Literature DB >> 19150890

Power relations in qualitative research.

Orit Karnieli-Miller1, Roni Strier, Liat Pessach.   

Abstract

This article focuses on the tensions between the commitment to power redistribution of the qualitative paradigm and the ethical and methodological complexity inherent in clinical research. Qualitative inquiry, in general, though there are significant variations between its different paradigms and traditions, proposes to reduce power differences and encourages disclosure and authenticity between researchers and participants. It clearly departs from the traditional conception of quantitative research, whereby the researcher is the ultimate source of authority and promotes the participants' equal participation in the research process. But it is precisely this admirable desire to democratize the research process, and the tendency to question traditional role boundaries, that raises multiple ethical dilemmas and serious methodological challenges. In this article, we offer a conceptual frame for addressing questions of power distribution in qualitative research through a developmental analysis of power relations across the different stages of the research process. We discuss ethical and methodological issues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19150890     DOI: 10.1177/1049732308329306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Health Res        ISSN: 1049-7323


  37 in total

1.  Protecting respondent confidentiality in qualitative research.

Authors:  Karen Kaiser
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2009-11

2.  Interpretation in cross-language research: tongues-tied in the health care interview?

Authors:  Peri J Ballantyne; Ming Yang; Heather Boon
Journal:  J Cross Cult Gerontol       Date:  2013-12

3.  An account from the inside: Examining the emotional impact of qualitative research through the lens of "insider" research.

Authors:  Lori E Ross
Journal:  Qual Psychol       Date:  2017-01-02

4.  Grief interrupted: the experience of loss among incarcerated women.

Authors:  Holly M Harner; Patricia M Hentz; Maria Carmela Evangelista
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2010-06-25

Review 5.  Considerations for employing intersectionality in qualitative health research.

Authors:  Jasmine A Abrams; Ariella Tabaac; Sarah Jung; Nicole M Else-Quest
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Pediatric oncology nurses' perceptions of prognosis-related communication.

Authors:  Amy R Newman; Kristin Haglund; Cheryl C Rodgers
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 3.250

7.  Using focus groups in community-based participatory research: challenges and resolutions.

Authors:  Christine Makosky Daley; Aimee S James; Ezekiel Ulrey; Stephanie Joseph; Angelia Talawyma; Won S Choi; K Allen Greiner; M Kathryn Coe
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2010-02-12

8.  Consumers' understanding and expectations of a community-based recovery-oriented mental health rehabilitation unit: a pragmatic grounded theory analysis.

Authors:  Stephen Parker; Frances Dark; Ellie Newman; Dominic Hanley; William McKinlay; Carla Meurk
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 6.892

9.  Research Participant Views regarding Qualitative Data Sharing.

Authors:  Jessica Mozersky; Meredith Parsons; Heidi Walsh; Kari Baldwin; Tristan McIntosh; James M DuBois
Journal:  Ethics Hum Res       Date:  2020-03

10.  Heat Emergencies: Perceptions and Practices of Community Members and Emergency Department Healthcare Providers in Karachi, Pakistan: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Uzma Rahim Khan; Naveed Ahmed; Rubaba Naeem; Umerdad Khudadad; Sarwat Masud; Nadeem Ullah Khan; Junaid Abdul Razzak
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.