How to search?
advanced search

Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 4
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:

Coalification eegree of the No. 116/2 seam in the Janina coal mine (Upper Silesian Coal Basin) based on vitrinite reflectance

Jacek Misiak
Gospodarka Surowcami Mineralnymi - Mineral Resources Management | 2023 | vol. 39 | No 4 | 123-140 | DOI: 10.24425/gsm.2023.148168
Keywords coal vitrinite reflectance coalification
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The subject of the study was the No. 116/2 coal seam belonging to the Cracow Sandstone Series of the Upper Silesian Coal Basin. Reflectograms of the samples taking into account all the vitrinite group macerals present in the coal were recorded for Δ Ro close to the standard deviation and in the standard range. A careful analysis of vitrinite reflectograms reveals the presence of three or four clearly distinguished peaks. When assessing the rank of coal, only the main maximum, peak No. 4, was considered to be significant. Measurements of the average reflectance of collotelinite were made only on the vitrinite surfaces with a thickness of more than 1 mm. Only two maxima were revealed on detailed reflectograms. These maxima correlate with the peaks marked as No. 3 and 4 in the sample reflectograms taking into account all the vitrinite group macerals. The C daf content in the tested coal from the Janina coal mine is between 75.9 and 77.5 wt%, while for vitrain, it ranges from 71.1 to 75.5 wt%. This relationship is an exponential regression with a correlation coefficient of r = 0.95h and can be approximated by a linear correlation of r = 0.94. The correlation strength between the volatile matter content and the coefficient of average reflectance in the vitrinite of the tested coal was also examined. The statistically significant correlation is strong, which is expressed by the exponential correlation coefficient “r” being close to 0.99 and its linear approximation with the correlation coefficient r = 0.98. However, no correlation was found between the measured reflectance values and the GI coefficient calculated for the examined samples.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jacek Misiak
1
ORCID: ORCID
  1. AGH University of Kraków, Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environment Protection, Poland

The role of reflexivity in creating a cultural identity – educational context

Mirosław Sobecki
Studia Pedagogiczne | 2017 | tom LXX | 81-89
Keywords cultural identity adolescence reflexivity phenomenology
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article contains reflections on the role of reflexivity in contemporary education. The most important is to emphasize the importance of a pragmatic reflexivity in constructing the cultural identity of a young man. The majority of the text consists of references to the thoughts of Hans Georg Gadamer in the context of pragmatics of reflexivity. In conclusion, the author proposes a pedagogical definition of reflexivity.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Mirosław Sobecki

The influence of petrographic properties of bituminous coal on the quality of metallurgical coke

Iwona Jelonek Zbigniew Jelonek
Zeszyty Naukowe Instytutu Gospodarki Surowcami Mineralnymi Polskiej Akademii Nauk | 2017 | Nr 100 | 49-66
Keywords bituminous coal macerals vitrinite reflectance metallurgical coke CSR CRI
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Studies on the quality of bituminous coal are mainly focused on physico-chemical analysis, examining the ash content, sulphur content, volatile matter content, moisture content, and the Net Calorific Value of coal. Until now, the above mentioned parameters form the basis of the Polish Standard PN-82/87002, on the basis of which individual types of bituminous coal are determined. In addition, an elemental analysis, providing information about the content of primary elements in the organic matter of solids, i.e. coal, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, and sulphur, is carried out for the selected samples. This issue has been studied by many authors, which undoubtedly provide invaluable knowledge due to the huge amount of data, but, as the authors themselves indicate, the knowledge of the petrography of coal, coking properties (Probierz et al. 2012) and finally the coke obtained from individual coal types (based on tests carried out using the Karbotest installation or the so-called „box tests” performed in the coke oven battery) is still very limited. The article discusses the impact of petrographic composition on the quality of metallurgical coke. The analysis was performed using samples of coking coal from the following mines: Pniówek, Zofiówka, Borynia, and Krupiński. The mentioned coal types are used to produce coke mixtures used for the production of coke in the Przyjaźń and Radlin coking plants. Based on the rank of coal and physicochemical parameters, the mentioned coal types were classified according to the Polish classification and the UN/ECE International Classification of In-Seam Coals (UN/ECE 1995). The prediction of thermomechanical properties of coke (CSR and CRI) performed according to the original CCP method were compared with the results obtained using the classical method of Nippon Steel Corporation.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Iwona Jelonek
Zbigniew Jelonek

Wywiad online jako nowa rzeczywistość badawcza w kontekście badań nad feminizacją pandemii

