Garro L C
Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Canada.
Cult Med Psychiatry. 1996 Dec;20(4):381-420. doi: 10.1007/BF00117086.
This paper presents a methodological approach for examining variation and consensus both within and between research settings and for addressing issues of generalizability and replicability. The comparison is based on how individuals diagnosed with diabetes and living in three Canadian Anishinaabe (Ojibway) communities explain diabetes and talk about their responses to the illness. Two kinds of interview format are used--an open-ended explanatory model type interview and a more structured, true-false, interview, amenable to analysis with cultural consensus theory. The responses given in both interviews converge on a set of explanations which can be found in all three communities, although differences occur in how these explanations are framed and emphasized. Implications of these differences and how these accounts relate to how individuals respond to diabetes are discussed. It is argued that the analysis of both interview formats leads to a deeper and more finely nuanced representation of understandings about causes of diabetes across the three communities than could be achieved by using one alone.
本文提出了一种方法论途径，用于研究研究环境内部和之间的差异与共识，并解决普遍性和可重复性问题。该比较基于生活在加拿大三个阿尼什纳比（奥吉布瓦）社区的糖尿病患者如何解释糖尿病以及谈论他们对疾病的应对方式。使用了两种访谈形式——一种开放式解释模型类型访谈和一种更结构化的是非型访谈，适合用文化共识理论进行分析。尽管在这些解释的构建和强调方式上存在差异，但两种访谈中给出的回答都集中在一组在所有三个社区都能找到的解释上。讨论了这些差异的影响以及这些描述与个人对糖尿病的应对方式之间的关系。有人认为，对两种访谈形式的分析能比单独使用一种形式更深入、更细致入微地呈现三个社区对糖尿病病因的理解。
