Pub Date : 2023-01-11DOI: 10.1177/16094069221147163
Gracen Mueller, A. Barford, Helen Osborne, Kaajal Pradhan, Rachel Proefke, Soniya Shrestha, A. Pratiwi
The common-place quantification of humanitarian disasters enables rapid and informed crisis responses. In disaster settings, understanding feelings and perceptions regarding individuals’ experiences, livelihood disruptions and coping mechanisms can also be valuable for extending and deepening quantitative insight. This paper explores the potential for diary methods to capture extensive, nuanced data from marginalised groups during a disaster, by drawing upon a study with 100 young diarists (aged 15–29) who produced 1418 diary entries over 4 months. In particular, we share how diary-methods can be designed inclusively, through addressing themes of equitable research partnerships, supporting more vulnerable participants, ensuring data quality, data management, participatory analysis, and budgeting for collaborative research.
{"title":"Disaster Diaries: Qualitative Research at a Distance","authors":"Gracen Mueller, A. Barford, Helen Osborne, Kaajal Pradhan, Rachel Proefke, Soniya Shrestha, A. Pratiwi","doi":"10.1177/16094069221147163","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221147163","url":null,"abstract":"The common-place quantification of humanitarian disasters enables rapid and informed crisis responses. In disaster settings, understanding feelings and perceptions regarding individuals’ experiences, livelihood disruptions and coping mechanisms can also be valuable for extending and deepening quantitative insight. This paper explores the potential for diary methods to capture extensive, nuanced data from marginalised groups during a disaster, by drawing upon a study with 100 young diarists (aged 15–29) who produced 1418 diary entries over 4 months. In particular, we share how diary-methods can be designed inclusively, through addressing themes of equitable research partnerships, supporting more vulnerable participants, ensuring data quality, data management, participatory analysis, and budgeting for collaborative research.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43293715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-11DOI: 10.1177/16094069221150107
Lauren Quinlivan, N. Dunphy
With global greenhouse gas emissions on the rise, the higher education sector has recognised the part it must play in reducing its carbon footprint, setting an example for others to follow in the global fight against climate change. In 2019 University College Cork undertook the complex task of designing and developing a Climate Action Plan, beginning with the compilation of a detailed inventory of the university’s greenhouse gas emissions and followed by a period of engaged research during which potential climate action measures were identified by key stakeholders. In response to the start of the Covid-19 pandemic and introduction of public health restrictions, a structured dialogue – modified Delphi – approach was employed as part of the engaged research. This mixed-methods approach proved successful at identifying a number of potential opportunities for reducing the university’s carbon footprint, with the structured dialogue method in particular offering the researchers numerous advantages for conducting engaged research during the unique circumstances arising as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.
{"title":"A Mixed-Methods Approach to Climate Action Planning","authors":"Lauren Quinlivan, N. Dunphy","doi":"10.1177/16094069221150107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221150107","url":null,"abstract":"With global greenhouse gas emissions on the rise, the higher education sector has recognised the part it must play in reducing its carbon footprint, setting an example for others to follow in the global fight against climate change. In 2019 University College Cork undertook the complex task of designing and developing a Climate Action Plan, beginning with the compilation of a detailed inventory of the university’s greenhouse gas emissions and followed by a period of engaged research during which potential climate action measures were identified by key stakeholders. In response to the start of the Covid-19 pandemic and introduction of public health restrictions, a structured dialogue – modified Delphi – approach was employed as part of the engaged research. This mixed-methods approach proved successful at identifying a number of potential opportunities for reducing the university’s carbon footprint, with the structured dialogue method in particular offering the researchers numerous advantages for conducting engaged research during the unique circumstances arising as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43007667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-09DOI: 10.1177/16094069221146991
Rosie Walters
This article explores how reading focus group data ‘against the grain’ offers new insights into publics’, and especially marginalised groups’, negotiation of dominant discourses. Using data from a study with members of the UN Foundation’s Girl Up campaign in the UK, US and Malawi, I demonstrate that reading against the grain both across and within groups enabled me to explore the girls’ complex negotiations of girl power discourses in international development. I argue that reading focus group data against the grain involves paying attention both to wider social power relations, as is crucial to a poststructuralist discourse analysis, and to interactions between group members, a form of analysis more commonly associated with Conversation Analysis. This methodological strategy enabled me to explore the topic of girl power discourses in international development from a new perspective, moving beyond the abundance of critiques in the literature of dominant discourses emerging from powerful institutions. By focusing on the girls’ instances of resistance to, and critical engagement with, dominant discourses, I suggest that reading focus group data against the grain opens up the possibility of a rich new area of research for scholars and practitioners alike: one which goes beyond simplistic victim/agency binaries and explores the complexities of audiences’ readings of texts.