Aneta Ostaszewska Marta Pietrusińska
Studia Socjologiczne | 2023 | No 3 | 37-58 | DOI: 10.24425/sts.2023.147160
Keywords kobiety refleksyjność metody jakościowe pandemia COVID-19 wywiad online
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Niniejszy artykuł jest próbą refleksji nad metodologicznymi wyzwaniami, jakie pojawiły się w czasie pandemii COVID-19 podczas realizacji jakościowej części projektu badawczego poświęconego feminizacji pandemii. W ramach badań prowadziłyśmy indywidualne wywiady online z kobietami pracującymi na uczelni wyższej. W niniejszym tekście bazując na doświadczeniach własnych z badania przeprowadzonego online oraz odwołując się do dyskusji w kręgu polskich badaczek i badaczy jakościowych aktualizujemy popularne mity z obszaru metodologii badań jakościowych dotyczące wywiadów zdalnych. Ponadto, w związku z tym, że zespół badawczy pracował tylko i wyłącznie w formie zdalnej, podejmujemy także refleksję nad wpływem pracy online na prowadzenie badań i naszą postawę badawczą.
Go to article

Bibliography

1. Andrejuk, Katarzyna. 2020. Online qualitative research in immigrant communities: Opportunities and challenges during the pandemic. Ask: Research and Methods, 29, 1: 55–73. DOI: 10.18061/ask.v29i1.0004.
2. Acker, Sandra. 2000. In/out/side: Positioning the researcher in feminist qualitative research. Resources for Feminist Research, 28, 1–2: 172–189.
3. Adams-Hutcheson, Gail, Robin Longhurst. 2017. ‘At least in person there would have been a cup of tea’: Interviewing via Skype. Area, 49, 2: 148–155. DOI: 10.1111/area.12306.
4. Archibald, Mandy M., Rachel C. Ambagtsheer, G. Casey Mavourneen, Michael Lawless. 2019. Using Zoom Videoconferencing for Qualitative Data Collection: Perceptions and Experiences of Researchers and Participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18. DOI: 10.1177/1609406919874596.
5. Australian National University (2020) Guide to Fieldwork Strategies in Response to COVID-19. https://www.anu.edu.au/files/guidance/ANU%20Guide%20to%20Fieldwork%20Strategies%20in%20Response%20to%20COVID-19%2C%20v1.0.pdf. Dostęp 11.03.2023.
6. Bampton, Robert, Christopher Cowton, Yvonne Downs. 2013. The E-Interview in Qualitative Research. In: N. Sappleton, ed. Advancing Research Methods with New Technologies. Portland: International Science Reference, 329–343.
7. Barclay, Kate, Sonia Garcia. 2020. Adapting Research Methodologies in the COVID-19 Pandemic. https://earthlab.uw.edu/2020/07/adapting-research-methodologies-inthe-covid-19-pandemic/. Dostęp 11.03.2023.
8. Basch, Johannes M., Klaus G. Melchers, Anja Kurz, Maya Krieger, Linda Miller. 2021. It Takes More Than a Good Camera: Which Factors Contribute to Differences Between Face-to-Face Interviews and Videoconference Interviews Regarding Performance Ratings and Interviewee Perceptions?. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36: 921–940. DOI: 10.1007/s10869-020-09714-3.
9. Batorski, Dominik, Marta Olcoń-Kubicka. 2006. Prowadzenie badań przez Internet-podstawowe zagadnienia metodologiczne. Studia Socjologiczne, 3: 99–132. https://www.studiasocjologiczne.pl/img_upl/studia_socjologiczne_2006_nr3_s.99_132.pdf Dostęp: 10.02.2023.
10. Binder, Piotr. 2021. The Social Experiment of Remote Work Forced by the Pandemic from a Qualitative Research Perspective. Kultura i Społeczeństwo, 65(1): 65-86. DOI: 10.35757/KiS.2021.65.1.2.
11. Binder, Piotr. 2022. Praca zdalna w czasie pandemii i jej implikacje dla rodzin z dziećmi–badanie jakościowe. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej, 18(1): 82-110. DOI: 10.18778/1733-8069.18.1.05.
12. Brown, Nicole. 2018. Video-Conference Interviews: Ethical and Methodological Concerns in the Context of Health Research. SAGE Research Methods Cases. DOI: 10.4135/9781526441812.
13. Bryman, Alan. 2012. Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Day, Suzanne. 2012. A Reflexive Lens: Exploring Dilemmas of Qualitative Methodology through the Concept of Reflexivity. Qualitative Sociology Review, 8, 1: 60–85. DOI: 10.18778/1733-8077.8.1.04.
15. Deakin, Hannah, Kelly Wakefield. 2014. Skype interviewing: reflections of two PhD researchers. Qualitative Research,14, 5: 603–616. DOI: 10.1177/1468794113488126.
