Introduction
Corruption is a phenomenon that has received and continues to receive a generous amount of attention from researchers and theorists alike in the Political world. Throughout the review of the source literature, certain themes were discovered as to where the literature converges and diverges. This paper addresses four of those themes namely; Qualitative (de Graaf and Hubarts, Urinboyev and Svensson and Jos ) versus Quantitative Research (Kilkon Ko and Ananya Samajdar, Lalountas et al, Chang and Chu) ; Operationalization; Data and Data Source; and Analysis.
Qualitative versus Quantitative Research In researching corruption some researchers use a more qualitative approach as compared to a quantitative one to investigate and test …show more content…
This is also echoed in the research by Philip Jos. He goes further to introduce work by Peter and Welch which sees corruption as an exchange. In this sense corruption would be assessed based on the official involved, the favor, relationship and the nature of the payoff (2010, 367).
In their research Chang and Chu on the other hand do not clearly operationalize corruption or the specific subjects’ namely political corruption and institutional trust. However they introduce "Asian corruption exceptionalism,” which argues that “one contextual account for differential corruption is that political cultures vary in different countries.” This concept tends to agree with the posit made by Urinboyev and Svensson. Urinboyev and Svensson surmise from their literature review that previous research has analyze Uzbekistan using Western definitions and measures (268). Because of the use of these measures the results have proved Uzbek government has entrenched corruption into the deep “fabrics” of the Uzbek culture. This is important to note as it shapes Urinboyev and Svensson’s research and their desire to look at corruption in Uzbekistan the way they do (2013, 268). They try to study the “socio- economic structures” using ethnographic data “on wedding ceremonies to show the local moral codes and values of informal transactions” could “undermine a pure Western perspective on corruption” (2013,
Corruption is a phenomenon that has received and continues to receive a generous amount of attention from researchers and theorists alike in the Political world. Throughout the review of the source literature, certain themes were discovered as to where the literature converges and diverges. This paper addresses four of those themes namely; Qualitative (de Graaf and Hubarts, Urinboyev and Svensson and Jos ) versus Quantitative Research (Kilkon Ko and Ananya Samajdar, Lalountas et al, Chang and Chu) ; Operationalization; Data and Data Source; and Analysis.
Qualitative versus Quantitative Research In researching corruption some researchers use a more qualitative approach as compared to a quantitative one to investigate and test …show more content…
This is also echoed in the research by Philip Jos. He goes further to introduce work by Peter and Welch which sees corruption as an exchange. In this sense corruption would be assessed based on the official involved, the favor, relationship and the nature of the payoff (2010, 367).
In their research Chang and Chu on the other hand do not clearly operationalize corruption or the specific subjects’ namely political corruption and institutional trust. However they introduce "Asian corruption exceptionalism,” which argues that “one contextual account for differential corruption is that political cultures vary in different countries.” This concept tends to agree with the posit made by Urinboyev and Svensson. Urinboyev and Svensson surmise from their literature review that previous research has analyze Uzbekistan using Western definitions and measures (268). Because of the use of these measures the results have proved Uzbek government has entrenched corruption into the deep “fabrics” of the Uzbek culture. This is important to note as it shapes Urinboyev and Svensson’s research and their desire to look at corruption in Uzbekistan the way they do (2013, 268). They try to study the “socio- economic structures” using ethnographic data “on wedding ceremonies to show the local moral codes and values of informal transactions” could “undermine a pure Western perspective on corruption” (2013,