敏感性研究:回顾性分析和概念化的试验

Q3 Social Sciences Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal Pub Date : 2023-09-24 DOI:10.19181/socjour.2023.29.3.1
Alexander Myagkov
{"title":"敏感性研究:回顾性分析和概念化的试验","authors":"Alexander Myagkov","doi":"10.19181/socjour.2023.29.3.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to understanding the problem of sensitivity in survey research. A retrospective analysis of the formation and development of the field of scientific knowledge, which in western sociology in the 1990’s was refereed to as “sensitive research”, is presented. A brief historical outline of the study of sensitive issues is given with an emphasis on the most prominent schools in world sociology and the most renowned authors who have made a significant contribution to the study of this topic (representatives of the Chicago School, A. Kinsey, S. Warner, G.S. Becker, R. Lee, C. Renzetti, R. Tourangeau, T. Yang and others). The early and modern conceptualizations of sensitivity are critically analyzed, the weaknesses and shortcomings of both expansive (J. Sieber and B. Stanley) and restrictive (N. Farberow) interpretations of this concept are shown. A multifactorial approach developed by R. Lee and K. Renzetti is considered as an alternative, one that takes into account various types of threats that determine the sensitive nature of the questions asked and the answers received. The social nature of sensitivity is discussed. It is shown how the socio-cultural context and the specifics of respondents’ perception of questions influence the results of survey studies. The main consequences of using sensitive issues in sociological research are also analyzed. At the same time, there are three most dangerous effects that have a detrimental effect on the quality of empirical data: weakening cooperation on behalf of respondents, the increase in the number of missing questions (non-answers) and the emergence of socially desirable (insincere) answers. The factors causing these effects are identified, and methods are proposed to help neutralize them. Conclusions are drawn about the socio-cultural conditionality of question sensitivity, its contextual and situational nature.","PeriodicalId":35261,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sensitive Research: a Trial of Retrospective Analysis and Conceptualizations\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Myagkov\",\"doi\":\"10.19181/socjour.2023.29.3.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article is devoted to understanding the problem of sensitivity in survey research. A retrospective analysis of the formation and development of the field of scientific knowledge, which in western sociology in the 1990’s was refereed to as “sensitive research”, is presented. A brief historical outline of the study of sensitive issues is given with an emphasis on the most prominent schools in world sociology and the most renowned authors who have made a significant contribution to the study of this topic (representatives of the Chicago School, A. Kinsey, S. Warner, G.S. Becker, R. Lee, C. Renzetti, R. Tourangeau, T. Yang and others). The early and modern conceptualizations of sensitivity are critically analyzed, the weaknesses and shortcomings of both expansive (J. Sieber and B. Stanley) and restrictive (N. Farberow) interpretations of this concept are shown. A multifactorial approach developed by R. Lee and K. Renzetti is considered as an alternative, one that takes into account various types of threats that determine the sensitive nature of the questions asked and the answers received. The social nature of sensitivity is discussed. It is shown how the socio-cultural context and the specifics of respondents’ perception of questions influence the results of survey studies. The main consequences of using sensitive issues in sociological research are also analyzed. At the same time, there are three most dangerous effects that have a detrimental effect on the quality of empirical data: weakening cooperation on behalf of respondents, the increase in the number of missing questions (non-answers) and the emergence of socially desirable (insincere) answers. The factors causing these effects are identified, and methods are proposed to help neutralize them. Conclusions are drawn about the socio-cultural conditionality of question sensitivity, its contextual and situational nature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35261,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2023.29.3.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2023.29.3.1","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

