Working groups considering fundamental questions concerning the pursuit of transparency in qualitative empirical research, which cut across the particular forms of research in which qualitative scholars engage
How do understandings of transparency turn on ontological and/or epistemological priors?
How should the pursuit of transparency interface with ethical obligations to protect human subjects?
Costs, benefits, and practicalities of different ways of institutionalizing the promotion of research transparency – and their interaction with power and resource differentials in the profession
Working groups considering what it means to be transparent when working with two kinds of empirical sources commonly considered by qualitative researchers.
How are and how should scholars be transparent about working with primary and secondary text-based sources
How are and how should scholars be transparent when using first-hand observations of, or interactions with, human participants as sources
Working groups considering distinctive ways of linking our empirical observations to our interpretations, inferences, or claims
How are and how should scholars be transparent in their use of comparative and process-tracing methods?
What does transparency mean for various interpretive methodologies, and how are its value and limits understood by interpretive scholars?
How are and how should scholars be transparent in their use of ethnographic methods?
How are and how should scholars be transparent in their use of algorithmic forms of analysis of qualitative data?
How are and how should scholars be transparent when using non-automated forms of content analysis?
Working groups considering particular contexts or substantive topics that raise distinctive issues for the pursuit of transparency.
What are the distinctive transparency challenges that arise for research in authoritarian or repressive political regimes?
What are the distinctive transparency challenges that arise for research in settings of political violence?
Go to advanced search