定性数据存档和共享的认识论和伦理挑战

IF 2.3 2区 文学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
S. Feldman, L. Shaw
{"title":"定性数据存档和共享的认识论和伦理挑战","authors":"S. Feldman, L. Shaw","doi":"10.1177/0002764218796084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article identifies the epistemological and ethical problems that accompany the growing mandate to archive and share qualitative data. We call attention to the potential consequences of “shared access” for data that is premised on meaning-making and interpretation embedded in interactions between the researcher and those they study. We argue that context specificity and the co-constitutive processes of qualitative data production preclude the separation of “evidence” from the relations of its production that is required when evidence is archived for future use by others. Furthermore, we identify the ethical challenges that attend to ensuring the rights and confidentiality of those we engage and the particular concerns such engagement entails for vulnerable populations when securing informed consent for the use of data by future unknown researchers. Finally, we ask whether the claim for greater efficiencies and accountability of public access are appropriate for the co-constitutive character of qualitative evidence and what these demands portend for knowledge production. We conclude by calling for the development of protocols to guide researchers who are sensitive to these issues but must respond to calls to archive and share their data.","PeriodicalId":48360,"journal":{"name":"American Behavioral Scientist","volume":"63 1","pages":"699 - 721"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0002764218796084","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Epistemological and Ethical Challenges of Archiving and Sharing Qualitative Data\",\"authors\":\"S. Feldman, L. Shaw\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0002764218796084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article identifies the epistemological and ethical problems that accompany the growing mandate to archive and share qualitative data. We call attention to the potential consequences of “shared access” for data that is premised on meaning-making and interpretation embedded in interactions between the researcher and those they study. We argue that context specificity and the co-constitutive processes of qualitative data production preclude the separation of “evidence” from the relations of its production that is required when evidence is archived for future use by others. Furthermore, we identify the ethical challenges that attend to ensuring the rights and confidentiality of those we engage and the particular concerns such engagement entails for vulnerable populations when securing informed consent for the use of data by future unknown researchers. Finally, we ask whether the claim for greater efficiencies and accountability of public access are appropriate for the co-constitutive character of qualitative evidence and what these demands portend for knowledge production. We conclude by calling for the development of protocols to guide researchers who are sensitive to these issues but must respond to calls to archive and share their data.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48360,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Behavioral Scientist\",\"volume\":\"63 1\",\"pages\":\"699 - 721\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0002764218796084\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Behavioral Scientist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218796084\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Behavioral Scientist","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218796084","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

本文确定了认识论和伦理问题,伴随着越来越多的任务,以存档和共享定性数据。我们呼吁注意数据“共享访问”的潜在后果,这些数据的前提是嵌入在研究人员和他们研究的对象之间的相互作用中的意义制造和解释。我们认为,上下文特异性和定性数据生产的共同构成过程排除了“证据”与其生产关系的分离,这是在证据存档以供他人将来使用时所需要的。此外,我们还确定了确保我们参与的人的权利和机密性所面临的伦理挑战,以及在确保未来未知研究人员使用数据的知情同意时,这种参与对弱势群体所带来的特殊关注。最后,我们提出,提高公共获取效率和问责制的要求是否适用于定性证据的共构成特征,以及这些要求对知识生产的预示。最后,我们呼吁制定协议来指导那些对这些问题敏感但必须响应存档和共享数据的呼吁的研究人员。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Epistemological and Ethical Challenges of Archiving and Sharing Qualitative Data
This article identifies the epistemological and ethical problems that accompany the growing mandate to archive and share qualitative data. We call attention to the potential consequences of “shared access” for data that is premised on meaning-making and interpretation embedded in interactions between the researcher and those they study. We argue that context specificity and the co-constitutive processes of qualitative data production preclude the separation of “evidence” from the relations of its production that is required when evidence is archived for future use by others. Furthermore, we identify the ethical challenges that attend to ensuring the rights and confidentiality of those we engage and the particular concerns such engagement entails for vulnerable populations when securing informed consent for the use of data by future unknown researchers. Finally, we ask whether the claim for greater efficiencies and accountability of public access are appropriate for the co-constitutive character of qualitative evidence and what these demands portend for knowledge production. We conclude by calling for the development of protocols to guide researchers who are sensitive to these issues but must respond to calls to archive and share their data.
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
6.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: American Behavioral Scientist has been a valuable source of information for scholars, researchers, professionals, and students, providing in-depth perspectives on intriguing contemporary topics throughout the social and behavioral sciences. Each issue offers comprehensive analysis of a single topic, examining such important and diverse arenas as sociology, international and U.S. politics, behavioral sciences, communication and media, economics, education, ethnic and racial studies, terrorism, and public service. The journal"s interdisciplinary approach stimulates creativity and occasionally, controversy within the emerging frontiers of the social sciences, exploring the critical issues that affect our world and challenge our thinking.
×
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