Search results

The purpose of this paper is to argue that qualitative researchers have much to learn from conducting methodological analyses of their own talk in relation to research participants in interviews. Yet there are specific difficulties in representing findings from methodological analyses of research interviews.

Although qualitative researchers have for some time followed recommendations to analyze both “how” interview data are generated in addition to “what” is discussed, little has been written about the challenges of representing these sorts of analyses. The paper uses a case to first examine difficulties in the representation of an analysis of interview data that draws on discursive psychology. After discussing the case, the paper further explores the challenges of conducting and presenting these sorts of methodological analyses of interview data to research participants and readers in ways that clearly convey what might be learned by examining how interviews are accomplished.

The paper outlines considerations for researchers in doing methodological analyses of interview data, including challenges, reconciling interpretations of “what” and “how” topics are discussed in research studies, and possible areas of focus.

This paper examines what researchers might learn from examinations of their own interview practice and does not focus on representations of topical analyses.

The paper argues that when interviewers subject their own talk to analysis, they learn about themselves, their craft, and the ways in which knowledge about social worlds are collaboratively produced in research encounters with participants.

By developing expertise in how to analyze their interview interaction methodologically, qualitative researchers can attend to significant features of their interview practice and in so doing, develop a reflexive research practice.

This paper aims to study the kinds of methodologies used in studying “doing gender” in working life and organisations. To do so, articles that use empirical research materials from different academic peer-reviewed journals have been analysed. By methodologies, both data gathering tools and the analysing techniques using and concerting the data have been largely understood. In the articles analysed, interviews were the main methodological tool in extracting the “doing gender”, while studies using naturally occurring data, e.g. historical materials and methods in relation to this type of data were in the minority. The following question has been proposed for further exploration: What impact does the domination of interviews as a research method have on the concept of “doing gender”?

Qualitative content analysis, close reading and data were collected from academic peer-reviewed journals with the applied principles of literature review.

The research methodologies adopted in the articles on “doing gender” mostly deal with interview data and their analysis. Interview data are used most often as the primary source for ethnographic analysis. These method choices limit the potential interpretations available for the analysis of the conceptual idea of “doing gender”.

The limitations of this article relate to the journals chosen for the analysis.

This paper contributes toward a deeper understanding of the “doing gender” approach, particularly by exploring the research methodologies that have been used when studying “doing gender” approach empirically.

This paper presents recently published resources on library instruction and information literacy. It provides an introductory overview and a selected annotated bibliography of publications covering various library types, study populations and research contexts. The selected bibliography is useful to efficiently keep up with trends in library instruction for busy practitioners, library science students and those wishing to learn about information literacy in other contexts.

This article annotates 424 English-language periodical articles, monographs, dissertations, theses and reports on library instruction and information literacy published in 2021. The sources were selected from the EBSCO platform for Library, Information Science, and Technology Abstracts (LISTA), Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and WorldCat, published in 2021 that included the terms “information literacy,” “library instruction,” or “information fluency” in the title, abstract or keywords. The sources were organized in Zotero. Annotations summarize the source, focusing on the findings or implications. Each source was categorized into one of seven pre-determined categories: K-12 Education, Children and Adolescents; Academic and Professional Programs; Everyday Life, Community, and the Workplace; Libraries and Health Information Literacy; Multiple Library Types; and Other Information Literacy Research and Theory.

The paper provides a brief description of 424 sources and highlights sources that contain unique or significant scholarly contributions.

The information may be used by librarians, researchers and anyone interested as a quick and comprehensive reference to literature on library instruction and information literacy within 2021.

This paper aims to examine the current practice of reporting on translation issues in qualitative, interdisciplinary accounting research. Based on an analysis of the methodological consideration of the translation of quotations from non-English interviews and additional interviews with experienced researchers, the authors aim to develop recommendations for the reporting on such translation procedures in future accounting research relying on interviews not conducted in English.

The analysis is based on papers published in four highly ranked interdisciplinary accounting journals: Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ), Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS), Critical Perspectives on Accounting (CPA) and Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management (QRAM). The subjects of the analysis are publications of non-English-speaking researchers who conducted non-English interviews and therefore were confronted with translation issues when attempting to get published in these English-language journals. Additionally, to gain deeper insights into reporting decisions on language and translation issues, the authors conducted interviews with experienced researchers in the field of qualitative, interdisciplinary accounting research whose mother tongue is not English. The authors combine these empirical insights with current developments in translation studies.