{"title":"Reading Focus Group Data Against the Grain","authors":"Rosie Walters","doi":"10.1177/16094069221146991","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221146991","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores how reading focus group data ‘against the grain’ offers new insights into publics’, and especially marginalised groups’, negotiation of dominant discourses. Using data from a study with members of the UN Foundation’s Girl Up campaign in the UK, US and Malawi, I demonstrate that reading against the grain both across and within groups enabled me to explore the girls’ complex negotiations of girl power discourses in international development. I argue that reading focus group data against the grain involves paying attention both to wider social power relations, as is crucial to a poststructuralist discourse analysis, and to interactions between group members, a form of analysis more commonly associated with Conversation Analysis. This methodological strategy enabled me to explore the topic of girl power discourses in international development from a new perspective, moving beyond the abundance of critiques in the literature of dominant discourses emerging from powerful institutions. By focusing on the girls’ instances of resistance to, and critical engagement with, dominant discourses, I suggest that reading focus group data against the grain opens up the possibility of a rich new area of research for scholars and practitioners alike: one which goes beyond simplistic victim/agency binaries and explores the complexities of audiences’ readings of texts.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44212390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-06DOI: 10.1177/16094069221149486
Ndiaga Niasse
Since its inception in the sociological field more than fifty years, Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) has been extended to a range of research areas but there still be confusions and misconceptions about its history and methodological principles. This paper attempts to provide a full theoretical overview of the history of GTM and allows limiting misconceptions about the methodology itself. Drawing upon social sciences perspectives, the paper begins by briefly shedding the light on two major related concepts: Grounded Theory (GT) and Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM). It continues by defining what GTM really means and outlines the reasons behind The Discovery of grounded theory and further focuses on the big split that gave birth to three schools of Grounded Theory Methodology: Glaserian, Straussian and Constructivist GTM.
扎根理论方法论(Grounded Theory Methodology, GTM)在社会学领域诞生50多年来，已经扩展到许多研究领域，但对它的历史和方法论原理仍然存在一些困惑和误解。本文试图提供GTM历史的完整理论概述，并允许限制对方法本身的误解。从社会科学的角度出发，本文首先简要介绍了两个主要的相关概念:扎根理论(GT)和扎根理论方法论(GTM)。它继续定义了GTM的真正含义，概述了基础理论发现背后的原因，并进一步关注了产生了三个基础理论方法论学派的大分裂:格拉塞里学派、斯特拉斯学派和建构主义GTM。
{"title":"Limiting Misleading ideas about the History of Grounded Theory Methodology","authors":"Ndiaga Niasse","doi":"10.1177/16094069221149486","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221149486","url":null,"abstract":"Since its inception in the sociological field more than fifty years, Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) has been extended to a range of research areas but there still be confusions and misconceptions about its history and methodological principles. This paper attempts to provide a full theoretical overview of the history of GTM and allows limiting misconceptions about the methodology itself. Drawing upon social sciences perspectives, the paper begins by briefly shedding the light on two major related concepts: Grounded Theory (GT) and Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM). It continues by defining what GTM really means and outlines the reasons behind The Discovery of grounded theory and further focuses on the big split that gave birth to three schools of Grounded Theory Methodology: Glaserian, Straussian and Constructivist GTM.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45025623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-06DOI: 10.1177/16094069221148415
K. Closson, Tadiwa Nemutambwe, Zoë Osborne, Gem Y. Lee, Colby Hangle, Sadie Stephenson, Patience Magagula, Ivan Leonce, A. Raj, V. Nicholson, A. Kaida
Gender-based power dynamics within intimate relationships such as controlling behaviours are driven by inequitable gender norms that perpetuate intimate partner violence (IPV). Yet, the ways in which we understand and measure gender-based power dynamics focus on the relationships of monogamous, cisgender, white, heterosexual women. This paper outlines our process of planning and implementing a qualitative, youth-led, community-based research (CBR) study exploring how diverse youth with intersecting identities perceive existing measures of gender equity and understand gender equity based on their own relationships. Between August-November 2022, we used purposive sampling to recruit 30 gender-inclusive young women and non-binary youth aged 17–29 with diverse identities, who live in British Columbia (BC), and have recent experience in a non-heterosexual and/or non-monogamous relationship (within prior 12 months). Using CBR methods, we