Snidman Hannah R, Swaringen Katarina S, Rice Lindsay
School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Marymount University, Arlington, VA, USA.
School of Professional Studies, Wake Forest University, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Account Res. 2024 Oct 3:1-22. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2408287.
This study explored experiences of quantitative researchers who work with marginalized populations. Participants were recruited from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology forum, and asked questions regarding their struggles and best practices while working with marginalized populations in which they are or are not a member. Responses included concerns regarding bidirectional trust, community norms, perceived bias, diversity and participant recruitment and compensation. We explore the benefits of qualitative understandings of bias (i.e. positionality, reflexivity), salient concerns reported by quantitative researchers, and our recommendations for the ethical inclusion of these practices across quantitative work. This paper contributes to understanding of current struggles and best practices while conducting research among marginalized populations. Additionally, we encourage quantitative researchers to engage in reflexive research practices, particularly for the benefit of marginalized group research. We extend the insider-outsider researcher discussion to quantitative researchers.
本研究探讨了与边缘化人群合作的定量研究人员的经历。参与者从人格与社会心理学协会论坛招募，并被问及他们在与自己所属或不属于的边缘化人群合作时所面临的困难和最佳实践。回答包括对双向信任、社区规范、感知到的偏见、多样性以及参与者招募和补偿的担忧。我们探讨了对偏见进行定性理解（即立场性、反思性）的益处、定量研究人员报告的突出问题，以及我们对在定量研究工作中道德纳入这些实践的建议。本文有助于理解在边缘化人群中进行研究时当前面临的困难和最佳实践。此外，我们鼓励定量研究人员采用反思性研究方法，特别是为了边缘化群体研究的利益。我们将内部 - 外部研究者的讨论扩展到定量研究人员。
