Reflecting on asynchronous internet mediated focus groups for researching culturally sensitive issues
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 12595121 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Nóirín Macnamara (0000-0002-6220-571X, Twitter (United States)), D Mackle (0000-0001-7638-6200, Twitter (United States)), Johanne Devlin Trew (0000-0003-4563-1239, Twitter (United States)), Claire Pierson (0000-0003-0961-7157, Twitter (United States)), Fiona Bloomer (0000-0003-3347-6403, University of Ulster, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2020 |
| Volumen | 24 |
| Número | 5 |
| Páginas | 553-565 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2020-12-09 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | No |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | International Journal of Social Research Methodology (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1364-5579 • E-ISSN: 1464-5300 |
| Editorial | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/13645579.2020.1857969 |
| OpenAlex | W3112675540 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 9 |
| Referencias citadas | 30 |
Internet-mediated focus groups (FGs) have become a feature of qualitative research over the last decade; however, their use within social sciences has been adopted at a slower pace than other disciplines. This paper considers the advantages and disadvantages of internet-mediated FGs and reflects on their use for researching culturally sensitive issues. It reports on an innovative study, which utilised text-based asynchronous internet-mediated FGs to explore attitudes to abortion, and abortion as a workplace issue. The authors identify three key elements of text-based asynchronous online FGs as particularly helpful in researching culturally sensitive issues – safety, time and pace. The authors demonstrate how these elements, integral to the actual process, contributed to ‘opinion change/evolution’ and challenged processes of stigmatisation centred on over-simplification, misinformation as to the incidence of a culturally sensitive issue in a population, and discrimination
Asynchronous communication · Focus group · Internet privacy · Misinformation · Pace · Political science · Population · Public relations · Qualitative research · Social science · Sociology · The Internet · World Wide Web · Computer Science · Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods · Gender, Feminism, and Media · Psychology · Social Media and Politics
Care, comfort, and capacity
Rethinking Reproductive Governance
Ways That Qualitative Researchers Engage in “Technological Reflexivity”
The workplace as a site of abortion surveillance
I Can('t) Talk About It At Work
Embrace Difference, Challenge Normativity
Faith voices resisting anti-abortion norms
Absence, multiplicity and the boundaries of research? Reflections on online asynchronous focus groups
Using Microsoft Teams to Facilitate Asynchronous Online Focus Groups
Selves Creating Stories Creating Selves
Sensitive Interviewing in Qualitative Research
The Sage Encyclopedia of LGBTQ Studies
To Tell or Not to Tell
Breaking the silence on abortion
In-Person Versus Online Focus Group Discussions
Internet-Mediated Technologies and Mixed Methods Research
To Tell or Not to Tell
Recommendations for Performing Internet-Based Research on Sensitive Subject Matter with “Hidden” or Difficult-to-Reach Populations
On‐line with e‐mums
Conceptualising abortion stigma
Doing Synchronous Online Focus Groups With Young People
Avoiding Pitfalls and Realising Opportunities
Contrasting Internet and Face-to-Face Focus Groups for Children with Chronic Health Conditions
Using asynchronous written online communications for qualitative inquiries
Researching sensitive issues online
Am I not answering your questions properly?' Clarification, adequacy and responsiveness in semi-structured telephone and face-to-face interviews
Researching online populations
| Obras citantes distintas | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 3 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2023 - 2026 (4) |
| Velocidad de citación | current |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 9 |