16. Dolińska, Anna, Kamil Łuczaj, Olga Kurek-Ochmańska. 2022. Metoda biograficzna w kontekście badań jakościowych realizowanych zdalnie – możliwości, ograniczenia i aspekty etyczne. Przegląd Socjologiczny, 71, 1: 61–84. DOI: 10.26485/PS/2022/71.1/3.
17. Dwyer, Sonia C., Jennifer L. Buckle. 2009. The Space Between: On Being an Insider-Outsider in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8, 1: 54–63. DOI: 10.1177/160940690900800105.
18. England, Kim. 1994. Getting Personal: Reflexivity, Positionality, and Feminist Research. The Professional Geographer, 46, 1: 80–89.
19. Elwood, Sarah A., Deborah G. Martin. 2000. “Placing” Interviews: Location and Scales of Power in Qualitative Research. The Professional Geographer, 52, 4: 649–657. DOI: 10.1111/0033-0124.00253.
20. Federacja Konsumentów. 2021. Wykluczenie cyfrowe podczas pandemii. Dostęp oraz korzystanie z internetu i komputera w wybranych grupach społecznych, http://www.federacja-konsumentow.org.pl/p,1689,dad1c,raport-fk-wykluczenie-cyfrowe.pdf. Dostęp 09.03.2023.
21. Finch, Janet. 1993. ‘It’s great to have someone to talk to’: Ethics and politics of interviewing women. Open University Press.
22. Goffman, Erving. 2000. Człowiek w teatrze życia codziennego. Przekład Helena Datner-Śpiewak, Paweł Śpiewak. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
23. Górak-Sosnowska, Katarzyna, Lidia Tomaszewska. 2022. Administracja uczelni w dobie pandemii. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH.
24. Hałas, Elżbieta. 2016. Refleksyjny podmiot w świecie społecznym. O paradygmacie i założeniach socjologii interpretacyjnej. Roczniki Nauk Społecznych, 8, 44, 4: 35–50. DOI: 10.18290/rns.2016.44.4-2.
25. Haraway, Donna. 1988. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14: 575–599.
26. Harvey, Orlanda, Edwin van Teijlingen, Margarete Parrish. 2023. Using a Range of Communication Tools to Interview a Hard-to-Reach Population. Sociological Research Online, 1–12. DOI: 10.1177/13607804221142212.
27. Herzog, Hanna. 2012. Interview location and its social meaning. The SAGE handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft, 207–218.
28. Hesse-Biber, Sharlene N., ed. 2014. Feminist Research Practice: A Primer. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
29. Hesse-Biber, Sharlene N. 2007. ‘The Practice of Feminist In-Depth Interviewing’. In: S.N. Hesse-Biber, P.L. Leavy, eds. Feminist Research Practice: A Primer. London: Sage, 111–148.
30. Howlett, Marnie. 2022. Looking at the ‘field’ through a Zoom lens: Methodological reflections on conducting online research during a global pandemic. Qualitative Research, 22, 3: 387–402. DOI: 10.1177/1468794120985691.
31. Irgil, Ezgi. 2021. Broadening the positionality in migration studies: Assigned insider category. Migration Studies, 993: 1215–1229. DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnaa016.
32. James, Nalita, Hugh Busher. 2006. Credibility, authenticity and voice: dilemmas in online interviewing. Qualitative Research, 6, 3: 403–420. DOI: 10.1177/1468794106065010.
33. Jemielniak, Dariusz. 2019. Socjologia Internetu. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
34. Jenner, Brandy M., Kit C. Myers. 2019. Intimacy, rapport, and exceptional disclosure: a comparison of in-person and mediated interview contexts. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22, 2: 165–177. DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2018.1512694.
35. Johnson, John M., Timothy Rowlands. 2012. The interpersonal dynamics of in-depth interviewing. In: J.F. Gubrium et al., eds. The SAGE Handbook of Interview Research. The Complexity of the Craft. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 99–114.
36. Kalinowska, Katarzyna, Beata Bielska, Sylwia Męcfal, Adrianna Surmiak. 2022. Czy badać? Co badać? Jak badać? Strategie badawcze w naukach społecznych i humanistycznych w pierwszej fali pandemii COVID-19. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej, XVIII, 4: 34–59. DOI: 10.18778/1733-8069.18.4.02.