As suggested by translation studies, translation is an act of sense making and reconstruction of meaning, and therefore is a complex task that needs to be carried out with caution. However, the findings suggest that in current interdisciplinary, qualitative accounting research, the reporting of language and translation issues, especially with regards to the translation of quotations from interview data, have so far received only limited attention. The authors therefore call for more awareness of and sensibility toward dealing with language and translation issues, which should be reflected in more transparent reporting on translation processes to support the credibility and authenticity of qualitative accounting studies based on non-English interviews.

This paper is limited to the reporting on the methodological consideration of translating quotations from non-English interviews in papers published in AAAJ, AOS, CPA and QRAM between 2004 and 2015. For future accounting research that relies on such interviews, the authors call for more transparency and provide specific recommendations. This in turn should strengthen the awareness that language and translation are factors to be considered and reported.

This paper is the first to develop recommendations for the reporting of translation processes in accounting research studies, which are based on interviews not led in the English language.

This paper describes the approach to studying leadership within the interpretive paradigm that the author undertook for their doctoral research.

For the study, qualitative data were collected via in-depth interviews and the researcher's systematic reflections. The analytical process consisted of database design and management followed by cyclical interview and cross-interview analyses and integration of the researcher's reflections.

The paper showed that integrating various qualitative methods in pragmatic ways that better align with the research scope, along with a systematic approach to studying complex phenomena—such as leadership—generated richer and more cohesive perspectives.

This paper provides a detailed account of how the qualitative data collection and analysis methods were used, which could be replicated or adapted for future research within the interpretive paradigm.

The paper helps students and junior researchers make sense of qualitative data analysis and interpretation by offering practical tools to tackle the diverse processes of qualitative research.

This paper is based on the Author's doctoral research, recording their experience with engaging in qualitative research.

The purpose of this paper is to draw on experience in supervising new researchers and the advice of other writers, to offer novice researchers, such as those engaged in study for a thesis, a pragmatic introduction to conducting research interviews.

After a brief introduction, the paper is organized into three main sections: designing and planning interviews, conducting interviews, and making sense of interview data. Within these sections, 11 questions often asked by novice researchers are posed and answered.

Novice interviewers need to conduct some research interviews in order to start to develop their skills in the craft of interviewing. This paper is designed to give novice interviewers the advice and support that they need before starting on this journey.

Other research methods texts offer advice on research interviews, but their advice is not tailored specifically to new researchers engaged in research for a thesis. They tend to offer options, but provide limited guidance on making crucial decisions in interview planning, design, conduct, and data analysis.

The purpose of this paper is to report on the initial validation of a new method, called the “Meaning of the Child Interview” (MotC), to assess the psychological meaning all children have for their parents, but which in cases of risk, submerge or distort the child’s identity. The MotC analyses parental discourse using a method developed from the discourse analysis used to classify the Adult Attachment Interview together with patterns derived from the infant CARE-Index, a procedure that evaluates face-to-face parent-child interaction. This allows the MotC to illuminate how the parent’s thinking influences the developing relationship between parent and child.

Parents are interviewed using the Parent Development Interview (PDI), or an equivalent, and then the interview transcript is classified using the MotC system. The coding method was developed from interviews drawn from the first author’s work with children and families in the family court system, and then tested with a sample of 85 mothers and fathers, 62 of whom were parents drawn from an “at risk” context. The parents were also videoed in a short free play interaction, using the CARE-Index.

The study found a strong correspondence between the levels of risk as assessed by the MotC patterns of parental representation of care giving, the risk to the parent-child relationship observed using the CARE-Index. There was also corroboration of the patterns of interaction identified by the MotC.

The results of the study provide good evidence for the Meaning of the Child as an identifiable construct, and as an assessment tool to identify and assess the nature of “at risk” parent-child relationships. MotC was developed in a clinical setting within the Family Court justice system, and is designed to offer assistance to child protection and mental health practitioners deciding how to intervene in particular parent-child relationships.

When improving business processes, process analysts can use data-driven methods, such as process mining, to identify improvement opportunities. However, despite being supported by data, process analysts decide which changes to implement. Analysts often use process visualisations to assess and determine which changes to pursue. This paper helps explore how process mining visualisations can aid process analysts in their work to identify, prioritise and communicate business process improvement opportunities.

The study follows the design science methodology to create and evaluate an artefact for visualising identified improvement opportunities (IRVIN).

A set of principles to facilitate the visualisation of process mining outputs for analysts to work with improvement opportunities was suggested. Particularly, insights into identifying, prioritising and communicating process improvement opportunities from visual representation are outlined.

Prior work focuses on visualisation from the perspectives – among others – of process exploration, process comparison and performance analysis. This study, however, considers process mining visualisation that aids in analysing process improvement opportunities.