From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Tue Sep 2 07:40:18 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 13:40:18 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] PhD positions at the VU Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E01368412@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> fyi, there are several Ph.D. positions being advertised (in English) at the VU in Amsterdam: http://www.fsw.vu.nl/en/research/ccss/phd-programme/index.asp The application deadline for the 5 "open topic" positions and for the 4 defined positions is 15 September! I do not have additional information on any of these, but I can tell you it's a nice place to work and a great city! Dvora Yanow Strategic Chair in Meaning and Method Department of Culture, Organization & Management Faculty of Social Sciences Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, THE NETHERLANDS -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080902/60563bcb/attachment.html From jhuns at vt.edu Wed Sep 3 15:27:33 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 15:27:33 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] CFP: Learning Inquiry Message-ID: Apologies for x-posting, please distribute as appropriate -jh Dear Colleagues; We invite your submissions to Learning Inquiry. We are sending out a call for participation in our ongoing creation of a transdiciplinary forum to engage the widest variety of perspectives on learning. We're looking for articles and special issues that push the boundaries and include new perspectives, but also take the opportunity to share research and experiences from particular locations of inquiry to a larger audience. Learning Inquiry is a refereed scholarly journal, which is devoted to establishing the area of "learning" as a focus for transdisciplinary study. The journal's goal is to be a forum centered on learning that remains open to varied objects of enquiry, including machine, human, plant and animal learning as well as the processes of learning in business, government, and the professions, both in informal and formal environments. The audience for this journal is anyone interested in learning, understanding its contexts, and anticipating its future. The first volume of Learning Inquiry has included papers from a wide variety of perspectives that have helped to frame the discourse we hope the journal will engender. Our first issue, on the futures of learning included contributions from Gary Natriello, Erik De Corte, Helen Verran, Mark Warschauer, Stuart Moulthrop, Douglas Kellner and Heinz Mandl on Discovery Networks, Metaphysics and Learning, Play, and Knowledge Management. Leonard J. Waks brought together a "Special Issue on Listening and Reflecting" with participation from Sophie Haroutunian-Gordon, Stanton Wortham, Latherine Schultz, Suzanne Rice, Elizabeth Meadows, Megan Laverty, Andrea English, A. G. Rud and Jim Garrison Past and forthcoming contributions cover topics as diverse as the ethical challenges of training brain surgeons, organizational learning theory, futures of digital learning, music and math, learning and discipline, and situated cognition. Learning Inquiry strives to strike a balance between presenting innovative research and documenting current knowledge to foster a scholarly dialogue on learning independent of domain and methodological restrictions. Learning Inquiry also presents special issues that identify the central areas of learning inquiry to provide focus for future research. Please visit the journal website (http://learning-inquiry.info) for more information and to submit a paper. Editors: Jason Nolan, Ryerson University, CANADA Jeremy W. Hunsinger, Virginia Tech., USA Editorial Board: David Berliner, Arizona State University, USA; Megan Boler, University of Toronto, CANADA; Erik De Corte, Catholic University of Leuven, BELGIUM; Katie Embree, Columbia University, USA; Charles Ess, Drury University, USA & Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NORWAY; Jim Garrison, Virginia Tech, USA; Henry Giroux, McMaster University, CANADA; Mimi Ito, University of Southern California, USA & Keio University, JAPAN; Cushla Kapitzke, Queensland University of Technology, AUSTRALIA; Heinz Mandl, Ludwig Maximilians University, GERMANY; Rochelle Mazar, University of Toronto/Missisauga, CANADA; Kinshuk, Athabasca University, CANADA; Penina Mlama, University of Dar es Salaam, TANZANIA; Vera Nincic, UNiversiyt of Toronto, CANADA; Nuria Oliver, Telefonica R&D SPAIN; K. Ann Renninger, Swarthmore College, USA; Ingvar Sigurgeirsson, Iceland University of Education, ICELAND; Susan Stucky, IBM, USA Joel Weiss, University of Toronto, CANADA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080903/44b914e2/attachment-0001.html From swr at uci.edu Fri Sep 5 17:56:37 2008 From: swr at uci.edu (Shawn Rosenberg) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 14:56:37 -0700 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] On the division of the disciplines References: <8CAB5BC11F4ACF7-9B4-4736@webmail-ng01.sysops.aol.com> <20080717085119.htrc4bkrcc4kwskg@webmail.csbs.utah.edu> Message-ID: Bill, Peri and Laleh, About the divides between disciplines. I too am not a fan. The rationale for the division reflects some of the intellectual divisions of the early 20th century. This was then reinforced by the inter-departmental politics of fighting for space and positions in the university. I tend to regard the current division of the social sciences as an institutionalized practice that is disciplining (a policing of boundaries and practices). The result of that practice, in my view, is the division of scholars into groups, each of which is distinguished by agreement on what it is legitimate to be ignorant of. For my own take on the direction of interdisciplinary (or better supra-discplinary) pursuit, I suggest the article mentioned below. It addresses the particular problem of the relation between political science/sociology on the one hand and psychology on the other. That said, I believe the argument applies more generally to interdisciplinary work: "Theorizing political psychology: Doing integrative social science under conditions of post-modernity." Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour. (2003), pp. 427-460. It is available at the following site: http://repositories.cdlib.org/postprints/1601/ Shawn W. Rosenberg Director and Professor Graduate Program in Political Psychology University of California, Irvine Faculty website: http://www.faculty.uci.edu/profile.cfm?faculty_id=2469 Program websites: http://www.polisci.uci.edu/POLPSYGROUP.htm http://aris.ss.uci.edu/polpsych/polpsych.html ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 7:51 AM Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods]Mark Bevir?s Methodological Gaps > Thanks Laleh for that citation. I would also add Wallerstein's The > End of the World as We Know It: Social Science for the Twenty-First > Century,1999,U of Minn Press. Peri > > > Quoting Laleh Khalili : > >> >> >> I can't speak to the second question, but as for disciplinary >> boundaries, Tim Mitchell has written a fascinating chapter for a book >> in which he argues (very briefly, as the main thrust of the article is >> something related but different) that the hardening of disciplinary >> boundaries is very recent and really a function of the politics (of >> both the "real world" sort and of academia). I find the argument >> plausible. >> >> Beside, having been trained as a "political scientist" in the US and >> teaching in a "politics" department in the UK which is anything but >> scientistic, and using all the methods and methodologies of *other* >> disciplines makes me not so concerned or worried about the possibility >> that these boundaries may be dissolved... Quite the contrary! :) >> >> The Mitchell chapter can be read at >> >> http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=uciaspubs/editedvolumes >> >> Laleh >> SOAS >> >> >> >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, wjkellpro at aol.com wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hello Fellow Interpretationistas! >>> >>> Lately I have been reading essays written, in whole or in part, by >>> Mark Bevir. I am very impressed by his understanding, and >>> practice, of interpretive social science. However, I do have a >>> couple of concerns. >>> >>> One is that his approach seems to dissolve all the traditional >>> "boundaries" in the social sciences. How can he, or any >>> interpretive social scientist, distinguish between sociology, >>> political science, or history? What is the methodological >>> rationale, if any, for marking off these boundaries? Is it only a >>> matter of self-identity? E.g., "I am employed in the Sociology >>> Department, therefore whatever I do is 'sociology'"? >>> >>> Can anyone point out some literature where this problem has been >>> resolved? I don't think Bevir has even addressed this issue. >>> >>> Secondly, Bevir's idea of being "critical" also leaves me >>> unsatisfied. He seems to think that being critical is limited to >>> such things as: a) exposing the actual relativity of claims to know >>> what is true or right with universal intent; b) revealing the >>> internal contradictions in an ideology, or claim to know; c) >>> finding distortions of fact; or, d)unmasking deceptions. >>> >>> These are all "critical" tactics from the neopositivist >>> "logical-empirical" point of view, but this very point of view >>> seems to me to be a self-contradiction within the interpretation >>> framework. In my understanding, there cannot be a "neopositivist" >>> value-neutral interpretive social science. Its >>> an oxymoron! >>> >>> Bevir says that he is committed to the view that people generally >>> act for reasons, and that it is his job to interpret those reasons >>> from the human behavior. But his theory of human rationality seems >>> to me overly technocratic; that is, lacking in any feeling for the >>> respect that is implicit in the major part of human behavior. He >>> sees people as creatively responding to dilemmas as their >>> traditional ways of acting and thinking are challenged. But he >>> seems unable to account for the way people generally shape those >>> responses with some element of concern for their impact on others. >>> He appears to distinguish between capitalist ideologies and >>> socialist ideologies, only by their logical properties. He doesn?t >>> explain why or how humans are valued differently within either >>> belief system. In the technocratic view, humans have no more value >>> than any of the other things in the world. >>> >>> For reasons stated in my prior posts, I would like to ask Bevir how >>> a human could be "rational" without being respectful of others? >>> >>> Consistent with this technocratic theory of rationality, Bevir's >>> method fails to acknowledge any part played by feelings of respect >>> for those whose meanings he sets out to interpret. And this seems >>> to me to be a methodological self-contradiction. >>> >>> To interpret the meanings of another, one person must engage the >>> other with a substantial degree of mutuality. This is a >>> requirement of empathy. The other is regarded as a person in >>> fundamen >>> tal ways like oneself; that is, sentient, full of meanings, and >>> acting for reasons. As Polanyi points out, this relationship is a >>> form of companionship. Even if the other is one of those dead >>> white guys they study in history, to understand him requires a >>> relationship of human mutuality. >>> >>> So, how can anyone have such a relationship without feeling some >>> respect for the other? That does not mean one must approve of the >>> other?s behavior, but to know someone person-to-person is to have a >>> respectful relationship. There is no such thing as an objective >>> interpretation, and Bevir has recognized that. So, to interpret >>> requires that one person engage the other as a fellow person. >>> Polanyi calls it an I-Thou relationship. >>> >>> Therefore, the professional conduct of interpretive social science >>> requires having respect for the human subject. But Bevir's >>> approach seems overly intellectualized and perhaps alienated from >>> the other. >>> >>> I am sure he actually does respect people, but he factors this out >>> of his social science. But is that intellectually honest, or fully >>> truthful? If you respect people as you are interpreting their >>> meanings, isn't that a part of your methodology? >>> >>> I think it is, and we Interpretationistas ought to say it. >>> >>> Bill Kelleher >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> !DSPAM:487ef9e719257163845084! > > > > -- > Peregrine Schwartz-Shea > Professor > > University of Utah > Political Science Department > 260 South Central Campus Drive Rm 252 > Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9152 > > (801) 581-6300 phone mail > psshea at poli-sci.utah.edu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > From patrickthaddeusjackson at gmail.com Sun Sep 7 06:27:56 2008 From: patrickthaddeusjackson at gmail.com (Patrick Thaddeus Jackson) Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 06:27:56 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] On the division of the disciplines In-Reply-To: References: <8CAB5BC11F4ACF7-9B4-4736@webmail-ng01.sysops.aol.com> <20080717085119.htrc4bkrcc4kwskg@webmail.csbs.utah.edu> Message-ID: <8C407682-7490-4A77-82B4-C7447AD7C995@gmail.com> Shawn: The problem, of course -- as Andrew Abbott has pointed out -- is that in the absence of disciplines we don't and can't have a meaningful concept of interdisciplinarity or even superdisciplinarity. I'm behind a firewall at the moment and can't access the piece you wrote, but two thoughts occur to me: 1) disciplines are historical and organizational/ institutional products, so the social fact that we have them is not because of any argument as much as it is because of the social effects of a variety of arguments and practices -- and as such we can't argue disciplines away; and 2) there is, however, an intellectual rationale for disciplinary work inasmuch as specialization can produce more precise analytical equipment and more empirically concrete scholarly outcomes. That said, I'm a big fan of synthesis, but a synthesis between disciplinary work that comes about as a result of serious, had work both by scholars within a discipline and by scholars familiar enough with multiple disciplines not to do undue interpretive violence to each by combining elements of them in a specific project for a specific explanatory purpose. My ?0.02 (I'm in Europe at the moment), PTJ On Sep 5, 2008, at 5:56 PM, Shawn Rosenberg wrote: > Bill, Peri and Laleh, > > About the divides between disciplines. I too am not a fan. The > rationale > for the division reflects some of the intellectual divisions of the > early > 20th century. This was then reinforced by the inter-departmental > politics > of fighting for space and positions in the university. I tend to > regard the > current division of the social sciences as an institutionalized > practice > that is disciplining (a policing of boundaries and practices). The > result > of that practice, in my view, is the division of scholars into > groups, each > of which is distinguished by agreement on what it is legitimate to be > ignorant of. > > For my own take on the direction of interdisciplinary (or better > supra-discplinary) pursuit, I suggest the article mentioned below. It > addresses the particular problem of the relation between political > science/sociology on the one hand and psychology on the other. That > said, I > believe the argument applies more generally to interdisciplinary work: > > "Theorizing political psychology: Doing integrative social science > under > conditions of post-modernity." Journal of the Theory of Social > Behaviour. > (2003), pp. 427-460. It is available at the following site: > http://repositories.cdlib.org/postprints/1601/ > > Shawn W. Rosenberg > Director and Professor > Graduate Program in Political Psychology > University of California, Irvine > Faculty website: > http://www.faculty.uci.edu/profile.cfm?faculty_id=2469 > Program websites: > http://www.polisci.uci.edu/POLPSYGROUP.htm > http://aris.ss.uci.edu/polpsych/polpsych.html === Patrick Thaddeus Jackson Director, General Education Program, American University Editor-in-Chief, Journal of International Relations and Development http://profptj.blogspot.com | http://www.kittenboo.com calendar: http://ical.mac.com/onyxdr/Patrick From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Tue Sep 9 04:24:15 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 10:24:15 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] FW: Call for Papers: Conference on Contemporary Critical Theories References: A<3D87CF7D04BB53438A534192D10508E00257785C@STAWINCOMAILCL1.staff.vuw.ac.nz> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD4EE@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080909/851e0340/attachment.html From Helga.Puelzl at sbg.ac.at Tue Sep 9 04:29:27 2008 From: Helga.Puelzl at sbg.ac.at (Helga.Puelzl at sbg.ac.at) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 10:29:27 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Full Professor in Empirical Social Research Methods In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD4EE@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> References: A<3D87CF7D04BB53438A534192D10508E00257785C@STAWINCOMAILCL1.staff.vuw.ac.nz> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD4EE@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <951B3150C616F74EB90F1040104B8CB6632D0F@MAIL2.plus.sbg.ac.at> Dear All, Please find below a vacancy announcement of the University of Vienna. Kind Regards Helga P?lzl ************************************ Dr. Helga P?lzl Department for Political Science and Sociology University of Salzburg Rudolfskai 42 A-5020 Salzburg Phone: + 43 - 662 - 8044 - 6602 Fax: + 43 - 662 - 6389 - 6602 email: helga.puelzl at sbg.ac.at www.uni-salzburg.at The Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Vienna announces the position of a Full Professor of Empirical Social Research Methods. As stated in its development plan (http://www.univie.ac.at/rektorenteam/ug2002/entwicklungs plan.html) the University of Vienna aims at strengthening its position as a major research-oriented university. Key elements of this strategy include the provision of an attractive range of research-based study programmes, support for furthering the work of junior academic colleagues, and high-calibre professorial appointments. The Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Vienna announces the position of a Full Professor of Empirical Social Research Methods (full time position under private law). In case of a first time appointment to a professorship, the appointment may be limited to 6 years and will become permanent after a positive evaluation. The University of Vienna intends to increase the number of women on its faculty, particularly in high-level positions, and therefore specifically invites applications by women. Among equally qualified applicants women will receive preferential consideration. The Faculty wishes to appoint a social scientist acquainted with the use and teaching of empirical research methods that are theoretically founded in substantive areas of the social sciences. The successful candidate will have an outstanding record of practical research experience, as well as proven competence in the area of social science methods. Successful candidates will have the following qualifications: - PhD and post-doctoral experience at a university or other research institution. (Austrian or equivalent international academic degree in the relevant field) - Outstanding research and publication record, with an excellent reputation as an active member in the international academic community (Habilitation (venia docendi) or equivalent international qualification in the relevant field is desirable) - Experience in designing, procuring and directing major research projects, and willingness and ability to assume the responsibility of team leadership - Experience in university teaching, and willingness and ability to teach at all curricular levels, to supervise theses, and to further the work of junior academic colleagues The University of Vienna expects the successful candidate to acquire, within three years, proficiency in German sufficient for teaching in Bachelor programmes and participation in committees The University of Vienna offers - Attractive terms and conditions of employment with a negotiable and performance-related salary, associated with a retirement fund - A ?start-up package? for the initiation of research projects - An attractive and dynamic research location in a city with a high quality of life and in a country with excellent research funding provision - Support for relocation to Vienna, where appropriate Candidates should send an application containing at least the following documents: - Academic curriculum vitae - Brief description of current research interests and research plans for the immediate future - List of publications together with a) specification of five key publications judged by the applicant to be particularly relevant to the advertised professorship together with an explanation of their relevance b) PDF versions of these five publications provided either as email attachments or through URLs of downloadable copies (PDF versions of monographs need only be provided if easily available.) - List of talks given, including detailed information about invited plenaries at international conferences - List of projects supported by third-party funds - Short survey of previous academic teaching and list of supervised PhD theses Applications in English should be submitted per e-mail (preferably as pdf attachments) to the Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences (Rosmarie.Mueller at univie.ac.at ) no later than September 30th, 2008 with reference490-10. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080909/a78bd23c/attachment-0001.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Tue Sep 9 12:57:50 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:57:50 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] CFP Political Studies Association (UK), Manchester 2009 Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E01368477@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> fyi, Dvora Yanow -----Original Message----- * Political Studies Association (UK), Manchester 2009 - call for papers ( http://www.psa.ac.uk/2009/info.html) The PSA Interpretive Group will be running a number of panels at the 2009 PSA in Manchester: Nick Turnbull is convening a panel on 'Political Rhetoric'. Catherine Durose is convening a panel on 'Entrepreneurialism in the public sector: re-interpreting street level bureaucracy'. I (Francesca Gains) will be convening a panel/round table on 'Current developments in international interpretive political science'. If you have ideas for panels or papers please send me details by the 15th September so I can co-ordinate and put people in touch with each other in time to meet the submission deadline. Email directly or copy Nick Turnbull [Nick.Turnbull at manchester.ac.uk] or Catherine Durose ( c.durose at dmu.ac.uk) in if your interest is in their panels. It would also be great if you could let me know if you would be able to act as a discussant or chair for one of the interpretive group panels. * PSA Interpretive Group meeting in Manchester 2009 I hope to hear from you with panel ideas or paper abstracts. I'll be in touch with the PSA Interpretive Group programme later in the Autumn. We'll also be holding a meeting of the group in Manchester and interpreting the delights of this wonderful city! Please pass on this email to anyone who might be interested in joining the mailing list and if you don't want to receive any follow up just let me know. In the meantime Best wishes Francesca Gains (Secretary of the PSA Interpretive Group) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080909/60ed41b6/attachment.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Wed Sep 10 13:30:38 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:30:38 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] French scholars of public administrative ethics Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013684B6@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Colleagues, I am writing on behalf of a US colleague of mine who is searching for public administration scholars in France engaging with administrative ethics. If you know of such, would you kindly contact me off line with their names and contact information or institutional affiliation? I.e., please don't hit the 'reply' key - that will send your message to the whole list. Instead, please email me directly at the address below. With thanks, Dvora Yanow d.yanow at fsw.vu.nl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080910/8e92df88/attachment-0001.html From wjkellpro at aol.com Wed Sep 10 19:47:46 2008 From: wjkellpro at aol.com (wjkellpro at aol.com) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:47:46 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] RE Rosenberg and Values in Soc Sci Message-ID: <8CAE1B6C27FB296-24C-1111@FWM-D43.sysops.aol.com> Hi Shawn and Everybody! ? Thanks for mentioning your essay entitled "Theorizing Political Psychology," at: http://repositories.cdlib.org/postprints/1601/ . ? I agree with your thesis that social inquiry should be sensitive to both the individual and their social structures when interpreting the meaning of patterns of action, or behavior, in a society.? But I would like to mention two general concerns I have with your very interesting essay.? One is that I don't feel like the essay has provided me with a set of tools for social science that are as refined and precise as those they have over in the natural scien ces.? Isn't there some way that interpretive social scientists can put together an interpretive framework with as distinct a methodology as those guys have? ? Secondly, while your method seems to me to lack the distinctiveness of that in the natural sciences, you seem to me to be writing with their idea in mind of what it means to be a "professional."