Intersectional approaches to data: The importance of an articulation mindset for intersectional data science

IF 6.5 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Big Data & Society Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/20539517231203667
Caitlin Bentley, Chisenga Muyoya, Sara Vannini, Susan Oman, Andrea Jimenez
{"title":"Intersectional approaches to data: The importance of an articulation mindset for intersectional data science","authors":"Caitlin Bentley, Chisenga Muyoya, Sara Vannini, Susan Oman, Andrea Jimenez","doi":"10.1177/20539517231203667","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Data's increasing role in society and high profile reproduction of inequalities is in tension with traditional methods of using social data for social justice. Alongside this, ‘intersectionality’ has increased in prominence as a critical social theory and praxis to address inequalities. Yet, there is not a comprehensive review of how intersectionality is operationalized in research data practice. In this study, we examined how intersectionality researchers across a range of disciplines conduct intersectional analysis as a means of unpacking how intersectional praxis may advance an intersectional data science agenda. To explore how intersectionality researchers collect and analyze data, we conducted a critical discourse analysis approach in a review of 172 articles that stated using an intersectional approach in some way. We contemplated whether and how Collins’ three frames of relationality were evident in their approach. We found an over-reliance on the additive thinking frame in quantitative research, which poses limits on the potential for this research to address structural inequality. We suggest ways in which intersectional data science could adopt an articulation mindset to improve on this tendency.","PeriodicalId":47834,"journal":{"name":"Big Data & Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Big Data & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231203667","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Data's increasing role in society and high profile reproduction of inequalities is in tension with traditional methods of using social data for social justice. Alongside this, ‘intersectionality’ has increased in prominence as a critical social theory and praxis to address inequalities. Yet, there is not a comprehensive review of how intersectionality is operationalized in research data practice. In this study, we examined how intersectionality researchers across a range of disciplines conduct intersectional analysis as a means of unpacking how intersectional praxis may advance an intersectional data science agenda. To explore how intersectionality researchers collect and analyze data, we conducted a critical discourse analysis approach in a review of 172 articles that stated using an intersectional approach in some way. We contemplated whether and how Collins’ three frames of relationality were evident in their approach. We found an over-reliance on the additive thinking frame in quantitative research, which poses limits on the potential for this research to address structural inequality. We suggest ways in which intersectional data science could adopt an articulation mindset to improve on this tendency.
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
数据的交叉方法:交叉数据科学中清晰思维的重要性
数据在社会中日益重要的作用和引人注目的不平等再现与利用社会数据促进社会正义的传统方法存在紧张关系。除此之外,“交叉性”作为解决不平等问题的关键社会理论和实践日益突出。然而,在研究数据实践中,交叉性是如何运作的,并没有一个全面的审查。在本研究中,我们研究了跨学科的交叉研究人员如何进行交叉分析,作为揭示交叉实践如何推进交叉数据科学议程的一种手段。为了探索交叉性研究人员如何收集和分析数据,我们对172篇以某种方式使用交叉性方法的文章进行了批判性话语分析。我们考虑了柯林斯的三个关系框架在他们的方法中是否明显,以及如何明显。我们发现在定量研究中过度依赖于加法思维框架,这限制了本研究解决结构性不平等的潜力。我们建议交叉数据科学可以采用清晰的思维方式来改善这种趋势。
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
Big Data & Society
Big Data & Society SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
10.60%
发文量
59
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Big Data & Society (BD&S) is an open access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes interdisciplinary work principally in the social sciences, humanities, and computing and their intersections with the arts and natural sciences. The journal focuses on the implications of Big Data for societies and aims to connect debates about Big Data practices and their effects on various sectors such as academia, social life, industry, business, and government. BD&S considers Big Data as an emerging field of practices, not solely defined by but generative of unique data qualities such as high volume, granularity, data linking, and mining. The journal pays attention to digital content generated both online and offline, encompassing social media, search engines, closed networks (e.g., commercial or government transactions), and open networks like digital archives, open government, and crowdsourced data. Rather than providing a fixed definition of Big Data, BD&S encourages interdisciplinary inquiries, debates, and studies on various topics and themes related to Big Data practices. BD&S seeks contributions that analyze Big Data practices, involve empirical engagements and experiments with innovative methods, and reflect on the consequences of these practices for the representation, realization, and governance of societies. As a digital-only journal, BD&S's platform can accommodate multimedia formats such as complex images, dynamic visualizations, videos, and audio content. The contents of the journal encompass peer-reviewed research articles, colloquia, bookcasts, think pieces, state-of-the-art methods, and work by early career researchers.
期刊最新文献
From rules to examples: Machine learning's type of authority Outlier bias: AI classification of curb ramps, outliers, and context Artificial intelligence and skills in the workplace: An integrative research agenda Redress and worldmaking: Differing approaches to algorithmic reparations for housing justice The promises and challenges of addressing artificial intelligence with human rights
×
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