Bringing rigor in contextual objectivity: lessons from applying feminist lens in scoping the evidence on girlhood studies in Indonesia.

Frontiers in research metrics and analytics Pub Date : 2024-05-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frma.2024.1339651
Santi Kusumaningrum, Shaila Tieken, Andrea Andjaringtyas Adhi, Siti Ainun Nisa, Widi Laras Sari, Annisa R Beta
{"title":"Bringing rigor in contextual objectivity: lessons from applying feminist lens in scoping the evidence on girlhood studies in Indonesia.","authors":"Santi Kusumaningrum, Shaila Tieken, Andrea Andjaringtyas Adhi, Siti Ainun Nisa, Widi Laras Sari, Annisa R Beta","doi":"10.3389/frma.2024.1339651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This perspective paper contemplates the nuances of engaging with literature ethically in conducting a scoping review based on the researchers' project on girlhood studies in Indonesia. We assert that the ethical perspective extends beyond conventional primary data collection from human participants, further emphasizing the essence of a feminist methodology in this scholarly investigation. We discuss the interplay between the role of rigor and the dynamics of power relations in research, shedding light on reconciling between the pursuit of facts and acknowledgment of biases in knowledge production. This reflection offers insights into the methodological process and the researcher's role, contributing to the broader discourse on how research can effectively address issues of gender equity and social inclusion. Through this paper, we underscore the necessity of an intentional approach in unifying the domains of science and advocacy because only then can we truly catalyze transformative change. In doing so, we seek to foster a more comprehensive, objective, and empathetic understanding of the researched: in this case, the experiences of girls and young women -and, by extension, marginalized individuals in Indonesia and beyond.</p>","PeriodicalId":73104,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11177752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2024.1339651","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This perspective paper contemplates the nuances of engaging with literature ethically in conducting a scoping review based on the researchers' project on girlhood studies in Indonesia. We assert that the ethical perspective extends beyond conventional primary data collection from human participants, further emphasizing the essence of a feminist methodology in this scholarly investigation. We discuss the interplay between the role of rigor and the dynamics of power relations in research, shedding light on reconciling between the pursuit of facts and acknowledgment of biases in knowledge production. This reflection offers insights into the methodological process and the researcher's role, contributing to the broader discourse on how research can effectively address issues of gender equity and social inclusion. Through this paper, we underscore the necessity of an intentional approach in unifying the domains of science and advocacy because only then can we truly catalyze transformative change. In doing so, we seek to foster a more comprehensive, objective, and empathetic understanding of the researched: in this case, the experiences of girls and young women -and, by extension, marginalized individuals in Indonesia and beyond.

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
在客观背景中体现严谨性:在印度尼西亚女童研究中运用女权主义视角的经验教训。
本视角论文以研究人员在印度尼西亚开展的女童研究项目为基础,探讨了在进行范围综述时如何从伦理角度参与文献研究的细微差别。我们认为,伦理视角超越了传统的从人类参与者那里收集原始数据的范围,进一步强调了这一学术调查中女性主义方法论的本质。我们讨论了研究中严谨性的作用与权力关系动态之间的相互作用,揭示了在知识生产中追求事实与承认偏见之间的协调。这种思考为研究方法过程和研究人员的角色提供了见解,有助于更广泛地讨论研究如何有效解决性别平等和社会包容问题。通过本文,我们强调了有意识地将科学与宣传领域统一起来的必要性,因为只有这样,我们才能真正推动变革。在此过程中,我们力图促进对被研究者更全面、更客观、更感同身受的理解:在本案例中,被研究者是女孩和年轻女性--进而是印度尼西亚及其他国家的边缘化个人--的经历。
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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating algorithm bias in AI: ensuring fairness and trust in Africa. The ethics of knowledge sharing: a feminist examination of intellectual property rights and open-source materials in gender transformative methodologies. Complexity and phase transitions in citation networks: insights from artificial intelligence research. Designing measures of complex collaborations with participatory, evidence-centered design. Patent data-driven analysis of literature associations with changing innovation trends.
×
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