Suppr超能文献

透过变焦镜头审视“研究领域”:关于在全球大流行期间开展在线研究的方法论思考

Looking at the 'field' through a Zoom lens: Methodological reflections on conducting online research during a global pandemic.

作者信息

Howlett Marnie

机构信息

Department of International Relations, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.

出版信息

Qual Res. 2022 Jun;22(3):387-402. doi: 10.1177/1468794120985691.

Abstract

For many social science scholars, the COVID-19 pandemic has forced us to re-think our approaches to research. As a result of new social distancing measures, those of us who conduct in-person qualitative and ethnographic research have faced significant challenges in accessing the populations and fields we study. Technology served as an incredibly useful tool for social interaction and research prior to the pandemic, and it has since become even more important as a way to engage with others. Although not all types of social research, or even all projects, lend themselves to online activities, digital communication platforms like Zoom, Skype, and Facebook have allowed many of us to continue our studies from a distance-in some cases, significant temporal and spatial distances away from our research sites. As such, it is important to consider how these different methodological approaches challenge our understandings of fieldwork. While the disadvantages of not physically accessing the places we study are clear, can mediated approaches offer (any) hope of the immersion we experienced with in-person fieldwork? If many of us are able to continue ethnographic research (in some form) without co-locating with our participants in our field sites, how are our studies fundamentally affected, as well as the ways we conceptualize the 'field' more largely? This paper explores these methodological and epistemological questions through reflections on conducting online research during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.

摘要

对于许多社会科学学者来说,新冠疫情迫使我们重新思考研究方法。由于新的社交距离措施,我们这些进行实地定性和人种志研究的人在接触我们所研究的人群和领域时面临了重大挑战。在疫情之前,技术是社交互动和研究的一项极其有用的工具,此后,它作为与他人互动的一种方式变得更加重要。尽管并非所有类型的社会研究,甚至不是所有项目都适合在线活动,但像Zoom、Skype和Facebook这样的数字通信平台使我们许多人能够在一定距离外继续我们的研究——在某些情况下,与我们的研究地点相隔很长的时间和空间距离。因此,重要的是要考虑这些不同的方法论方法如何挑战我们对实地调查的理解。虽然无法实际进入我们所研究的地方的缺点显而易见,但通过媒介进行的方法能否提供(任何)我们在实地亲身调查中所体验到的那种沉浸感呢?如果我们许多人能够(以某种形式)继续人种志研究,而无需与我们在实地的参与者共处一地,那么我们的研究在根本上会受到怎样的影响,以及我们在更广泛意义上对“实地”的概念化方式又会受到怎样的影响呢?本文通过对在新冠疫情初期进行在线研究的反思,探讨了这些方法论和认识论问题。

相似文献

6
The Social Relations of Ethnographic Fieldwork: Access, Ethics and Research Governance.民族志田野调查的社会关系:准入、伦理与研究治理
Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2023 Sep 8;10:23333936231193885. doi: 10.1177/23333936231193885. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.

引用本文的文献

2
Sociology from a Distance: Remote Interviews and Feminist Methods.远距离社会学:远程访谈与女性主义方法
Qual Sociol. 2024 Mar;47(1):43-67. doi: 10.1007/s11133-024-09556-y. Epub 2024 Jan 23.
5
Unveiling polish judges' views on empathy and impartiality.揭示波兰法官对同理心与公正性的看法。
Front Sociol. 2024 Nov 1;9:1417762. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2024.1417762. eCollection 2024.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验