Qualitative Research最新文献

英文中文

A day without Global North researchers: Making space for equitable collaboration after COVID-19 没有全球北方研究人员的日子：在 COVID-19 之后为公平合作创造空间

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241264669

Annalisa Bolin, Tatiana Carayannis, Gino Vlavonou, David Nkusi

What happens when researchers based in the Global North are suddenly unable to access research sites, especially those in the Global South? In 2020, COVID-related public health measures and travel restrictions made clear how dependent certain categories of researchers in the North are on easy access to research sites in the South. The space opened up by their pandemic-imposed retreat and the solutions devised in response have provoked both challenges and opportunities. In this article, we reflect on this space, focusing on how forms of more just collaboration become possible when the inertia of Global North-controlled research is interrupted. Many scholars have argued for change in how Global North-South scholarly collaborations proceed, seeking to root out colonial practices and attend to power imbalances that disadvantage South-based scholars. COVID's disruptions offer a chance to reorient these collaborations toward more ethical forms of research. We examine the ethical and practical questions inherent in such collaborations and explore two case studies of attempts to reorient collaborative work, drawing primarily on examples of collaboration between African, European, and North American scholars. Cognizant that these efforts are only initial attempts toward reworking collaborative practice, we also trace the challenges they bring, from the duty of care and paternalistic approaches to funding and practical problems. We suggest that a careful consideration of these issues can help to establish more just ways to fully reengage North-South research and collaboration in the wake of the global pandemic.

如果位于全球北方的研究人员突然无法进入研究地点，特别是全球南方的研究地点，会发生什么情况？2020 年，与 COVID 相关的公共卫生措施和旅行限制清楚地表明，北方某些类别的研究人员是多么依赖于能够方便地前往南方的研究基地。这些措施和限制所开辟的空间，以及为应对这些措施和限制而制定的解决方案，既带来了挑战，也带来了机遇。在本文中，我们将对这一空间进行反思，重点关注当全球北方控制的研究惰性被打破时，如何实现更加公正的合作形式。许多学者都主张改变全球南北学术合作的方式，寻求根除殖民主义做法，关注不利于南方学者的权力失衡问题。COVID 的中断为调整这些合作提供了一个机会，使其朝着更符合伦理的研究形式发展。我们研究了此类合作中固有的伦理和实践问题，并主要借鉴非洲、欧洲和北美学者之间的合作实例，探讨了两个试图调整合作工作方向的案例研究。我们认识到，这些努力仅仅是重塑合作实践的初步尝试，我们还追踪了它们所带来的挑战，从照顾责任和家长式方法到资金和实际问题。我们建议，认真考虑这些问题有助于建立更加公正的方法，在全球大流行病之后重新全面参与南北研究与合作。

{"title":"A day without Global North researchers: Making space for equitable collaboration after COVID-19","authors":"Annalisa Bolin, Tatiana Carayannis, Gino Vlavonou, David Nkusi","doi":"10.1177/14687941241264669","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941241264669","url":null,"abstract":"What happens when researchers based in the Global North are suddenly unable to access research sites, especially those in the Global South? In 2020, COVID-related public health measures and travel restrictions made clear how dependent certain categories of researchers in the North are on easy access to research sites in the South. The space opened up by their pandemic-imposed retreat and the solutions devised in response have provoked both challenges and opportunities. In this article, we reflect on this space, focusing on how forms of more just collaboration become possible when the inertia of Global North-controlled research is interrupted. Many scholars have argued for change in how Global North-South scholarly collaborations proceed, seeking to root out colonial practices and attend to power imbalances that disadvantage South-based scholars. COVID's disruptions offer a chance to reorient these collaborations toward more ethical forms of research. We examine the ethical and practical questions inherent in such collaborations and explore two case studies of attempts to reorient collaborative work, drawing primarily on examples of collaboration between African, European, and North American scholars. Cognizant that these efforts are only initial attempts toward reworking collaborative practice, we also trace the challenges they bring, from the duty of care and paternalistic approaches to funding and practical problems. We suggest that a careful consideration of these issues can help to establish more just ways to fully reengage North-South research and collaboration in the wake of the global pandemic.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142185305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Giving up the ‘Good Research Child’ 放弃 "研究好孩子

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-08-09 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241264490

Abi Hackett, Mel Hall, Kate Pahl, Peter Kraftl

Do you like apples? Do you want to plant trees? Do you love books? Qualitative research with children is peppered with vignettes of what we conceptualise as the ‘Good Research Child’. Good Research Children tell stories, plant trees, eat healthily, love reading and engage enthusiastically with researchers as co-playmates. They explore the world with drawings and oral stories and are enthusiastically portrayed by their adult researchers as unique, special and meaningful. Even when their actions are unexpected, this can provide rich material to be ‘used’. How are Good Research Children produced, what work do they do and how can we resist their pull?

