Explore the vast range of titles available.

We analyze methodological trends in empirical research in JIBS from 1970 to 2019. Our results point to the prevalence of the following patterns: there has been an increase in the use of (1) large-scale longitudinal, cross-national datasets, (2) complex analytical techniques, including the incorporation of multiple analytical techniques within the same study, but (3) a decline in the diversity of methods in use. We relate these trends to the underlying social, technical, and communicative conventions in the journal during the 50-year period. The observed patterns are consistent with theory that posits scientific fields entrench a dominant paradigm over time, resulting in a restricted set of methodological options being selected. Such restrictions jeopardize the quality of research because the study of any phenomenon requires the use of multiple methodological procedures to avoid the systematic biases, errors, omissions, and limitations introduced by any single option. Therefore, we propose the use of triangulation as a strategy for building methodological alternatives into research designs. Institutionalization of this principle in the field of international business has the potential to enhance both the rigor and scope of future inquiry.

The 1938 Provincial Exhibition in Trois-Rivières is a rare example of a modern ensemble designed for a regional collective event in Canada. Long neglected in critical discourse, the site reveals traces of transformation, abandonment, and adaptive reuse that have altered its original unity while demonstrating the resilience of modern architectural languages. This paper offers critical reading based on archival, iconographic, and in situ research to reconstruct the site's evolution and identify typological continuities. Special focus is given to the design studio Re-Habiter l’Expo, which explored heritage reactivation through stratigraphic analysis, identity values, and hybrid conservation and design methods. The case challenges conventional restoration theory, proposing new strategies for fragile modern architectures that balance memory and collective appropriation. From this peripheral context, broader insights emerge for the Canadian and international debate on modern heritage conservation.

Autoethnography is an avant-garde method of qualitative inquiry that has captured the attention of an ever-increasing number of scholars from a variety of disciplines. Personal experience methods can offer a new and unique vantage point from which to make a contribution to social science yet, autoethnography has been criticized for being self-indulgent, narcissistic, introspective, and individualized. Methodological discussions about this method are polarized. As an autoethnographer and qualitative methodologist with an interest in personal experience methods, I have had the opportunity to review several autoethnographic manuscripts over the years. As my reviews accumulated, I began to see themes in my responses and it became apparent that I was advocating for an approach to autoethnography that lies in contrast to the frequently offered methodological polemics from philosophically divergent scholars. In this article, I draw from the reviews I have done to address topics such as applications and purposes for autoethnography, the degree of theory and analysis used within the method, data sources and dissemination of findings, and ethical issues. I then connect the concerns I see in the reviewed manuscripts to examples in the autoethnographic literature. Ultimately, I propose a moderate and balanced treatment of autoethnography that allows for innovation, imagination, and the representation of a range of voices in qualitative inquiry while also sustaining confidence in the quality, rigor, and usefulness of academic research.

To commemorate 40 years since the founding of the Journal of Business Ethics, the editors-in-chief of the journal have invited the editors to provide commentaries on the future of business ethics. This essay comprises a selection of commentaries aimed at creating dialog around the theme Bringing Excitement to Empirical Business Ethics Research (inspired by the title of the commentary by Babalola and van Gils). These editors, considering the diversity of empirical approaches in business ethics, envisage a future in which quantitative business ethics research is more bold and innovative, as well as reflexive about its techniques, and dialog between quantitative and qualitative research nourishes the enrichment of both. In their commentary, Babalola and van Gils argue that leadership research has stagnated with the use of too narrow a range of perspectives and methods and too many overlapping concepts. They propose that novel insights could be achieved by investigating the lived experience of leadership (through interviews, document analysis, archival data); by focusing on topics of concern to society; by employing different personal, philosophical, or cultural perspectives; and by turning the lens on the heroic leader (through “dark-side” and follower studies). Taking a provocative stance, Bal and Garcia-Lorenzo argue that we need radical voices in current times to enable a better understanding of the psychology underlying ethical transformations. Psychology can support business ethics by not shying away from grander ideas, going beyond the margins of “unethical behaviors harming the organization” and expanding the range of lenses used to studying behavior in context. In the arena of finance and business ethics, Guedhami, Liang, and Shailer emphasize novel data sets and innovative methods. Significantly, they stress that an understanding the intersection of finance and ethics is central to business ethics; financial equality and inclusion are persistent socio-economic and political concerns that are not always framed as ethics issues, yet relevant business policies and practices manifest ethical values. Finally, Charles Cho offers his opinion on the blurry line between the “ethical” versus “social” or “critical” aspects of accounting papers. The Journal of Business Ethics provides fertile ground for innovative, even radical, approaches to quantitative methods (see Zyphur and Pierides in J Bus Ethics 143(1):1–16, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3549-8, 2017), as part of a broad goal of ethically reflecting on empirical research.

