Living with the scepticism for qualitative research: a phenomenological polyethnography

IF 0.8 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Qualitative Research Journal Pub Date : 2023-09-28 DOI:10.1108/qrj-03-2023-0052
Jill Fenton Taylor, Ivana Crestani
{"title":"Living with the scepticism for qualitative research: a phenomenological polyethnography","authors":"Jill Fenton Taylor, Ivana Crestani","doi":"10.1108/qrj-03-2023-0052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This paper aims to explore how an academic researcher and a practitioner experience scepticism for their qualitative research. Design/methodology/approach The study applies Olt and Teman's new conceptual phenomenological polyethnography (2019) methodology, a hybrid of phenomenology and duoethnography. Findings For the researcher-participants, the essence of living with scepticism means feeling a sense of injustice; struggling with the desire for simplicity and quantification; being in a circle of uneasiness; having a survival mechanism; and embracing healthy scepticism. They experience the essence differently and similarly in varied cultural contexts. Through duoethnographic conversations, they acknowledge that while there can be scepticism of their work, it is important to remain sceptical, persistent and curious by challenging traditional concepts. Theoretical and practical advances in artificial intelligence (AI) continue to highlight the need for clarifying qualitative researcher roles in academia and practice. Originality/value This paper contributes to the debate of qualitative versus quantitative research. Its originality is in exploring scepticism as lived experience, from an academic and practitioner perspective and applying a phenomenological polyethnography approach that blends two different traditional research paradigms.","PeriodicalId":47040,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qrj-03-2023-0052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore how an academic researcher and a practitioner experience scepticism for their qualitative research. Design/methodology/approach The study applies Olt and Teman's new conceptual phenomenological polyethnography (2019) methodology, a hybrid of phenomenology and duoethnography. Findings For the researcher-participants, the essence of living with scepticism means feeling a sense of injustice; struggling with the desire for simplicity and quantification; being in a circle of uneasiness; having a survival mechanism; and embracing healthy scepticism. They experience the essence differently and similarly in varied cultural contexts. Through duoethnographic conversations, they acknowledge that while there can be scepticism of their work, it is important to remain sceptical, persistent and curious by challenging traditional concepts. Theoretical and practical advances in artificial intelligence (AI) continue to highlight the need for clarifying qualitative researcher roles in academia and practice. Originality/value This paper contributes to the debate of qualitative versus quantitative research. Its originality is in exploring scepticism as lived experience, from an academic and practitioner perspective and applying a phenomenological polyethnography approach that blends two different traditional research paradigms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与质性研究的怀疑主义共存:现象学的多民族志
本文旨在探讨学术研究者和实践者在质性研究中如何体验怀疑主义。该研究采用了Olt和Teman的新概念现象学多民族志(2019)方法,这是现象学和多民族志的混合体。对于研究参与者来说,怀疑主义生活的本质意味着感觉不公正;挣扎于对简单和量化的渴望;处于不安的圈子里;有生存机制的;并接受健康的怀疑主义。在不同的文化背景下,他们对本质的体验既不同又相似。通过多元人种学的对话,他们承认,虽然他们的工作可能会受到怀疑,但重要的是要通过挑战传统观念来保持怀疑、坚持和好奇。人工智能(AI)的理论和实践进展继续突出了澄清定性研究人员在学术界和实践中的角色的必要性。原创性/价值这篇论文有助于定性研究与定量研究的争论。它的独创性在于从学术和实践的角度探索作为生活经验的怀疑主义,并应用现象学的多民族志方法,融合了两种不同的传统研究范式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Qualitative Research Journal
Qualitative Research Journal SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research Journal (QRJ) is an international journal devoted to the communication of the theory and practice of qualitative research in the human sciences. It is interdisciplinary and eclectic, covering all methodologies that can be described as qualitative. It offers an international forum for researchers and practitioners to advance knowledge and promote good qualitative research practices. QRJ deals comprehensively with the collection, analysis and presentation of qualitative data in the human sciences as well as theoretical and conceptual inquiry.
期刊最新文献
Home–school interactions relating to students with disability: a document analysis of Australian policy and guidelines Entrepreneurial mindset strategies in times of crisis: a qualitative study on street food vendors Métissage – somewhere between hope and happening The door opens inward: meeting Linda Tuhiwai Smith Relationships with horses and humans: Smith’s legacy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1