您喜欢苹果吗？你想种树吗？你爱看书吗？在对儿童进行定性研究的过程中，我们发现了许多我们称之为 "优秀研究儿童 "的小故事。好研究儿童会讲故事、植树、健康饮食、热爱阅读，并热情地与研究人员一起玩耍。他们用图画和口述故事探索世界，被成年研究人员热情地描绘成独特、特别和有意义的形象。即使他们的行为出乎意料，也能为 "利用 "他们提供丰富的素材。优秀研究儿童是如何产生的，他们从事什么工作，我们如何抵制他们的拉扯？

引用次数: 0

North-South research collaboration during complex global emergencies: Qualitative knowledge production and sharing during COVID-19 全球复杂紧急情况下的南北研究合作：COVID-19 期间的定性知识生产与共享

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241264677

Adriana Rudling, Mohamed Sesay, Eric Wiebelhaus-Brahm, Angelika Rettberg

Large multinational teams of academics and activist-practitioners that span the Global North-South divide have become common in qualitative research because of the reliance of field of peace and conflict studies on “local” knowledge and expertise. Complex global emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present the opportunity to (re)shape and (re)consider these endeavors in key some ways. This article focuses on the involvement of South-based activist-practitioners in three large North-South collaborations, one pre-pandemic (Beyond Words: Implementing Latin American Truth Commission Recommendations), one ongoing when the pandemic began (Gender, Justice, and Security Hub), and one launched during the pandemic (Truth Commissions and Sexual Violence: African and Latin American Experiences). Drawing on center-periphery framework, we adopt an autoethnographic approach, to reflect on how the pandemic has not only reinforced existing structural and institutional asymmetries through reduced funding, professional uncertainty, and personal loss and insecurity but also added some new ethical concerns. This reality has tested both our capacity and commitment to work toward the decolonization of knowledge in the field. In making this argument, we seek to contribute to the discussion on research ethics and the politics of knowledge production and sharing in qualitative peace and conflict research.

由于和平与冲突研究领域对 "当地 "知识和专业技能的依赖，由跨越全球南北鸿沟的学者和活动家组成的大型多国团队在定性研究中已十分常见。复杂的全球紧急事件（如 COVID-19 大流行病）为我们提供了机会，使我们能够以关键的方式（重新）塑造和（重新）考虑这些努力。本文重点介绍了南方活动家参与三项大型南北合作的情况，一项是大流行前的合作（超越言语：落实拉丁美洲真相委员会的建议），一项是大流行开始时正在进行的合作（性别、正义与安全中心），还有一项是大流行期间启动的合作（真相委员会与性暴力：非洲和拉丁美洲的经验》）。借鉴中心-边缘框架，我们采用了一种自述式方法，反思大流行病不仅通过资金减少、职业不确定性、个人损失和不安全感加剧了现有的结构和制度不对称，而且还增加了一些新的伦理问题。这一现实考验了我们努力实现该领域知识非殖民化的能力和决心。通过提出这一论点，我们试图为和平与冲突定性研究中的研究伦理和知识生产与共享政治的讨论做出贡献。

{"title":"North-South research collaboration during complex global emergencies: Qualitative knowledge production and sharing during COVID-19","authors":"Adriana Rudling, Mohamed Sesay, Eric Wiebelhaus-Brahm, Angelika Rettberg","doi":"10.1177/14687941241264677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941241264677","url":null,"abstract":"Large multinational teams of academics and activist-practitioners that span the Global North-South divide have become common in qualitative research because of the reliance of field of peace and conflict studies on “local” knowledge and expertise. Complex global emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present the opportunity to (re)shape and (re)consider these endeavors in key some ways. This article focuses on the involvement of South-based activist-practitioners in three large North-South collaborations, one pre-pandemic (Beyond Words: Implementing Latin American Truth Commission Recommendations), one ongoing when the pandemic began (Gender, Justice, and Security Hub), and one launched during the pandemic (Truth Commissions and Sexual Violence: African and Latin American Experiences). Drawing on center-periphery framework, we adopt an autoethnographic approach, to reflect on how the pandemic has not only reinforced existing structural and institutional asymmetries through reduced funding, professional uncertainty, and personal loss and insecurity but also added some new ethical concerns. This reality has tested both our capacity and commitment to work toward the decolonization of knowledge in the field. In making this argument, we seek to contribute to the discussion on research ethics and the politics of knowledge production and sharing in qualitative peace and conflict research.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141941426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