? I?ll show you what I mean by using your section on "normative considerations" as an example.? First, I will reproduce the entire section so that other readers can form their own opinions.? Then I?ll offer my interpretation. ? All feedback will be welcome!? ============= Shawn?s Essay. ? Normative Considerations (pages 39-40, paragraph breaks added). A structural pragmatic epistemology also suggests the ends and means of normative or ethical inquiry. In both instances, considerations are conditioned by the background recognition that values and judgments are socio-historically and subjectively relative constructions. ? In the case of the determination of the ends of normative inquiry, this structural pragmatic understanding shifts analysis from a focus on values and judgments themselves to the processes whereby they are constructed. This in turn leads to several levels of ethical consideration. ? On one level, there may be a consideration of the compatibility of the values advocated and the quality of the structuring forces that are operative. Thus if individuals are thinking in concretely, experientially guided terms and social regulation consists of specific rituals of action, the value of freedom makes little cultural or subjective sense. Indeed to the degree that these values can be practically introduced, the general effect would be a negative one of personal and cultural disintegration. ? At another level, there may be an assessment of the relative input of individuals and communities into the value determination process. Clearly the comprehensibility and practicality of values or evaluative practices is relative to the structures of meaning and action into which they are incorporated. Insofar as the construction of value tends to be dominated either by individuals or by their community, the meanings and needs of the weaker structuring force may be (within certain limits that need to be understood) ignored. This may prove destructive for either the individual selves or for the community thus subordinated. In this manner, the ethical worth of particular value claims or evaluative practices may be judged from an expressly social psychological point of view. ? Structural pragmatics also suggests how ethical inquiry should be conducted. In a manner that parallels empirical research, ethical inquiry requires the interpretative analysis of the quality or meaning of the values and evaluative practices observed or considered. This in turn implies that ethical inquiry must be conducted in a manner that is sensitive to the socio-cultural and psychological relativity of the normative standards to be inferred. In addition structural pragmatics suggests that normative inquiry cannot be the isolated enterprise of the philosopher or political theorist. While such subjective aspects of the inquiry are important, the inquiry must also be discursive. In the latter regard, it must also engage those whose values are being judged and it must do so in full recognition of the potential for irresolvable disagreement that may follow. [End] ==================== Bill's Comments. ? As I read your essay, I envisioned you as seeing yourself as a competent professional social scientist, who desires to contribute something of value to the profession.? I do not question the validity of that self-image for an instant, and I share that desire.? My point is that in the course of your presentation of yourself as a "professional," you employ assumptions that are peculiar to the dominant expectations of "professionalism" in the social sciences, and especially in political science. I apologize for making this discussion so personal, but this seems to me to be the most direct way of illustrating one of the key problems we insurgent interpretationists are up against.? Defining what it means to be a good professional social scientist is one of the main ways the dominant neo-positivist paradigm stays in power. One observation?I have made in my reading of social science literature, especially in journals, is that writers tend to present themselves as "professionals."? While that may seem obvious, there is a tacit dimension to this.? For this presentation of self, the writers strive to fulfill the image of professionalism they have internalized in the course of their apprenticeship.? I don't say that these things move you, but prestige, honors and awards, grants, tenure, and other signs of career success are often dependent upon how those in power perceive a writer's professionalism.? Also, defining what it means to be a good professional is one way of controlling the accepted understanding of what is "truth" for professional social scientists.? You mentioned something like this in your section on "epistemology" when you connected power and knowledge. It is with these considerations in mind that I read your statement, "values and judgments are socio-historically and subjectively relative constructions." Notice that the statement seems to preclu de the possibility of any natural order of values for humans, but seems to imply that all values are social and/or individual constructs. It seems to me that this is what most "good" or competent professionals would l ikely say in the social sciences today. But in my opinion, we need a new image of professionalism, one which is more appropriate to the actual practice of interpretation.? The neo-positivist model of the detached, ethically neutral, observer who only describes what he or she sees and makes no moral judgments about it does not seem to me to be a proper fit for the actual practice of interpretation. The same themes occur to me as I read "this structural pragmatic understanding shifts analysis from a focus on values and judgments themselves to the processes whereby they are constructed."? I'm not comfortable with the image this gives me of a detached interpretationist, only concerned about process, and not about the values that the subjects live by. Consistent with the first two quotes, you suggest that the good professional may also be concerned with making "an assessment of the relative input of individuals and communities into the value determination process."? But with the word "assessment" you begin to move away from a strict descriptivism into a more critical stance.? Indeed, there seems to me to be some unacknowledged ethical imperatives built into your "structural prag matics."? You write, for example, that "Insofar as the construction of value tends to be dominated either20by individuals or by their community, the meanings and needs of the weaker structuring force may be ? ignored. This may prove destructive for either the individual selves or for the community thus subordinated."? To me this statement suggests the ethical imperative "Thou shalt not be 'destructive' of individuals or of subordinate communities."? (This further suggests to me a generalization to power elites of the Hippocratic Oath to "do no harm.") I suspect you would define "destructive" for individuals something like Maslow --?as a frustration of the desire for self-realization.? The Western Liberal conception of protecting minority rights seems implied by your reference to "subordinate communities." By the way, these moral principles are OK with me.? My concern is that they aren't made an explicit part of your method; perhaps because doing so would violate one of the tenets of the dominant image of professionalism. Continuing in the mode of implicit ethical imperative, you write that the professional's "inquiry must also be discursive."? But you don't say why it "must" be so. You say the social scientist "must also engage those whose values are being judged."? But you don't say why this dialogue with the subjects should be engaged in. Finally, you write that the social scientist who thus engages his subjects "must do so in full recognition of the potential for irresolvable disagreement that may follow."? But you don't say why he should be so tolerant of their values. What=2 0are the ethical principles underlying these imperatives?? And why are they left implied, rather than being made an explicit aspect of your methodology? What I think I see at play here is an unresolved conflict in your thinking between your desire to be "professional," as that role is understood in the dominant circles of social science, and your desire to be a human respectfully interacting with other humans.? The later desire gets squeezed out of your discussion, so that you don't violate the fa?ade of ethical neutrality demanded by those who currently define "professionalism."? This is how I read your statement that "Structural pragmatics also suggests how ethical inquiry should be conducted. ?In a manner that parallels empirical research ?" The dominant a-critical definition of professionalism conceptually disarms social scientists, rendering them incapable of making "professional" criticisms of the power elite.? The ethical imperative implied by their paradigm is that "what is is right."? That is why grant givers are so generous with descriptive social scientists, and so stingy with critical social scientists ? the later are currently regarded by the power elite as less professional. In my view, it is precisely that artificial ideal of "professionalism" that should give way, and not our natural impulse to be respectful of subjects.? The ideal of professionalism that seems to me to be more compatible with interpretive methods is one that openly declares that interpretive social scienti sts naturally respect other people, and care about the dignity of those folks whom they study. In line with these values, I suggest some methodological maxims to guide our social science.? Among these are that interpretive social scientists should reject dehumanizing conceptions of people, as well as mechanistic causal explanations of the behavior of their subjects, whether of the S-R learning theory sort or the neuro-mechanistic and cybernetic sorts.? For us, subjects are humans with creativity, resourcefulness, self-awareness, and agency, just like us.? They are never to be regarded as mere objects of detached description, because that is a snub rather than an acknowledgement of their humanity.? Instead, for interpretationists, subjects are to be understood with empathy, which always entails respect.? And, wherever possible, social scientists should engage their subjects as fellows who have the capacity to contribute, through dialogue, to shaping the way they are understood by others. I say that interpretationist social science methodology should re-define what it means to be a professional social scientist in a way that jibs with the actual practice of interpretation.? The idea of "science" for social science need not ape the dehumanized conception that has spun off the neo-positivist philosophy of natural science.? Well, that is enough for now.? Let's dialogue everybody! Bill Kelleher -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080910/dd150bdb/attachment-0001.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Tue Sep 16 04:35:28 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:35:28 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] FW: Available Headwords References: Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD56C@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080916/538a823c/attachment.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Wed Sep 17 13:32:39 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:32:39 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] an article of interest Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E0136850D@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Dear All, I'd like to call your attention to an article just out that has a wonderfully written methods section - "The Power of Local Ties: Popular Participation in the Rwandan Genocide," by Lee Ann Fujii journal Security Studies , Volume 17 , Issue 3 July 2008 , pages 568 - 597 Lee Ann engages directly all those challenges that interpretive researchers are often faced with - of the 'goodness' of interview data and bias from reconstructed memories, etc. She hits the issues straight on. This, quite aside from the substantive arguments. Dvora Yanow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080917/e6840749/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 1273 bytes Desc: image001.gif Url : http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080917/e6840749/attachment.gif From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Thu Sep 18 05:44:51 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:44:51 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap References: <000b01c9142d$34c8d2b0$2101a8c0@engelman5trif9> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD51E@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> <000d01c918f6$646100b0$2101a8c0@engelman5trif9> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5BE@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/d327ca7b/attachment.html From navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in Thu Sep 18 05:59:48 2008 From: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in (Navdeep Mathur) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:29:48 +0530 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5BE@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> References: <000b01c9142d$34c8d2b0$2101a8c0@engelman5trif9> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD51E@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> <000d01c918f6$646100b0$2101a8c0@engelman5trif9> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5BE@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <550f31d00809180259t63ed2608i94637718025ac47d@mail.gmail.com> A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a disabled researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the Researched, *Qualitative Research*, *6*(2), pp.207-220. Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: Shah, S. (2008) *Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and Choices of Young Disabled People*, Ashgate Publishing. best, Navdeep On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow wrote: > Friends, Colleagues -- > > I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a student > in my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am writing to > ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage the questions > he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences by those > with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences one might > expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if anything. > > His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods literature, > presuming able-bodied researchers. > > I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both to the list > and to him. > > With thanks, > Dvora > > > -----Original Message----- > Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly the > discussion about the several identities a researcher could have during > his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own possible > identities as researcher in an organization.... > > Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through which I am > dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work when I am > doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be more > difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I like doing > this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in advance. ... I > consider this process as a big challange. > > I am curious if you have experience with students who have a visible > handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the field. Or do > you know experiences about this case? > > I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the observed) people > (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a researcher in a > wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the handicap. In > daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a physical > handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of this, these > people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my > opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone who has a > handicap. > I wonder how this will be during my research in the next period. Are there > experiences of this? > > I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. > > Kind regards, > Erwin Engelman > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > -- Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. Public Systems Group Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, India Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/80b3aa70/attachment-0001.html From ed.schatz at utoronto.ca Thu Sep 18 06:18:40 2008 From: ed.schatz at utoronto.ca (Ed Schatz) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:18:40 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doingresearch when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: <550f31d00809180259t63ed2608i94637718025ac47d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> I have no first-hand experience in this regard, nor do I have suggestions about work others have done. What I would put on the table is that each of us comes with particular background, skills, and personal characteristics that necessarily become part of the research encounter. I, for example, can generally do fieldwork in predominantly Muslim societies, but, since I am male, there are severe limitations on my access to women in (some) parts of the region I study. This is unlikely to change anytime soon, so I simply think of it this way: certain of my characteristics simply foreclose certain avenues for research. That's ok. There's a lot that remains open to me. Most characteristics, however, neither foreclose nor open avenues. It depends on how you use them. In the case of a visible handicap that might be unusual for your interlocutors, it strikes me that it's best to be up-front as possible about this fact. You want to put your interlocutors at ease, so rather than risking what might follow from their being surprised by the manifestation of your cerebral palsy, you could think about a few things to say ahead of time to them so that they know what to expect during your interactions. Moreover, and I am going out on a limb here, it might be valuable to find ways to be as light-hearted as possible about it; if you make it into a Big Deal, interlocutors might not know how to react. On the other hand, if you present it as simply something that they might experience during the course of interaction but that in no way has anything to do with the substance of what your conversation/relationship is about, then they might be put at ease. No guarantees, of course; many conversations/interviews fail to be useful for a variety of reasons. Perhaps revealing something about your CP could even be a net positive for the research encounter. Any time the researcher reveals something about her/himself, it has the potential to engender trust from the interlocutor. Trust can generate fluency and engagement in the research topic at hand. Again, no guarantees, but in my experience the people I interact with very much like to make person-to-person connection as human beings. The usual "professional" distance between researcher and researched can be off-putting to many. With apologies for speaking about something I know little about, but it strikes me that cultural difference, ethnic or racial difference, gender difference, etc. offer a rough analogy that in some abstract sense might be worth pondering. Ed _____ From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Navdeep Mathur Sent: September 18, 2008 6:00 AM To: interpretation and methods group Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu; erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl; Lorraine Nencel Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doingresearch when you have a visible handicap A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a disabled researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the Researched, Qualitative Research, 6(2), pp.207-220. Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: Shah, S. (2008) Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and Choices of Young Disabled People, Ashgate Publishing. best, Navdeep On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow wrote: Friends, Colleagues -- I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a student in my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am writing to ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage the questions he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences by those with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences one might expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if anything. His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods literature, presuming able-bodied researchers. I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both to the list and to him. With thanks, Dvora -----Original Message----- Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly the discussion about the several identities a researcher could have during his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own possible identities as researcher in an organization.... Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through which I am dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work when I am doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be more difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I like doing this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in advance. ... I consider this process as a big challange. I am curious if you have experience with students who have a visible handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the field. Or do you know experiences about this case? I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the observed) people (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a researcher in a wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the handicap. In daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a physical handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of this, these people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone who has a handicap. I wonder how this will be during my research in the next period. Are there experiences of this? I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. Kind regards, Erwin Engelman erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl _______________________________________________ Interpretationandmethods mailing list Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods -- Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. Public Systems Group Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, India Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/bc474039/attachment.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Thu Sep 18 08:27:24 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:27:24 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap References: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/3817ce40/attachment-0001.html From r.bhuyan at utoronto.ca Thu Sep 18 09:28:59 2008 From: r.bhuyan at utoronto.ca (Rupaleem Bhuyan) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:28:59 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> References: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: Dear Dvora, Erwin and colleagues, Thank you for presenting this worthwhile question. I do not have direct experience working with a student or colleague in the 'field' who uses a wheelchair and has a speech impediment. However, this past year I did have a student in my class who had a similar situation. Based on this experience I do think it's important to consider what skill sets the researcher brings, as well and possible barriers to facilitating communication, learning the organizational culture, and building relationships that can enhance the research endeavor. My guess is that Erwin is quite adept at negotiating relationships in an organizational contexts given his use of a wheelchair and speech patterns, this includes identifying and enduring discrimination that manifests at the interpersonal level and through institutional processes. How he positions this part of his identity relative to other aspects would be an interesting site of analysis in and of itself, depending also on the subject of his organizational study. Drawing upon standpoint theory, I did include specific questions in my research with domestic violence advocates in an ethnically oriented agency in formal interviews and informal discussions. The conversations focussed on gender, age, ethnicity and sexual orientation of the advocates relative to the women they served. This provided rich context for other research questions as well as a site of analysis itself. In this study, I positioned this set of questions towards the end of formal interviews and as a co-ethnic researcher used my own identity when engaging others in these conversations. With regard to the mode of gathering information, I do think it is worthwhile to consider the optimal format for Eriwin to conduct 'interviews'. Interviews are often challenging and require nuanced and quick replies and adaptations. It may be that Erwin's speech patterns coupled with the interviewee's competency in communicating with Erwin, would raise logistic and conceptual concerns: a) the interview may take substantially longer and b) interpreting the interview may increase the focus on the co-construction of the interview narrative (an interesting subject in its own right, but perhaps distant from Erwin's research interests). In this circumstance, I wonder if innovative uses of technology would facilitate an 'interview' process. For example, setting up interviews to take place online via a chat mechanism, or recruiting small groups of people to engage in dialogue. Finally, Erwin may want to consider the length of time spent in the field and based on his prior life experience, and what typically facilitates his own relationship building and communication with colleagues. Back to the student in my class, I met her at the end of full year where she had interacted with the same group of students. The group had developed very sophisticated ways of adapting the group's mode of communication to be inclusive of this student. As the instructor just meeting this 'group', it took me a little longer to adjust my communication style (and perhaps I never did this well), but I learned the power of group dynamics to shift with the composition of the group, which in this case included someone with very visible and audible points of difference from the 'norm'. This dynamic is always occurring, but perhaps more pronounced when points of difference are more 'visible'. Best of luck! Rupaleem On Sep 18, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Dvora Yanow wrote: > Thanks to Navdeep for the references and Ed for the thoughts. > > Let me