Article contents
Collaborative Methodology from a Skeptical but Nonetheless Sympathetic Point of View
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 April 2021
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
![Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'](https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%3Aid%3Aarticle%3AS1049096521000123/resource/name/firstPage-S1049096521000123a.jpg)
- Type
- Quantitative and Qualitative Collaborative Methodologies
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association
References
REFERENCES
Ayrton, Rachel. 2018. “The Micro-Dynamics of Power and Performance in Focus Groups: An Example from Discussions on National Identity with the South Sudanese Diaspora in the UK.” Qualitative Research 19 (3): 323–39.
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belgrave, Linda L., and Smith, Kenneth J.. 1995. “Negotiated Validity in Collaborative Ethnography.” Qualitative Inquiry 1 (1): 69–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramer, Katherine. 2016. “The Turn Away from Government and the Need to Revive the Civic Purpose of Higher Education.” Perspectives on Politics 14 (2): 442–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyr, Jennifer. 2019. Focus Groups for the Social Science Researcher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firchow, Pamina. 2018. Reclaiming Everyday Peace: Local Voices in Measurement and Evaluation after War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firchow, Pamina, and MacGinty, Roger. 2017. “Measuring Peace: Comparability, Commensurability, and Complementarity Using Bottom-Up Indicators.” International Studies Review 19 (1): 6–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gellman, Mneesha. (n.d.) Culture Kids: Indigenous Resistance and Language Survival in Mexico and the United States. Unpublished book manuscript.Google Scholar
Gellman, Mneesha. 2021. “Collaborative Methodology with Indigenous Communities: A Framework for Addressing Power Inequalities.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi: 10.1017/S1049096521000299.Google Scholar
Goertz, Gary, and Mahoney, James. 2012. A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Charles (ed.). 2008. Engaging Contradictions: Theory, Politics, and Methods of Activist Scholarship. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Jok, Jok Madut. 2013. “Power Dynamics and the Politics of Fieldwork under Sudan’s Prolonged Conflicts.” In Research Methods in Conflict Settings: A View from Below, eds. Mazurana, Dyan, Jacobsen, Karen, and Gale, Lacey Andrews, 149–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, Felice J., and Skedsvold, Paula R.. 2008. “Where the Rubber Meets the Road: Aligning IRBs and Research Practice.” PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (3): 501–505.Google Scholar
McTaggart, Robin. 1991. “Principles for Participatory Action Research.” Adult Education Quarterly 41 (3): 168–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R. 2016. “The Risk of Over-Reliance on the Institutional Review Board: An Approved Project Is Not Always an Ethical Project.” PS: Political Science & Politics 49 (2): 299–303.Google Scholar
Quatrini, Allison, 2020. “Introduction to Symposium: When Locals Say You Are Wrong: Member-Checking and Political Science.” Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 17–18 (1): 27–8.Google Scholar
Riley, Sarah, Schouten, Wendy, and Cahill, Sharon. 2003. “Exploring the Dynamics of Subjectivity and Power between Researcher and Researched.” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 4 (2): 1–19.Google Scholar
Scheper-Hughes, Nancy. 1995. “The Primacy of the Ethical: Propositions for a Militant Anthropology.” Current Anthropology 36 (3): 409–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seawright, Jason. 2016. Multi-Method Social Science: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Tools. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2
- Cited by