View
213
Download
1
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Critical methodologies. Propousal
Citation preview
Queering Research. Cri0cal research methodologies from Peer to Peer
David Berná, Eva M. Herrero, Fernándo Villaamil, Ariel Jerez. Facultad de Ciencias Polí0cas y Sociología Universidad Complutense de Madrid
To Stablish
Why we are in this? • Personal background: Work experience with excluded
groups (Roma, baSered women, pros0tutes, transsexuals, lesbians and gays, minori0zed social movements, indigenous, etc). These works broke something inside us and aroused in us a certain emo0onal and poli0cal sensi0vity.
• Theore0cal background: Queer Theory, Postcolonial Studies and poststructuralist philosophy.
• Social and Poli0cal Context, Local and Na0onal. Global crisis not only economic but also cultural and intellectual.
• Personal Situa0on: I’m Fagot, I’m women,…. this is my way for think and live, all live, to may scien0fic work, and we don’t want to be normal in any aspect of our lives.
Theore0cal Support
Queer studies are an space of academic research and produc0ons result and accomplice of LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) struggles that became at 1990s. Queer posi0on implies an academic cri0cal posi0on that ques0ons understandings of gender and sexuality, iden0ty poli0cs and hegemonic discourses on heteronorma0vity. But specially it ques0ons mechanisms of truth produc0on. Queer studies usually are joined with cri0cal research paradigms like feminism and post-‐colonial studies. in fact, the queer posi0on results from lgtbq people being thrown out from feminist, migrant and ethnic ac0vist spaces in America.
Are commonly known queer theore0cal produc0ons, usually philosophical. But queer work have also been made methodological knowledge produc0on. These are less known, but their importance is crucial.
And before this, in our discussions, the following challenges arise to overcoming, or at least call into
ques0on
• 1. Colonial Heritage of Social Research / Know to domes0cate / Know to demonstrate the inferiority / Know to s0gma0ze
• 2. Academic arrogance product of the indolent ra0onality (Santos 2005). Scien0fic knowledge is always higher than that produced by the subjects in their daily life.
• 3. Cogni0ve fic0on of Produc0on of truth / Objec0vity / Posi0vism
• 4. Rela0ons of Power-‐Knowledge. Desubjec0vize and transform subjets to objects.
• 5. Assume that science is subjec0ve, situated and produced by men, white, heterosexual and middle and upper classes.( Donna Haraway )
A bit of History
-‐Great technological, scien0fic, ideological, social and poli0cal changes occurred in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. -‐These were part of a re-‐ar0cula0on of reality which led to new regimes of power. Foucault: Power disciplinarian who cares life of popula0ons. Before regimes to manage death, allowing life, but never will care (New geopoli0cal and economic system: capitalism and na0on-‐state). -‐That life care Foucault will call biopoli0cal regime Power, which take care of life. disciplining, taming and controlling the subjec0vity of individuals = Construc0on of subjects by Regimes of Power.. -‐And how was done this?
-‐Alliance between producers of knowledge, poli0cal structures and disciplinary ins0tu0ons (hospital, factory, school)
-‐Change in veridic0on regimes. God is banished and the man took center. The belief is replaced by Reason.
-‐A speech was imposed: The posi0vist-‐ra0onalist prism is the only one capable of crea0ng knowledge through hypothe0cal-‐deduc0ve method.
-‐ Modern science is the only way to know the reality and correct the mistakes of individuals and communi0es. Only through the Scien0fic Objec0vity (Stengers, 1993).
And them, What are we do? Our Methodological propousal
Dialogic interview/ Peer to Peer Dialogues
Cualita0ve Interview
The interview is defined as a conversa0on between two or more people in a par0cular place for a specific purpose. Technically it is a scien0fic research method that uses verbal communica0on to collect informa0on regarding a specific purpose (Grawitz, 1984: 188; Aktouf, 1992: 91; Mayer and Ouellet, 1991: 308). The researcher asks ques0ons and the interviewee answers their ques0ons. He describes his experiences, opinions, aspira0ons, etc.