flesh out a little bit in Erwin's question. As he sought to > suggest, he is wheelchair bound, and although his typed text is > fluent, his speech is halting. This means, in addition to what he > described as his experiences in everyday settings with how people > respond to him, that a conversation (interview, e.g.) could well > take longer than it would with another researcher. > > Ed, I think it's helpful to consider how someone with these > physical abilities might prepare others when it comes to interview > or observation -- and it would be interesting to see what Sonali > Shah says on this. I do think, tho, that there are differences > between the difficulties facing able-bodied researchers of whatever > demographic characteristics and others. I.e., I'm not sure that > 'difference' is the same across the board! > > Dvora > > -----Original Message----- > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on > behalf of Ed Schatz > Sent: Thu 18-Sep-08 12:18 > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard > todoingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > I have no first-hand experience in this regard, nor do I have > suggestions > about work others have done. > > > > What I would put on the table is that each of us comes with particular > background, skills, and personal characteristics that necessarily > become > part of the research encounter. I, for example, can generally do > fieldwork > in predominantly Muslim societies, but, since I am male, there are > severe > limitations on my access to women in (some) parts of the region I > study. > This is unlikely to change anytime soon, so I simply think of it > this way: > certain of my characteristics simply foreclose certain avenues for > research. > That's ok. There's a lot that remains open to me. > > > > Most characteristics, however, neither foreclose nor open avenues. It > depends on how you use them. In the case of a visible handicap that > might be > unusual for your interlocutors, it strikes me that it's best to be > up-front > as possible about this fact. You want to put your interlocutors at > ease, so > rather than risking what might follow from their being surprised by > the > manifestation of your cerebral palsy, you could think about a few > things to > say ahead of time to them so that they know what to expect during your > interactions. Moreover, and I am going out on a limb here, it might be > valuable to find ways to be as light-hearted as possible about it; > if you > make it into a Big Deal, interlocutors might not know how to react. > On the > other hand, if you present it as simply something that they might > experience > during the course of interaction but that in no way has anything to > do with > the substance of what your conversation/relationship is about, then > they > might be put at ease. No guarantees, of course; many > conversations/interviews fail to be useful for a variety of reasons. > > > > Perhaps revealing something about your CP could even be a net > positive for > the research encounter. Any time the researcher reveals something > about > her/himself, it has the potential to engender trust from the > interlocutor. > Trust can generate fluency and engagement in the research topic at > hand. > Again, no guarantees, but in my experience the people I interact > with very > much like to make person-to-person connection as human beings. The > usual > "professional" distance between researcher and researched can be > off-putting > to many. > > > > With apologies for speaking about something I know little about, > but it > strikes me that cultural difference, ethnic or racial difference, > gender > difference, etc. offer a rough analogy that in some abstract sense > might be > worth pondering. > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > _____ > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu] On > Behalf Of > Navdeep Mathur > Sent: September 18, 2008 6:00 AM > To: interpretation and methods group > Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu; erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl; Lorraine Nencel > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to > doingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a disabled > researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: > > Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the > Researched, > Qualitative Research, 6(2), pp.207-220. > > Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: > > Shah, S. (2008) Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and Choices > of Young > Disabled People, Ashgate Publishing. > > best, > > Navdeep > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow > wrote: > > Friends, Colleagues -- > > I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a > student in > my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am > writing to > ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage the > questions > he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences by > those > with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences one > might > expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if anything. > > His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods > literature, > presuming able-bodied researchers. > > I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both to > the list > and to him. > > With thanks, > Dvora > > > -----Original Message----- > Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly the > discussion about the several identities a researcher could have during > his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own possible > identities as researcher in an organization.... > > Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through which > I am > dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work when > I am > doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be more > difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I like > doing > this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in > advance. ... I > consider this process as a big challange. > > I am curious if you have experience with students who have a visible > handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the > field. Or do > you know experiences about this case? > > I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the observed) > people > (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a researcher in a > wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the > handicap. In > daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a physical > handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of this, > these > people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my > opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone > who has a > handicap. > I wonder how this will be during my research in the next period. > Are there > experiences of this? > > I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. > > Kind regards, > Erwin Engelman > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > > > -- > Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. > Public Systems Group > > Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus > Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad > Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, > India > > > Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 > Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 > email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods Rupaleem Bhuyan Assistant Professor Faculty of Social Work University of Toronto 246 Bloor Street W Toronto, Ontario Canada M5S 1A1 Phone: 416-946-5085 Email: r.bhuyan at utoronto.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/17b8196d/attachment.html From lafujii at gwu.edu Thu Sep 18 09:38:26 2008 From: lafujii at gwu.edu (Lee Ann Fujii) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:38:26 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> References: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: I might add that I did my interviews in the field by asking my interpreter to write out people's answers; a colleague gave me this idea to overcome my fear of working in French at a time when I wasn't very confident in my French skills. But even after getting more fluent and more comfortable working in French, the format of our interviews did not change. What this meant was there was an imposed tempo on them that made them slow. But I found that that too could be an advantage. I think my questions were more thoughtful. I'm not sure how it changed people's answers. Also, the fact that people might be uncomfortable talking to a researcher with CP might not be all bad either. It's possible people might be more "honest" in their state of discomfort b/c they might be trying hard not to look uncomfortable or something. Lee Ann Original Message ----- From: Dvora Yanow Date: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:27 am Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap To: interpretation and methods group , pader at larp.umass.edu, erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl, Lorraine Nencel > Thanks to Navdeep for the references and Ed for the thoughts. > > Let me flesh out a little bit in Erwin's question. As he sought to > suggest, he is wheelchair bound, and although his typed text is > fluent, his speech is halting. This means, in addition to what he > described as his experiences in everyday settings with how people > respond to him, that a conversation (interview, e.g.) could well take > longer than it would with another researcher. > > Ed, I think it's helpful to consider how someone with these physical > abilities might prepare others when it comes to interview or > observation -- and it would be interesting to see what Sonali Shah > says on this. I do think, tho, that there are differences between the > difficulties facing able-bodied researchers of whatever demographic > characteristics and others. I.e., I'm not sure that 'difference' is > the same across the board! > > Dvora > > -----Original Message----- > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf > of Ed Schatz > Sent: Thu 18-Sep-08 12:18 > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard > todoingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > I have no first-hand experience in this regard, nor do I have suggestions > about work others have done. > > > > What I would put on the table is that each of us comes with particular > background, skills, and personal characteristics that necessarily become > part of the research encounter. I, for example, can generally do fieldwork > in predominantly Muslim societies, but, since I am male, there are severe > limitations on my access to women in (some) parts of the region I study. > This is unlikely to change anytime soon, so I simply think of it this > way: > certain of my characteristics simply foreclose certain avenues for research. > That's ok. There's a lot that remains open to me. > > > > Most characteristics, however, neither foreclose nor open avenues. It > depends on how you use them. In the case of a visible handicap that > might be > unusual for your interlocutors, it strikes me that it's best to be up-front > as possible about this fact. You want to put your interlocutors at > ease, so > rather than risking what might follow from their being surprised by the > manifestation of your cerebral palsy, you could think about a few > things to > say ahead of time to them so that they know what to expect during your > interactions. Moreover, and I am going out on a limb here, it might be > valuable to find ways to be as light-hearted as possible about it; if > you > make it into a Big Deal, interlocutors might not know how to react. > On the > other hand, if you present it as simply something that they might experience > during the course of interaction but that in no way has anything to > do with > the substance of what your conversation/relationship is about, then they > might be put at ease. No guarantees, of course; many > conversations/interviews fail to be useful for a variety of reasons. > > > > Perhaps revealing something about your CP could even be a net > positive for > the research encounter. Any time the researcher reveals something about > her/himself, it has the potential to engender trust from the interlocutor. > Trust can generate fluency and engagement in the research topic at hand. > Again, no guarantees, but in my experience the people I interact with > very > much like to make person-to-person connection as human beings. The usual > "professional" distance between researcher and researched can be off-putting > to many. > > > > With apologies for speaking about something I know little about, but > it > strikes me that cultural difference, ethnic or racial difference, gender > difference, etc. offer a rough analogy that in some abstract sense > might be > worth pondering. > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > _____ > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu] On > Behalf Of > Navdeep Mathur > Sent: September 18, 2008 6:00 AM > To: interpretation and methods group > Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu; erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl; Lorraine Nencel > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to > doingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a disabled > researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: > > Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the Researched, > Qualitative Research, 6(2), pp.207-220. > > Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: > > Shah, S. (2008) Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and Choices of > Young > Disabled People, Ashgate Publishing. > > best, > > Navdeep > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow wrote: > > Friends, Colleagues -- > > I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a > student in > my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am > writing to > ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage the questions > he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences by those > with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences one might > expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if anything. > > His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods literature, > presuming able-bodied researchers. > > I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both to the > list > and to him. > > With thanks, > Dvora > > > -----Original Message----- > Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly the > discussion about the several identities a researcher could have during > his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own possible > identities as researcher in an organization.... > > Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through which I > am > dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work when I > am > doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be more > difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I like doing > this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in advance. > ... I > consider this process as a big challange. > > I am curious if you have experience with students who have a visible > handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the field. > Or do > you know experiences about this case? > > I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the observed) people > (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a researcher in a > wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the > handicap. In > daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a physical > handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of this, these > people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my > opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone > who has a > handicap. > I wonder how this will be during my research in the next period. Are > there > experiences of this? > > I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. > > Kind regards, > Erwin Engelman > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > > > -- > Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. > Public Systems Group > > Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus > Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad > Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, > India > > > Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 > Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/8215e8ee/attachment-0001.html From lafujii at gwu.edu Thu Sep 18 09:38:26 2008 From: lafujii at gwu.edu (Lee Ann Fujii) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:38:26 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> References: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: I might add that I did my interviews in the field by asking my interpreter to write out people's answers; a colleague gave me this idea to overcome my fear of working in French at a time when I wasn't very confident in my French skills. But even after getting more fluent and more comfortable working in French, the format of our interviews did not change. What this meant was there was an imposed tempo on them that made them slow. But I found that that too could be an advantage. I think my questions were more thoughtful. I'm not sure how it changed people's answers. Also, the fact that people might be uncomfortable talking to a researcher with CP might not be all bad either. It's possible people might be more "honest" in their state of discomfort b/c they might be trying hard not to look uncomfortable or something. Lee Ann Original Message ----- From: Dvora Yanow Date: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:27 am Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap To: interpretation and methods group , pader at larp.umass.edu, erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl, Lorraine Nencel > Thanks to Navdeep for the references and Ed for the thoughts. > > Let me flesh out a little bit in Erwin's question. As he sought to > suggest, he is wheelchair bound, and although his typed text is > fluent, his speech is halting. This means, in addition to what he > described as his experiences in everyday settings with how people > respond to him, that a conversation (interview, e.g.) could well take > longer than it would with another researcher. > > Ed, I think it's helpful to consider how someone with these physical > abilities might prepare others when it comes to interview or > observation -- and it would be interesting to see what Sonali Shah > says on this. I do think, tho, that there are differences between the > difficulties facing able-bodied researchers of whatever demographic > characteristics and others. I.e., I'm not sure that 'difference' is > the same across the board! > > Dvora > > -----Original Message----- > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf > of Ed Schatz > Sent: Thu 18-Sep-08 12:18 > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard > todoingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > I have no first-hand experience in this regard, nor do I have suggestions > about work others have done. > > > > What I would put on the table is that each of us comes with particular > background, skills, and personal characteristics that necessarily become > part of the research encounter. I, for example, can generally do fieldwork > in predominantly Muslim societies, but, since I am male, there are severe > limitations on my access to women in (some) parts of the region I study. > This is unlikely to change anytime soon, so I simply think of it this > way: > certain of my characteristics simply foreclose certain avenues for research. > That's ok. There's a lot that remains open to me. > > > > Most characteristics, however, neither foreclose nor open avenues. It > depends on how you use them. In the case of a visible handicap that > might be > unusual for your interlocutors, it strikes me that it's best to be up-front > as possible about this fact. You want to put your interlocutors at > ease, so > rather than risking what might follow from their being surprised by the > manifestation of your cerebral palsy, you could think about a few > things to > say ahead of time to them so that they know what to expect during your > interactions. Moreover, and I am going out on a limb here, it might be > valuable to find ways to be as light-hearted as possible about it; if > you > make it into a Big Deal, interlocutors might not know how to react. > On the > other hand, if you present it as simply something that they might experience > during the course of interaction but that in no way has anything to > do with > the substance of what your conversation/relationship is about, then they > might be put at ease. No guarantees, of course; many > conversations/interviews fail to be useful for a variety of reasons. > > > > Perhaps revealing something about your CP could even be a net > positive for > the research encounter. Any time the researcher reveals something about > her/himself, it has the potential to engender trust from the interlocutor. > Trust can generate fluency and engagement in the research topic at hand. > Again, no guarantees, but in my experience the people I interact with > very > much like to make person-to-person connection as human beings. The usual > "professional" distance between researcher and researched can be off-putting > to many. > > > > With apologies for speaking about something I know little about, but > it > strikes me that cultural difference, ethnic or racial difference, gender > difference, etc. offer a rough analogy that in some abstract sense > might be > worth pondering. > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > _____ > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu] On > Behalf Of > Navdeep Mathur > Sent: September 18, 2008 6:00 AM > To: interpretation and methods group > Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu; erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl; Lorraine Nencel > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to > doingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a disabled > researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: > > Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the Researched, > Qualitative Research, 6(2), pp.207-220. > > Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: > > Shah, S. (2008) Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and Choices of > Young > Disabled People, Ashgate Publishing. > > best, > > Navdeep > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow wrote: > > Friends, Colleagues -- > > I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a > student in > my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am > writing to > ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage the questions > he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences by those > with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences one might > expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if anything. > > His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods literature, > presuming able-bodied researchers. > > I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both to the > list > and to him. > > With thanks, > Dvora > > > -----Original Message----- > Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly the > discussion about the several identities a researcher could have during > his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own possible > identities as researcher in an organization.... > > Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through which I > am > dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work when I > am > doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be more > difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I like doing > this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in advance. > ... I > consider this process as a big challange. > > I am curious if you have experience with students who have a visible > handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the field. > Or do > you know experiences about this case? > > I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the observed) people > (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a researcher in a > wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the > handicap. In > daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a physical > handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of this, these > people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my > opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone > who has a > handicap. > I wonder how this will be during my research in the next period. Are > there > experiences of this? > > I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. > > Kind regards, > Erwin Engelman > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > > > -- > Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. > Public Systems Group > > Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus > Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad > Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, > India > > > Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 > Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/8215e8ee/attachment-0002.html From timothy.pachirat at gmail.com Thu Sep 18 11:07:31 2008 From: timothy.pachirat at gmail.com (Timothy Pachirat) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:07:31 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: References: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <4b80a9430809180807v56b7b140v1f41d2fcefd2cc98@mail.gmail.com> Robin Turner, a Ph.D. Candidate at the University of California Berkeley, presented a fantastic paper at this last APSA Meeting in Boston that would be very helpful to this discussion. I'll see if I can get her to post it to the list-serv. Timothy Pachirat On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Lee Ann Fujii wrote: > I might add that I did my interviews in the field by asking my interpreter > to write out people's answers; a colleague gave me this idea to overcome my > fear of working in French at a time when I wasn't very confident in my > French skills. But even after getting more fluent and more comfortable > working in French, the format of our interviews did not change. What this > meant was there was an imposed tempo on them that made them slow. But I > found that that too could be an advantage. I think my questions were more > thoughtful. I'm not sure how