But where's the body? Bodies, time, money, and the political economy of post-pandemic field research 但尸体在哪里？身体、时间、金钱和流行病后实地研究的政治经济学

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241264473

Donna Baines, Susan Braedley, Tamara Daly, Gudmund Ågotnes, Albert Banerjee, Elias Chaccour, Karine Côté-Boucher, Stinne Glasdam, Sean Hillier, Martha MacDonald, Frode Fadnes Jacobsen, Christie Stilwell

Since the pandemic, field work has been transformed by shifts in the political economy affecting the material conditions underpinning research. In this research note, a research team considers their challenges and learning in completing field studies conducted in 2022, including intensified strains on time, money, researchers’ bodies, and risks associated with illness and infection spread. We argue that a neoliberal “research super-hero” norm operates within the research community, rooted in a conception of high productivity that mingles uneasily, for many researchers, with feminist, anti-racist, and anti-colonial social justice aims and responsibilities. Our 2022 fieldwork experience led us to notice how this norm has circulated within our explicitly feminist research team and nudged us to challenge it, while raising questions about how a “research-worker” norm can best be supported.

自大流行病以来，政治经济的变化影响了支撑研究的物质条件，实地工作也随之发生了变化。在本研究报告中，一个研究团队探讨了他们在完成 2022 年开展的实地研究过程中遇到的挑战和学到的经验，包括时间、资金、研究人员身体方面的压力加剧，以及与疾病和感染传播相关的风险。我们认为，新自由主义的 "研究超级英雄 "规范在研究界内运作，这种规范植根于高生产率的理念，对许多研究人员来说，这种理念与女权主义、反种族主义和反殖民主义的社会正义目标和责任交织在一起，令人不安。我们 2022 年的实地工作经验让我们注意到，这种规范是如何在我们明确的女权主义研究团队中流传的，并促使我们对其提出挑战，同时提出了如何才能最好地支持 "研究工作者 "规范的问题。

引用次数: 0

Anti-oppression as praxis in the research field: Implementing emancipatory approaches for researchers and community partners. 反压迫作为研究领域的实践:为研究人员和社区伙伴实施解放方法

IF 3.2 1区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-03 DOI: 10.1177/14687941231196382

Ruth Rodney, Marsha Hinds, Jessica Bonilla-Damptey, Danielle Boissoneau, Aaliya Khan, Anika Forde

Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) and anti-oppression (AO) policies are implemented in research to address intersecting systemic barriers for marginalized populations. Grant applications now include questions about EDI to ensure researchers have considered how research designs perpetuate discriminatory practices. However, complying with these measures may not mean that researchers have engaged with AO as praxis. Three central points emerged from our work as a women's research collective committed to embedding AO practices within the research methodology of our community-based study. First, research ideas must be connected to larger pursuits of AO in and across marginalized communities. Secondly, AO as praxis in the research design is an exercise in centering cultural knowledge and pragmatic research preparation and response that honours the collective. Lastly, AO approaches are not prescriptive. They must shift, adapt, and change based on the research project and team, creating space for transformative resistance and emancipation of racialized researchers and community workers.

在研究中实施公平、多样性和包容性（EDI）和反压迫（AO）政策，以解决边缘化人群的交叉系统性障碍。拨款申请现在包括有关EDI的问题，以确保研究人员考虑到研究设计如何延续歧视性做法。然而，遵守这些措施可能并不意味着研究人员已经将AO作为实践。作为一个致力于将AO实践纳入我们基于社区的研究方法中的妇女研究集体，我们的工作中出现了三个中心点。首先，研究理念必须与AO在边缘化社区和跨边缘化社区的更大追求联系起来。其次，AO作为研究设计中的实践，是一种以文化知识为中心的实践，也是一种尊重集体的务实研究准备和回应。最后，AO方法不是规定性的。他们必须根据研究项目和团队进行转变、适应和改变，为变革性抵抗和种族化研究人员和社区工作者的解放创造空间。

