掌握编制反身性陈述的六种方法。

Canadian medical education journal Pub Date : 2024-11-13 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.36834/cmej.78824
Heather Braund, Jennifer Turnnidge, Nicholas Cofie, Oluwatoyosi Kuforiji, Sarah Greco, Amber Hastings-Truelove, Shannon Hill, Nancy Dalgarno
{"title":"掌握编制反身性陈述的六种方法。","authors":"Heather Braund, Jennifer Turnnidge, Nicholas Cofie, Oluwatoyosi Kuforiji, Sarah Greco, Amber Hastings-Truelove, Shannon Hill, Nancy Dalgarno","doi":"10.36834/cmej.78824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Qualitative researchers have underscored the value and importance of being reflexive in the research process, yet existing guidelines or checklists on how to practically address reflexivity are often scant and scattered across studies. In this scholarly perspective, we review, analyse, and present an overview of conceptions of reflexivity. Further, we offer practical guidelines for addressing and developing reflexivity statements in qualitative research. We describe reflexivity as both a concept and a deliberate ongoing process that requires a certain level of researcher consciousness, reflection, introspection, self-awareness, and an analytic attention to the researcher's role in the research process at all stages. We highlight the notion that reflexivity offers researchers an opportunity to examine potential assumptions, through the continuous process of questioning, examining, accepting, and articulating our attitudes, assumptions, perspectives, and roles. We present six recommendations to promote dialogue on the practice of reflexivity among researchers from various ontological and epistemological communities and encourage them to develop their own reflexivity practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":72503,"journal":{"name":"Canadian medical education journal","volume":"15 5","pages":"146-149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11586026/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Six ways to get a grip on developing reflexivity statements.\",\"authors\":\"Heather Braund, Jennifer Turnnidge, Nicholas Cofie, Oluwatoyosi Kuforiji, Sarah Greco, Amber Hastings-Truelove, Shannon Hill, Nancy Dalgarno\",\"doi\":\"10.36834/cmej.78824\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Qualitative researchers have underscored the value and importance of being reflexive in the research process, yet existing guidelines or checklists on how to practically address reflexivity are often scant and scattered across studies. In this scholarly perspective, we review, analyse, and present an overview of conceptions of reflexivity. Further, we offer practical guidelines for addressing and developing reflexivity statements in qualitative research. We describe reflexivity as both a concept and a deliberate ongoing process that requires a certain level of researcher consciousness, reflection, introspection, self-awareness, and an analytic attention to the researcher's role in the research process at all stages. We highlight the notion that reflexivity offers researchers an opportunity to examine potential assumptions, through the continuous process of questioning, examining, accepting, and articulating our attitudes, assumptions, perspectives, and roles. We present six recommendations to promote dialogue on the practice of reflexivity among researchers from various ontological and epistemological communities and encourage them to develop their own reflexivity practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian medical education journal\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"146-149\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11586026/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian medical education journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.78824\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian medical education journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.78824","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定性研究人员强调了在研究过程中进行反思的价值和重要性,然而,关于如何切实解决反思问题的现有指导原则或清单往往很少,而且散见于各种研究中。在这篇学术论文中,我们回顾、分析并概述了反身性的概念。此外,我们还提供了在定性研究中处理和制定反身性陈述的实用指南。我们将反身性描述为一个概念和一个慎重的持续过程,它要求研究人员具有一定程度的意识、反思、内省和自我意识,并对研究人员在研究过程中各个阶段的角色给予分析性关注。我们强调的理念是,通过不断质疑、审视、接受和阐明我们的态度、假设、观点和角色,反思性为研究人员提供了审视潜在假设的机会。我们提出了六项建议,以促进来自不同本体论和认识论社区的研究人员就反身性实践开展对话,并鼓励他们发展自己的反身性实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Six ways to get a grip on developing reflexivity statements.

Qualitative researchers have underscored the value and importance of being reflexive in the research process, yet existing guidelines or checklists on how to practically address reflexivity are often scant and scattered across studies. In this scholarly perspective, we review, analyse, and present an overview of conceptions of reflexivity. Further, we offer practical guidelines for addressing and developing reflexivity statements in qualitative research. We describe reflexivity as both a concept and a deliberate ongoing process that requires a certain level of researcher consciousness, reflection, introspection, self-awareness, and an analytic attention to the researcher's role in the research process at all stages. We highlight the notion that reflexivity offers researchers an opportunity to examine potential assumptions, through the continuous process of questioning, examining, accepting, and articulating our attitudes, assumptions, perspectives, and roles. We present six recommendations to promote dialogue on the practice of reflexivity among researchers from various ontological and epistemological communities and encourage them to develop their own reflexivity practices.

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
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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