[READ FIRST] What we've been talking about so far (Updated 5/24)
Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:27 am
If you’re just arriving at the site, here’s a map to some of the issues that we’ve been discussing so far (as of 5/11). Click on a question below to see a set of links on the topic.
Join the conversation by responding to any of these threads or by creating a new topic to raise an issue we haven’t gotten to yet. These discussion boards will remain open until May 22.
What does the pursuit of transparency mean for specific research approaches, such as ethnography, interpretive work, or QCA?
What transparency practices are of value?
What do we mean by “transparency” anyway? What about forms of transparency beyond the DA-RT framework, such as being explicit about how research design choices were made or about positionality?
What ethical and human-subject protection issues confront the pursuit of transparency?
There’s been extensive discussion of data-sharing rules and their implications, around questions such as:
• What does data-sharing concretely mean?
• What are the costs of and obstacles to data-sharing, and how might these differently affect scholars employing different methods or working at different kinds of institutions?
• How beneficial is greater sharing of qualitative data?
• How could data access rules affect researchers’ incentives or ability to undertake certain kinds of research?
• How central are “data” to qualitative political analysis? What counts as data?
What does analytic transparency look like in qualitative research?
What do we think of journals’ current transparency policies?
Who should judge whether research is sufficiently transparent? Should we have transparency rules? Organically evolving norms? Acknowledged best practices?
What are the implications of transparency rules for graduate training?
How might DA-RT affect public perceptions of political science?
What are the benefits of research transparency in general? (See above for benefits of data access in particular.)
How should QTD Working Groups be defined?
What role does transparency play in the evaluation of research? What alternative criteria or tools of evaluation do/should scholars employ?
What should be QTD working group foci?
What are the implications of “the right of first use” for the pursuit of transparency?
Please join one of the discussions above, or start your own by clicking "New Topic"!
If you'd like to comment on this summary, please email the Steering Committee Co-Chairs here.
Join the conversation by responding to any of these threads or by creating a new topic to raise an issue we haven’t gotten to yet. These discussion boards will remain open until May 22.
What does the pursuit of transparency mean for specific research approaches, such as ethnography, interpretive work, or QCA?
What transparency practices are of value?
What do we mean by “transparency” anyway? What about forms of transparency beyond the DA-RT framework, such as being explicit about how research design choices were made or about positionality?
What ethical and human-subject protection issues confront the pursuit of transparency?
There’s been extensive discussion of data-sharing rules and their implications, around questions such as:
• What does data-sharing concretely mean?
• What are the costs of and obstacles to data-sharing, and how might these differently affect scholars employing different methods or working at different kinds of institutions?
• How beneficial is greater sharing of qualitative data?
• How could data access rules affect researchers’ incentives or ability to undertake certain kinds of research?
• How central are “data” to qualitative political analysis? What counts as data?
What does analytic transparency look like in qualitative research?
What do we think of journals’ current transparency policies?
Who should judge whether research is sufficiently transparent? Should we have transparency rules? Organically evolving norms? Acknowledged best practices?
What are the implications of transparency rules for graduate training?
How might DA-RT affect public perceptions of political science?
What are the benefits of research transparency in general? (See above for benefits of data access in particular.)
How should QTD Working Groups be defined?
What role does transparency play in the evaluation of research? What alternative criteria or tools of evaluation do/should scholars employ?
What should be QTD working group foci?
What are the implications of “the right of first use” for the pursuit of transparency?
Please join one of the discussions above, or start your own by clicking "New Topic"!
If you'd like to comment on this summary, please email the Steering Committee Co-Chairs here.