说真话!黑人女性的对话在学术成果中的作用

IF 3.2 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Daniella Ann Cook, Michelle L. Bryan
{"title":"说真话!黑人女性的对话在学术成果中的作用","authors":"Daniella Ann Cook, Michelle L. Bryan","doi":"10.1177/14687941231206739","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we offer insights derived from an analysis of a structured dialogue on methodological decision making. Our analysis highlights the ways in which our dialogic process for revising a manuscript reflected key onto-epistemic qualities of Black women's ways of knowing. Drawing from an Afrocentric feminist epistemological standpoint, we tease apart how shared ways of knowing can facilitate heightened clarity about one's engagement in the research process. By positioning structured dialogues as a methodological tool, we offer several insights regarding their generative nature in facilitating researcher clarity on methodological decision making and in elucidating key shifts in the evolution of a researcher's methodological self. Indeed, as a form of facilitated reflexive praxis, engaging in structure dialogues about one's methodological choices is requisite for defining and understanding oneself as a researcher, scholar, and intellectual.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Speak truth! The role of Black women's dialogue in the production of scholarship\",\"authors\":\"Daniella Ann Cook, Michelle L. Bryan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14687941231206739\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, we offer insights derived from an analysis of a structured dialogue on methodological decision making. Our analysis highlights the ways in which our dialogic process for revising a manuscript reflected key onto-epistemic qualities of Black women's ways of knowing. Drawing from an Afrocentric feminist epistemological standpoint, we tease apart how shared ways of knowing can facilitate heightened clarity about one's engagement in the research process. By positioning structured dialogues as a methodological tool, we offer several insights regarding their generative nature in facilitating researcher clarity on methodological decision making and in elucidating key shifts in the evolution of a researcher's methodological self. Indeed, as a form of facilitated reflexive praxis, engaging in structure dialogues about one's methodological choices is requisite for defining and understanding oneself as a researcher, scholar, and intellectual.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941231206739\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941231206739","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

在这篇文章中,我们提供了来自对方法论决策的结构化对话的分析的见解。我们的分析强调了我们修改手稿的对话过程反映了黑人女性认知方式的关键认知品质的方式。从以非洲为中心的女权主义认识论的立场出发,我们梳理了共同的认识方式如何促进人们在研究过程中的参与更加清晰。通过将结构化对话定位为方法论工具,我们提供了一些关于其生成性质的见解,以促进研究人员对方法论决策的清晰度,并阐明研究人员方法论自我演变的关键转变。事实上,作为一种便利的反身实践形式,参与关于方法论选择的结构对话对于定义和理解自己作为研究人员、学者和知识分子是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Speak truth! The role of Black women's dialogue in the production of scholarship
In this article, we offer insights derived from an analysis of a structured dialogue on methodological decision making. Our analysis highlights the ways in which our dialogic process for revising a manuscript reflected key onto-epistemic qualities of Black women's ways of knowing. Drawing from an Afrocentric feminist epistemological standpoint, we tease apart how shared ways of knowing can facilitate heightened clarity about one's engagement in the research process. By positioning structured dialogues as a methodological tool, we offer several insights regarding their generative nature in facilitating researcher clarity on methodological decision making and in elucidating key shifts in the evolution of a researcher's methodological self. Indeed, as a form of facilitated reflexive praxis, engaging in structure dialogues about one's methodological choices is requisite for defining and understanding oneself as a researcher, scholar, and intellectual.
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
8.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research is a fully peer reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles on the methodological diversity and multi-disciplinary focus of qualitative research within the social sciences. Research based on qualitative methods, and methodological commentary on such research, have expanded exponentially in the past decades. This is the case across a number of disciplines including sociology, social anthropology, health and nursing, education, cultural studies, human geography, social and discursive psychology, and discourse studies.
×
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