冲突时期的政治民族志与俄罗斯研究

IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Post-Soviet Affairs Pub Date : 2022-11-24 DOI:10.1080/1060586X.2022.2151275
Jeremy Morris
{"title":"冲突时期的政治民族志与俄罗斯研究","authors":"Jeremy Morris","doi":"10.1080/1060586X.2022.2151275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT As reliable and unfiltered access to Russia and Russians becomes a fraught issue for social scientists who wish to conduct surveys, focus groups, do ethnographies, or interview elite actors, the war presents scholars with an opportunity to reflect on questions of what data collection means, and on better communication between quantitative and qualitative scholars. Similarly, it forces us confront the extractive and colonial nature of knowledge production; the war reveals how social science has always relied on, but not really acknowledged, the labor of native scholars, but can no longer ignore indigenously produced work, particularly qualitative research. In this review piece, the author highlights both blind spots in the potential communication between political scientists and other social scientists, and already-existing points of connection that can be further expanded, precisely because of, not despite the war.","PeriodicalId":46960,"journal":{"name":"Post-Soviet Affairs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Political ethnography and Russian studies in a time of conflict\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy Morris\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1060586X.2022.2151275\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT As reliable and unfiltered access to Russia and Russians becomes a fraught issue for social scientists who wish to conduct surveys, focus groups, do ethnographies, or interview elite actors, the war presents scholars with an opportunity to reflect on questions of what data collection means, and on better communication between quantitative and qualitative scholars. Similarly, it forces us confront the extractive and colonial nature of knowledge production; the war reveals how social science has always relied on, but not really acknowledged, the labor of native scholars, but can no longer ignore indigenously produced work, particularly qualitative research. In this review piece, the author highlights both blind spots in the potential communication between political scientists and other social scientists, and already-existing points of connection that can be further expanded, precisely because of, not despite the war.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46960,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Post-Soviet Affairs\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Post-Soviet Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2022.2151275\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Post-Soviet Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2022.2151275","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

摘要对于那些希望进行调查、焦点小组、民族志研究或采访精英行为者的社会科学家来说,可靠和未经过滤地接触俄罗斯和俄罗斯人成为一个令人担忧的问题,这场战争为学者们提供了一个反思数据收集意味着什么以及定量和定性学者之间更好沟通的机会。同样,它迫使我们面对知识生产的采掘和殖民性质;这场战争揭示了社会科学是如何一直依赖但没有真正承认本土学者的劳动的,但不能再忽视本土生产的工作,尤其是定性研究。在这篇评论文章中,作者强调了政治科学家和其他社会科学家之间潜在沟通的盲点,以及已经存在的可以进一步扩大的联系点,正是因为战争,而不是尽管战争。
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
Political ethnography and Russian studies in a time of conflict
ABSTRACT As reliable and unfiltered access to Russia and Russians becomes a fraught issue for social scientists who wish to conduct surveys, focus groups, do ethnographies, or interview elite actors, the war presents scholars with an opportunity to reflect on questions of what data collection means, and on better communication between quantitative and qualitative scholars. Similarly, it forces us confront the extractive and colonial nature of knowledge production; the war reveals how social science has always relied on, but not really acknowledged, the labor of native scholars, but can no longer ignore indigenously produced work, particularly qualitative research. In this review piece, the author highlights both blind spots in the potential communication between political scientists and other social scientists, and already-existing points of connection that can be further expanded, precisely because of, not despite the war.
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
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
13.60%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Quarterly publication featuring the work of prominent Western scholars on the republics of the former Soviet Union providing exclusive, up-to-the-minute analyses of the state of the economy and society, progress toward economic reform, and linkages between political and social changes and economic developments. Published since 1985.
期刊最新文献
Dissecting Putin’s regime ideology Two statisms of Putin’s ideology: from proclamations of patriotic values to welfare promises of wartime mobilization A hidden form of mass event: the law, politics, and practice of single pickets in Russia “You should care by prohibiting all this obscenity”: a public policy analysis of the Russian law banning medical and legal transition for transgender people Authoritarian succession, rules, and conflicts: Tokayev’s gambit and Kazakhstan’s bloody January of 2022 (Qandy Qantar)
×
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