hired and trained three Youth Research Associates (YRAs) and convened a 10-member Youth Advisory Committee (YAC) comprised of youth aged 19–28 years with queer, trans, and/or non-monogamous identities and experiences to consult on all aspects of our study. YRAs conducted cognitive interviews using an interview guide co-developed and piloted in partnership with the YAC and YRAs. Cognitive interviews explored youth perceptions of gender equity and two gender equity measures widely used in health research today. Interview data will be analyzed collaboratively using intersectional descriptive and thematic analysis. Results from our CBR study will be used to make recommendations to advance gender equity measurement to be more inclusive of and applicable to a diversity of youth relationships, experiences, and identities.
{"title":"Relationship and Gender Equity Measurement Among Gender-Inclusive Young Women and Non-Binary Youth in British Columbia (RE-IMAGYN BC): Planning a Youth-Led, Community-Based, Qualitative Research Study","authors":"K. Closson, Tadiwa Nemutambwe, Zoë Osborne, Gem Y. Lee, Colby Hangle, Sadie Stephenson, Patience Magagula, Ivan Leonce, A. Raj, V. Nicholson, A. Kaida","doi":"10.1177/16094069221148415","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221148415","url":null,"abstract":"Gender-based power dynamics within intimate relationships such as controlling behaviours are driven by inequitable gender norms that perpetuate intimate partner violence (IPV). Yet, the ways in which we understand and measure gender-based power dynamics focus on the relationships of monogamous, cisgender, white, heterosexual women. This paper outlines our process of planning and implementing a qualitative, youth-led, community-based research (CBR) study exploring how diverse youth with intersecting identities perceive existing measures of gender equity and understand gender equity based on their own relationships. Between August-November 2022, we used purposive sampling to recruit 30 gender-inclusive young women and non-binary youth aged 17–29 with diverse identities, who live in British Columbia (BC), and have recent experience in a non-heterosexual and/or non-monogamous relationship (within prior 12 months). Using CBR methods, we hired and trained three Youth Research Associates (YRAs) and convened a 10-member Youth Advisory Committee (YAC) comprised of youth aged 19–28 years with queer, trans, and/or non-monogamous identities and experiences to consult on all aspects of our study. YRAs conducted cognitive interviews using an interview guide co-developed and piloted in partnership with the YAC and YRAs. Cognitive interviews explored youth perceptions of gender equity and two gender equity measures widely used in health research today. Interview data will be analyzed collaboratively using intersectional descriptive and thematic analysis. Results from our CBR study will be used to make recommendations to advance gender equity measurement to be more inclusive of and applicable to a diversity of youth relationships, experiences, and identities.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47174775","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-05DOI: 10.1177/16094069221144594
G. Bates, A. Le Gouais, A. Barnfield, Rosalie Callway, Md Nazmul Hasan, Caglar Koksal, Heeseo Rain Kwon, L. Montel, S. Peake-Jones, Jo White, K. Bondy, Sarah Ayres
Large scale, multi-organisational collaborations between researchers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds are increasingly recognised as important to investigate and tackle complex real-world problems. However differing expectations, epistemologies, and preferences across these teams pose challenges to following best practice for ensuring high-quality and rigorous qualitative research, while maintaining goodwill and team cohesion across team members. This article presents critical reflections from the real-world experiences of a team navigating the challenges of collaborating on a large-scale, cross-disciplinary interview study. Based on these experiences, we extend the literature on large team qualitative collaboration by highlighting the importance of balancing autonomy and collaboration, and propose eight recommendations to support high quality research and team cohesion. We identify how this balance can be achieved at different times: when centralised decision-making should be prioritised, and autonomy can be allowed. We argue that prioritising time to develop shared understandings, build trust, and creating positive environments that accept and support differing researcher perspectives on qualitative methods is paramount. By exploring and reflecting on these differences, teams can identify how and when to support autonomy in decision-making, when to move forward collaboratively, and how to ensure that shared processes reflect the needs of the whole team. The reflexive findings, emanating from practical experience, can inform large research teams undertaking qualitative studies to explore complex issues. We make an original contribution to qualitative methods research by arguing that balancing autonomy and collaboration is the key to promoting high quality research and cohesion in large teams.