{"title":"Anti-oppression as praxis in the research field: Implementing emancipatory approaches for researchers and community partners.","authors":"Ruth Rodney, Marsha Hinds, Jessica Bonilla-Damptey, Danielle Boissoneau, Aaliya Khan, Anika Forde","doi":"10.1177/14687941231196382","DOIUrl":"10.1177/14687941231196382","url":null,"abstract":"Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) and anti-oppression (AO) policies are implemented in research to address intersecting systemic barriers for marginalized populations. Grant applications now include questions about EDI to ensure researchers have considered how research designs perpetuate discriminatory practices. However, complying with these measures may not mean that researchers have engaged with AO as praxis. Three central points emerged from our work as a women's research collective committed to embedding AO practices within the research methodology of our community-based study. First, research ideas must be connected to larger pursuits of AO in and across marginalized communities. Secondly, AO as praxis in the research design is an exercise in centering cultural knowledge and pragmatic research preparation and response that honours the collective. Lastly, AO approaches are not prescriptive. They must shift, adapt, and change based on the research project and team, creating space for transformative resistance and emancipation of racialized researchers and community workers.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11303120/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42100487","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A social researcher researching social researchers – Lessons from feminist epistemologies 社会研究人员研究社会研究人员--从女权主义认识论中汲取的经验教训

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241259980

Lili Schwoerer

Qualitative research literature discusses how power shapes the interview process and the resulting data and explores the epistemic basis for interview research theoretically. However, processes of negotiating epistemic authority in the interview situation, and in data analysis, are investigated less frequently. This paper draws on 34 interviews with social science academics interested in gender, feminist and queer studies in four English universities to reflect on the epistemological challenges of researching social researchers about their work. Through this, it contributes to explorations of how, in qualitative interviewing and data analysis, we can combine a critical reading of interview data with a commitment to respondents’ accounts of their realities. I argue that Black, anti-colonial, queer, feminist epistemological approaches can be well suited to navigate this challenge. I advocate for an epistemic reflexivity that acknowledges the fluidity of speaker positions while taking structural power relations, and their effects on epistemology, seriously.

定性研究文献讨论了权力如何影响访谈过程和由此产生的数据，并从理论上探讨了访谈研究的认识论基础。然而，在访谈情境和数据分析中，对认识论权威的协商过程的研究却较少。本文通过对英国四所大学中对性别、女权和同性恋研究感兴趣的社会科学学者进行的 34 次访谈，反思了对社会研究人员的工作进行研究所面临的认识论挑战。这有助于探索在定性访谈和数据分析中，我们如何将对访谈数据的批判性解读与受访者对其现实的描述结合起来。我认为，黑人、反殖民主义、同性恋、女性主义的认识论方法可以很好地应对这一挑战。我提倡一种认识论的反思性，承认说话者立场的流动性，同时认真对待结构性权力关系及其对认识论的影响。

引用次数: 0

Off track or on point? Side comments in focus groups with teens. 偏离轨道还是正题?青少年焦点小组的旁注

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 Arts and Humanities

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-29 DOI: 10.1177/14687941231176931

Lindsay C Sheppard, Rebecca Raby

Side comments and conversations in focus groups can pose challenges for facilitators. Rather than seeing side comments as problematic behavior or "failed" data, we argue that they can add to and deepen analyses. Drawing on focus group data with grade nine students from a study on early work, in this methodological paper we discuss three patterns. First, side comments have highlighted where participants required clarification, and illustrated their views and questions about the research process. Second, side comments added new data to our analysis, including personal reflections, connections to others' comments, and information about participants' uncertainties about the research topics. Third, these comments offered insight into peer relations and dynamics, including participants' reflections on age, and how they deployed gender relations in their discussions. Provided that their use fits within established ethical protocols, we argue that there is a place for attention to side comments, especially in focus group research with young people where adult-teen hierarchies and peer dynamics might lead young people to engage more with peers than directly respond to researchers' questions.