37. Keen, Sam, Martha Lomeli-Rodriguez, Helene Joffe. 2022. From Challenge to Opportunity: Virtual Qualitative Research During COVID-19 and Beyond. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21. DOI: 10.1177/16094069221105075.
38. Kim, Bryan, Bradley Brenner, Christopther Liang, Penelope Asay. 2003. A qualitative study of adaptation experiences of 1.5-generation Asian Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9, 2: 156–170.
39. Kirk, Jerome, Mark L. Miller. 1986. Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
40. Krouwel, Matthew, Kate Jolly, Sheila Greenfield. 2019. Comparing Skype (video calling) and in-person qualitative interview modes in a study of people with irritable bowel syndrome – an exploratory comparative analysis. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19, 219. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-019-0867-9.
41. Krueger, Richard. 1994. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
42. Kvale, Steainar. 2010. Prowadzenie wywiadów. Przekład Agata Dziuban. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
43. Letherby, Gayle. 2003. Feminist Research in Theory and Practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
44. Lewandowska, Izabela. 2004. Wywiad jako technika zdobywania informacji źródłowych w badaniu historii najnowszej. Echa Przeszłości, 5: 279–299. https://bazhum.muzhp.pl/media//files/Echa_Przeszlosci/Echa_Przeszlosci-r2004-t5/Echa_Przeszlosci-r2004-t5-s279-299/Echa_Przeszlosci-r2004-t5-s279-299.pdf. Dostęp: 11.03.2023.
45. Linabary, Jasmine R., Stephanie A. Hamel. 2017. Feminist online interviewing: engaging issues of power, resistance and reflexivity in practice. Feminist review, 115, 1: 97–113. DOI: 10.1057/s41305-017-0041-3.
46. Lo Iacono, Valeria, Paul Symonds, David H.K. Brown. 2016. Skype as a Tool for Qualitative Research Interviews. Sociological Research Online, 21, 2: 103–117. DOI: 10.5153/sro.3952.
47. Lobe, Bojana, David Morgan, Kim A. Hoffman. 2020. Qualitative data collection in an era of social distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19: 1–8.
48. Lupton, Deborah. 2021. Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd-sourced document), revised version. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1clGjGABB2h2qbduTgfqribHmog9B6P0NvMgVuiHZCl8/edit. Dostęp 02.03.2023.
49. Mason-Bish, Hannah. 2019. The elite delusion: reflexivity, identity and positionality in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 19, 3: 263–276. DOI: 10.1177/1468794118770078.
50. McMaster University. 2020. Guidelines for Fieldwork During the COVID-19 Pandemic. https://hr.mcmaster.ca/app/uploads/2020/05/Fieldwork-Research-GuidelinesCOVID-19-FINAL.pdf. Dostęp: 11.03.2023.
51. Naples, Nancy A. 1996. A feminist revisiting of the insider/outsider debate: The “outsider phenomenon” in rural Iowa. Qualitative sociology, 19: 83–106. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02393249.
52. Narodowe Centrum Nauki. 2020. Komunikat w sprawie realizacji projektów badawczych w czasie pandemii COVID-19. https://www.ncn.gov.pl/aktualnosci/2020-07-13-komunikat-w-sprawie-realizacji-projektow-badawczych-w-czasie-pandemiicovid-19. Dostęp 13.03.2023.
53. Nguyen, Minh Hao, Jonathan Gruber, Jaelle Fuchs, Will Marler, Amanda Hunsaker, Eszter Hargittai. 2020. Changes in Digital Communication During the COVID-19 Global Pandemic: Implications for Digital Inequality and Future Research. Social Media + Society, 1–6. DOI: 10.1177/2056305120948255.
54. Niżnik, Józef. 1972. Wokół formalno-strukturalnej koncepcji mitu. E. Cassirer i C. Lévi-Strauss. Człowiek i Światopogląd, 5: 113–115.
55. O’Connor, Henrietta, Claire Madge. 2017. Online Interviewing. In: N.G. Fielding, R.M. Lee, G. Blank, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 416–434.
56. Oakley, Anne. 2016. Interviewing Women Again: Power, Time and the Gift. Sociology, 50, 1: 195–213. DOI: 10.1177/0038038515580253.
57. Oakley, Anne. 1981. Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. In: H. Roberts, ed. Doing Feminist Research. London: Routledge, 30–61.
58. Olser, Lucy, Dan Zahavi. 2022. Sociality and Embodiment: Online Communication During and After Covid-19. Found Sci. DOI: 10.1007/s10699-022-09861-1.