{"title":"Balancing Autonomy and Collaboration in Large-Scale and Disciplinary Diverse Teams for Successful Qualitative Research","authors":"G. Bates, A. Le Gouais, A. Barnfield, Rosalie Callway, Md Nazmul Hasan, Caglar Koksal, Heeseo Rain Kwon, L. Montel, S. Peake-Jones, Jo White, K. Bondy, Sarah Ayres","doi":"10.1177/16094069221144594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221144594","url":null,"abstract":"Large scale, multi-organisational collaborations between researchers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds are increasingly recognised as important to investigate and tackle complex real-world problems. However differing expectations, epistemologies, and preferences across these teams pose challenges to following best practice for ensuring high-quality and rigorous qualitative research, while maintaining goodwill and team cohesion across team members. This article presents critical reflections from the real-world experiences of a team navigating the challenges of collaborating on a large-scale, cross-disciplinary interview study. Based on these experiences, we extend the literature on large team qualitative collaboration by highlighting the importance of balancing autonomy and collaboration, and propose eight recommendations to support high quality research and team cohesion. We identify how this balance can be achieved at different times: when centralised decision-making should be prioritised, and autonomy can be allowed. We argue that prioritising time to develop shared understandings, build trust, and creating positive environments that accept and support differing researcher perspectives on qualitative methods is paramount. By exploring and reflecting on these differences, teams can identify how and when to support autonomy in decision-making, when to move forward collaboratively, and how to ensure that shared processes reflect the needs of the whole team. The reflexive findings, emanating from practical experience, can inform large research teams undertaking qualitative studies to explore complex issues. We make an original contribution to qualitative methods research by arguing that balancing autonomy and collaboration is the key to promoting high quality research and cohesion in large teams.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42958336","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-05DOI: 10.1177/16094069221144940
Manuel S. González Canché
Labeling or classifying textual data and qualitative evidence is an expensive and consequential challenge. The rigor and consistency behind the construction of these labels ultimately shape research findings and conclusions. A multifaceted methodological conundrum to address this challenge is the need for human reasoning for classification that leads to deeper and more nuanced understandings; however, this same manual human classification comes with the well-documented increase in classification inconsistencies and errors, particularly when dealing with vast amounts of documents and teams of coders. An alternative to human coding consists of machine learning-assisted techniques. These data science and visualization techniques offer tools for data classification that are cost-effective and consistent but are prone to losing participants’ meanings or voices for two main reasons: (a) these classifications typically aggregate all texts configuring each input file (i.e., each interview transcript) into a single topic or code and (b) these words configuring texts are analyzed outside of their original contexts. To address this challenge and analytic conundrum, we present an analytic framework and software tool, that addresses the following question: How to classify vast amounts of qualitative evidence effectively and efficiently without losing context or the original voices of our research participants and while leveraging the nuances that human reasoning bring to the qualitative and mixed methods analytic tables? This framework mirrors the line-by-line coding employed in human/manual code identification but relying on machine learning to classify texts in minutes rather than months. The resulting outputs provide complete transparency of the classification process and aid to recreate the contextualized, original, and unaltered meanings embedded in the input documents, as provided by our participants. We offer access to the database ( González Canché, 2022e ) and software required ( González Canché, 2022a , Mac https://cutt.ly/jc7n3OT , and Windows https://cutt.ly/wc7nNKF ) to replicate the analyses. We hope this opportunity to become familiar with the analytic framework and software, may result in expanded access of data science tools to analyze qualitative evidence (see also González Canché 2022b , 2022c , 2022d , for related no-code data science applications to classify and analyze qualitative and textual data dynamically).
