从解释到中断:接受颠覆性分析

Timothy Clark
{"title":"从解释到中断:接受颠覆性分析","authors":"Timothy Clark","doi":"10.1177/14687941241230240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Qualitative analysis is, inherently, a complex, messy and nuanced process. In the context of contested notions of validity, for novice researchers there is therefore an attraction in adopting established, systematic and formulaic approaches. Yet, in prioritising methodical processes, over critical engagement and methodologically coherent quality criteria, these approaches can risk limiting research to a process of cataloguing and reporting face value readings. This research note reflects on an attempt to address and examine this risk in a doctoral research project by progressing from an initial thematic interpretative approach to data analysis to a secondary stage informed by ideas of interruptive analysis. The paper introduces a conceptualisation of interruption as prioritising interrogation of aspects of presentation, over a focus on the interpretation of content or a shift from analysing what is said, to how it is said. Empirical data from research exploring doctoral students’ methodological decision-making is utilised to illustrate the approach and to provoke consideration of the value of embracing disruption. Analysis of two narrative accounts from the study is presented, providing a snapshot of the different understandings and an insight into the learning it generated. The learning in this research note is intended to act as an illustration and provocation for thinking rather than any form of procedural guide.","PeriodicalId":509994,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":"206 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Interpretation to Interruption: Embracing disruptive analysis\",\"authors\":\"Timothy Clark\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14687941241230240\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Qualitative analysis is, inherently, a complex, messy and nuanced process. In the context of contested notions of validity, for novice researchers there is therefore an attraction in adopting established, systematic and formulaic approaches. Yet, in prioritising methodical processes, over critical engagement and methodologically coherent quality criteria, these approaches can risk limiting research to a process of cataloguing and reporting face value readings. This research note reflects on an attempt to address and examine this risk in a doctoral research project by progressing from an initial thematic interpretative approach to data analysis to a secondary stage informed by ideas of interruptive analysis. The paper introduces a conceptualisation of interruption as prioritising interrogation of aspects of presentation, over a focus on the interpretation of content or a shift from analysing what is said, to how it is said. Empirical data from research exploring doctoral students’ methodological decision-making is utilised to illustrate the approach and to provoke consideration of the value of embracing disruption. Analysis of two narrative accounts from the study is presented, providing a snapshot of the different understandings and an insight into the learning it generated. The learning in this research note is intended to act as an illustration and provocation for thinking rather than any form of procedural guide.\",\"PeriodicalId\":509994,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research\",\"volume\":\"206 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-12\",\"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/10.1177/14687941241230240\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941241230240","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定性分析本质上是一个复杂、混乱和微妙的过程。因此,在有效性概念备受争议的背景下,对新手研究人员来说,采用既定的、系统的和公式化的方法具有吸引力。然而,这些方法优先考虑的是方法过程,而不是批判性参与和方法上一致的质量标准,因此有可能将研究局限于编目和报告表面价值解读的过程。本研究报告反思了在一个博士研究项目中应对和检查这种风险的尝试,即从最初的专题解释性数据分析方法发展到以中断分析思想为指导的第二阶段。论文介绍了中断的概念,即优先考虑对陈述的各个方面进行审问,而不是将重点放在对内容的解释上,或者从分析说了什么转向分析是如何说的。本文利用对博士生方法论决策进行探索研究的经验数据来说明这种方法,并引发对接受中断的价值的思考。本研究报告对研究中的两个叙述进行了分析,提供了不同理解的缩影,并对研究中产生的学习成果进行了深入探讨。本研究说明中的学习内容旨在说明和启发思考,而不是任何形式的程序指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From Interpretation to Interruption: Embracing disruptive analysis
Qualitative analysis is, inherently, a complex, messy and nuanced process. In the context of contested notions of validity, for novice researchers there is therefore an attraction in adopting established, systematic and formulaic approaches. Yet, in prioritising methodical processes, over critical engagement and methodologically coherent quality criteria, these approaches can risk limiting research to a process of cataloguing and reporting face value readings. This research note reflects on an attempt to address and examine this risk in a doctoral research project by progressing from an initial thematic interpretative approach to data analysis to a secondary stage informed by ideas of interruptive analysis. The paper introduces a conceptualisation of interruption as prioritising interrogation of aspects of presentation, over a focus on the interpretation of content or a shift from analysing what is said, to how it is said. Empirical data from research exploring doctoral students’ methodological decision-making is utilised to illustrate the approach and to provoke consideration of the value of embracing disruption. Analysis of two narrative accounts from the study is presented, providing a snapshot of the different understandings and an insight into the learning it generated. The learning in this research note is intended to act as an illustration and provocation for thinking rather than any form of procedural guide.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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