Researching Vulnerable Groups: Definitions, Controversies, Dilemmas, and the Researcher’s Personal Entanglement

Q3 Social Sciences Qualitative Sociology Review Pub Date : 2024-01-31 DOI:10.18778/1733-8077.20.1.02
Urszula Kluczyńska, A. Kłonkowska, Małgorzata Bieńkowska
{"title":"Researching Vulnerable Groups: Definitions, Controversies, Dilemmas, and the Researcher’s Personal Entanglement","authors":"Urszula Kluczyńska, A. Kłonkowska, Małgorzata Bieńkowska","doi":"10.18778/1733-8077.20.1.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article aims to describe vulnerable groups in the context of qualitative research in social science with special attention to ethical and methodological dilemmas. This is a theoretical study, which does not aspire to offer solutions or guidelines, but rather show elements worth taking notice of and analyzing when research is planned and carried out. We argue that in the social sciences, vulnerability is relational and crucial. However, social science researchers perceive the category of vulnerability as ambiguous and nuanced. This article shows that ascribing research participants univocally to a vulnerable group may lead not only to them being stereotyped and deprived of individuality but also to a situation where the research act itself disempowers them. We also argue that apart from issues often raised concerning the protection of participants from vulnerable groups, the researcher and their protection are also pivotal, particularly when the researcher, due to their involvement, abandons the out-group perspective or when they belong to the vulnerable group.","PeriodicalId":53708,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Sociology Review","volume":"120 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Sociology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.20.1.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article aims to describe vulnerable groups in the context of qualitative research in social science with special attention to ethical and methodological dilemmas. This is a theoretical study, which does not aspire to offer solutions or guidelines, but rather show elements worth taking notice of and analyzing when research is planned and carried out. We argue that in the social sciences, vulnerability is relational and crucial. However, social science researchers perceive the category of vulnerability as ambiguous and nuanced. This article shows that ascribing research participants univocally to a vulnerable group may lead not only to them being stereotyped and deprived of individuality but also to a situation where the research act itself disempowers them. We also argue that apart from issues often raised concerning the protection of participants from vulnerable groups, the researcher and their protection are also pivotal, particularly when the researcher, due to their involvement, abandons the out-group perspective or when they belong to the vulnerable group.
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
研究弱势群体:定义、争议、困境和研究人员的个人纠葛
文章旨在描述社会科学定性研究中的弱势群体,特别关注伦理和方法论困境。这是一项理论研究,无意提供解决方案或指导原则,而是展示在规划和开展研究时值得注意和分析的因素。我们认为,在社会科学中,脆弱性是相关的,也是至关重要的。然而,社会科学研究人员对脆弱性这一范畴的认识是模糊的、有细微差别的。本文指出,将研究参与者一概归入弱势群体,不仅可能导致他们被定型和被剥夺个性,还可能导致研究行为本身剥夺了他们的权利。我们还认为,除了经常提出的有关保护弱势群体参与者的问题外,研究人员及其保护也至关重要,尤其是当研究人员由于参与研究而放弃了外群体的观点或他们属于弱势群体时。
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 Sociology Review
Qualitative Sociology Review Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: For a long time, we have observed an increased interest in qualitative sociology, and the use of an interpretive frame to understand human actions, social processes, meanings and definitions, and new social theory generally. In order to enable a free flow of information and to integrate the community of qualitative sociologists, we have decided to create an open-access, international scientific journal. Qualitative Sociology Review publishes empirical, theoretical and methodological articles applicable to all fields and specializations within sociology.
期刊最新文献
“Am I Going to Die?” Considering the Preparation for Research on an Example of Hospice Patients Transitioning (on the) Internet: Shifting Challenges and Contradictions of Ethics of Studying Online Gender Transition Narratives Ethical and Methodological Dilemmas in Qualitative Research Conducted among Vulnerable Groups—Guest Editors’ Introduction The Conceptual Metaphor as an Ethical Kaleidoscope in Field Research Researching Vulnerable Groups: Definitions, Controversies, Dilemmas, and the Researcher’s Personal Entanglement
×
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