焦点小组中的附带评论和对话可能会给主持人带来挑战。我们认为，与其将附带评论视为有问题的行为或“失败”的数据，不如将其添加到分析中并加深分析。在这篇方法论论文中，我们利用九年级学生早期工作研究的焦点小组数据，讨论了三种模式。首先，附带评论强调了参与者需要澄清的地方，并说明了他们对研究过程的看法和问题。其次，附带评论为我们的分析添加了新的数据，包括个人反思、与他人评论的联系，以及参与者对研究主题的不确定性信息。第三，这些评论深入了解了同伴关系和动态，包括参与者对年龄的思考，以及他们如何在讨论中运用性别关系。如果它们的使用符合既定的伦理协议，我们认为有必要关注旁敲侧击，特别是在针对年轻人的焦点小组研究中，成年青少年的等级制度和同伴动态可能会导致年轻人更多地与同伴接触，而不是直接回应研究人员的问题。

{"title":"Off track or on point? Side comments in focus groups with teens.","authors":"Lindsay C Sheppard, Rebecca Raby","doi":"10.1177/14687941231176931","DOIUrl":"10.1177/14687941231176931","url":null,"abstract":"Side comments and conversations in focus groups can pose challenges for facilitators. Rather than seeing side comments as problematic behavior or \"failed\" data, we argue that they can add to and deepen analyses. Drawing on focus group data with grade nine students from a study on early work, in this methodological paper we discuss three patterns. First, side comments have highlighted where participants required clarification, and illustrated their views and questions about the research process. Second, side comments added new data to our analysis, including personal reflections, connections to others' comments, and information about participants' uncertainties about the research topics. Third, these comments offered insight into peer relations and dynamics, including participants' reflections on age, and how they deployed gender relations in their discussions. Provided that their use fits within established ethical protocols, we argue that there is a place for attention to side comments, especially in focus group research with young people where adult-teen hierarchies and peer dynamics might lead young people to engage more with peers than directly respond to researchers' questions.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11161323/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47782508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Driving together: Shared car journeys as research space 共同驾驶：作为研究空间的共享汽车旅行

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 Arts and Humanities

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-05-29 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241255251

Gabrielle Lynch

This paper introduces driving around with people in private cars as a research space to which walking methods can be adapted and in which productive accidental ethnography can take place. Whether one is walking or driving together with research participant(s), one's shared mobility is key: the act and rhythm of moving together through land and sense-scapes provides prompts and insights and facilitates conversation and rapport. However, the coverage of larger distances at greater speeds in a car and the car's existence as a private space separate from the scenes and places passed through ensures that driving together is qualitatively different to walking together and that it can sometimes be more useful. The paper argues that driving together can be a productive research space depending on research focus, context, and ethical and security considerations.

本文介绍了与驾驶私家车的人一起驾车兜风，将其作为一种研究空间，可以对步行方法进行调整，并在其中进行富有成效的意外人种学研究。无论是与研究对象一起步行还是驾车，共同的移动性都是关键所在：在陆地和感官景观中共同移动的行为和节奏提供了提示和洞察力，促进了对话和融洽关系。然而，由于汽车能以更快的速度行驶更远的距离，而且汽车作为一个私人空间，与所经过的场景和地方是分开的，这就确保了共同驾车与共同步行有着质的不同，而且有时可能更有用。本文认为，根据研究重点、背景以及道德和安全方面的考虑，共同驾车可以成为一个富有成效的研究空间。

引用次数: 0

Remote interviewing, accessibility, and scams: Notes on a case of fraudulent responses to a recruitment flyer 远程面试、无障碍环境和骗局：关于招聘传单欺诈回复案例的说明

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 Arts and Humanities

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-05-29 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241255234

M. Ariel Cascio

Remote interviewing has become even more common since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and allows greater accessibility for many interview participants regardless of pandemic circumstances. This accessibility is especially important in the context of my research with autistic individuals. However, it may also expose interview studies to the same concerns about fraudulent responses that survey studies face. While advice for survey research often suggests requiring interviews as a way to discourage fraudulent responses, I had participants I later concluded were misrepresenting their eligibility actually complete audio interviews. In this note, I describe my experience with this potential scam, the solutions I rejected, and the solutions I ultimately implemented to add additional screening questions related to where the participant lived and how they heard about the study. In line with my interpretivist and constructivist approach to autism studies, I focus on strategies for identifying who is “really eligible” without gatekeeping who is “really autistic.” I argue that many of the suggestions for identifying fraudulent participants may inappropriately exclude autistic or neurodivergent individuals, and describe a framework for identifying locally relevant and culturally appropriate screening questions that do not overly burden or scrutinize participants.