Although several methods have been developed to allow for the analysis of data in the presence of missing values, no clear guide exists to help family researchers in choosing among the many options and procedures available. We delineate these options and examine the sensitivity of the findings in a regression model estimated in three random samples from the National Survey of Families and Households (n = 250-2,000). These results, combined with findings from simulation studies, are used to guide answers to a set of 10 common questions asked by researchers when selecting a missing data approach. Modern missing data techniques were found to perform better than traditional ones, but differences between the types of modern approaches had minor effects on the estimates and substantive conclusions. Our findings suggest that the researcher has considerable flexibility in selecting among modern options for handling missing data.

This paper introduces two methodological innovations designed to enhance the transparency, ethics, and creative rigor of youth-focused participatory research in mental health. First, we conceptualize ‘Invisible Ink’ as a metaphor for latent participant knowledge—insights rooted in lived experience that remain hidden without specific relational and analytic scaffolds. Second, we model ‘Backstage Cafés as emergent, informal third spaces where young people, researchers, and practitioners co-create trust, surface vulnerabilities, and negotiate power relations before stepping into formal research activities. Drawing on co-authored reflections from the UKRI-funded Attune and Create projects ( n ≈ 200 participants, aged 10–24), we demonstrate how these tools operated across two iterative phases: (1) collaborative inquiry into ‘meaningful mess’—where uncertainty and vulnerability fuel creative exploration—and (2) management of ‘messy muddles’—complex ethical dilemmas and role ambiguities that arose in real time. Through a six-stage writing process combining surveys, interviews, collaborative coding, and a residential retreat, we illustrate how Invisible Ink and Backstage Cafés enabled genuine co-production of methodological insights, flattened traditional hierarchies, and sustained participant agency throughout data collection, analysis, and dissemination. Implications for qualitative and mixed-methods researchers include guidelines for integrating unstructured relational spaces, deliberately surfacing hidden contributions, and maintaining ethical reflexivity in long-term participatory endeavours. By foregrounding the dynamics of backstage processes, the behind-the-scenes activities that support the public facing participatory work, this paper advances participatory methodology beyond static frameworks toward a fluid, ethically accountable paradigm.

Social inclusion unfolds through everyday movement and encounter and is shaped by embodied, affective, and spatial dynamics. Conceptualizing in/exclusion as layered and co-occurring, this article examines how a multimodal methodological assemblage can generate situated knowledge about lived experiences of inclusion in urban environments in the context of autism. Grounded in González Rey’s Theory of Meaning Production and a primarily autoethnographic design, the study shows how embodied walkscapes, social mapping, and reflexive field diary writing operate together to make perceptible affective–spatial configurations that often remain inaccessible to verbocentric qualitative approaches. The article makes a methodological contribution. Using self-generated materials produced through recurrent urban walkscapes and reflexive documentation during research conducted in 2024, it demonstrates how movement, spatial inscription, and reflexive interpretation enable epistemic access to embodied rhythms, affective nodes, spatial interruptions, and atmospheric gradients. Participatory mapping with caregivers is included as contextual methodological work within the broader research setting but is not treated as collaborative autoethnographic data. The article explicates the analytic operations and epistemic boundaries of multimodal integration. By detailing how insights emerge through circulation across embodied, visual–spatial, and reflexive modalities, the study proposes a transferable methodological framework for researching lived experience across diverse contexts.

Qualitative researchers increasingly work with populations experiencing active marginalization and legislative targeting, yet existing methodological frameworks inadequately address how to create conditions for authentic knowledge production when participation itself carries criminalized risk. This article presents individual participant scaffolding—a replicable methodological framework that treats differentiated support as essential for rigorous research rather than methodological compromise. We developed and tested this framework during summer 2024 through a five-week arts-based research program with four transgender youth (ages 12-18) in Texas, where anti-transgender legislation had created unprecedented vulnerability. The framework operates through four interconnected mechanisms: differentiated support structures responsive to intersectional identities, temporal adaptation that treats disruptions as methodological data rather than attrition, graduated visibility protocols that enable disclosure while maintaining participant control, and collaborative analysis processes that position youth as knowledge co-creators. When participants faced surgery, hospitalization, family crisis, or sensory overwhelm, these mechanisms enabled engagement without requiring them to abandon their safety or selfhood. All four participants completed the program despite significant disruptions, producing sophisticated knowledge—ecological metaphors of transformation, cosmological frameworks for identity, poetic articulations of psychological violence, and scientific challenges to biological determinism—that emerged specifically through individualized scaffolding. Individual participant scaffolding provides practical, replicable guidance for researchers working with vulnerable populations in hostile contexts. The framework demonstrates that responsive adaptation enhances rather than compromises methodological rigor, challenging conventional assumptions that standardization is necessary for validity. The principles are transferable across contexts while remaining flexible for local implementation, transforming research from extraction to collaboration and from standardization to justice.