摘要

本文致力于理解调查研究中的敏感性问题。对20世纪90年代西方社会学称之为“敏感研究”的科学知识领域的形成和发展进行了回顾分析。本书简要介绍了敏感问题研究的历史概况,重点介绍了世界社会学中最著名的学派和对这一主题的研究做出重大贡献的最著名的作者(芝加哥学派的代表人物,A.金赛、S.华纳、G.S.贝克尔、R.李、C.伦泽蒂、R.图朗高、T.杨等人)。对敏感性的早期和现代概念进行了批判性分析,并指出了这一概念的扩张性解释(J. Sieber和B. Stanley)和限制性解释(N. Farberow)的弱点和缺点。由R. Lee和K. Renzetti开发的多因素方法被认为是另一种选择,它考虑了决定所问问题和所收到答案的敏感性的各种威胁。讨论了敏感性的社会性质。它显示了社会文化背景和受访者对问题的看法的具体情况如何影响调查研究的结果。本文还分析了在社会学研究中使用敏感问题的主要后果。与此同时,有三种最危险的影响对经验数据的质量产生不利影响:代表受访者的合作减弱,缺失问题(无答案)数量的增加以及社会期望(不真诚)答案的出现。确定了造成这些影响的因素,并提出了有助于消除这些影响的方法。结论是问题敏感性的社会文化条件、语境和情景性质。
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
Sensitive Research: a Trial of Retrospective Analysis and Conceptualizations
The article is devoted to understanding the problem of sensitivity in survey research. A retrospective analysis of the formation and development of the field of scientific knowledge, which in western sociology in the 1990’s was refereed to as “sensitive research”, is presented. A brief historical outline of the study of sensitive issues is given with an emphasis on the most prominent schools in world sociology and the most renowned authors who have made a significant contribution to the study of this topic (representatives of the Chicago School, A. Kinsey, S. Warner, G.S. Becker, R. Lee, C. Renzetti, R. Tourangeau, T. Yang and others). The early and modern conceptualizations of sensitivity are critically analyzed, the weaknesses and shortcomings of both expansive (J. Sieber and B. Stanley) and restrictive (N. Farberow) interpretations of this concept are shown. A multifactorial approach developed by R. Lee and K. Renzetti is considered as an alternative, one that takes into account various types of threats that determine the sensitive nature of the questions asked and the answers received. The social nature of sensitivity is discussed. It is shown how the socio-cultural context and the specifics of respondents’ perception of questions influence the results of survey studies. The main consequences of using sensitive issues in sociological research are also analyzed. At the same time, there are three most dangerous effects that have a detrimental effect on the quality of empirical data: weakening cooperation on behalf of respondents, the increase in the number of missing questions (non-answers) and the emergence of socially desirable (insincere) answers. The factors causing these effects are identified, and methods are proposed to help neutralize them. Conclusions are drawn about the socio-cultural conditionality of question sensitivity, its contextual and situational nature.
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
Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal
Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
37 weeks
期刊介绍: “Sotsiologicheskij Zhurnal” publishes the articles on sociological disciplines. Interdisciplinary studies in sociology and related disciplines, such as social psychology, cultural studies, anthropology, ethnography, etc. — are also welcomed. The main emphasis is on the fundamental research in the field of theory, methodology and history of sociology. The regular rubric highlights the results of mass surveys and case studies. The rubric “Discussion”, which debated the controversial issues of sociological research, is regular as well. The journal publishes book reviews, and summaries, as well as lists of new books in Russian and English, which represent the main areas of interdisciplinary research in the social sciences. The journal aims to not only play samples of knowledge, considered regulatory and standards of internal expertise in the professional community, but also aims for opportunities to improve them. These rules, a tough selection and decision to print only a small portion of incoming materials allow “Sotsiologicheskij Zhurnal” contribute to improving the quality of sociological research. Submitted manuscripts should show a high integrity in problem setting, problem analysis and correspond to the journal’s thematic profile and its scientific priorities.
期刊最新文献
Theoretical Approaches Towards Studying Motivation for Surrogate Motherhood A Person that Feels, Values, and Studies Time. Professor Garold E. Zborovsky is 85 Years Old Is it Possible for a Society to Exist Without Development? Telemedicine in Russian Megacities: Problems and Prospects Batygin’s Lesson stuck with me on my Professional Path — Always Check Yourself to Make Sure your Conclusions Can Be Substantiated”. Interview Prepared by D.M. Rogozin
×
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