在美国国会进行访谈项目:分析该领域专家的方法

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Legislative Studies Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-10-02 DOI:10.1111/lsq.12436
Daniel Steiman, Elizabeth Suhay
{"title":"在美国国会进行访谈项目:分析该领域专家的方法","authors":"Daniel Steiman,&nbsp;Elizabeth Suhay","doi":"10.1111/lsq.12436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>The field of political science is seeing renewed interest in studying the US Congress via one-on-one interviews. Yet, the qualitative research methods literature on this topic has lagged behind, with few recent treatments available. The result is uncertainty regarding how best to access and interview Congress. In this study, we implement a novel study design, interviewing over 20 authors—who collectively represent nearly all Congressional qualitative interview studies from the past several decades—about their research practices. Whereas the existing literature focuses on lessons learned from one or two authors’ research experiences, this approach allows us to synthesize a wide range of researchers’ practices and perspectives, identifying areas of consensus and dispute and ultimately providing comprehensive advice to qualitative researchers. As interviewing Congress becomes increasingly difficult amidst growing political polarization and distrust of academics, this methodological advice comes at an opportune time for researchers studying the US Congress and beyond.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47672,"journal":{"name":"Legislative Studies Quarterly","volume":"48 4","pages":"699-730"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conducting Interview Projects in the US Congress: Analyzing the Methods of Experts in the Field\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Steiman,&nbsp;Elizabeth Suhay\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/lsq.12436\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>The field of political science is seeing renewed interest in studying the US Congress via one-on-one interviews. Yet, the qualitative research methods literature on this topic has lagged behind, with few recent treatments available. The result is uncertainty regarding how best to access and interview Congress. In this study, we implement a novel study design, interviewing over 20 authors—who collectively represent nearly all Congressional qualitative interview studies from the past several decades—about their research practices. Whereas the existing literature focuses on lessons learned from one or two authors’ research experiences, this approach allows us to synthesize a wide range of researchers’ practices and perspectives, identifying areas of consensus and dispute and ultimately providing comprehensive advice to qualitative researchers. As interviewing Congress becomes increasingly difficult amidst growing political polarization and distrust of academics, this methodological advice comes at an opportune time for researchers studying the US Congress and beyond.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legislative Studies Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"48 4\",\"pages\":\"699-730\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legislative Studies Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lsq.12436\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legislative Studies Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lsq.12436","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

政治学领域重新燃起了人们对通过一对一访谈研究美国国会的兴趣。然而,关于这一主题的定性研究方法文献滞后,最近的治疗方法很少。其结果是不确定如何最好地接触和采访国会。在这项研究中,我们采用了一种新颖的研究设计,采访了20多位作者——他们代表了过去几十年来几乎所有的国会定性访谈研究——了解他们的研究实践。鉴于现有文献侧重于从一两个作者的研究经验中吸取的教训,这种方法使我们能够综合广泛的研究人员的实践和观点,确定共识和争议的领域,并最终为定性研究人员提供全面的建议。随着政治两极分化和对学者的不信任日益加剧,采访国会变得越来越困难,对于研究美国国会及其他地区的研究人员来说,这一方法论建议来得正是时候。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Conducting Interview Projects in the US Congress: Analyzing the Methods of Experts in the Field

The field of political science is seeing renewed interest in studying the US Congress via one-on-one interviews. Yet, the qualitative research methods literature on this topic has lagged behind, with few recent treatments available. The result is uncertainty regarding how best to access and interview Congress. In this study, we implement a novel study design, interviewing over 20 authors—who collectively represent nearly all Congressional qualitative interview studies from the past several decades—about their research practices. Whereas the existing literature focuses on lessons learned from one or two authors’ research experiences, this approach allows us to synthesize a wide range of researchers’ practices and perspectives, identifying areas of consensus and dispute and ultimately providing comprehensive advice to qualitative researchers. As interviewing Congress becomes increasingly difficult amidst growing political polarization and distrust of academics, this methodological advice comes at an opportune time for researchers studying the US Congress and beyond.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Legislative Studies Quarterly
Legislative Studies Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The Legislative Studies Quarterly is an international journal devoted to the publication of research on representative assemblies. Its purpose is to disseminate scholarly work on parliaments and legislatures, their relations to other political institutions, their functions in the political system, and the activities of their members both within the institution and outside. Contributions are invited from scholars in all countries. The pages of the Quarterly are open to all research approaches consistent with the normal canons of scholarship, and to work on representative assemblies in all settings and all time periods. The aim of the journal is to contribute to the formulation and verification of general theories about legislative systems, processes, and behavior.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information About the Authors Legislating landlords: Private interests, issue emphasis, and policy positions Issue Information
×
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