Difference between revisions of "Harris2003"
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Scott R. Harris |Title=Studying equality/inequality: Naturalist and constructionist approaches to equality in marriage |Tag(s)=EMCA; Soc...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
|Author(s)=Scott R. Harris | |Author(s)=Scott R. Harris | ||
− | |Title=Studying equality/inequality: | + | |Title=Studying equality/inequality: naturalist and constructionist approaches to equality in marriage |
− | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Social constructionism; Marriage; Equality; Research Methods; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Social constructionism; Marriage; Equality; Research Methods; |
|Key=Harris2003 | |Key=Harris2003 | ||
|Year=2003 | |Year=2003 | ||
|Journal=Journal of Contemporary Ethnography | |Journal=Journal of Contemporary Ethnography | ||
|Volume=32 | |Volume=32 | ||
− | |Pages= | + | |Number=2 |
− | |URL= | + | |Pages=200–232 |
+ | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0891241602250886 | ||
|DOI=10.1177/0891241602250886 | |DOI=10.1177/0891241602250886 | ||
|Abstract=This article compares naturalist and constructionist approaches to the qualitative study of equality and inequality, and encourages more ethnographers to adopt the latter. Focusing on the subfield of marital equality, three areas of divergence are explored: sampling, interviewing, and the analysis and presentation of data. In each area, naturalists tend to obscure the diversity and complexity of respondents’ interpretations. The constructionist alternative is to make storytelling paramount by treating equality and inequality as situated narrative accomplishments. A constructionist approach focuses on respondents’ own ethnographic skills while still fitting “the data” into a larger analytic story about equality. | |Abstract=This article compares naturalist and constructionist approaches to the qualitative study of equality and inequality, and encourages more ethnographers to adopt the latter. Focusing on the subfield of marital equality, three areas of divergence are explored: sampling, interviewing, and the analysis and presentation of data. In each area, naturalists tend to obscure the diversity and complexity of respondents’ interpretations. The constructionist alternative is to make storytelling paramount by treating equality and inequality as situated narrative accomplishments. A constructionist approach focuses on respondents’ own ethnographic skills while still fitting “the data” into a larger analytic story about equality. | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 06:02, 31 October 2019
Harris2003 | |
---|---|
BibType | ARTICLE |
Key | Harris2003 |
Author(s) | Scott R. Harris |
Title | Studying equality/inequality: naturalist and constructionist approaches to equality in marriage |
Editor(s) | |
Tag(s) | EMCA, Social constructionism, Marriage, Equality, Research Methods |
Publisher | |
Year | 2003 |
Language | |
City | |
Month | |
Journal | Journal of Contemporary Ethnography |
Volume | 32 |
Number | 2 |
Pages | 200–232 |
URL | Link |
DOI | 10.1177/0891241602250886 |
ISBN | |
Organization | |
Institution | |
School | |
Type | |
Edition | |
Series | |
Howpublished | |
Book title | |
Chapter |
Abstract
This article compares naturalist and constructionist approaches to the qualitative study of equality and inequality, and encourages more ethnographers to adopt the latter. Focusing on the subfield of marital equality, three areas of divergence are explored: sampling, interviewing, and the analysis and presentation of data. In each area, naturalists tend to obscure the diversity and complexity of respondents’ interpretations. The constructionist alternative is to make storytelling paramount by treating equality and inequality as situated narrative accomplishments. A constructionist approach focuses on respondents’ own ethnographic skills while still fitting “the data” into a larger analytic story about equality.
Notes