it changed people's answers. > > Also, the fact that people might be uncomfortable talking to a researcher > with CP might not be all bad either. It's possible people might be more > "honest" in their state of discomfort b/c they might be trying hard not to > look uncomfortable or something. > > Lee Ann > > > > Original Message ----- > From: Dvora Yanow > Date: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:27 am > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing > research when you have a visible handicap > To: interpretation and methods group < > interpretationandmethods at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu>, pader at larp.umass.edu, > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl, Lorraine Nencel > > > > Thanks to Navdeep for the references and Ed for the thoughts. > > > > Let me flesh out a little bit in Erwin's question. As he sought to > > suggest, he is wheelchair bound, and although his typed text is > > fluent, his speech is halting. This means, in addition to what he > > described as his experiences in everyday settings with how people > > respond to him, that a conversation (interview, e.g.) could well take > > longer than it would with another researcher. > > > > Ed, I think it's helpful to consider how someone with these physical > > abilities might prepare others when it comes to interview or > > observation -- and it would be interesting to see what Sonali Shah > > says on this. I do think, tho, that there are differences between the > > difficulties facing able-bodied researchers of whatever demographic > > characteristics and others. I.e., I'm not sure that 'difference' is > > the same across the board! > > > > Dvora > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf > > of Ed Schatz > > Sent: Thu 18-Sep-08 12:18 > > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard > > todoingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > I have no first-hand experience in this regard, nor do I have > suggestions > > about work others have done. > > > > > > > > What I would put on the table is that each of us comes with particular > > background, skills, and personal characteristics that necessarily become > > > part of the research encounter. I, for example, can generally do > fieldwork > > in predominantly Muslim societies, but, since I am male, there are > severe > > limitations on my access to women in (some) parts of the region I study. > > > This is unlikely to change anytime soon, so I simply think of it this > > way: > > certain of my characteristics simply foreclose certain avenues for > research. > > That's ok. There's a lot that remains open to me. > > > > > > > > Most characteristics, however, neither foreclose nor open avenues. It > > depends on how you use them. In the case of a visible handicap that > > might be > > unusual for your interlocutors, it strikes me that it's best to be > up-front > > as possible about this fact. You want to put your interlocutors at > > ease, so > > rather than risking what might follow from their being surprised by the > > manifestation of your cerebral palsy, you could think about a few > > things to > > say ahead of time to them so that they know what to expect during your > > interactions. Moreover, and I am going out on a limb here, it might be > > valuable to find ways to be as light-hearted as possible about it; if > > you > > make it into a Big Deal, interlocutors might not know how to react. > > On the > > other hand, if you present it as simply something that they might > experience > > during the course of interaction but that in no way has anything to > > do with > > the substance of what your conversation/relationship is about, then they > > > might be put at ease. No guarantees, of course; many > > conversations/interviews fail to be useful for a variety of reasons. > > > > > > > > Perhaps revealing something about your CP could even be a net > > positive for > > the research encounter. Any time the researcher reveals something about > > her/himself, it has the potential to engender trust from the > interlocutor. > > Trust can generate fluency and engagement in the research topic at hand. > > > Again, no guarantees, but in my experience the people I interact with > > very > > much like to make person-to-person connection as human beings. The usual > > > "professional" distance between researcher and researched can be > off-putting > > to many. > > > > > > > > With apologies for speaking about something I know little about, but > > it > > strikes me that cultural difference, ethnic or racial difference, gender > > > difference, etc. offer a rough analogy that in some abstract sense > > might be > > worth pondering. > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu] On > > Behalf Of > > Navdeep Mathur > > Sent: September 18, 2008 6:00 AM > > To: interpretation and methods group > > Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu; erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl; Lorraine Nencel > > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to > > doingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > > > > > A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a disabled > > researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: > > > > Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the > Researched, > > Qualitative Research, 6(2), pp.207-220. > > > > Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: > > > > Shah, S. (2008) Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and Choices of > > Young > > Disabled People, Ashgate Publishing. > > > > best, > > > > Navdeep > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow wrote: > > > > > Friends, Colleagues -- > > > > I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a > > student in > > my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am > > writing to > > ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage the > questions > > he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences by those > > > with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences one might > > > expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if anything. > > > > His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods > literature, > > presuming able-bodied researchers. > > > > I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both to the > > list > > and to him. > > > > With thanks, > > Dvora > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly the > > discussion about the several identities a researcher could have during > > his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own possible > > identities as researcher in an organization.... > > > > Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through which I > > am > > dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work when I > > am > > doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be more > > difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I like doing > > this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in advance. > > ... I > > consider this process as a big challange. > > > > I am curious if you have experience with students who have a visible > > handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the field. > > Or do > > you know experiences about this case? > > > > I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the observed) people > > (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a researcher in a > > wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the > > handicap. In > > daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a physical > > handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of this, these > > > people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my > > opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone > > who has a > > handicap. > > I wonder how this will be during my research in the next period. Are > > there > > experiences of this? > > > > I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. > > > > Kind regards, > > Erwin Engelman > > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. > > Public Systems Group > > > > Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus > > Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad > > Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, > > India > > > > > > Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 > > Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in > > _______________________________________________ > > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/da8cf6af/attachment-0001.html From timothy.pachirat at gmail.com Thu Sep 18 11:07:31 2008 From: timothy.pachirat at gmail.com (Timothy Pachirat) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:07:31 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: References: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <4b80a9430809180807v56b7b140v1f41d2fcefd2cc98@mail.gmail.com> Robin Turner, a Ph.D. Candidate at the University of California Berkeley, presented a fantastic paper at this last APSA Meeting in Boston that would be very helpful to this discussion. I'll see if I can get her to post it to the list-serv. Timothy Pachirat On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Lee Ann Fujii wrote: > I might add that I did my interviews in the field by asking my interpreter > to write out people's answers; a colleague gave me this idea to overcome my > fear of working in French at a time when I wasn't very confident in my > French skills. But even after getting more fluent and more comfortable > working in French, the format of our interviews did not change. What this > meant was there was an imposed tempo on them that made them slow. But I > found that that too could be an advantage. I think my questions were more > thoughtful. I'm not sure how it changed people's answers. > > Also, the fact that people might be uncomfortable talking to a researcher > with CP might not be all bad either. It's possible people might be more > "honest" in their state of discomfort b/c they might be trying hard not to > look uncomfortable or something. > > Lee Ann > > > > Original Message ----- > From: Dvora Yanow > Date: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:27 am > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing > research when you have a visible handicap > To: interpretation and methods group < > interpretationandmethods at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu>, pader at larp.umass.edu, > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl, Lorraine Nencel > > > > Thanks to Navdeep for the references and Ed for the thoughts. > > > > Let me flesh out a little bit in Erwin's question. As he sought to > > suggest, he is wheelchair bound, and although his typed text is > > fluent, his speech is halting. This means, in addition to what he > > described as his experiences in everyday settings with how people > > respond to him, that a conversation (interview, e.g.) could well take > > longer than it would with another researcher. > > > > Ed, I think it's helpful to consider how someone with these physical > > abilities might prepare others when it comes to interview or > > observation -- and it would be interesting to see what Sonali Shah > > says on this. I do think, tho, that there are differences between the > > difficulties facing able-bodied researchers of whatever demographic > > characteristics and others. I.e., I'm not sure that 'difference' is > > the same across the board! > > > > Dvora > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf > > of Ed Schatz > > Sent: Thu 18-Sep-08 12:18 > > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard > > todoingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > I have no first-hand experience in this regard, nor do I have > suggestions > > about work others have done. > > > > > > > > What I would put on the table is that each of us comes with particular > > background, skills, and personal characteristics that necessarily become > > > part of the research encounter. I, for example, can generally do > fieldwork > > in predominantly Muslim societies, but, since I am male, there are > severe > > limitations on my access to women in (some) parts of the region I study. > > > This is unlikely to change anytime soon, so I simply think of it this > > way: > > certain of my characteristics simply foreclose certain avenues for > research. > > That's ok. There's a lot that remains open to me. > > > > > > > > Most characteristics, however, neither foreclose nor open avenues. It > > depends on how you use them. In the case of a visible handicap that > > might be > > unusual for your interlocutors, it strikes me that it's best to be > up-front > > as possible about this fact. You want to put your interlocutors at > > ease, so > > rather than risking what might follow from their being surprised by the > > manifestation of your cerebral palsy, you could think about a few > > things to > > say ahead of time to them so that they know what to expect during your > > interactions. Moreover, and I am going out on a limb here, it might be > > valuable to find ways to be as light-hearted as possible about it; if > > you > > make it into a Big Deal, interlocutors might not know how to react. > > On the > > other hand, if you present it as simply something that they might > experience > > during the course of interaction but that in no way has anything to > > do with > > the substance of what your conversation/relationship is about, then they > > > might be put at ease. No guarantees, of course; many > > conversations/interviews fail to be useful for a variety of reasons. > > > > > > > > Perhaps revealing something about your CP could even be a net > > positive for > > the research encounter. Any time the researcher reveals something about > > her/himself, it has the potential to engender trust from the > interlocutor. > > Trust can generate fluency and engagement in the research topic at hand. > > > Again, no guarantees, but in my experience the people I interact with > > very > > much like to make person-to-person connection as human beings. The usual > > > "professional" distance between researcher and researched can be > off-putting > > to many. > > > > > > > > With apologies for speaking about something I know little about, but > > it > > strikes me that cultural difference, ethnic or racial difference, gender > > > difference, etc. offer a rough analogy that in some abstract sense > > might be > > worth pondering. > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu] On > > Behalf Of > > Navdeep Mathur > > Sent: September 18, 2008 6:00 AM > > To: interpretation and methods group > > Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu; erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl; Lorraine Nencel > > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to > > doingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > > > > > A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a disabled > > researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: > > > > Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the > Researched, > > Qualitative Research, 6(2), pp.207-220. > > > > Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: > > > > Shah, S. (2008) Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and Choices of > > Young > > Disabled People, Ashgate Publishing. > > > > best, > > > > Navdeep > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow wrote: > > > > > Friends, Colleagues -- > > > > I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a > > student in > > my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am > > writing to > > ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage the > questions > > he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences by those > > > with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences one might > > > expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if anything. > > > > His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods > literature, > > presuming able-bodied researchers. > > > > I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both to the > > list > > and to him. > > > > With thanks, > > Dvora > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly the > > discussion about the several identities a researcher could have during > > his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own possible > > identities as researcher in an organization.... > > > > Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through which I > > am > > dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work when I > > am > > doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be more > > difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I like doing > > this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in advance. > > ... I > > consider this process as a big challange. > > > > I am curious if you have experience with students who have a visible > > handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the field. > > Or do > > you know experiences about this case? > > > > I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the observed) people > > (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a researcher in a > > wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the > > handicap. In > > daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a physical > > handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of this, these > > > people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my > > opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone > > who has a > > handicap. > > I wonder how this will be during my research in the next period. Are > > there > > experiences of this? > > > > I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. > > > > Kind regards, > > Erwin Engelman > > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. > > Public Systems Group > > > > Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus > > Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad > > Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, > > India > > > > > > Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 > > Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in > > _______________________________________________ > > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/da8cf6af/attachment-0002.html From rlturner at berkeley.edu Thu Sep 18 13:23:14 2008 From: rlturner at berkeley.edu (Robin L. Turner) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:23:14 -0700 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap In-Reply-To: <4b80a9430809180807v56b7b140v1f41d2fcefd2cc98@mail.gmail.com> References: <001401c91977$ecc313e0$6c01a8c0@DS> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD5CC@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> <4b80a9430809180807v56b7b140v1f41d2fcefd2cc98@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <48D28E82.5040403@berkeley.edu> Hi all, I've been reading this list for a long while, but this is my first post! I presented a paper at the most recent APSA titled "Embodiment, Positionality and Self-presentation: Informant Perceptions and Fieldwork Strategies in Southern Africa," that tries to address some of the ways in which our physical characteristics inflect our research interactions. The paper makes brief reference to disabilities, drawing from a paper by Ellingson, and I suspect a related records search would pull up work that directly addresses Erwin's concerns. I've attached the paper and would welcome comments. Ellingson, L. L. 2006. "Embodied knowledge: Writing researchers' bodies into qualitative health research." /Qualitative Health Research/ 16 (2):298-310. Robin Timothy Pachirat wrote: > Robin Turner, a Ph.D. Candidate at the University of California > Berkeley, presented a fantastic paper at this last APSA Meeting in > Boston that would be very helpful to this discussion. I'll see if I > can get her to post it to the list-serv. > > Timothy Pachirat > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Lee Ann Fujii > wrote: > > I might add that I did my interviews in the field by asking my > interpreter to write out people's answers; a colleague gave me > this idea to overcome my fear of working in French at a time when > I wasn't very confident in my French skills. But even after > getting more fluent and more comfortable working in French, the > format of our interviews did not change. What this meant was there > was an imposed tempo on them that made them slow. But I found that > that too could be an advantage. I think my questions were more > thoughtful. I'm not sure how it changed people's answers. > > Also, the fact that people might be uncomfortable talking to a > researcher with CP might not be all bad either. It's possible > people might be more "honest" in their state of discomfort b/c > they might be trying hard not to look uncomfortable or something. > > Lee Ann > > > > Original Message ----- > From: Dvora Yanow > > Date: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:27 am > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to > doing research when you have a visible handicap > To: interpretation and methods group > >, > pader at larp.umass.edu , > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl , > Lorraine Nencel > > > > > > Thanks to Navdeep for the references and Ed for the thoughts. > > > > Let me flesh out a little bit in Erwin's question. As he > sought to > > suggest, he is wheelchair bound, and although his typed text is > > fluent, his speech is halting. This means, in addition to what he > > described as his experiences in everyday settings with how people > > respond to him, that a conversation (interview, e.g.) could well > take > > longer than it would with another researcher. > > > > Ed, I think it's helpful to consider how someone with these > physical > > abilities might prepare others when it comes to interview or > > observation -- and it would be interesting to see what Sonali Shah > > says on this. I do think, tho, that there are differences > between the > > difficulties facing able-bodied researchers of whatever demographic > > characteristics and others. I.e., I'm not sure that > 'difference' is > > the same across the board! > > > > Dvora > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu > on > behalf > > of Ed Schatz > > Sent: Thu 18-Sep-08 12:18 > > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard > > todoingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > I have no first-hand experience in this regard, nor do I have > suggestions > > about work others have done. > > > > > > > > What I would put on the table is that each of us comes with > particular > > background, skills, and personal characteristics that > necessarily become > > part of the research encounter. I, for example, can generally > do fieldwork > > in predominantly Muslim societies, but, since I am male, there > are severe > > limitations on my access to women in (some) parts of the region > I study. > > This is unlikely to change anytime soon, so I simply think of > it this > > way: > > certain of my characteristics simply foreclose certain avenues > for research. > > That's ok. There's a lot that remains open to me. > > > > > > > > Most characteristics, however, neither foreclose nor open > avenues. It > > depends on how you use them. In the case of a visible handicap > that > > might be > > unusual for your interlocutors, it strikes me that it's best to > be up-front > > as possible about this fact. You want to put your interlocutors at > > ease, so > > rather than risking what might follow from their being > surprised by the > > manifestation of your cerebral palsy, you could think about a few > > things to > > say ahead of time to them so that they know what to expect > during your > > interactions. Moreover, and I am going out on a limb here, it > might be > > valuable to find ways to be as light-hearted as possible about > it; if > > you > > make it into a Big Deal, interlocutors might not know how to > react. > > On the > > other hand, if you present it as simply something that they > might experience > > during the course of interaction but that in no way has > anything to > > do with > > the substance of what your conversation/relationship is about, > then they > > might be put at ease. No guarantees, of course; many > > conversations/interviews fail to be useful for a variety of > reasons. > > > > > > > > Perhaps revealing something about your CP could even be a net > > positive for > > the research encounter. Any time the researcher reveals > something about > > her/himself, it has the potential to engender trust from the > interlocutor. > > Trust can generate fluency and engagement in the research topic > at hand. > > Again, no guarantees, but in my experience the people I > interact with > > very > > much like to make person-to-person connection as human beings. > The usual > > "professional" distance between researcher and researched can > be off-putting > > to many. > > > > > > > > With apologies for speaking about something I know little > about, but > > it > > strikes me that cultural difference, ethnic or racial > difference, gender > > difference, etc. offer a rough analogy that in some abstract sense > > might be > > worth pondering. > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > ] On > > Behalf Of > > Navdeep Mathur > > Sent: September 18, 2008 6:00 AM > > To: interpretation and methods group > > Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu ; > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl ; > Lorraine Nencel > > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to > > doingresearch when you have a visible handicap > > > > > > > > A Researcher in the UK Sonali Shah outlines her methods as a > disabled > > researcher researching disabled youth, here is the citation: > > > > Shah, S. (2006) Sharing the same world: The Researcher and the > Researched, > > Qualitative Research, 6(2), pp.207-220. > > > > Her new book also expands on her methodological reflections: > > > > Shah, S. (2008) Future Selves: Listening to the Voices and > Choices of > > Young > > Disabled People, Ashgate Publishing. > > > > best, > > > > Navdeep > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Dvora Yanow > wrote: > > > > Friends, Colleagues -- > > > > I received this question, below, yesterday from Erwin Engelman, a > > student in > > my MA Fieldwork Preparation course. With his permission, I am > > writing to > > ask your help, as I am unaware of materials that might engage > the questions > > he's asking -- anything reporting on field research experiences > by those > > with visible handicaps or advising on the kinds of experiences > one might > > expect and what a researcher might do to anticipate them, if > anything. > > > > His question made me aware of an unspoken bias in the methods > literature, > > presuming able-bodied researchers. > > > > I'm copying Erwin on this email and asking that you reply both > to the > > list > > and to him. > > > > With thanks, > > Dvora > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > Today's lecture of the course Fieldwork Preparation, and mainly > the > > discussion about the several identities a researcher could have > during > > his/her investigation, has let me start thinking about my own > possible > > identities as researcher in an organization.... > > > > Through my handicap - I have cerebral palsy (spasm), through > which I > > am > > dependent on a wheelchair - I am very curious how it will work > when I > > am > > doing research in an organization. Of course I know it will be > more > > difficult in my situation to do research in the field, but I > like doing > > this. To realize this a few "problems" should be solved in > advance. > > ... I > > consider this process as a big challange. > > > > I am curious if you have experience with students who have a > visible > > handicap (especially spasm) and who were doing research in the > field. > > Or do > > you know experiences about this case? > > > > I wonder what kind of influence it should have on (the > observed) people > > (objects), when they are interviewed or observed by a > researcher in a > > wheelchair and who talks less fluently as a consequence of the > > handicap. In > > daily life I have noticed that many people think, next to a > physical > > handicap, I have also a mental handicap. As a consequence of > this, these > > people approach me as a child, or even they ignore me. In my > > opinion/experience they are afraid of a confrontation with someone > > who has a > > handicap. > > I wonder how this will be during my research in the next > period. Are > > there > > experiences of this? > > > > I am looking forward to your answer. Thank you in advance. > > > > Kind regards, > > Erwin Engelman > > erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > > > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Navdeep Mathur, Ph.D. > > Public Systems Group > > > > Faculty Cabin 6, New Campus > > Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad > > Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, > > India > > > > > > Phone: +91-79-6632 4406 > > Fax: +91-79-2630-6896 email: navdeep at iimahd.ernet.in > > > _______________________________________________ > > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > -- Ms. Robin L. Turner Doctoral Candidate in Political Science University of California-Berkeley 210 Barrows Hall #1950 Berkeley, CA 94720-1950 USA Email: rlturner at berkeley.edu Skype: robin.turner ""We are caught in an inescapable web of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. That is the way the world is made." Martin Luther King, Jr. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/bbfca864/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Turner APSA 2008 embodiment positionality & self presentation v2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 132432 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080918/bbfca864/attachment-0001.pdf From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Wed Sep 24 05:38:49 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:38:49 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] FW: Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E0136858E@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> I think Erwin's message of last week disappeared into the ether, so I'm forwarding it to the list. Apologies for the duplication if indeed it came through earlier. Dvora -----Original Message----- From: Erwin Engelman [mailto:erwin.engelman at tiscali.nl] Sent: zaterdag 20 september 2008 10:56 To: Timothy Pachirat; interpretation and methods group; Dvora Yanow Cc: pader at larp.umass.edu; Lorraine Nencel; interpretation and methods group Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Question with regard to doing research when you have a visible handicap Dear all, With great interest I have taken note of your e-mails as a reply to the question of Mrs Dvora Yanow, my lecturer. For your ideas and literature suggestions concerning doing research when you have a visible handicap, I would thank you very much for willing to think along with us in this situation. Surely, I will look up this literature. Some of you have suggested that it would be possible for a researcher with spasm to conduct interviews during his time in the field. In my opinion this should be also possible and practicable. Conducting interviews I will consider this as a great challange. Next to gathering relevant information for the research I am curious how the interviewees will react to me as a student who is not able to speak quite fluenty. In this way both the interviewee and interviewer could be confrontated with the situation. In the near past I conducted some interviews, both by telephone and by face-to-face. With a sense of satisfaction I look back on these conversations. Mostly, in advance, I informed the approached people that I have spasm, through I speak less fluently. All the time my way of speech was not a reason for these people to refuse an interview, conducting by me. Sometimes in advance the interviewees asked to get the list of my interview-questions, through which they were able to read the questions me. In this way they could just better understand my questions. Conducting my interviews by a chat-programm could be also a possibility, of course. Then, I am more certain that people understand me well and once. On the other hand, in that case interviewees should have patience, because my speed of typing is very slow. Yesterday I had a first engagement with the co-ordinator of the MA-thesis and the student counsellor to discuss which steps should be taken, through which I can also do fieldwork-research. The long and the short of it is, there have to be organized many things. For I want to do research, for a part, in Germany. I am interested in the coorperation between local councils in the border region of The Netherlands and Germany. Once again, I want to thank you for your responses. Best wishes, Erwin Engelman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080924/b13eb969/attachment.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Wed Sep 24 13:25:19 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:25:19 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] an article of possible interest Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013685B6@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> For those interested in disciplines, this article might be of interest: Organization Studies, Vol. 29, No. 10, 1315-1336 (2008) 'Positioning Qualitative Research as Resistance to the Institutionalization of the Academic Labour Process' Gillian Symon, Anna Buehring, Phil Johnson, Catherine Cassell The focus of this paper is on the `institutional work' (Lawrence and Suddaby 2006) of disrupting institutions, examining the rhetorical strategies employed to construct and justify meanings and interpretations. This work is explored in the context of the contemporary academic labour process; specifically, research approaches within the management discipline. A total of 45 individuals involved in funding, conducting, publishing and using qualitative management research were interviewed. From our analysis of their arguments, we focus specifically on the discursive positioning of quantitative research as illegitimate institutionalization of academic working practices and of qualitative research as legitimate resistance to this institutionalization. We identify a number of rhetorical strategies which construct and justify these discursive positions including: the undermining of success criteria; the legitimizing of interests (through claims of institutionalized discrimination) and actors (through identity claims); attributions of political action (including the construction of counter-institutions); claims to agency; and the invocation of alternative institutional logics. We argue that examining institutional work as rhetoric adds to our theoretical understanding of the discursive disruption of institutions, particularly with respect to the manipulation of contradictory meanings and the functions of agency-structure discourse; and contributes a political dimension to our understanding of the qualitative-quantitative `divide' within management research. http://oss.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/29/10/1315?etoc Dvora Yanow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080924/ba0d7bd6/attachment-0001.html From ed.schatz at utoronto.ca Wed Sep 24 14:12:12 2008 From: ed.schatz at utoronto.ca (Ed Schatz) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:12:12 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013685B6@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <200809241811.m8OIBuhY005504@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> All, A colleague of mind was asked to strengthen his application for funding by referring to work that deals with the use of confidential / anonymous / pseudonymous sources. Any ideas? Ed -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080924/18406b86/attachment.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Wed Sep 24 14:26:02 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:26:02 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources In-Reply-To: <200809241811.m8OIBuhY005504@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013685C4@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> umm, can you provide a bit more context? as in: problems with use of such? advantages in? 'thou shalt nots' of? need to do so in dangerous/conflict-ridden/communistic states? Dvora -----Original Message----- From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu]On Behalf Of Ed Schatz Sent: woensdag 24 september 2008 20:12 To: 'interpretation and methods group' Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources All, A colleague of mind was asked to strengthen his application for funding by referring to work that deals with the use of confidential / anonymous / pseudonymous sources. Any ideas? Ed -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080924/9d840e27/attachment.html From ed.schatz at utoronto.ca Wed Sep 24 14:28:16 2008 From: ed.schatz at utoronto.ca (Ed Schatz) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:28:16 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013685C4@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <200809241828.m8OIS0is010450@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> Yes, yes, yes, and yes. All of the above! Ethical and practical considerations involved therein :-) _____ From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Dvora Yanow Sent: September 24, 2008 2:26 PM To: interpretation and methods group Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources umm, can you provide a bit more context? as in: problems with use of such? advantages in? 'thou shalt nots' of? need to do so in dangerous/conflict-ridden/communistic states? Dvora -----Original Message----- From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu]On Behalf Of Ed Schatz Sent: woensdag 24 september 2008 20:12 To: 'interpretation and methods group' Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources All, A colleague of mind was asked to strengthen his application for funding by referring to work that deals with the use of confidential / anonymous / pseudonymous sources. Any ideas? Ed -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080924/a5da35fa/attachment-0001.html From marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca Wed Sep 24 21:23:37 2008 From: marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca (marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:23:37 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors Message-ID: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> Greetings all, I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? Thank you for your attention, Marie-Eve Reny University of Toronto, Canada marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca From jhuns at vt.edu Wed Sep 24 22:08:19 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:08:19 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <7C215D33-8BFF-4CD4-96DF-EC74C1506A19@vt.edu> If it were me... I would stay with ethnography, but make it indirect. Really what does it matter what the central government actors say or do... when you have a rich group of diasporas spread around the world trying to interpret and interpollate what those actors might do. I would visit community leaders in chinese diasporic communities in whatever region you want to focus on and use their reactions and understandings of the central leaders. In that way, you develop an indirect understanding of the chinese leaders, but you also develop and understanding of how people come to know and understand those chinese leaders from afar. but perhaps my approach is too pragmatic. On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > Greetings all, > > I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central > government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, > and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in > February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be > ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to > generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in > China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have > any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state > in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a > way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government > officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate > insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher > levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in > taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of > group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world > system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the > local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about > central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways > to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? > > Thank you for your attention, > > Marie-Eve Reny > University of Toronto, Canada > marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods From jhuns at vt.edu Wed Sep 24 22:04:55 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:04:55 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <8C012E14-8009-4B49-8875-BD94F36C2911@vt.edu> If it were me... I would stay with ethnography, but make it indirect. Really what does it matter what the central government actors say or do... when you have a rich group of diasporas spread around the world trying to interpret and interpollate what those actors might do. I would visit community leaders in chinese diasporic communities in whatever region you want to focus on and use their reactions and understandings of the central leaders. In that way, you develop an indirect understanding of the chinese leaders, but you also develop and understanding of how people come to know and understand those chinese leaders from afar. but perhaps my approach is too pragmatic. On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > Greetings all, > > I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central > government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, > and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in > February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be > ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to > generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in > China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have > any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state > in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a > way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government > officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate > insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher > levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in > taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of > group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world > system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the > local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about > central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways > to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? > > Thank you for your attention, > > Marie-Eve Reny > University of Toronto, Canada > marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods From jhuns at vt.edu Wed Sep 24 22:04:55 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:04:55 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <8C012E14-8009-4B49-8875-BD94F36C2911@vt.edu> If it were me... I would stay with ethnography, but make it indirect. Really what does it matter what the central government actors say or do... when you have a rich group of diasporas spread around the world trying to interpret and interpollate what those actors might do. I would visit community leaders in chinese diasporic communities in whatever region you want to focus on and use their reactions and understandings of the central leaders. In that way, you develop an indirect understanding of the chinese leaders, but you also develop and understanding of how people come to know and understand those chinese leaders from afar. but perhaps my approach is too pragmatic. On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > Greetings all, > > I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central > government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, > and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in > February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be > ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to > generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in > China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have > any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state > in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a > way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government > officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate > insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher > levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in > taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of > group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world > system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the > local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about > central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways > to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? > > Thank you for your attention, > > Marie-Eve Reny > University of Toronto, Canada > marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods From jhuns at vt.edu Wed Sep 24 22:22:43 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:22:43 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] oops sorry for the multipost In-Reply-To: <8C012E14-8009-4B49-8875-BD94F36C2911@vt.edu> References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> <8C012E14-8009-4B49-8875-BD94F36C2911@vt.edu> Message-ID: <30B5686B-2DC7-4D4C-96FE-CBF9D271EA27@vt.edu> darn home email wasn't recognizing my ssh tunnel From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Thu Sep 25 09:15:59 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:15:59 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study UneasilyAccessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <8C012E14-8009-4B49-8875-BD94F36C2911@vt.edu> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013685D6@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> It seems to me, Jeremy, not that your approach is too pragmatic, but that you have just completely changed the research question. However, when access is blocked, one has either to use 'surrogates' or revise the research focus. Perhaps one of the things you might explore, Marie Eve, is the extent of central control at this point in time (on this particular topic area), through the lens of local government - although this, too, would likely be a sensitive topic. Also, context matters, and I don't know enough about China to know if the local level could be seen as surrogate for the top. Dvora Yanow -----Original Message----- From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu]On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: donderdag 25 september 2008 4:05 To: interpretation and methods group Cc: interpretationandmethods at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study UneasilyAccessible State Actors If it were me... I would stay with ethnography, but make it indirect. Really what does it matter what the central government actors say or do... when you have a rich group of diasporas spread around the world trying to interpret and interpollate what those actors might do. I would visit community leaders in chinese diasporic communities in whatever region you want to focus on and use their reactions and understandings of the central leaders. In that way, you develop an indirect understanding of the chinese leaders, but you also develop and understanding of how people come to know and understand those chinese leaders from afar. but perhaps my approach is too pragmatic. On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > Greetings all, > > I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central > government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, > and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in > February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be > ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to > generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in > China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have > any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state > in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a > way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government > officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate > insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher > levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in > taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of > group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world > system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the > local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about > central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways > to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? > > Thank you for your attention, > > Marie-Eve Reny > University of Toronto, Canada > marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods _______________________________________________ Interpretationandmethods mailing list Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods From jhuns at vt.edu Thu Sep 25 09:23:27 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 09:23:27 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study UneasilyAccessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013685D6@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> References: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E013685D6@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <9CA7D0AE-9553-4FE1-BD76-5559980268DE@vt.edu> yes, but, i've never seen very many research questions that stayed the same once the project started. but, my concern is the same, if you cannot get access isn't the only question with heavily policed communities, it is whether they can ever trust you enough to actually provide worthwhile information, which is why i pushed surrogates and past that changed the research topic form 'what this body of people do/ think' to 'what do interested outsiders think those people do/think', the diasporic communities part was mainly to put the question back on the international stage instead of the local stage. On Sep 25, 2008, at 9:15 AM, Dvora Yanow wrote: > It seems to me, Jeremy, not that your approach is too pragmatic, but > that you have just completely changed the research question. > > From ed.schatz at utoronto.ca Thu Sep 25 10:58:22 2008 From: ed.schatz at utoronto.ca (Ed Schatz) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:58:22 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to StudyUneasilyAccessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <9CA7D0AE-9553-4FE1-BD76-5559980268DE@vt.edu> Message-ID: <200809251458.m8PEw6LX007629@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> My own take is that, yes, surrogates are often necessary but that we shouldn't rush to use them. Rather, we should be striving to get as close as possible (given practical, ethical and other limitations) to the sources of evidence that speak to the question(s) we are asking. The rush in this case to chat with members of the diaspora would be akin to a statistician using GDP per capita simply because the data are easy to download. Studying really interesting questions sometimes entails a fair bit of inconvenience, though the intellectual rewards may be notable. Whether the professional rewards are equally notable is another question... Ed From sohini.guha at mail.mcgill.ca Thu Sep 25 12:29:26 2008 From: sohini.guha at mail.mcgill.ca (Sohini Guha) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:29:26 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography toStudyUneasilyAccessible State Actors References: <200809251458.m8PEw6LX007629@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <730833067A689B46B10E20205A98F04E831599@EXCHANGE2VS4.campus.mcgill.ca> Marie, I am wondering whether it might not help to identify some key contacts, and build relationships with them over time, that is, engage in a whole lot of conversations with the same sources at different points of fieldwork, and try and catch them in unofficial as well as in official settings (the last will probably happen as time passes). This may not be terribly difficult for you, since you are going to be there in the field for a while. Might it not be that they will loosen up as they get to know you better, and say more and more interesting things as time goes by, and as you gradually progress to the status of " that girl from Canada", rather than the alien foreign researcher? It is my hunch that respondents, even CPC officials, will tend to let down their guard just a little bit as trust builds up. Though this might well be more doable at the local level. On the whole, I think it might work better for you to build deep relationships, and rely on multiple conversations with sources, rather than talk to a whole lot of people once or twice, without them knowing you very well. Just my two penny worth. I am going by what worked for me in India, and I did manage to worm my way there into getting some pretty tight-lipped party cadres to relax, after paying them many, many, visits, and usually over dinner with their families. I realize that the Chinese situation may be very different however. Best, Sohini. --------------------------------- Sohini Guha Doctoral Candidate Department of Political Science, McGill University. ________________________________ From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf of Ed Schatz Sent: Thu 25/09/2008 10:58 AM To: 'interpretation and methods group' Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography toStudyUneasilyAccessible State Actors My own take is that, yes, surrogates are often necessary but that we shouldn't rush to use them. Rather, we should be striving to get as close as possible (given practical, ethical and other limitations) to the sources of evidence that speak to the question(s) we are asking. The rush in this case to chat with members of the diaspora would be akin to a statistician using GDP per capita simply because the data are easy to download. Studying really interesting questions sometimes entails a fair bit of inconvenience, though the intellectual rewards may be notable. Whether the professional rewards are equally notable is another question... Ed _______________________________________________ Interpretationandmethods mailing list Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Thu Sep 25 15:08:49 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:08:49 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography toStudyUneasilyAccessible State Actors References: <200809251458.m8PEw6LX007629@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD655@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080925/8466fc65/attachment.html From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Thu Sep 25 15:25:03 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:25:03 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources References: <200809241828.m8OIS0is010450@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD656@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080925/2eeac0d9/attachment.html From lk180 at columbia.edu Thu Sep 25 15:31:26 2008 From: lk180 at columbia.edu (Laleh Khalili) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:31:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD656@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> References: <200809241828.m8OIS0is010450@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca> <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD656@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: There is an older volume on fieldwork in dangerous places. I would also love the citation for any more recent volumes: Nordstrom, Carolyn and Anotonius C.G.M. Robben. 