{"title":"Latent Code Identification (LACOID): A Machine Learning-Based Integrative Framework [and Open-Source Software] to Classify Big Textual Data, Rebuild Contextualized/Unaltered Meanings, and Avoid Aggregation Bias","authors":"Manuel S. González Canché","doi":"10.1177/16094069221144940","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221144940","url":null,"abstract":"Labeling or classifying textual data and qualitative evidence is an expensive and consequential challenge. The rigor and consistency behind the construction of these labels ultimately shape research findings and conclusions. A multifaceted methodological conundrum to address this challenge is the need for human reasoning for classification that leads to deeper and more nuanced understandings; however, this same manual human classification comes with the well-documented increase in classification inconsistencies and errors, particularly when dealing with vast amounts of documents and teams of coders. An alternative to human coding consists of machine learning-assisted techniques. These data science and visualization techniques offer tools for data classification that are cost-effective and consistent but are prone to losing participants’ meanings or voices for two main reasons: (a) these classifications typically aggregate all texts configuring each input file (i.e., each interview transcript) into a single topic or code and (b) these words configuring texts are analyzed outside of their original contexts. To address this challenge and analytic conundrum, we present an analytic framework and software tool, that addresses the following question: How to classify vast amounts of qualitative evidence effectively and efficiently without losing context or the original voices of our research participants and while leveraging the nuances that human reasoning bring to the qualitative and mixed methods analytic tables? This framework mirrors the line-by-line coding employed in human/manual code identification but relying on machine learning to classify texts in minutes rather than months. The resulting outputs provide complete transparency of the classification process and aid to recreate the contextualized, original, and unaltered meanings embedded in the input documents, as provided by our participants. We offer access to the database ( González Canché, 2022e ) and software required ( González Canché, 2022a , Mac https://cutt.ly/jc7n3OT , and Windows https://cutt.ly/wc7nNKF ) to replicate the analyses. We hope this opportunity to become familiar with the analytic framework and software, may result in expanded access of data science tools to analyze qualitative evidence (see also González Canché 2022b , 2022c , 2022d , for related no-code data science applications to classify and analyze qualitative and textual data dynamically).","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45690593","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-03DOI: 10.1177/16094069221148868
N. Basnet, A. Wouters, R. Kusurkar
The aim of this paper is to highlight timeline mapping exercise as a research tool and the benefits and challenges of incorporating this method into research. Timeline mapping offers a novel methodological approach toward gathering and accessing rich and meaningful data in the study of life transitions for instance from secondary education to higher education or from education to employment. This paper especially focuses on how it can be incorporated into research studies specific to HPE (Health Professions Education). It also offers researchers step-by-step instructions on how to conduct timeline mapping exercises and how to go about analysing the findings and gathering insights from the findings.
{"title":"Timeline Mapping as a Methodological Approach to Study Transitions in Health Professions Education","authors":"N. Basnet, A. Wouters, R. Kusurkar","doi":"10.1177/16094069221148868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221148868","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to highlight timeline mapping exercise as a research tool and the benefits and challenges of incorporating this method into research. Timeline mapping offers a novel methodological approach toward gathering and accessing rich and meaningful data in the study of life transitions for instance from secondary education to higher education or from education to employment. This paper especially focuses on how it can be incorporated into research studies specific to HPE (Health Professions Education). It also offers researchers step-by-step instructions on how to conduct timeline mapping exercises and how to go about analysing the findings and gathering insights from the findings.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47323555","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-03DOI: 10.1177/16094069221149871
Belinda Li, T. Soma, Nadia Springle, Tamara Shulman
Qualitative research methods had to quickly adapt to using online platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic to limit in-person interactions. Online platforms have been used extensively for interviews and focus groups, but workshops with larger groups requiring more complex interactions have not been widely implemented. This paper presents a case study of a fully virtual social innovation lab on bioplastics packaging, which was adapted from a series of in-person workshops. A positive outcome of the online setting was diversifying the types of participants who could participate. Highly interactive activities such as icebreakers, networking, bricolage, and prototyping were particularly challenging to shift from in-person to online using traditional web conferencing platforms like Zoom. Creative use of online tools, such as Gather.Town and Kahoot!, helped unlock more innovative thinking by employing novel techniques such as gamification. However, challenges such as adapting facilitation for an online environment and exclusion of groups that do not have consistent access to internet and/or computers still need to be addressed. The reflections and lessons learned from this paper can help researchers adapt qualitative methods to virtual environments.
