metodens

Metodens is a theoretical framework for evaluating and guiding the selection, combination, and evaluation of research methods across disciplines. It emphasizes methodological coherence, transparency, and reproducibility, and it seeks to align the chosen methods with the aims, data, and ethical considerations of a study. The term is used primarily in discussions about meta-methodology and is not tied to a single discipline.

It emerged from debates on methodological pluralism and reflexivity in contemporary research, where scholars argued that method choice should be justified in relation to research questions, data quality, and theoretical commitments rather than follows of tradition. Metodens proposes a structured approach to assess and report method decisions.

Its core principles include methodological pluralism (valuing multiple methods when appropriate), triangulation to corroborate findings, reflexivity about biases, and transparent documentation of reasoning behind method selection. It also endorses predefined evaluation criteria, such as validity, reliability, ethical considerations, and feasibility.

A typical Metodens workflow includes a pre-study assessment of research questions, data types, and constraints; a decision log where method choices are recorded; and a reporting template that links methods to results and limitations. Some implementations offer a scoring rubric to compare alternative designs.

Advocates argue that Metodens enhances comparability across studies and supports peer review by making method choices explicit. Critics caution that the framework can be time-consuming to apply and may introduce rigidity or bureaucratization into research processes.