MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4221065823 · doi:10.33137/utjph.v3i1.37656

The emotional and psychological labour of insider qualitative research among systemically excluded and oppressed groups: A call for equity in training and practice

2022· article· en· W4221065823 sur OpenAlexaff
David J. Kinitz

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Toronto Journal of Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésInsiderReflexivityPsychologyEquity (law)Qualitative researchPublic relationsSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

As memories began to fill my mind, reminding me of the details from my own experiences that I had forgotten, I realized just how well I know this topic. Had I forgotten? Or had I just pushed these memories to the corners of my mind? I awoke at 4:00AM, parched, while my mind recalled lines of interview data that resonated with my own experiences. Stories of trauma that consumed hours of carefully conceptualized research had begun leaching into my dreams. Universities with a history of exclusion now seek to recruit systemically marginalized early career researchers (ECRs) with expertise in equity-related research, requiring unique training and research practices. Given shifts to include systemically marginalized groups in faculty hiring, graduate-student recruitment, ethics protocols, and funding calls for community-based research, these ECRs are likely to conduct research within their communities, on topics of personal relevance (i.e., insider research). Qualitative methodological training, practice, and literature on the conduct of insider research places an emphasis on reflexivity in order to ensure rigour, trustworthiness, and ethical processes; however, the emotional and psychological demands of insider research on the researcher are seldom discussed. Greater attention to the impacts of insider research is critical for understanding how ECRs can prepare for and be supported in their training and research. I argue that as critical qualitative scholars, we consider how researchers are potentially impacted by the emotional and psychological impacts of their work, particularly those from systemically marginalized groups conducting insider research. As an illustrative example, I recount my experience as an insider on a qualitative research study investigating individuals’ experiences of conversion therapy, practices that attempt to suppress or change one’s sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression. This methodological reflection is based on analytical memos and field notes written during a research project completed as part of my research assistant work. Embodiment and creative non-fiction are used to articulate my experiences of conducting deeply personal qualitative interviews and engaging in a critical analysis of stories of trauma that mirrored my own. Specifically, I have narrated four vignettes that articulate my story of beginning insider research with confidence and stoicism and ending, for now, with a churning stomach and lingering state of mental arousal. The vignettes illustrate the emotionally and mentally charged task of conducting insider research on topics of inequity as a systemically marginalized researcher and call for an ethic of equity to account for this unique labour – labour from which the academy benefits at the expense of systemically marginalized ECRs’ wellbeing. Conducting qualitative research using interpretivist, constructivist, critical, or emancipatory paradigms, where insider research is commonly situated, goes beyond the conventional, intellectual exercise of disseminating written work that is seemingly void of emotion in an academic journal. Moreover, being an insider within these paradigms demands empathy, vulnerability, emotion, passion, and personal sacrifice on the behalf of the researcher. Finally, this paradoxically rewarding and taxing work necessitates adequate education in methodological courses, institutional support amidst austerity, and an openness to innovation when calling for diversity in the academy.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,120
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesMétarecherche
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,205
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,993

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,1200,016
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,760
Tête enseignante GPT0,661
Écart entre enseignants0,099 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Toronto Journal of Public HealthMême sujetQualitative Research Methods and EthicsTravaux en français237 207