抵制定性研究的客观化:背景、研究人员和非访谈数据的无声化

Hans Hansen, S. Elias, Anna Stevenson, Anne D. Smith, B. Alexander, Marcos Barros
{"title":"抵制定性研究的客观化:背景、研究人员和非访谈数据的无声化","authors":"Hans Hansen, S. Elias, Anna Stevenson, Anne D. Smith, B. Alexander, Marcos Barros","doi":"10.1177/10944281231215119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Based on an analysis of qualitative research papers published between 2019 and 2021 in four top-tier management journals, we outline three interrelated silences that play a role in the objectification of qualitative research: silencing of noninterview data, silencing the researcher, and silencing context. Our analysis unpacks six silencing moves: creating a hierarchy of data, marginalizing noninterview data, downplaying researcher subjectivity, weakening the value of researcher interpretation, thin description, and backgrounding context. We suggest how researchers might resist the objectification of qualitative research and regain its original promise in developing more impactful and interesting theories: noninterview data can be unsilenced by democratizing data sources and utilizing nonverbal data, the researcher can be unsilenced by leveraging engagement and crafting interpretations, and finally, context can be unsilenced by foregrounding context as an interpretative lens and contextualizing the researcher, the researched, and the research project. Overall, we contribute to current understandings of the objectification of qualitative research by both unpacking particular moves that play a role in it and delineating specific practices that help researchers embrace subjectivity and engage in inspired theorizing.","PeriodicalId":507528,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Research Methods","volume":"18 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resisting the Objectification of Qualitative Research: The Unsilencing of Context, Researchers, and Noninterview Data\",\"authors\":\"Hans Hansen, S. Elias, Anna Stevenson, Anne D. Smith, B. Alexander, Marcos Barros\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10944281231215119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Based on an analysis of qualitative research papers published between 2019 and 2021 in four top-tier management journals, we outline three interrelated silences that play a role in the objectification of qualitative research: silencing of noninterview data, silencing the researcher, and silencing context. Our analysis unpacks six silencing moves: creating a hierarchy of data, marginalizing noninterview data, downplaying researcher subjectivity, weakening the value of researcher interpretation, thin description, and backgrounding context. We suggest how researchers might resist the objectification of qualitative research and regain its original promise in developing more impactful and interesting theories: noninterview data can be unsilenced by democratizing data sources and utilizing nonverbal data, the researcher can be unsilenced by leveraging engagement and crafting interpretations, and finally, context can be unsilenced by foregrounding context as an interpretative lens and contextualizing the researcher, the researched, and the research project. Overall, we contribute to current understandings of the objectification of qualitative research by both unpacking particular moves that play a role in it and delineating specific practices that help researchers embrace subjectivity and engage in inspired theorizing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Research Methods\",\"volume\":\"18 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281231215119\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281231215119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于对2019年至2021年期间发表在四本顶级管理期刊上的定性研究论文的分析,我们概述了在定性研究客观化过程中起作用的三种相互关联的沉默:对非访谈数据的沉默、对研究者的沉默和对背景的沉默。我们的分析揭示了六种缄默行为:建立数据等级制度、边缘化非访谈数据、淡化研究者的主观性、削弱研究者解释的价值、稀薄描述以及背景化。我们建议研究人员如何抵制定性研究的客观化,并在发展更有影响力、更有趣的理论时重拾其最初的承诺:可以通过数据源民主化和利用非语言数据来消除非访谈数据的无声化,可以通过利用参与和精心制作解释来消除研究人员的无声化,最后,可以通过将背景作为解释透镜并将研究人员、被研究者和研究项目背景化来消除背景的无声化。总之,我们通过解读在定性研究客体化过程中发挥作用的特殊举措,以及界定有助于研究人员接受主观性并参与灵感理论化的具体实践,为当前对定性研究客体化的理解做出了贡献。
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
Resisting the Objectification of Qualitative Research: The Unsilencing of Context, Researchers, and Noninterview Data
Based on an analysis of qualitative research papers published between 2019 and 2021 in four top-tier management journals, we outline three interrelated silences that play a role in the objectification of qualitative research: silencing of noninterview data, silencing the researcher, and silencing context. Our analysis unpacks six silencing moves: creating a hierarchy of data, marginalizing noninterview data, downplaying researcher subjectivity, weakening the value of researcher interpretation, thin description, and backgrounding context. We suggest how researchers might resist the objectification of qualitative research and regain its original promise in developing more impactful and interesting theories: noninterview data can be unsilenced by democratizing data sources and utilizing nonverbal data, the researcher can be unsilenced by leveraging engagement and crafting interpretations, and finally, context can be unsilenced by foregrounding context as an interpretative lens and contextualizing the researcher, the researched, and the research project. Overall, we contribute to current understandings of the objectification of qualitative research by both unpacking particular moves that play a role in it and delineating specific practices that help researchers embrace subjectivity and engage in inspired theorizing.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mixed-Keying or Desirability-Matching in the Construction of Forced-Choice Measures? An Empirical Investigation and Practical Recommendations Building a Bigger Toolbox: The Construct Validity of Existing and Proposed Measures of Careless Responding to Cognitive Ability Tests Mixed-Keying or Desirability-Matching in the Construction of Forced-Choice Measures? An Empirical Investigation and Practical Recommendations Building a Bigger Toolbox: The Construct Validity of Existing and Proposed Measures of Careless Responding to Cognitive Ability Tests Confounding Effects of Insufficient Effort Responding Across Survey Sources: The Case of Personality Predicting Performance
×
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