Beyond “insider” and “outsider” in the Field: Reflections on the Roles of Human Geographers in Shifting Contexts

IF 3.9 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
{"title":"Beyond “insider” and “outsider” in the Field: Reflections on the Roles of Human Geographers in Shifting Contexts","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/16094069231169095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous scholarship in qualitative methodologies commonly classifies researchers’ status in the field into insiders or outsiders. However, the prevalence of participatory observation in numerous social science disciplines has blurred the insider/outsider dichotomy and highlighted that the levels of researchers’ involvement in the field are becoming context-specific and far more complex than just insider or outsider. Inspired by this tendency in fieldwork methodology, this paper seeks insights from a theory in communication studies, role theory, to understand researchers’ status regarding the roles they adopt in their interactions with research participants. Through reference to relevant sociological and psychological schools of thought, this paper highlights discourse as a crucial instrument for researchers’ role-making in fieldwork. This study draws on the author’s experience conducting fieldwork in a Central China city to demonstrate how a researcher engages in shifting field contexts by intentionally assuming numerous roles. To explore state-firm relations in local development, the author recruited two groups of research participants: government officials and business managers. The author actively learned and employed comparable discursive techniques in interactions with each group of participants, thereby assuming various roles in different contexts. These findings underscore the purposeful self-presentation and intentional role-playing/change as effective means for human geographers and researchers in extensive disciplines to be involved in participant groups for gathering data more efficiently. Meanwhile, the author’s self-reflection also illuminates the consequent impacts on research outcomes and ethical issues due to the involvement of researchers in their participants, therefore highlighting the necessity for detachment.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231169095","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous scholarship in qualitative methodologies commonly classifies researchers’ status in the field into insiders or outsiders. However, the prevalence of participatory observation in numerous social science disciplines has blurred the insider/outsider dichotomy and highlighted that the levels of researchers’ involvement in the field are becoming context-specific and far more complex than just insider or outsider. Inspired by this tendency in fieldwork methodology, this paper seeks insights from a theory in communication studies, role theory, to understand researchers’ status regarding the roles they adopt in their interactions with research participants. Through reference to relevant sociological and psychological schools of thought, this paper highlights discourse as a crucial instrument for researchers’ role-making in fieldwork. This study draws on the author’s experience conducting fieldwork in a Central China city to demonstrate how a researcher engages in shifting field contexts by intentionally assuming numerous roles. To explore state-firm relations in local development, the author recruited two groups of research participants: government officials and business managers. The author actively learned and employed comparable discursive techniques in interactions with each group of participants, thereby assuming various roles in different contexts. These findings underscore the purposeful self-presentation and intentional role-playing/change as effective means for human geographers and researchers in extensive disciplines to be involved in participant groups for gathering data more efficiently. Meanwhile, the author’s self-reflection also illuminates the consequent impacts on research outcomes and ethical issues due to the involvement of researchers in their participants, therefore highlighting the necessity for detachment.
超越田野中的“局内人”与“局外人”:对变迁语境中人文地理学家角色的思考
以往定性方法论的学术研究通常将研究人员在该领域的地位分为局内人或局外人。然而,参与式观察在众多社会科学学科中的盛行已经模糊了局内人/局外人的二分法,并强调了研究人员在该领域的参与程度正在变得特定于环境,而且远比局内人或局外人要复杂得多。受田野调查方法论的这种趋势的启发,本文试图从传播学中的一个理论——角色理论——中寻求见解,以了解研究人员在与研究参与者的互动中所采用的角色的地位。通过参考相关的社会学和心理学思想流派,本文强调话语是研究人员在田野调查中角色塑造的重要工具。本研究借鉴了作者在中国中部城市进行实地考察的经验,以展示研究人员如何通过有意承担多个角色来参与不断变化的领域背景。为了探讨地方发展中的国有企业关系,作者招募了两组研究参与者:政府官员和企业经理。在与每一组参与者的互动中,作者积极学习并运用可比较的话语技巧,从而在不同的语境中扮演不同的角色。这些发现强调了有目的的自我呈现和有意的角色扮演/改变是人文地理学家和广泛学科的研究人员参与参与者群体以更有效地收集数据的有效手段。同时,作者的自我反思也阐明了研究人员参与其参与者对研究成果和伦理问题的影响,从而强调了超然的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Qualitative Methods
International Journal of Qualitative Methods SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
139
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal Highlights Impact Factor: 5.4 Ranked 5/110 in Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary – SSCI Indexed In: Clarivate Analytics: Social Science Citation Index, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Scopus Launched In: 2002 Publication is subject to payment of an article processing charge (APC) Submit here International Journal of Qualitative Methods (IJQM) is a peer-reviewed open access journal which focuses on methodological advances, innovations, and insights in qualitative or mixed methods studies. Please see the Aims and Scope tab for further 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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信