解构监狱研究的权力动力学

IF 0.9 4区 社会学 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Melissa Barragan, Dallas Augustine, Gabriela Gonzalez, Keramet Reiter
{"title":"解构监狱研究的权力动力学","authors":"Melissa Barragan, Dallas Augustine, Gabriela Gonzalez, Keramet Reiter","doi":"10.1177/00328855231208011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines methodological dilemmas surrounding entrée, emotion, and epistemology that can arise when conducting qualitative research in carceral settings. We address how our research team navigated consent and presentations of self for maintaining access; how they managed empathy and the emotional toll of conducting research in adversarial settings; and how conflicting narratives raised questions about data validity and knowledge construction. Analysis reveals how institutional power dynamics shape behind-the-scenes methodological decisions we make during fieldwork. Without open discussion, researchers risk perpetuating the opacity we seek to diffuse and replicating the power dynamics we aim to objectively document within total institutions.","PeriodicalId":47409,"journal":{"name":"Prison Journal","volume":"41 168","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deconstructing the Power Dynamics of Prison Research\",\"authors\":\"Melissa Barragan, Dallas Augustine, Gabriela Gonzalez, Keramet Reiter\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00328855231208011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines methodological dilemmas surrounding entrée, emotion, and epistemology that can arise when conducting qualitative research in carceral settings. We address how our research team navigated consent and presentations of self for maintaining access; how they managed empathy and the emotional toll of conducting research in adversarial settings; and how conflicting narratives raised questions about data validity and knowledge construction. Analysis reveals how institutional power dynamics shape behind-the-scenes methodological decisions we make during fieldwork. Without open discussion, researchers risk perpetuating the opacity we seek to diffuse and replicating the power dynamics we aim to objectively document within total institutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prison Journal\",\"volume\":\"41 168\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prison Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00328855231208011\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prison Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00328855231208011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了在医学环境中进行定性研究时可能出现的围绕个体、情感和认识论的方法论困境。我们解决了我们的研究团队如何导航同意和自我展示以保持访问;他们如何管理同理心和在敌对环境中进行研究的情绪损失;以及相互矛盾的叙述如何引发了有关数据有效性和知识构建的问题。分析揭示了机构权力动态如何塑造我们在实地工作中做出的幕后方法论决策。如果没有公开讨论,研究人员就有可能延续我们试图扩散的不透明性,并复制我们旨在客观记录整个机构内部的权力动态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deconstructing the Power Dynamics of Prison Research
This article examines methodological dilemmas surrounding entrée, emotion, and epistemology that can arise when conducting qualitative research in carceral settings. We address how our research team navigated consent and presentations of self for maintaining access; how they managed empathy and the emotional toll of conducting research in adversarial settings; and how conflicting narratives raised questions about data validity and knowledge construction. Analysis reveals how institutional power dynamics shape behind-the-scenes methodological decisions we make during fieldwork. Without open discussion, researchers risk perpetuating the opacity we seek to diffuse and replicating the power dynamics we aim to objectively document within total institutions.
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
Prison Journal
Prison Journal CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The editorial team"s aim is to establish The Prison Journal as a focal point and the forum of choice for studies, ideas, and discussion of adult and juvenile confinement, treatment interventions, and alternative sanctions.
×
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