评估一致性和忠实性

IF 0.9 4区 文学 Q3 COMMUNICATION
Mehmet Ali Üzelgün, Hossein Turner, Rahmi Oruç, Goncagül Şahin
{"title":"评估一致性和忠实性","authors":"Mehmet Ali Üzelgün, Hossein Turner, Rahmi Oruç, Goncagül Şahin","doi":"10.1075/ni.23053.uze","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Non-fictional narratives have an open-ended character that projects roles and values to those who participate in\n them. Narrative participation, in turn, entails narrative assessment and identification processes, through which adherence to\n values and positions may fail or be achieved. In the analysis of interviews with university students across Turkey, we draw on\n Fisher’s narrative paradigm to focus on how our participants carry out assessments of narrative credibility. To elucidate\n narrative coherence and fidelity, we take inspiration from an argumentative-rhetorical perspective, and focus specifically on the\n relationship among the criteria identified in the literature on narrative assessment. Our study of interviewee evaluations of\n COVID-19 narratives confirms the use of the coherence criteria, calls into question the fidelity criteria, and highlights the\n relevance of identification as a basic process for fidelity assessments. We conclude by discussing our limitations and directions\n for further research.","PeriodicalId":46671,"journal":{"name":"Narrative Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing coherence and fidelity\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet Ali Üzelgün, Hossein Turner, Rahmi Oruç, Goncagül Şahin\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/ni.23053.uze\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Non-fictional narratives have an open-ended character that projects roles and values to those who participate in\\n them. Narrative participation, in turn, entails narrative assessment and identification processes, through which adherence to\\n values and positions may fail or be achieved. In the analysis of interviews with university students across Turkey, we draw on\\n Fisher’s narrative paradigm to focus on how our participants carry out assessments of narrative credibility. To elucidate\\n narrative coherence and fidelity, we take inspiration from an argumentative-rhetorical perspective, and focus specifically on the\\n relationship among the criteria identified in the literature on narrative assessment. Our study of interviewee evaluations of\\n COVID-19 narratives confirms the use of the coherence criteria, calls into question the fidelity criteria, and highlights the\\n relevance of identification as a basic process for fidelity assessments. We conclude by discussing our limitations and directions\\n for further research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Narrative Inquiry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Narrative Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.23053.uze\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Narrative Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.23053.uze","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

非虚构叙事具有开放性的特点,它将角色和价值观投射到参与叙事的人身上。反过来,叙事参与又包含叙事评估和识别过程,通过这一过程,对价值观和立场的坚持可能会失败,也可能会实现。在对土耳其大学生的访谈分析中,我们借鉴了费舍尔的叙事范式,重点关注参与者如何对叙事可信度进行评估。为了阐明叙事的连贯性和忠实性,我们从论证-修辞的角度获得启发,并特别关注叙事评估文献中确定的标准之间的关系。我们对 COVID-19 叙事受访者评价的研究证实了连贯性标准的使用,对忠实性标准提出了质疑,并强调了识别作为忠实性评估基本过程的相关性。最后,我们讨论了我们的局限性和进一步研究的方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing coherence and fidelity
Non-fictional narratives have an open-ended character that projects roles and values to those who participate in them. Narrative participation, in turn, entails narrative assessment and identification processes, through which adherence to values and positions may fail or be achieved. In the analysis of interviews with university students across Turkey, we draw on Fisher’s narrative paradigm to focus on how our participants carry out assessments of narrative credibility. To elucidate narrative coherence and fidelity, we take inspiration from an argumentative-rhetorical perspective, and focus specifically on the relationship among the criteria identified in the literature on narrative assessment. Our study of interviewee evaluations of COVID-19 narratives confirms the use of the coherence criteria, calls into question the fidelity criteria, and highlights the relevance of identification as a basic process for fidelity assessments. We conclude by discussing our limitations and directions for further research.
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
Narrative Inquiry
Narrative Inquiry Multiple-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
14.30%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Narrative Inquiry is devoted to providing a forum for theoretical, empirical, and methodological work on narrative. Articles appearing in Narrative Inquiry draw upon a variety of approaches and methodologies in the study of narrative as a way to give contour to experience, tradition, and values to next generations. Particular emphasis is placed on theoretical approaches to narrative and the analysis of narratives in human interaction, including those practiced by researchers in psychology, linguistics and related disciplines.
×
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