自 COVID-19 大流行开始以来，远程访谈变得更加普遍，无论大流行情况如何，许多访谈参与者都能更方便地进行访谈。就我对自闭症患者的研究而言，这种便利性尤为重要。不过，这也可能使访谈研究面临与调查研究同样的欺诈性回答问题。虽然调查研究的建议通常建议要求进行访谈以阻止虚假回答，但我曾让后来被我断定为虚报资格的参与者实际完成了音频访谈。在这篇笔记中，我描述了我在这一潜在骗局中的经历、我拒绝的解决方案，以及我最终实施的解决方案，即增加与参与者居住地和如何得知研究相关的额外筛选问题。根据我在自闭症研究中采用的解释主义和建构主义方法，我将重点放在识别哪些人 "真正符合条件"，而不对哪些人 "真正患有自闭症 "进行把关的策略上。我认为，许多关于识别欺诈性参与者的建议可能会不适当地将自闭症患者或神经变异者排除在外，我还描述了一个框架，用于识别与当地相关且与文化相适应的筛选问题，这些问题不会对参与者造成过重的负担或审查。

{"title":"Remote interviewing, accessibility, and scams: Notes on a case of fraudulent responses to a recruitment flyer","authors":"M. Ariel Cascio","doi":"10.1177/14687941241255234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941241255234","url":null,"abstract":"Remote interviewing has become even more common since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and allows greater accessibility for many interview participants regardless of pandemic circumstances. This accessibility is especially important in the context of my research with autistic individuals. However, it may also expose interview studies to the same concerns about fraudulent responses that survey studies face. While advice for survey research often suggests requiring interviews as a way to discourage fraudulent responses, I had participants I later concluded were misrepresenting their eligibility actually complete audio interviews. In this note, I describe my experience with this potential scam, the solutions I rejected, and the solutions I ultimately implemented to add additional screening questions related to where the participant lived and how they heard about the study. In line with my interpretivist and constructivist approach to autism studies, I focus on strategies for identifying who is “really eligible” without gatekeeping who is “really autistic.” I argue that many of the suggestions for identifying fraudulent participants may inappropriately exclude autistic or neurodivergent individuals, and describe a framework for identifying locally relevant and culturally appropriate screening questions that do not overly burden or scrutinize participants.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141191968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Writing against the chain transmission of fear: Reflections on institutionalised ethics 反对恐惧连锁传播的写作：对制度化伦理的思考

IF 3.6 1区社会学 Q1 Arts and Humanities

Qualitative Research

Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI: 10.1177/14687941241255237

Mieke Struwig

As a master's student investigating curricular decolonisation at South African tertiary music departments, I found myself in a chain of fear driven by previous contestations of similar critical projects. Despite stringently following the institutional ethics requirements, ethical concerns regarding the critical content of my work were still raised, perpetuating this fear. In this article, I discuss my concerns that the issues raised stemmed from an environment in which moral knowledge has become codified in a template for ethical research. I consider the problems that occur when ethical procedures such as anonymity, protecting ‘vulnerable’ interviewees and member checking become mere tick-boxes on a template for ethical research, as well as how such templates can become a method of imbuing fear into the researcher. In conclusion, I propose the development of an ethical praxis premised on an ethics of care that enables, rather than stymies, critical research.

作为一名调查南非高等音乐院系课程非殖民化情况的硕士研究生，我发现自己陷入了一连串的恐惧之中，这些恐惧是由之前类似批评项目的争议所驱动的。尽管我严格遵守了学校的伦理要求，但有关我工作中批判性内容的伦理问题仍然被提出来，从而延续了这种恐惧。在本文中，我讨论了我的担忧，即所提出的问题源于道德知识已被编入道德研究模板的环境。我考虑了当匿名、保护 "弱势 "受访者和成员核查等伦理程序仅仅成为伦理研究模板上的 "勾选框 "时会出现的问题，以及这些模板如何成为向研究人员灌输恐惧的方法。最后，我建议发展一种以关爱伦理为前提的伦理实践，这种伦理实践能够促进而不是阻碍批判性研究。

引用次数: 0

首页上一页

下一页尾页

类型

全部化学•材料生命科学医学物理工程技术环境•农林材料科学地球科学法学管理学化学环境科学与生态学计算机科学教育学经济学农林科学人文科学生物学数学物理与天体物理心理学综合性期刊其他工业工程理学历史学农学文学信息工程

数据库

全部 ACS Publications Elsevier ieeexplore Springer The Royal Society of Chemistry Wiley

期刊

Qualitative Research

全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.

﹀