Quote
Fischer, U., & Liebermann, S. (2024). On the significance of non-standardized methods in research on unconditional basic income. In B. Neumärker & J. Schulz, Care & Gender - Potentials & Risks of Universal Basic Income (UBI) (pp. 289-322). Zurich: LIT.
Content
This article examines the significance of qualitative, specifically reconstructive research methods for studies on unconditional basic income. In order to be able to provide information on the convictions that guide decisions and how they relate to the possibilities that an UBI would create, it is necessary to reconstruct these convictions. This requires data collection and evaluation methods that allow us to get as close as possible to the actual lifestyle. In contrast to standardized methods, which have to abstract from the individual due to their peculiarities because they break them down into characteristic dimensions and only measure them in aggregated form, reconstructive methods can reconstruct habitus and interpretation patterns of individuals. These habitus and interpretation patterns are formed against the background of general action problems to which they provide an answer. In order to substantiate this thesis, the article first presents the fundamental differences between standardized and non-standardized methods of data collection and evaluation in order to make clear what distinguishes the two approaches. Using the specific example of an ongoing research project on the UBI, brief analyses are carried out using the objective hermeneutics method in order to highlight the differences and demonstrate the advantages of reconstructive methods.
Keywords
Unconditional basic income
Objective hermeneutics
Differences between qualitative and quantitative research methods