通过定性研究揭示种族主义:解释的政治学

IF 3.2 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Katarzyna Wojnicka, Magdalena Nowicka
{"title":"通过定性研究揭示种族主义:解释的政治学","authors":"Katarzyna Wojnicka, Magdalena Nowicka","doi":"10.1177/14687941231216640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main purpose of the article is to present and compare various strategies aimed at encouraging research participants to voice their experiences of racism and discrimination. This is supplemented by the discussion on how scholars can unveil the intersections of multiple systems of oppression reverberating in research participants’ narratives, given the challenge of racial asymmetry in research and the politics of interpretation in a race-mute societal context. Based on their study involving young migrants, the authors argue that qualitative research instruments such as individual and focus-group interviews, visual elicitation, co-creative methods, and video interviews enable individuals to frame their experienced reality in complementary ways. Comparing how each method can conceal or disclose racism, the authors warn of treating narrations on racism on face value and plead for carefully analyzing the extent to which individual narrations align with political agendas and normative discourses within the research's contexts. Addressing each research tool's potential and limitations, the authors also show how the researchers’ epistemological and political positionalities shape their data collection and analysis.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unveiling racism through qualitative research: The politics of interpretation\",\"authors\":\"Katarzyna Wojnicka, Magdalena Nowicka\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14687941231216640\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The main purpose of the article is to present and compare various strategies aimed at encouraging research participants to voice their experiences of racism and discrimination. This is supplemented by the discussion on how scholars can unveil the intersections of multiple systems of oppression reverberating in research participants’ narratives, given the challenge of racial asymmetry in research and the politics of interpretation in a race-mute societal context. Based on their study involving young migrants, the authors argue that qualitative research instruments such as individual and focus-group interviews, visual elicitation, co-creative methods, and video interviews enable individuals to frame their experienced reality in complementary ways. Comparing how each method can conceal or disclose racism, the authors warn of treating narrations on racism on face value and plead for carefully analyzing the extent to which individual narrations align with political agendas and normative discourses within the research's contexts. Addressing each research tool's potential and limitations, the authors also show how the researchers’ epistemological and political positionalities shape their data collection and analysis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941231216640\",\"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":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941231216640","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

文章的主要目的是介绍和比较旨在鼓励研究参与者表达其种族主义和歧视经历的各种策略。此外,文章还讨论了在种族不对称的社会背景下,鉴于研究中的种族不对称和解释政治所带来的挑战,学者如何才能揭示回荡在研究参与者叙述中的多重压迫体系的交叉点。基于他们对年轻移民的研究,作者认为,定性研究工具,如个人和焦点小组访谈、视觉诱导、共同创造方法和视频访谈,能够使个人以互补的方式构建他们所经历的现实。在比较每种方法如何掩盖或揭露种族主义时,作者告诫我们不要只看表面价值来看待关于种族主义的叙述,并呼吁我们仔细分析个人叙述在多大程度上与研究背景下的政治议程和规范性话语相一致。针对每种研究工具的潜力和局限性,作者还展示了研究人员的认识论和政治立场如何影响他们的数据收集和分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Unveiling racism through qualitative research: The politics of interpretation
The main purpose of the article is to present and compare various strategies aimed at encouraging research participants to voice their experiences of racism and discrimination. This is supplemented by the discussion on how scholars can unveil the intersections of multiple systems of oppression reverberating in research participants’ narratives, given the challenge of racial asymmetry in research and the politics of interpretation in a race-mute societal context. Based on their study involving young migrants, the authors argue that qualitative research instruments such as individual and focus-group interviews, visual elicitation, co-creative methods, and video interviews enable individuals to frame their experienced reality in complementary ways. Comparing how each method can conceal or disclose racism, the authors warn of treating narrations on racism on face value and plead for carefully analyzing the extent to which individual narrations align with political agendas and normative discourses within the research's contexts. Addressing each research tool's potential and limitations, the authors also show how the researchers’ epistemological and political positionalities shape their data collection and analysis.
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