How we define the Dialogic interview/Peer to peer dialog
A face-‐to-‐face situa0on (Mayer and Ouellet, 1991: 308; Taylor and Bogdan, 1996), where reciprocal exchange occurs through the use of verbal and body language. All those present occupy the informant / interviewer roles. All ask and be asked. The informant is not a representa0ve of a par0cular social group. It is present from its par0cularity. From this posi0on they converse. In this interrela0onship, the reality is reconstructed from the connec0ons between subjects present on common experiences. The direc0on of informa0on depend on the real experiences of both individuals and not the research objec0ves. This can be a problem or an advantage.
How we do it? I
First steps: • Sample: 24 youngs in couples. • Sample Selec0on: Youngs arround 19 and 25 years old, with lgtbq iden00es or non heterosituated prac0ce who live in madrid.
• Selec0on methodologies: Snowball(Beaud, 1983:187).
How we do it?II: Nego0a0on
• Nego0a0on of Topic. • Nego0a0on of Partner. • Nego0a0on of Dura0on. • Nego0a0on of physical space. • Nego0a0on of archive support.
Nego0a0on of Interview Partner • The use of the snowball recruiment technique facilitated the pairing: – Some of the youth were already known directly. Others were friends of friends. So there was already a prior trust and security.
– In cases where they did not know. We told them superficially who could be (Studies, age, orienta0on expressed desire ac0vism, friends) poten0al candidates and they chose).
– In two cases expressed the need to do it with a stranger / a. They expressed feeling more comfortable with strangers.
Nego0a0on of topic • Distendid dialogue with young people individually about their situa0on and the situa0on of young LGBTIQ from their point of view. This was guided by a set of topics that the team thought that might interest and coincided with the interests raised in the research hypothesis.
• The topics selected for interview were those in which the young put more interest and engaged more 0me to talk.
• We then performed an outline / guide with the selected topics. This paper scheme was provided on the day of the interview.
Nego0a0on of archive support.
• Not all media (video, sound, etc.) represent the same interference in the development of the interviews. Write, record video or audio, condi0on differently the dynamics developed in communica0on.
• Finally all chose the audio recorder. Previously we thought that this medium was the least invasive means. We give when we express this approach op0ons. (Perhaps we influence, yes, but do not forget that we do not pursue objec0vity)
Development • Scheme were provided to them with the main topics and variables that had been nego0ated.
• A tape recorder were provided • Water, soda or beer were provided, depending the space (Faculty, park or bar)
• Researchers leave and return when young no0fied them by mobile
• During that 0me the young begin with scheme, but as 0me progresses the forks are diverse. In some cases girded the scheme, but in others the conversa0on took a different tack.
What is the outcome? • Recordings of 1.5 to two hours • Conversa0ons among young, looking for connec0ons and reflect on the differences.
• Informa0on on experiences, expecta0ons, thoughts, desires
• Episodes of listening, empathy and support each other with narra0ves of painful or difficult situa0ons. Dialogic interview transcends the aim of obtaining informa0on.
• Young created jointly narra0ves about their life history. A common language.
And arer…
• Dialogic Analysis • Dialogic Wri0ng
Strengths
• The researcher does not interfere or limit the expression of informants.
• The expression of emo0ons, the result of the encounter between two people with shared experiences, can be much higher.
• The course of the interview is free and not determined by the interests of researchers.
• Are present other languages and other logics, absolutely different that research logic and prac0ce suppose.
Problems and risks -‐One of the informants can dominate the conversa0on to their own interests or needs For example, a member poli0cized condi0ons speeches and headed towards poli0cal speeches, away from their own experience and expression of emo0ons -‐There are issues that they do not speak. Although these issues were rated as important. For example: Girls have never talked about their experiences of child homophobia. However, the boys expressed an infant experiences homophobia in full. This raises research ques0ons. For either of them if they have suffered homophobia and also do not have or have not suffered due to differences in norma0ve gender system. Both op0ons involve both a problem and a poten0al analysis.
Recommended