{"title":"Reflections From Implementing a Virtual Social Innovation Lab","authors":"Belinda Li, T. Soma, Nadia Springle, Tamara Shulman","doi":"10.1177/16094069221149871","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221149871","url":null,"abstract":"Qualitative research methods had to quickly adapt to using online platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic to limit in-person interactions. Online platforms have been used extensively for interviews and focus groups, but workshops with larger groups requiring more complex interactions have not been widely implemented. This paper presents a case study of a fully virtual social innovation lab on bioplastics packaging, which was adapted from a series of in-person workshops. A positive outcome of the online setting was diversifying the types of participants who could participate. Highly interactive activities such as icebreakers, networking, bricolage, and prototyping were particularly challenging to shift from in-person to online using traditional web conferencing platforms like Zoom. Creative use of online tools, such as Gather.Town and Kahoot!, helped unlock more innovative thinking by employing novel techniques such as gamification. However, challenges such as adapting facilitation for an online environment and exclusion of groups that do not have consistent access to internet and/or computers still need to be addressed. The reflections and lessons learned from this paper can help researchers adapt qualitative methods to virtual environments.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42808142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1177/16094069221149487
Eva Bajo Marcos, Ángela Ordóñez-Carabaño, Elena Rodríguez-Ventosa Herrera, Inma Serrano
This paper presents the Delphi methodology employed to select a final dashboard of 30 indicators on the socio-educative inclusion of refugee and migrant children in Europe. Firstly, a procedure for identifying Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) was carried out, including a specialized scientific literature review, the mapping of previous indicators, and qualitative workshops with key stakeholders at micro, meso, and macro levels in six countries. Then, a Delphi design was implemented to assess, rate, and provide meaningful qualitative improvements to a pool of pre-selected indicators. The Delphi methodology involved a group of international experts on the matters of inclusive education or migration, researchers, NGOs, and public officers. As an alternative to traditional "benchmark-based" consensus, we introduced the use of a) the CARA model and b) an alternative multi-input and mixed-method consensus-building procedure. The results provided a significant contribution to qualitative methods on the one hand and to migration and integration literature on the other. The methodological innovations, the diversity of experts' perspectives involved in the process, and the structured nature of the method constituted significant advantages to improve the robustness of the Delphi methodology for selecting and validating indicators. Future research involving a Delphi methodology can benefit from applying the present procedure.
{"title":"Identifying the Core Indicators of Migrant and Refugee Children’s Integration Using the Delphi Method: A Multi-Input Strategy for Definition of Consensus","authors":"Eva Bajo Marcos, Ángela Ordóñez-Carabaño, Elena Rodríguez-Ventosa Herrera, Inma Serrano","doi":"10.1177/16094069221149487","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221149487","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents the Delphi methodology employed to select a final dashboard of 30 indicators on the socio-educative inclusion of refugee and migrant children in Europe. Firstly, a procedure for identifying Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) was carried out, including a specialized scientific literature review, the mapping of previous indicators, and qualitative workshops with key stakeholders at micro, meso, and macro levels in six countries. Then, a Delphi design was implemented to assess, rate, and provide meaningful qualitative improvements to a pool of pre-selected indicators. The Delphi methodology involved a group of international experts on the matters of inclusive education or migration, researchers, NGOs, and public officers. As an alternative to traditional \"benchmark-based\" consensus, we introduced the use of a) the CARA model and b) an alternative multi-input and mixed-method consensus-building procedure. The results provided a significant contribution to qualitative methods on the one hand and to migration and integration literature on the other. The methodological innovations, the diversity of experts' perspectives involved in the process, and the structured nature of the method constituted significant advantages to improve the robustness of the Delphi methodology for selecting and validating indicators. Future research involving a Delphi methodology can benefit from applying the present procedure.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47478858","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：