1995. Fieldwork under Fire: Contemporary Studies of Violence and Survival. Berkeley: University of California Press. Laleh Khalili Soas On Thu, 25 Sep 2008, Dvora Yanow wrote: > > Sorry, Ed, I'm having a hard time with this one. > > All I can think of right now is, IRBs in the US are pushing researchers > to anonymize sources, and in the EU, you almost have to anonymize, in > order not to run afoul of privacy laws (which also require destroying > data, I think within 5 yrs). > > I can't tell if your colleague WANTS to anonymize and is being 'blocked,' > or wants NOT to anonymize and ditto. > > Arguments FOR have been sounded in settings that are 'troubled', as you > know, where identifying 'informants' might well lead to their > ostracizing, arrest, punishment, murder.? Aside from the discussion in > Lorraine Bayard de Volo's paper, which you know, the recently published > volume on doing field research in difficult settings might have something > on this. > > Claire W., are you reading this?? If so, can you send the citation -- or > anyone else who knows the volume in question?? I don't have the title, > etc. at hand. > > I have heard arguments against anonymizing from my colleagues who study > in organizations that WANT to be known, because giving a researcher > access is part of their 'public service' (giving back to the NL).? So > being required to have their identities disguised is a problem for them. > > Disguise can also be problematic when you're researching an entity that > is unique.? Imagine shadowing the Prime Minister of wherever, or > researching a large public-private partnership that constructs > mega-infrastructure things.? Not easy to 'offshore' them because of their > unique features -- and then if you do, your name is likely to give the > game away (here, at least). > > Does any of this begin to get at the concerns at hand?? A bit more > context might help us think with you on this. > > Dvora > > -----Original Message----- > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf of > Ed Schatz > Sent: Wed 24-Sep-08 20:28 > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources > > Yes, yes, yes, and yes. All of the above! Ethical and practical > considerations involved therein :-) > > > > ? _____? > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu] On Behalf > Of > Dvora Yanow > Sent: September 24, 2008 2:26 PM > To: interpretation and methods group > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources > > > > umm, can you provide a bit more context? > > > > as in:? problems with use of such?? advantages in? 'thou shalt nots' of? > need to do so in dangerous/conflict-ridden/communistic states? > > > > Dvora > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu]On Behalf > Of > Ed Schatz > Sent: woensdag 24 september 2008 20:12 > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources > > > > All, > > A colleague of mind was asked to strengthen his application for funding > by > referring to work that deals with the use of confidential / anonymous / > pseudonymous sources. > > > > Any ideas? > > Ed > > > > > > > > From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Thu Sep 25 15:50:49 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:50:49 +0200 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources References: <200809241828.m8OIS0is010450@bureau61.ns.utoronto.ca><5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD656@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD659@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080925/ee71f4d9/attachment-0001.html From patrickthaddeusjackson at gmail.com Thu Sep 25 22:38:40 2008 From: patrickthaddeusjackson at gmail.com (Patrick Thaddeus Jackson) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 22:38:40 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <7C215D33-8BFF-4CD4-96DF-EC74C1506A19@vt.edu> References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> <7C215D33-8BFF-4CD4-96DF-EC74C1506A19@vt.edu> Message-ID: Before I take a position on Jeremy's suggestion (in a separate and subsequent e-mail to the one I'm replying to here) to essentially modify the research question to make it answerable in the light of the available data, I'm curious what the original research question actually was. "Rationale underlying" strikes me as a somewhat problematic place to begin, ethnographically speaking, since it presumes a kind of psychoanalytic depth model: here's what people do or did, and here's why they really did it, despite what they might have said in public. If they've given public rationales, and that's what you're interested in, then you don't actually need to talk to them; you've got their public rationales, after all. The only reason I can think of to actually talk to them at that point would be to somehow get through or past the public rationale to the "real" rationale, and that puts you in tricky epistemological territory. Ethnographic techniques can immerse you in a meaningful social context, but I am quite skeptical that it can ever even in principle get you to "real reasons" or "underlying rationales" -- because those conceptual objects have no place in an ethnographic analysis concerned with categories-in-use and other such features of lived social settings. Alternatively, you could approach the situation with a universal theory about interests in hand, and avoid the necessity to investigate people's lived social experiences altogether? I suppose what I'm asking is what Marie-Eve means by "insights about the behaviour of political actors." If this means clues as to their motivations, then that basically means using local informants as sources for hypotheses, a practice I am not fond of since it conflates primary- and secondary-source commentary. What local people think about their leaders' actions is a very interesting topic in its own right, but it is most emphatically not (in my view) a valid way to interrogate the actions of those leaders themselves. Although, as Jeremy seemed to suggest, it is a great way to make sense of the subject-positions that those leaders occupy in their local context. On the other hand, "insights about the behaviour of political actors" might instead mean primary-source information about what leaders said and did, then that looks fine to me, as long as the local governmental officials and other local people have that information (which strikes me as an empirical question). Or, to ask the same thing in yet a different way: I'm not quite sure what it means to take a smaller entity as a unit of analysis to study aspects of the larger whole to which that entity belongs. If we are talking about individuals, then the group to which they belong occurs as a commonplace carried in their social transactions, but we learn little about the group "itself" from that study; we learn about the role played by references to and actions oriented towards the group. It's waiting for Godot: we learn a lot about the people waiting, but little or nothing about Godot, by studying the actions (including words) of people waiting for Godot. We don't even learn whether Godot "really" exists, and it doesn't matter for the analysis: people comport themselves towards imaginary, or immaterial, or transcendental, objects all the time (e.g. "God", "witches", "justice"), and what matters is that people comport themselves and how they comport themselves. That's what has the effects. To buy into our informants' narratives to the point where we treat the testimony of a religious believer as evidence that God exists (or a nationalist that her nation exists, etc.) is to make, I think, a methodological mistake of a pretty profound sort. I'm just very skeptical of the proposition that we can learn something about an object by investigating patterns of social action oriented towards that object. That goes for governments, states, civilizations, people who aren't in the room at the time of the investigation, etc. All we learn about by observing social action is, well, social action, undertaken by the actors directly under observation. The fact that they reference or invoke other things is a fact about the actors and their social relations, not about the things they reference or invoke. I moved a bit far away from Marie-Eve's initial concerns! Sorry. But I do think that before one could make a determination about proxy data sources, one would at the very least have to more precisely define the research question, and how any data collected might help you to answer it. PTJ PS the "waiting for Godot" example isn't mine; it's John Shotter's, from his brilliant little book _Conversational Realities_. On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > Greetings all, > > I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central > government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, > and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in > February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be > ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to > generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in > China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have > any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state > in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a > way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government > officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate > insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher > levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in > taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of > group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world > system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the > local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about > central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways > to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? > > Thank you for your attention, > > Marie-Eve Reny > University of Toronto, Canada > marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca === Patrick Thaddeus Jackson Director, General Education Program, American University Editor-in-Chief, Journal of International Relations and Development http://profptj.blogspot.com | http://www.kittenboo.com calendar: http://ical.mac.com/onyxdr/Patrick From ed.schatz at utoronto.ca Fri Sep 26 05:53:31 2008 From: ed.schatz at utoronto.ca (Ed Schatz) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 05:53:31 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources In-Reply-To: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FD659@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> Message-ID: <007201c91fbd$be432040$6c01a8c0@DS> Thanks to Dvora and Laleh for these thoughts/cites. I sense that my colleague is simply looking to justify the use of confidential sources (which could make nervous those social scientists bent on "verification" or "replication") by citing work that details the rationale(s) behind using such sources. I will forward him your thoughts. Best, Ed _____ From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Dvora Yanow Sent: September 25, 2008 3:51 PM To: interpretation and methods group Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources I forgot to add something: Oscar Salemink, in chapter 1 of a book on anthropology in Vietnam, tells of a researcher whose work was picked up by the French forces (or CIA, my memory is hazy), who then went and did violence (Oscar's narrative is not specific) to one of the women (at least) whom the anthropologist had interacted with. I can't recall now if he named her, or if he used a pseudonym, but the other particulars were clear enough that who she was could be figured out. DY -----Original Message----- From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf of Laleh Khalili Sent: Thu 25-Sep-08 21:31 To: interpretation and methods group Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources There is an older volume on fieldwork in dangerous places. I would also love the citation for any more recent volumes: Nordstrom, Carolyn and Anotonius C.G.M. Robben. 1995. Fieldwork under Fire: Contemporary Studies of Violence and Survival. Berkeley: University of California Press. Laleh Khalili Soas On Thu, 25 Sep 2008, Dvora Yanow wrote: > > Sorry, Ed, I'm having a hard time with this one. > > All I can think of right now is, IRBs in the US are pushing researchers > to anonymize sources, and in the EU, you almost have to anonymize, in > order not to run afoul of privacy laws (which also require destroying > data, I think within 5 yrs). > > I can't tell if your colleague WANTS to anonymize and is being 'blocked,' > or wants NOT to anonymize and ditto. > > Arguments FOR have been sounded in settings that are 'troubled', as you > know, where identifying 'informants' might well lead to their > ostracizing, arrest, punishment, murder. Aside from the discussion in > Lorraine Bayard de Volo's paper, which you know, the recently published > volume on doing field research in difficult settings might have something > on this. > > Claire W., are you reading this? If so, can you send the citation -- or > anyone else who knows the volume in question? I don't have the title, > etc. at hand. > > I have heard arguments against anonymizing from my colleagues who study > in organizations that WANT to be known, because giving a researcher > access is part of their 'public service' (giving back to the NL). So > being required to have their identities disguised is a problem for them. > > Disguise can also be problematic when you're researching an entity that > is unique. Imagine shadowing the Prime Minister of wherever, or > researching a large public-private partnership that constructs > mega-infrastructure things. Not easy to 'offshore' them because of their > unique features -- and then if you do, your name is likely to give the > game away (here, at least). > > Does any of this begin to get at the concerns at hand? A bit more > context might help us think with you on this. > > Dvora > > -----Original Message----- > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu on behalf of > Ed Schatz > Sent: Wed 24-Sep-08 20:28 > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources > > Yes, yes, yes, and yes. All of the above! Ethical and practical > considerations involved therein :-) > > > > _____ > > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu] On Behalf > Of > Dvora Yanow > Sent: September 24, 2008 2:26 PM > To: interpretation and methods group > Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources > > > > umm, can you provide a bit more context? > > > > as in: problems with use of such? advantages in? 'thou shalt nots' of? > need to do so in dangerous/conflict-ridden/communistic states? > > > > Dvora > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu > [mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu]On Behalf > Of > Ed Schatz > Sent: woensdag 24 september 2008 20:12 > To: 'interpretation and methods group' > Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] using confidential sources > > > > All, > > A colleague of mind was asked to strengthen his application for funding > by > referring to work that deals with the use of confidential / anonymous / > pseudonymous sources. > > > > Any ideas? > > Ed > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080926/0c290d01/attachment.html From marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca Mon Sep 29 02:24:14 2008 From: marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca (marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:24:14 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> <7C215D33-8BFF-4CD4-96DF-EC74C1506A19@vt.edu> Message-ID: <20080929022414.0hw3zs6ckkkw4k4s@webmail.utoronto.ca> Dear all, I apologize for the delay in my response and would like to thank you for your helpful thoughts in reaction to my questions. I would like to clarify a few things and respond to some comments: * Jeremy -- There are two reasons why I would not change my research topic for one that gives priority to diaspora communities: 1) while ethnography seems to have predominantly been used to study realities pertaining to societal actors (more easily accessible to the ethnographer), more ought to be written on how to overcome the challenge of "reconciling" ethnography and the study of the state; one of the objectives of my project is to be innovative from a methodological perspective and generate insights that can be helpful for political scientists for whom the state is after all one of the most important units of analysis. If we want ethnographic research designs to become more widespread in Political Science, we ought to figure out ways to address the potential analytical tensions involved in applying ethnographic methods to the study of the state (and even more so in non-democratic societies); 2) too many scholars have studied China through the lenses of diaspora communities in different parts of the world; the epistemic community's expectations about China experts' familiarity with the Chinese context have grown to the extent that China scholars cannot get away with simply doing field research amongst diapora communities and pretend to be "China experts"; fluency in Mandarin (or any other Chinese language) as well as extensive (if not intensive) research in the field are two such expectations which may have not existed 10 or 20 years ago. These expectations grow in a context where the world wants to know more about China; as Ed mentioned, we ought to get as close as possible to the sources of evidence, and the least this involves is being physically in China. * Patrick -- You mentioned you were curious as to what the original research question was. I should have perhaps been more specific here. My project starts with the following puzzle: why has the central government in China been constant in repressing often peacefully mobilizing religious protesters, and has recently shown greater responsiveness to increasingly disruptive and violent land-related protests? I'd like to respond to some of the issues you raised. I did not think the words I used in my post would be subject to such scrutiny. You seem to dislike my usage of "rationale underlying" claiming that it presumes some kind of "psychoanalytic depth model". I would however be concerned to overlook such a possibility for two reasons: first, the causes of actions are not always self-evident; second, and not unrelated to the first point, explaining the 'why' of actions goes beyond publicly expressed rationales; indeed, it is also about explaining the 'why' of 'how' rationales may be expressed publicly, but most importantly, the mechanisms that make central government officials categorize and make sense of collective claims in certain ways. Moreover, even when publicly expressed rationales reflect the actual intentions of decision makers, this still has to be articulated with some analytically convincing qualitative explanation; it cannot just be assumed. Here, I think it is more desirable to think of public rationales as part of a general outcome (i.e. state reaction to collective protests), and what my analysis attempts to do is to explain the processes leading to such an outcome. I would like to use ethnography as a tool, among others (i.e. discourse analysis), to dig into the complex psychology of the Chinese state. Of course there are problems in taking a smaller entity as a unit of analysis to study aspects of the larger whole, and vice versa. Having said that, claiming that the above procedure should be avoided as it has its own limitations is in itself a problem. It assumes that entities are not mutually interacting and influencing each other; to the extent that they mutually interact, each unit can tell aspects of a story about the other unit, and vice versa; we unfortunately (...or fortunately) do not live in a world in which units live a life of their own, and our analyses ought to take such complexity into consideration. Finally, you seem unsure that one can "learn something about an object by investigating patterns of social action oriented towards that object". Your comment however could be interpreted as based on the assumption that there is something "real" about these objects that cannot be captured by the study of other (related) objects. This somehow contradicts your earlier skepticism about my usage of "rationale underlying" (assuming the existence of a "real rationale"). * Sohini -- Many thanks for the practical tips. I am still at the stage where I am trying to figure out how building relationships with local leaders may help me answer my puzzle. I imagine I will better be able to identify these mechanisms in the field. * Dvora -- Whether local governments can be considered surrogates for the top I believe varies from one locality to another and is partly based on how good central-local government relations are (the latter of which are influenced by a range of factors). Having said this, even in areas where local-central government relations are tense and local governments should not be considered surrogates for the top, a lot could still be said about the motivations of the top in response to collective protests targeting the bottom (i.e. strategic protesters usually target the local government as opposed to the central government). Sorry for the long email. Many many thanks once again for your precious feedback! Best, Marie -- Marie-Eve Reny Department of Political Science Asian Institute, Munk Centre for International Studies University of Toronto marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca Quoting Patrick Thaddeus Jackson : > Before I take a position on Jeremy's suggestion (in a separate and > subsequent e-mail to the one I'm replying to here) to essentially > modify the research question to make it answerable in the light of the > available data, I'm curious what the original research question > actually was. "Rationale underlying" strikes me as a somewhat > problematic place to begin, ethnographically speaking, since it > presumes a kind of psychoanalytic depth model: here's what people do > or did, and here's why they really did it, despite what they might > have said in public. If they've given public rationales, and that's > what you're interested in, then you don't actually need to talk to > them; you've got their public rationales, after all. The only reason I > can think of to actually talk to them at that point would be to > somehow get through or past the public rationale to the "real" > rationale, and that puts you in tricky epistemological territory. > Ethnographic techniques can immerse you in a meaningful social > context, but I am quite skeptical that it can ever even in principle > get you to "real reasons" or "underlying rationales" -- because those > conceptual objects have no place in an ethnographic analysis concerned > with categories-in-use and other such features of lived social settings. > > Alternatively, you could approach the situation with a universal > theory about interests in hand, and avoid the necessity to investigate > people's lived social experiences altogether? > > I suppose what I'm asking is what Marie-Eve means by "insights about > the behaviour of political actors." If this means clues as to their > motivations, then that basically means using local informants as > sources for hypotheses, a practice I am not fond of since it conflates > primary- and secondary-source commentary. What local people think > about their leaders' actions is a very interesting topic in its own > right, but it is most emphatically not (in my view) a valid way to > interrogate the actions of those leaders themselves. Although, as > Jeremy seemed to suggest, it is a great way to make sense of the > subject-positions that those leaders occupy in their local context. On > the other hand, "insights about the behaviour of political actors" > might instead mean primary-source information about what leaders said > and did, then that looks fine to me, as long as the local governmental > officials and other local people have that information (which strikes > me as an empirical question). > > Or, to ask the same thing in yet a different way: I'm not quite sure > what it means to take a smaller entity as a unit of analysis to study > aspects of the larger whole to which that entity belongs. If we are > talking about individuals, then the group to which they belong occurs > as a commonplace carried in their social transactions, but we learn > little about the group "itself" from that study; we learn about the > role played by references to and actions oriented towards the group. > It's waiting for Godot: we learn a lot about the people waiting, but > little or nothing about Godot, by studying the actions (including > words) of people waiting for Godot. We don't even learn whether Godot > "really" exists, and it doesn't matter for the analysis: people > comport themselves towards imaginary, or immaterial, or > transcendental, objects all the time (e.g. "God", "witches", > "justice"), and what matters is that people comport themselves and how > they comport themselves. That's what has the effects. To buy into our > informants' narratives to the point where we treat the testimony of a > religious believer as evidence that God exists (or a nationalist that > her nation exists, etc.) is to make, I think, a methodological mistake > of a pretty profound sort. > > I'm just very skeptical of the proposition that we can learn something > about an object by investigating patterns of social action oriented > towards that object. That goes for governments, states, civilizations, > people who aren't in the room at the time of the investigation, etc. > All we learn about by observing social action is, well, social action, > undertaken by the actors directly under observation. The fact that > they reference or invoke other things is a fact about the actors and > their social relations, not about the things they reference or invoke. > > I moved a bit far away from Marie-Eve's initial concerns! Sorry. But I > do think that before one could make a determination about proxy data > sources, one would at the very least have to more precisely define the > research question, and how any data collected might help you to answer > it. > > PTJ > > PS the "waiting for Godot" example isn't mine; it's John Shotter's, > from his brilliant little book _Conversational Realities_. > > On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > >> Greetings all, >> >> I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central >> government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, >> and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in >> February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be >> ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to >> generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in >> China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have >> any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state >> in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a >> way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government >> officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate >> insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher >> levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in >> taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of >> group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world >> system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the >> local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about >> central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways >> to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? >> >> Thank you for your attention, >> >> Marie-Eve Reny >> University of Toronto, Canada >> marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > === > Patrick Thaddeus Jackson > Director, General Education Program, American University > Editor-in-Chief, Journal of International Relations and Development > http://profptj.blogspot.com | http://www.kittenboo.com > calendar: http://ical.mac.com/onyxdr/Patrick > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > From marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca Mon Sep 29 02:24:48 2008 From: marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca (marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:24:48 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> <7C215D33-8BFF-4CD4-96DF-EC74C1506A19@vt.edu> Message-ID: <20080929022448.r10u1ro944g444gc@webmail.utoronto.ca> Dear all, I apologize for the delay in my response and would like to thank you for your helpful thoughts in reaction to my questions. I would like to clarify a few things and respond to some comments: * Jeremy -- There are two reasons why I would not change my research topic for one that gives priority to diaspora communities: 1) while ethnography seems to have predominantly been used to study realities pertaining to societal actors (more easily accessible to the ethnographer), more ought to be written on how to overcome the challenge of "reconciling" ethnography and the study of the state; one of the objectives of my project is to be innovative from a methodological perspective and generate insights that can be helpful for political scientists for whom the state is after all one of the most important units of analysis. If we want ethnographic research designs to become more widespread in Political Science, we ought to figure out ways to address the potential analytical tensions involved in applying ethnographic methods to the study of the state (and even more so in non-democratic societies); 2) too many scholars have studied China through the lenses of diaspora communities in different parts of the world; the epistemic community's expectations about China experts' familiarity with the Chinese context have grown to the extent that China scholars cannot get away with simply doing field research amongst diapora communities and pretend to be "China experts"; fluency in Mandarin (or any other Chinese language) as well as extensive (if not intensive) research in the field are two such expectations which may have not existed 10 or 20 years ago. These expectations grow in a context where the world wants to know more about China; as Ed mentioned, we ought to get as close as possible to the sources of evidence, and the least this involves is being physically in China. * Patrick -- You mentioned you were curious as to what the original research question was. I should have perhaps been more specific here. My project starts with the following puzzle: why has the central government in China been constant in repressing often peacefully mobilizing religious protesters, and has recently shown greater responsiveness to increasingly disruptive and violent land-related protests? I'd like to respond to some of the issues you raised. I did not think the words I used in my post would be subject to such scrutiny. You seem to dislike my usage of "rationale underlying" claiming that it presumes some kind of "psychoanalytic depth model". I would however be concerned to overlook such a possibility for two reasons: first, the causes of actions are not always self-evident; second, and not unrelated to the first point, explaining the 'why' of actions goes beyond publicly expressed rationales; indeed, it is also about explaining the 'why' of 'how' rationales may be expressed publicly, but most importantly, the mechanisms that make central government officials categorize and make sense of collective claims in certain ways. Moreover, even when publicly expressed rationales reflect the actual intentions of decision makers, this still has to be articulated with some analytically convincing qualitative explanation; it cannot just be assumed. Here, I think it is more desirable to think of public rationales as part of a general outcome (i.e. state reaction to collective protests), and what my analysis attempts to do is to explain the processes leading to such an outcome. I would like to use ethnography as a tool, among others (i.e. discourse analysis), to dig into the complex psychology of the Chinese state. Of course there are problems in taking a smaller entity as a unit of analysis to study aspects of the larger whole, and vice versa. Having said that, claiming that the above procedure should be avoided as it has its own limitations is in itself a problem. It assumes that entities are not mutually interacting and influencing each other; to the extent that they mutually interact, each unit can tell aspects of a story about the other unit, and vice versa; we unfortunately (...or fortunately) do not live in a world in which units live a life of their own, and our analyses ought to take such complexity into consideration. Finally, you seem unsure that one can "learn something about an object by investigating patterns of social action oriented towards that object". Your comment however could be interpreted as based on the assumption that there is something "real" about these objects that cannot be captured by the study of other (related) objects. This somehow contradicts your earlier skepticism about my usage of "rationale underlying" (assuming the existence of a "real rationale"). * Sohini -- Many thanks for the practical tips. I am still at the stage where I am trying to figure out how building relationships with local leaders may help me answer my puzzle. I imagine I will better be able to identify these mechanisms in the field. * Dvora -- Whether local governments can be considered surrogates for the top I believe varies from one locality to another and is partly based on how good central-local government relations are (the latter of which are influenced by a range of factors). Having said this, even in areas where local-central government relations are tense and local governments should not be considered surrogates for the top, a lot could still be said about the motivations of the top in response to collective protests targeting the bottom (i.e. strategic protesters usually target the local government as opposed to the central government). Sorry for the long email. Many many thanks once again for your precious feedback! Best, Marie -- Marie-Eve Reny Department of Political Science Asian Institute, Munk Centre for International Studies University of Toronto marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca Quoting Patrick Thaddeus Jackson : > Before I take a position on Jeremy's suggestion (in a separate and > subsequent e-mail to the one I'm replying to here) to essentially > modify the research question to make it answerable in the light of the > available data, I'm curious what the original research question > actually was. "Rationale underlying" strikes me as a somewhat > problematic place to begin, ethnographically speaking, since it > presumes a kind of psychoanalytic depth model: here's what people do > or did, and here's why they really did it, despite what they might > have said in public. If they've given public rationales, and that's > what you're interested in, then you don't actually need to talk to > them; you've got their public rationales, after all. The only reason I > can think of to actually talk to them at that point would be to > somehow get through or past the public rationale to the "real" > rationale, and that puts you in tricky epistemological territory. > Ethnographic techniques can immerse you in a meaningful social > context, but I am quite skeptical that it can ever even in principle > get you to "real reasons" or "underlying rationales" -- because those > conceptual objects have no place in an ethnographic analysis concerned > with categories-in-use and other such features of lived social settings. > > Alternatively, you could approach the situation with a universal > theory about interests in hand, and avoid the necessity to investigate > people's lived social experiences altogether? > > I suppose what I'm asking is what Marie-Eve means by "insights about > the behaviour of political actors." If this means clues as to their > motivations, then that basically means using local informants as > sources for hypotheses, a practice I am not fond of since it conflates > primary- and secondary-source commentary. What local people think > about their leaders' actions is a very interesting topic in its own > right, but it is most emphatically not (in my view) a valid way to > interrogate the actions of those leaders themselves. Although, as > Jeremy seemed to suggest, it is a great way to make sense of the > subject-positions that those leaders occupy in their local context. On > the other hand, "insights about the behaviour of political actors" > might instead mean primary-source information about what leaders said > and did, then that looks fine to me, as long as the local governmental > officials and other local people have that information (which strikes > me as an empirical question). > > Or, to ask the same thing in yet a different way: I'm not quite sure > what it means to take a smaller entity as a unit of analysis to study > aspects of the larger whole to which that entity belongs. If we are > talking about individuals, then the group to which they belong occurs > as a commonplace carried in their social transactions, but we learn > little about the group "itself" from that study; we learn about the > role played by references to and actions oriented towards the group. > It's waiting for Godot: we learn a lot about the people waiting, but > little or nothing about Godot, by studying the actions (including > words) of people waiting for Godot. We don't even learn whether Godot > "really" exists, and it doesn't matter for the analysis: people > comport themselves towards imaginary, or immaterial, or > transcendental, objects all the time (e.g. "God", "witches", > "justice"), and what matters is that people comport themselves and how > they comport themselves. That's what has the effects. To buy into our > informants' narratives to the point where we treat the testimony of a > religious believer as evidence that God exists (or a nationalist that > her nation exists, etc.) is to make, I think, a methodological mistake > of a pretty profound sort. > > I'm just very skeptical of the proposition that we can learn something > about an object by investigating patterns of social action oriented > towards that object. That goes for governments, states, civilizations, > people who aren't in the room at the time of the investigation, etc. > All we learn about by observing social action is, well, social action, > undertaken by the actors directly under observation. The fact that > they reference or invoke other things is a fact about the actors and > their social relations, not about the things they reference or invoke. > > I moved a bit far away from Marie-Eve's initial concerns! Sorry. But I > do think that before one could make a determination about proxy data > sources, one would at the very least have to more precisely define the > research question, and how any data collected might help you to answer > it. > > PTJ > > PS the "waiting for Godot" example isn't mine; it's John Shotter's, > from his brilliant little book _Conversational Realities_. > > On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > >> Greetings all, >> >> I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central >> government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, >> and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in >> February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be >> ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to >> generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in >> China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have >> any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state >> in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a >> way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government >> officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate >> insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher >> levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in >> taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of >> group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world >> system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the >> local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about >> central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways >> to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? >> >> Thank you for your attention, >> >> Marie-Eve Reny >> University of Toronto, Canada >> marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > === > Patrick Thaddeus Jackson > Director, General Education Program, American University > Editor-in-Chief, Journal of International Relations and Development > http://profptj.blogspot.com | http://www.kittenboo.com > calendar: http://ical.mac.com/onyxdr/Patrick > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > From js11 at soas.ac.uk Mon Sep 29 04:24:11 2008 From: js11 at soas.ac.uk (Julia Strauss) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:24:11 +0100 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <20080929022448.r10u1ro944g444gc@webmail.utoronto.ca> References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> <7C215D33-8BFF-4CD4-96DF-EC74C1506A19@vt.edu> <20080929022448.r10u1ro944g444gc@webmail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <7f2948f90809290124s7d4aad7cp488aac6e5f6446ee@mail.gmail.com> Dear Marie, For my two cents' worth (I may be one of the few explicitly "China scholars" on this list), there are a range of possible answers to your "puzzle" --- which, if you have training in chinese history and a long duree perspective on the chinese state --- start to look much less puzzling. Crudely, the chinese state from late imperial times (Ming at the very least) has fairly consistently exhibited exactly this sort of reaction: deep suspicion of anything that smacks of "heterodox" religion, and equal sensitivity and attention to rural protest, particularly protests that are wrapped up with issues of reasonable subsistence (See R. Bin Wong / Pierre Etienne Will's work on granaries as an example of this). Now, as a practical matter, this has meant, despite regime change and a bunch of other things changing, that the Chinese central stated has been remarkably consistent over time:, deeply concerned with maintaining religious/ ideological orthodoxy (even as it tolerates and even condones a range of popular practices - the devil here is in the detail), as well as where to make an appropriate judgment call as to where to draw the line between implicitly understandable if not acceptable "protest" and un-acceptable "disorder". (Central and more local levels of government may well diverge on this point). It turns out that there is a variety of ways to study this in the contemporary period short of getting access to central government leaders. There is in fact a highly developed discourse on exactly these matters, freely available in print, that justifies actions taken or about to be taken - both against local officials for not providing subsistence and squeezing the people too hard, and against "evil sects". In fact, if you look back at the propaganda / media blitz surrounding the crackdown on falungong and after, you'll have enough data to keep you going for quite some time. The other place to look would be the to the press, reports, and interviews you can get with local implementors (typically Minzheng ju or chu I would think), and see how their discourse and actions differ (or are in alignment) with central rhetoric, directives, and sanctions. The historical dimension is key, though. There are a set of preoccupations and discourses that go way, way back here, that continue to be drawn upon in surprisingly unchanged ways. Julia Strauss 2008/9/29 > Dear all, > > I apologize for the delay in my response and would like to thank you > for your helpful thoughts in reaction to my questions. I would like to > clarify a few things and respond to some comments: > > * Jeremy -- There are two reasons why I would not change my research > topic for one that gives priority to diaspora communities: 1) while > ethnography seems to have predominantly been used to study realities > pertaining to societal actors (more easily accessible to the > ethnographer), more ought to be written on how to overcome the > challenge of "reconciling" ethnography and the study of the state; one > of the objectives of my project is to be innovative from a > methodological perspective and generate insights that can be helpful > for political scientists for whom the state is after all one of the > most important units of analysis. If we want ethnographic research > designs to become more widespread in Political Science, we ought to > figure out ways to address the potential analytical tensions involved > in applying ethnographic methods to the study of the state (and even > more so in non-democratic societies); 2) too many scholars have > studied China through the lenses of diaspora communities in different > parts of the world; the epistemic community's expectations about China > experts' familiarity with the Chinese context have grown to the extent > that China scholars cannot get away with simply doing field research > amongst diapora communities and pretend to be "China experts"; fluency > in Mandarin (or any other Chinese language) as well as extensive (if > not intensive) research in the field are two such expectations which > may have not existed 10 or 20 years ago. These expectations grow in a > context where the world wants to know more about China; as Ed > mentioned, we ought to get as close as possible to the sources of > evidence, and the least this involves is being physically in China. > > * Patrick -- You mentioned you were curious as to what the original > research question was. I should have perhaps been more specific here. > My project starts with the following puzzle: why has the central > government in China been constant in repressing often peacefully > mobilizing religious protesters, and has recently shown greater > responsiveness to increasingly disruptive and violent land-related > protests? > > I'd like to respond to some of the issues you raised. I did not think > the words I used in my post would be subject to such scrutiny. You > seem to dislike my usage of "rationale underlying" claiming that it > presumes some kind of "psychoanalytic depth model". I would however be > concerned to overlook such a possibility for two reasons: first, the > causes of actions are not always self-evident; second, and not > unrelated to the first point, explaining the 'why' of actions goes > beyond publicly expressed rationales; indeed, it is also about > explaining the 'why' of 'how' rationales may be expressed publicly, > but most importantly, the mechanisms that make central government > officials categorize and make sense of collective claims in certain > ways. Moreover, even when publicly expressed rationales reflect the > actual intentions of decision makers, this still has to be articulated > with some analytically convincing qualitative explanation; it cannot > just be assumed. Here, I think it is more desirable to think of public > rationales as part of a general outcome (i.e. state reaction to > collective protests), and what my analysis attempts to do is to > explain the processes leading to such an outcome. I would like to use > ethnography as a tool, among others (i.e. discourse analysis), to dig > into the complex psychology of the Chinese state. > > Of course there are problems in taking a smaller entity as a unit of > analysis to study aspects of the larger whole, and vice versa. Having > said that, claiming that the above procedure should be avoided as it > has its own limitations is in itself a problem. It assumes that > entities are not mutually interacting and influencing each other; to > the extent that they mutually interact, each unit can tell aspects of > a story about the other unit, and vice versa; we unfortunately (...or > fortunately) do not live in a world in which units live a life of > their own, and our analyses ought to take such complexity into > consideration. > > Finally, you seem unsure that one can "learn something about an object > by investigating patterns of social action oriented towards that > object". Your comment however could be interpreted as based on the > assumption that there is something "real" about these objects that > cannot be captured by the study of other (related) objects. This > somehow contradicts your earlier skepticism about my usage of > "rationale underlying" (assuming the existence of a "real rationale"). > > * Sohini -- Many thanks for the practical tips. I am still at the > stage where I am trying to figure out how building relationships with > local leaders may help me answer my puzzle. I imagine I will better be > able to identify these mechanisms in the field. > > * Dvora -- Whether local governments can be considered surrogates for > the top I believe varies from one locality to another and is partly > based on how good central-local government relations are (the latter > of which are influenced by a range of factors). Having said this, even > in areas where local-central government relations are tense and local > governments should not be considered surrogates for the top, a lot > could still be said about the motivations of the top in response to > collective protests targeting the bottom (i.e. strategic protesters > usually target the local government as opposed to the central > government). > > Sorry for the long email. Many many thanks once again for your > precious feedback! > > Best, > > Marie > > -- > Marie-Eve Reny > Department of Political Science > Asian Institute, Munk Centre for International Studies > University of Toronto > marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > Quoting Patrick Thaddeus Jackson : > > > Before I take a position on Jeremy's suggestion (in a separate and > > subsequent e-mail to the one I'm replying to here) to essentially > > modify the research question to make it answerable in the light of the > > available data, I'm curious what the original research question > > actually was. "Rationale underlying" strikes me as a somewhat > > problematic place to begin, ethnographically speaking, since it > > presumes a kind of psychoanalytic depth model: here's what people do > > or did, and here's why they really did it, despite what they might > > have said in public. If they've given public rationales, and that's > > what you're interested in, then you don't actually need to talk to > > them; you've got their public rationales, after all. The only reason I > > can think of to actually talk to them at that point would be to > > somehow get through or past the public rationale to the "real" > > rationale, and that puts you in tricky epistemological territory. > > Ethnographic techniques can immerse you in a meaningful social > > context, but I am quite skeptical that it can ever even in principle > > get you to "real reasons" or "underlying rationales" -- because those > > conceptual objects have no place in an ethnographic analysis concerned > > with categories-in-use and other such features of lived social settings. > > > > Alternatively, you could approach the situation with a universal > > theory about interests in hand, and avoid the necessity to investigate > > people's lived social experiences altogether? > > > > I suppose what I'm asking is what Marie-Eve means by "insights about > > the behaviour of political actors." If this means clues as to their > > motivations, then that basically means using local informants as > > sources for hypotheses, a practice I am not fond of since it conflates > > primary- and secondary-source commentary. What local people think > > about their leaders' actions is a very interesting topic in its own > > right, but it is most emphatically not (in my view) a valid way to > > interrogate the actions of those leaders themselves. Although, as > > Jeremy seemed to suggest, it is a great way to make sense of the > > subject-positions that those leaders occupy in their local context. On > > the other hand, "insights about the behaviour of political actors" > > might instead mean primary-source information about what leaders said > > and did, then that looks fine to me, as long as the local governmental > > officials and other local people have that information (which strikes > > me as an empirical question). > > > > Or, to ask the same thing in yet a different way: I'm not quite sure > > what it means to take a smaller entity as a unit of analysis to study > > aspects of the larger whole to which that entity belongs. If we are > > talking about individuals, then the group to which they belong occurs > > as a commonplace carried in their social transactions, but we learn > > little about the group "itself" from that study; we learn about the > > role played by references to and actions oriented towards the group. > > It's waiting for Godot: we learn a lot about the people waiting, but > > little or nothing about Godot, by studying the actions (including > > words) of people waiting for Godot. We don't even learn whether Godot > > "really" exists, and it doesn't matter for the analysis: people > > comport themselves towards imaginary, or immaterial, or > > transcendental, objects all the time (e.g. "God", "witches", > > "justice"), and what matters is that people comport themselves and how > > they comport themselves. That's what has the effects. To buy into our > > informants' narratives to the point where we treat the testimony of a > > religious believer as evidence that God exists (or a nationalist that > > her nation exists, etc.) is to make, I think, a methodological mistake > > of a pretty profound sort. > > > > I'm just very skeptical of the proposition that we can learn something > > about an object by investigating patterns of social action oriented > > towards that object. That goes for governments, states, civilizations, > > people who aren't in the room at the time of the investigation, etc. > > All we learn about by observing social action is, well, social action, > > undertaken by the actors directly under observation. The fact that > > they reference or invoke other things is a fact about the actors and > > their social relations, not about the things they reference or invoke. > > > > I moved a bit far away from Marie-Eve's initial concerns! Sorry. But I > > do think that before one could make a determination about proxy data > > sources, one would at the very least have to more precisely define the > > research question, and how any data collected might help you to answer > > it. > > > > PTJ > > > > PS the "waiting for Godot" example isn't mine; it's John Shotter's, > > from his brilliant little book _Conversational Realities_. > > > > On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:23 PM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > > > >> Greetings all, > >> > >> I am currently doing research on the rationale underlying central > >> government reactions to religious and land-related protests in China, > >> and will be starting sixteen months of field research in China in > >> February 2009. I would like a part of my research design to be > >> ethnographic, but remain unsure as to how to use ethnographic tools to > >> generate insights about the behaviour of central government actors in > >> China, whom as we know are hardly accessible to most researchers. Have > >> any scholars addressed how ethnography may be used to study the state > >> in a context where state actors are uneasily accessible? Is there a > >> way one could take alternative units of analysis like local government > >> officials (who are more accessible to researchers) to generate > >> insights about the behaviour of political actors located at higher > >> levels of the hierarchy? I am thinking that if there are advantages in > >> taking the individual as the unit of analysis to study aspects of > >> group behaviour, and the state as a unit to study aspects of the world > >> system (and vice versa), then there should be advantages in taking the > >> local government as a unit of analysis to generate findings about > >> central government actors' rationale for reacting in particular ways > >> to different kinds of collective claims. Any thoughts? > >> > >> Thank you for your attention, > >> > >> Marie-Eve Reny > >> University of Toronto, Canada > >> marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca > > > > > > === > > Patrick Thaddeus Jackson > > Director, General Education Program, American University > > Editor-in-Chief, Journal of International Relations and Development > > http://profptj.blogspot.com | http://www.kittenboo.com > > calendar: http://ical.mac.com/onyxdr/Patrick > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080929/2a625f0a/attachment-0001.html From patrickthaddeusjackson at gmail.com Mon Sep 29 10:19:42 2008 From: patrickthaddeusjackson at gmail.com (Patrick Thaddeus Jackson) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:19:42 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Using Ethnography to Study Uneasily Accessible State Actors In-Reply-To: <20080929022448.r10u1ro944g444gc@webmail.utoronto.ca> References: <20080924212337.0r34u6w7fuo0wkw0@webmail.utoronto.ca> <7C215D33-8BFF-4CD4-96DF-EC74C1506A19@vt.edu> <20080929022448.r10u1ro944g444gc@webmail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: On Sep 29, 2008, at 2:24 AM, marieeve.reny at utoronto.ca wrote: > Dear all, > > I apologize for the delay in my response and would like to thank you > for your helpful thoughts in reaction to my questions. I would like to > clarify a few things and respond to some comments: > Glad it was helpful. Let me just reply to a few of your thoughts on my comments, largely because I think it's instructive to have these exchanges in public so that they can help the group as a whole think through some of this stuff. > * Patrick -- You mentioned you were curious as to what the original > research question was. I should have perhaps been more specific here. > My project starts with the following puzzle: why has the central > government in China been constant in repressing often peacefully > mobilizing religious protesters, and has recently shown greater > responsiveness to increasingly disruptive and violent land-related > protests? So is the puzzle here the different expressed attitudes (and actions) of the government vis-a-vis these two types of protestors, or the temporal shift in the government's handling of the land-related protests (with reactions to the religious protestors serving as a baseline against which to measure the exceptionality of the government's response)? In other words, does the government's reaction to the religious protestors have to be explained, or merely described? > I'd like to respond to some of the issues you raised. I did not think > the words I used in my post would be subject to such scrutiny. You > seem to dislike my usage of "rationale underlying" claiming that it > presumes some kind of "psychoanalytic depth model". I would however be > concerned to overlook such a possibility for two reasons: first, the > causes of actions are not always self-evident; second, and not > unrelated to the first point, explaining the 'why' of actions goes > beyond publicly expressed rationales; indeed, it is also about > explaining the 'why' of 'how' rationales may be expressed publicly, > but most importantly, the mechanisms that make central government > officials categorize and make sense of collective claims in certain > ways. "Mechanisms that make" strikes me as problematic. The implicit model there is that actors are somehow compelled to do things by mechanisms. This stands opposed to a model in which action arises from ambiguous contexts, and mechanisms are ways that actors cope with their situation(s). In other words, the difference here is between a structural, or quasi-determinist, account of action and a post- structural, or creative, account of action. I'd agree that the causes of action are not always self-evident, but I'd be very resistant to the notion that our job is to find the "real causes" of action, especially when identifying those "real causes" involves digging behind or beneath observable patterns in a quest for deeper generative forces. I'm all for identifying grammars of action, but as ideal-typical analytical tools, not as deep-structural assertions of existence. > Moreover, even when publicly expressed rationales reflect the > actual intentions of decision makers, this still has to be articulated > with some analytically convincing qualitative explanation; it cannot > just be assumed. Here, I think it is more desirable to think of public > rationales as part of a general outcome (i.e. state reaction to > collective protests), and what my analysis attempts to do is to > explain the processes leading to such an outcome. I would like to use > ethnography as a tool, among others (i.e. discourse analysis), to dig > into the complex psychology of the Chinese state. This is a useful elaboration of the differences between us. I'm not at all convinced that a phrase like "the complex psychology of the Chinese state" is analytically useful; nor am I convinced that "actual intentions of decision makers" is a well-defined notion. It looks to me like you are operating with a notion that action, whether state or individual, is caused by some kind of inner compulsion (which might be tied to an external environmental structure, perhaps through a notion of "socialization"), some state of mind that produces agentic doing. That seems to hold both for your discussion of individuals and your discussion of the Chinese state as a whole. And I just don't buy that -- I don't buy the notion that action is caused by an internal disposition any more than I buy the notion that action is an inevitable or probabilistic result of external circumstances. Instead, I think action is a fundamentally creative social phenomenon whereby actors draw on their environments in sometimes surprising ways and generate outcomes, which as I hinted above is a post-structural notion of agency. The relevance of this to ethnography, or to interpretive approaches in general, is that for me these techniques are not about penetrating surface articulations to get at real motives. They are about precisely tracking the ways in which things take place: which cultural resources, which linkages between them, which analytical mechanisms of formation, etc. Pardon the pun, but no depth in sight ;-) I know that some, perhaps most, interpretivists seek to use their techniques to "surface" things that are buried, but to me this kind of surfacing only makes social-scientific sense if one holds to a pretty strict mind-world dichotomy such that there's a real set of reasons "out there" that we are trying to mirror in our accounts. Otherwise, we either stick with the observable and experienceable (even experienceable only through participant-observation, which seems to me to be the primary contribution of ethnography to these discussions: like an electron microscope, it makes visible things that we couldn't see before), or we ditch social science and do participatory action research in which our claims about the world are primarily intended to change it, not to study it. And that's fine, but let's be clear about what we're doing. > Of course there are problems in taking a smaller entity as a unit of > analysis to study aspects of the larger whole, and vice versa. Having > said that, claiming that the above procedure should be avoided as it > has its own limitations is in itself a problem. It assumes that > entities are not mutually interacting and influencing each other; to > the extent that they mutually interact, each unit can tell aspects of > a story about the other unit, and vice versa; we unfortunately (...or > fortunately) do not live in a world in which units live a life of > their own, and our analyses ought to take such complexity into > consideration. Good point. But I don't think that you get at interaction between units by generating an internal, or even a liminal participant- observer, account from the perspective of any one of the units. To get at interaction, you need to adopt a point of view above the interacting units; otherwise you're getting one vector (from your chosen unit outwards) and not the more complex elements of the interaction-system itself. Now, it's possible to use a given point of view as a source of primary data about interaction, but then you'd both have to collect data form the perspectives of the other units, and integrate them into an account that didn't adopt any of those perspectives. To put this differently: even WEB DuBois didn't think that we learn much about the interaction of the dominated and the dominant by adopting the point of view of the dominated. I'm also reminded of Cynthia Enloe's piece on the importance of margins and silences bottom rungs when studying the state, of Jim Scott's work on the arts of resistance. Placing our eyes where the marginalized are, we get one of two things: either we get data that can help us to elucidate how the dominant unit operates (data that we might not have been able to get at before because of official secrecy, repression, etc.), or we get data that can help us make sense of how the subordinate unit makes its way in the world and makes a world for itself. But in neither case do we get any closer to putatively internal motivational states of the dominant unit; we might plausible read our data as indicating something about such a factor in the subordinate unit, but as I've said I don't find that the best use of our data in such a case. And the insights we generate about how the dominant unit operates are analytical descriptions of tactics and strategies: they're what and how, not the "why" your research question seems to be looking for. Parenthetically, I'm quite skeptical of traditional "why" questions anyhow; I think we ought to be asking "what," "how," and "how- possible" questions. Especially if we adopt a interpretive or hermeneutic philosophical ontology that rejects strict mind-world dualism in favor of something more continuous or monistic. That might be at the root of the disagreement here. > Finally, you seem unsure that one can "learn something about an object > by investigating patterns of social action oriented towards that > object". Your comment however could be interpreted as based on the > assumption that there is something "real" about these objects that > cannot be captured by the study of other (related) objects. This > somehow contradicts your earlier skepticism about my usage of > "rationale underlying" (assuming the existence of a "real rationale"). I would invert that, myself: it's only by assuming that there's a mind- independent object of some sort "out there" that we could use second- hand testimony as a valid source of information about it. If we reject the notion of any such object, then testimony is less about an object (in the sense of representing it more or less accurately) and more about the actor (who is implicated in the constitution and production of that object, at least from their own position). If I'm interested in the subordinate unit's self-crafting, and the role that a notion of the dominant unit plays in that, then sure, by all means, I locate myself analytically at that point in the process. But that doesn't get me to the dominant object per se, but only to the subordinate's constitution/production of it. For the dominant object itself I need to engage it directly, so as to generate knowledge that is actually about it. Listening to economists tells you a lot about economists (and perhaps the discipline of economics) and little about the economy; if you want to know something about the economy you have to study it. Does that mean becoming an economist? Well, that depends on the configuration of cultural resources legitimating "economic knowledge" . . . PTJ === Patrick Thaddeus Jackson Director, General Education Program, American University Editor-in-Chief, Journal of International Relations and Development http://profptj.blogspot.com | http://www.kittenboo.com calendar: http://ical.mac.com/onyxdr/Patrick From jhuns at vt.edu Tue Sep 30 11:29:55 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:29:55 -0400 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] journals under threat Message-ID: <01DCF8CD-4A96-4FCE-8380-B4A081FD9B12@vt.edu> Sorry for x-posting, but I think people need to know this is likely going on in their field too. Journals under Threat: A Joint Response from History of Science, Technology and Medicine Editors We live in an age of metrics. All around us, things are being standardized, quantified, measured. Scholars concerned with the work of science and technology must regard this as a fascinating and crucial practical, cultural and intellectual phenomenon. Analysis of the roots and meaning of metrics and metrology has been a preoccupation of much of the best work in our field for the past quarter century at least. As practitioners of the interconnected disciplines that make up the field of science studies we understand how significant, contingent and uncertain can be the process of rendering nature and society in grades, classes and numbers. We now confront a situation in which our own research work is being subjected to putatively precise accountancy by arbitrary and unaccountable agencies. Some may already be aware of the proposed European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH), an initiative originating with the European Science Foundation. The ERIH is an attempt to grade journals in the humanities - including "history and philosophy of science". The initiative proposes a league table of academic journals, with premier, second and third divisions. According to the European Science Foundation, ERIH "aims initially to identify, and gain more visibility for, top-quality European Humanities research published in academic journals in, potentially, all European languages". It is hoped "that ERIH will form the backbone of a fully-fledged research information system for the Humanities". What is meant, however, is that ERIH will provide funding bodies and other agencies in Europe and elsewhere with an allegedly exact measure of research quality. In short, if research is published in a premier league journal it will be recognized as first rate; if it appears somewhere in the lower divisions, it will be rated (and not funded) accordingly. This initiative is entirely defective in conception and execution. Consider the major issues of accountability and transparency. The process of producing the graded list of journals in science studies was overseen by a committee of four (the membership is currently listed at http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/research- infrastructures-including-erih/erih-governance-and-panels/erih-expert- panel s .html). This committee cannot be considered representative. It was not selected in consultation with any of the various disciplinary organizations that currently represent our field such as the European Association for the History of Medicine and Health, the Society for the Social History of Medicine, the British Society for the History of Science, the History of Science Society, the Philosophy of Science Association, the Society for the History of Technology or the Society for Social Studies of Science. Journal editors were only belatedly informed of the process and its relevant criteria or asked to provide any information regarding their publications. No indication hgiven of the means through which the list was compiled; nor how it might be maintained in the future. The ERIH depends on a fundamental misunderstanding of conduct and publication of research in our field, and in the humanities in general. Journals' quality cannot be separated from their contents and their review processes. Great research may be published anywhere and in any language. Truly ground-breaking work may be more likely to appear from marginal, dissident or unexpected sources, rather than from a well-established and entrenched mainstream. Our journals are various, heterogeneous and distinct. Some are aimed at a broad, general and international readership, others are more specialized in their content and implied audience. Their scope and readership say nothing about the quality of their intellectual content. The ERIH, on the other hand, confuses internationality with quality in a way that is particularly prejudicial to specialist and non-English language journals. In a recent report, the British Academy, with judicious understatement, concludes that "the European Reference Index for the Humanities as presently conceived does not represent a reliable way in which metrics of peer-reviewed publications can be constructed" (Peer Review: the Challenges for the Humanities and Social Sciences, September 2007: http://www.britac.ac.uk/reports/peer-review). Such exercises as ERIH can become self- fulfilling prophecies. If such measures as ERIH are adopted as metrics by funding and other agencies, then many in our field will conclude that they have little choice other than to limit their publications to journals in the premier division. We will sustain fewer journals, much less diversity and impoverish our discipline. Along with many others in our field, this Journal has concluded that we want no part of this dangerous and misguided exercise. This joint Editorial is being published in journals across the fields of history of science and science studies as an expression of our collective dissent and our refusal to allow our field to be managed and appraised in this fashion. We have asked the compilers of the ERIH to remove our journals' titles from their lists. Hanne Andersen (Centaurus) Roger Ariew & Moti Feingold (Perspectives on Science) A. K. Bag (Indian Journal of History of Science) June Barrow-Green & Benno van Dalen (Historia mathematica) Keith Benson (History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences) Marco Beretta (Nuncius) Michel Blay (Revue d'Histoire des Sciences) Cornelius Borck (Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte) Geof Bowker and Susan Leigh Star (Science, Technology and Human Values) Massimo Bucciantini & Michele Camerota (Galilaeana: Journal of Galilean Studies) Jed Buchwald and Jeremy Gray (Archive for History of Exacft Sciences) Vincenzo Cappelletti & Guido Cimino (Physis) Roger Cline (International Journal for the History of Engineering & Technology) Stephen Clucas & Stephen Gaukroger (Intellectual History Review) Hal Cook & Anne Hardy (Medical History) Leo Corry, Alexandre M?traux & J?rgen Renn (Science in Context) D.Diecks & J.Uffink (Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics) Brian Dolan & Bill Luckin (Social History of Medicine) Hilmar Duerbeck & Wayne Orchiston (Journal of Astronomical History & Heritage) Moritz Epple, Mikael H?rd, Hans-J?rg Rheinberger & Volker Roelcke (NTM: Zeitschrift f?r Geschichte der Wissenschaften, Technik und Medizin) Steven French (Metascience) Willem Hackmann (Bulletin of the Scientific Instrument Society) Bosse Holmqvist (Lychnos) Paul Farber (Journal of the History of Biology) Mary Fissell & Randall Packard (Bulletin of the History of Medicine) Robert Fox (Notes & Records of the Royal Society) Jim Good (History of the Human Sciences) Michael Hoskin (Journal for the History of Astronomy) Ian Inkster (History of Technology) Marina Frasca Spada (Studies in History and Philosophy of Science) Nick Jardine (Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences) Trevor Levere (Annals of Science) Bernard Lightman (Isis) Christoph L?thy (Early Science and Medicine) Michael Lynch (Social Studies of Science) Stephen McCluskey & Clive Ruggles (Archaeostronomy: the Journal of Astronomy in Culture) Peter Morris (Ambix) E. Charles Nelson (Archives of Natural History) Ian Nicholson (Journal of the History of the Behavioural Sciences) Iwan Rhys Morus (History of Science) John Rigden & Roger H Stuewer (Physics in Perspective) Simon Schaffer (British Journal for the History of Science) Paul Unschuld (Sudhoffs Archiv) Peter Weingart (Minerva) Stefan Zamecki (Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki) Viviane Quirke RCUK Academic Fellow in twentieth-century Biomedicine Secretary of the BSHS Centre for Health, Medicine and Society Oxford Brookes University