What Counts as Qualitative Research? Some Cautionary Comments

Silverman, D

What Counts as Qualitative Research? Some Cautionary Comments

Silverman, D

Permalink

Publisher:: The Russian Academy of Sciences
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2019, (8), pp. 44-51
Issue Date:: 2019

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	revisedpaperoct12.doc	Submitted version	72 kB	Unknown	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Silverman, D
dc.date.accessioned	2020-06-06T00:48:46Z
dc.date.available	2020-06-06T00:48:46Z
dc.date.issued	2019
dc.identifier.citation	Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2019, (8), pp. 44-51
dc.identifier.issn	0132-1625
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/141170
dc.description.abstract	Many doctoral students (PhD students) unconsciously begin as naturalists or emotionalists. They conduct research through interviews to identify people's feelings and opinions on an obvious issue. An analysis of several issues of one journal showed that this naive use of interview data has become a common place for qualitative research. Criticizing one of these articles, I will demonstrate how research based on interviews sometimes simply reproduces the informants' own stories, supplementing them (to divert eyes) with several categories of social science. By focusing on “extracting” suitable fragments from the interview, researchers of this kind do not take into account the fundamental importance of the sequence of our statements and actions.
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	The Russian Academy of Sciences
dc.relation.ispartof	Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.31857/s013216250006160-9
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.subject	1608 Sociology
dc.subject.classification	Political Science & Public Administration
dc.title	What Counts as Qualitative Research? Some Cautionary Comments
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.for	1608 Sociology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	false
dc.date.updated	2020-06-06T00:48:41Z
pubs.issue	8
pubs.publication-status	Published
utslib.start-page	44
utslib.citation.issue	8

Abstract:

Many doctoral students (PhD students) unconsciously begin as naturalists or emotionalists. They conduct research through interviews to identify people's feelings and opinions on an obvious issue. An analysis of several issues of one journal showed that this naive use of interview data has become a common place for qualitative research. Criticizing one of these articles, I will demonstrate how research based on interviews sometimes simply reproduces the informants' own stories, supplementing them (to divert eyes) with several categories of social science. By focusing on “extracting” suitable fragments from the interview, researchers of this kind do not take into account the fundamental importance of the sequence of our statements and actions.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/141170