2. Argyris, C. (1980). Inner contradictions of rigorous research. New York: Academic Press.
3. Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Argyris, C. (1997). Kurt Lewin award lectures 1997: Field theory as a basis for scholarly consulting. Journal of Social Issues, 53, 811-827.
5. Bargal, D. (2006). Personal and intellectual influences leading to Lewin's paradigm of action research. Action Research, 4 (4). 367-388.
6. Bargal, D., & Bar, H. (1992). A Lewinian approach to intergroup workshops for Arab-Palestinian and Jewish youth. Journal of Social Issues, 48 (2). 139-154.
7. Bargal, D., Gold, M., & Lewin, M. (1992). Introduction: The heritage of Kurt Lewin. Journal of Social Issues, 48 (2). 3-13.
8. Boog, B. (2003). The emancipatory character of action research: Its history and the present state of the art. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 426-438.
9. Bradbury, H., & Reason, P. (2003). Action research: An opportunity for revitalizing research purpose and practice. Qualitative Social Work, 2 (2). 155-175.
10. Burke, W. (2002). Organization change: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Cassell, C., & Johnson, P. (2006). Action research: Explaining the diversity. Human Relations, 54 (6). 783-814.
12. Checkland, P. (1991). From framework through experience to learning: The essential nature of action research. In H. E. Nissen, H. K. Klein, & R. Hirscheim (Eds.), Information systems research: Contemporary approaches and emergent traditions (pp. 397-403). Amsterdam: North Holland / Elsevier Science.
13. Chein, I., Cook, S., & Harding, J. (1948). The field of action research. The American Psychologist, 3, 43-60.
14. Coch, L., & French, J. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change. Human Relations, 1, 512-532.
15. Coghlan, D., & Shani, A. (2005). Roles, politics and ethics in action research design. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 18 (6). 533-546.
16. Cullen, J. (1998). The needle and the damage done: Research, action research and the organizational and social construction of health in the "information society. " Human Relations, 51 (12). 1543-1564.
17. DeLucia-Waak, L., & Kalodner, C. (2005). Contemporary issues in group practice. In S. Wheelan (Ed.), The handbook of group research and practice (pp. 65-84). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2 nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Dickens, L., & Watkins, K. (1999). Action research: Rethinking Lewin. Management Learning, 30 (2). 127-140.
20. Eden, C., & Huxham, C. (1996). Action research for the study of organizations. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 526-542). London: Sage.
21. Elden, M., & Chisholm, R. (1993). Emerging varieties of action research. Introduction to the special issue. Human Relations, 46 (2). 121-142.
22. Forsyth, D. (1990). Group dynamics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks-Cole.
23. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
24. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory action research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2 nd ed., pp. 567-605). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Leitch, R., & Day, C. (2000). Action research and reflective practice: Towards a holistic view. Educational Action Research, 8 (1). 179-193.
26. Lewin, K. (1943-1944 / 1951). Problems of research in social psychology. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers by Kurt Lewin (pp. 155-169). New York: Harper & Row.
27. Lewin, K. (1946 / 1948). Action research and minority problems. In G.W. Lewin (Ed.), Resolving social conflicts (pp. 201-216). New York: Harper & Row.
28. Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics. Part II. Human Relations, 1, 143-153.
29. Lieberman, M. (1980). Group methods. In. F. Kanfer & A. Goldstein (Eds.), Helping people change (pp. 470-536). New York: Pergamon.
30. Magen, R., & Mangiardi, E. (2005). Groups and individual change. In S. Wheelan (Ed.), The handbook of group research and practice (pp. 351-362). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31. Peters, M., & Robinson, U. (1984). The origin and status of action research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 20, 113-124.
32. Pettigrew, T. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65-85.
33. Pettigrew, T., & Tropp, L. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (5). 751-783.
34. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. Rogers, C. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 22, 95-103.
36. Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
37. Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflicts. Journal of Sociology, 63, 349-356.
38. Sussman, G., & Evered, R. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 582-603.
39. Watzlawick, P. (1978). The language of change: Elements of therapeutic communication. New York: Basic Books.
40. Weick, K. (2003). Theory and practice in the real world. In H. Tsoukas & C. Knudsen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organization theory (pp. 453-475). New York: Oxford University Press.