Raftery, J (1998) From Ptolemy to Heisenberg: Quantitative models and reality. Construction Management and Economics, 16(3), pp. 295-302. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
An aspect of methodology in research in the field of design economics and cost modelling is described, discussed and evaluated. This review is designed for post-graduate students and built-environment professionals embarking on a PhD in that field. Models, built using methods regarded as 'scientific' at the time, have enabled us to solve specific problems and to learn more about the world. A generalized approach to building and testing symbolic models is outlined. In conclusion, a number of limitations are identified which are inherent in the conventional quantitative modelling approach.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | models; research methods |
| Index terms: | graduate student, design economics, methodology, testing, modelling |
| Subjects: | curriculum design, professional practice, analytical methods, design theory, research methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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