Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters
Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/10503300902798375
复制
发表时间：
2009-01-01
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Fischer, Constance T.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fischer, Constance T.
分类是研究人员参与的两种形式：有数据的和不断发展的发现。第一种形式是众所周知的识别和暂时搁置研究人员的假设。第二个参与是对数据的解释学重温，以及一个人根据对主题任何方面的修订理解而不断演变的对数据的理解。这两个过程都在进行中，其中包括仔细制定表述调查结果的语言。文中还提供了大量的日常分类和面试的例子。作为定性研究中的一种披露形式，本文写作的背景是共享的。在这一点上，胡塞尔和海德格尔简要介绍了括号的历史介绍，然后讨论了反身性和解释学。文章最后警告说，残留的实证主义可能会与定性的严谨性背道而驰，并建议进行一项关于分类的定性研究。
Bracketing is presented as two forms of researcher engagement: with data and with evolving findings. The first form is the well-known identification and temporary setting aside of the researcher's assumptions. The second engagement is the hermeneutic revisiting of data and of one's evolving comprehension of it in light of a revised understanding of any aspect of the topic. Both of these processes are ongoing, and they include the careful development of language with which to represent findings. Extensive everyday examples of bracketing and of interviewing are presented. As a form of disclosure in qualitative research, the background from which this article was written is shared. At that point, Husserl's and Heidegger's historical introductions of bracketing are presented briefly, followed by a discussion of reflexivity and hermeneutics. The article closes with warnings of how residual positivism can work against qualitative rigor and with a suggested qualitative research study on bracketing.