Title

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

Journal title

Studia Socjologiczne

Yearbook

2023

Issue

No 3

Affiliation

Ostaszewska, Aneta : WSNSiR, Uniwersytet Warszawski ; Pietrusińska, Marta : Wydział Pedagogiczny, Wydział Socjologii, Uniwersytet Warszawski

Authors

Ostaszewska, Aneta ; Pietrusińska, Marta

Keywords

kobiety ; refleksyjność ; metody jakościowe ; pandemia COVID-19 ; wywiad online

Divisions of PAS

Nauki Humanistyczne i Społeczne

Coverage

37-58

Publisher

Instytut Filozofii i Socjologii PAN ; Komitet Socjologii PAN ; Wydział Socjologii UW

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.

Date

2023.09.27

Type

Artykuły / Articles

Identifier

DOI: 10.24425/sts.2023.147160