Animal sheltering: A scoping literature review grounded in institutional ethnography.

IF 1.7 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Discourse-Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education Pub Date : 2023-01-26 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1017/awf.2022.4
Katherine E Koralesky, Janet M Rankin, David Fraser
{"title":"Animal sheltering: A scoping literature review grounded in institutional ethnography.","authors":"Katherine E Koralesky, Janet M Rankin, David Fraser","doi":"10.1017/awf.2022.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A diverse research literature now exists on the animals, staff and organisations involved in animal sheltering. We reviewed this research through the lens of institutional ethnography, a method of inquiry that focuses on the actual work that people do within institutions. The main topics, identified through a larger ethnographic study of animal sheltering, were: (i) research about shelter staff and officers; (ii) the relinquishment of animals to shelters; and (iii) animals' length of stay in shelters. After reviewing the literature, we held focus groups with shelter personnel to explore how their work experiences are or are not represented in the research. The review showed that stress caused by performing euthanasia has attracted much research, but the decision-making that leads to euthanasia, which may involve multiple staff and potential conflict, has received little attention. Research on 'compassion fatigue' has also tended to focus on euthanasia but a granular description about the practical and emotional work that personnel undertake that generates such fatigue is missing. Published research on both relinquishment and length of stay is dominated by metrics (questionnaires) and often relies upon shelter records, despite their limitations. Less research has examined the actual work processes involved in managing relinquishment as well as monitoring and reducing animals' length of stay. Institutional ethnography's focus on people's work activities can provide a different and more nuanced understanding of what is happening in animal sheltering and how it might better serve the needs of the animals and staff.</p>","PeriodicalId":47908,"journal":{"name":"Discourse-Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education","volume":"5 1","pages":"e3"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10936336/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse-Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2022.4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A diverse research literature now exists on the animals, staff and organisations involved in animal sheltering. We reviewed this research through the lens of institutional ethnography, a method of inquiry that focuses on the actual work that people do within institutions. The main topics, identified through a larger ethnographic study of animal sheltering, were: (i) research about shelter staff and officers; (ii) the relinquishment of animals to shelters; and (iii) animals' length of stay in shelters. After reviewing the literature, we held focus groups with shelter personnel to explore how their work experiences are or are not represented in the research. The review showed that stress caused by performing euthanasia has attracted much research, but the decision-making that leads to euthanasia, which may involve multiple staff and potential conflict, has received little attention. Research on 'compassion fatigue' has also tended to focus on euthanasia but a granular description about the practical and emotional work that personnel undertake that generates such fatigue is missing. Published research on both relinquishment and length of stay is dominated by metrics (questionnaires) and often relies upon shelter records, despite their limitations. Less research has examined the actual work processes involved in managing relinquishment as well as monitoring and reducing animals' length of stay. Institutional ethnography's focus on people's work activities can provide a different and more nuanced understanding of what is happening in animal sheltering and how it might better serve the needs of the animals and staff.

动物收容:以机构人种学为基础的范围性文献回顾。
目前,关于动物收容机构的动物、工作人员和组织的研究文献多种多样。我们通过机构人种学的视角对这些研究进行了回顾,机构人种学是一种调查方法,主要关注人们在机构中的实际工作。通过对动物收容所进行更大规模的人种学研究,我们确定了以下主要议题:(i) 关于收容所工作人员和官员的研究;(ii) 动物放弃收容所的情况;(iii) 动物在收容所的逗留时间。在查阅文献后,我们与收容所工作人员进行了焦点小组讨论,以探讨他们的工作经历在研究中是如何体现或没有体现的。综述显示,实施安乐术所造成的压力已经吸引了大量研究,但导致安乐术的决策(可能涉及多名工作人员和潜在冲突)却很少受到关注。有关 "同情疲劳 "的研究也往往集中在安乐死上,但对工作人员所从事的导致这种疲劳的实际工作和情感工作却缺乏详细描述。已发表的有关放弃和逗留时间的研究主要以指标(问卷调查)为基础,而且往往依赖于收容所的记录,尽管这些记录有其局限性。较少研究对放弃管理以及监控和缩短动物滞留时间的实际工作流程进行审查。机构人种学对人们工作活动的关注,可以让人们对动物收容所中发生的事情以及如何更好地满足动物和工作人员的需求有一个不同的、更细致入微的了解。
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
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Discourse is an international, fully peer-reviewed journal publishing contemporary research and theorising in the cultural politics of education. The journal publishes academic articles from throughout the world which contribute to contemporary debates on the new social, cultural and political configurations that now mark education as a highly contested but important cultural site. Discourse adopts a broadly critical orientation, but is not tied to any particular ideological, disciplinary or methodological position. It encourages interdisciplinary approaches to the analysis of educational theory, policy and practice. It welcomes papers which explore speculative ideas in education, are written in innovative ways, or are presented in experimental ways.
×
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