Sociological stalking? Methods, ethics and power in longitudinal criminological research
Sociological stalking? Methods, ethics and power in longitudinal criminological research
复制标题
社会学跟踪？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. Sharpe
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. Sharpe
关于犯罪生涯和停止犯罪的学术研究采用纵向方法，很少关注社会学和人类学关于认识论、反身性和研究者立场的争论。这是令人惊讶的，鉴于最近的现象学转向停止研究，其中（前）违法者的身份，反身性和自我理解已成为中心的当务之急。在这篇文章中，我询问方面的定性纵向研究的“底面”与犯罪妇女通过检查的监督地位的研究人员。侧重于方法，道德和权力，我研究女权主义关注的一些矛盾，以“让妇女的声音”在研究涉及重新追踪过度监视和高度污名化的人口。我反思的影响，研究者的立场，通过概念化的重跟踪方法，在最坏的情况下，一种形式的社会学跟踪。
Scholarship on criminal careers and desistance from crime employing longitudinal methodologies has paid scant attention to sociological and anthropological debates regarding epistemology, reflexivity and researcher positionality. This is surprising in light of a recent phenomenological turn in desistance research wherein (former) lawbreakers’ identity, reflexivity and self-understanding have become central preoccupations. In this article I interrogate aspects of the methodological ‘underside’ of qualitative longitudinal research with criminalized women through an examination of the surveillant position of the researcher. Focusing on methods, ethics and power, I examine some contradictions of feminist concerns to ‘give women voice’ in research involving re-tracing an over-surveilled and highly stigmatized population. I reflect on the effects of researcher positionality through a conceptualization of re-tracing methods as, at worst, a form of sociological stalking.