Liu, J; Shahi, A; Haas, C T; Goodrum, P and Caldas, C H (2014) Validation methodologies and their impact in construction productivity research. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(10): 04014046, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Choosing validation methods in construction research is challenging. This study explores trends in the use of validation methods and their impacts based on a statistical analysis of a sample set of 365 research articles on construction productivity. This sample set provides a balance of the breadth and cohesion required for significant comparisons and the temporal depth required for longitudinal analysis. The contributions of this research include (1) a critical review of the validation methodologies that can be used for research projects in construction engineering and management, (2) an investigation of the statistical relationship between validation methods and the impact in terms of citations of research over time in different source categories, and (3) statistically significant observations over the preceding thirty years of the increased use of functional demonstration as a validation methodology and the decreased existence of unclear validation. These results may be used in the future to influence the choice of validation methods to increase the impact of construction productivity research.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction engineering; data management; data sharing; industry forum; research methodology; research validation; statistical analysis |
| Index terms: | longitudinal analysis, validation, investigation, data management, methodology, construction engineering, cohesion, research methodology, statistical analysis, construction productivity |
| Subjects: | professional development, data management, engineering methods, research methods, operations management, research design and methodology, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, structural engineering, data science |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here