59. Pike, Kenneth L. 1954. Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human behavior. Summer Institute of Linguistics.
60. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej. 2012. VIII(1). Socjologia Jakościowa – innowacyjne metody w badaniach jakościowych. http://www.qualitativesociologyreview.org/PL/Volume18/PSJ_8_1.pdf.
61. Ramazanoglu, Caroline, Janet Holland. 2002 . Feminist Methodology: Challenges and Choices. London: Sage Publications.
62. Reay, Diane. 1996. Dealing with Difficult Differences: Reflexivity and Social Class in Feminist Research. Feminism & Psychology, 6, 3: 443–456. DOI: 10.1177/0959353596063007.
63. Reinharz, Shulamit, Susan E. Chase. 2002. Interviewing women. In: F. Jaber Gubrium, J.A. Holstein, eds. Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 221–238.
64. Ricoeur, Paul. 1986. Symbolika zła. Przekład Maryna Ochab, Stansław Cichowicz. Warszawa: Aletheia.
65. Ricoeur, Paul. 1991. “Myth as the Bearer of Possible Worlds”. A Ricoeur Reader: Reflection and Imagination. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 482–490.
66. Rosenthal, Gabriele 2018. Interpretative Social Research. Göttingen: University Press.
67. Salmons, Janet. 2014. Qualitative online interviews. Thousand Oaks: Sage. DOI: 10.4135/9781071878880.
68. Seitz, Sally. 2016. Pixilated partnerships, overcoming obstacles in qualitative interviews via Skype: a research note. Qualitative Research, 16, 2: 229–235. DOI: 10.1177/1468794115577011.
69. Siuda, Piotr, red. 2016. Metody badań online. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Katedra.
70. Ślęzak, Izabela. 2021. Zło konieczne, substytut, szansa – wykorzystanie komunikatora Skype w badaniach jakościowych. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej, 17, 4: 88–113. DOI: 10.18778/1733-8069.17.4.05.
71. Ślęzak, Izabela. 2019. Praca nad zaufaniem. Etyczne, praktyczne i metodologiczne wyzwania w relacjach badacz–badani na przykładzie etnografii agencji towarzyskich. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej, 14, 1: 138–162. DOI: 10.18778/1733-8069.14.1.07.
72. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1988. Can the subaltern speak?. In: C. Nelson, L. Grossberg, eds. Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 271–313.
73. Stacey, Judith. 1991. Can there be a feminist ethnography? In: S.B. Gluck, D. Patai, eds. Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. London: Routledge, 111–120.
74. Thunberg, Sara, Linda Arnell. 2021. Pioneering the use of technologies in qualitative research – A research review of the use of digital interviews. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25, 6: 757–768. DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2021.1935565.
75. Toldi, Nicole L. 2021. Job applicants favor video interviewing in the candidate-selection process. Employment Relations Today, 38: 19–27. DOI: 10.1002/ert.20351.
76. Tristram, Hoole, Hooley Marriott, Jane Wellens. 2012. “Introduction.” What is Online Research?: Using the Internet for Social Science Research. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 1–6. The ‚What is?’ Research Methods Series. Bloomsbury Collections. DOI: 10.1002/ert.20351.
77. Walentynowicz-Moryl, Katarzyna. 2017. Indywidualny wywiad online – technika asynchroniczna. Relacje. Studia z nauk społecznych, 3: 55–65. http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-512db671-6292-4d81-b375-4d400ee50b87.
78. Weller, Susie. 2015. The potentials and pitfalls of using Skype for qualitative (longitudinal) interviews. NCRM Working Paper, Southampton, England: National Centre for Research Methods. https://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/id/eprint/3757. Dostęp: 12.10.2022.
79. Wolf, Diane L. 1996. Feminist Dilemmas in Fieldwork. Oxford: Westview Press.
80. Wyka, Anna. 1993. Badacz społeczny wobec doświadczenia. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo IFiS PAN.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Aneta Ostaszewska
1
ORCID: ORCID
Marta Pietrusińska
2
ORCID: ORCID
  1. WSNSiR, Uniwersytet Warszawski
  2. Wydział Pedagogiczny, Wydział Socjologii, Uniwersytet Warszawski

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more