Defining Mass Observation: using mixed-methods longitudinal analysis to increase knowledge of the Mass Observation Project's volunteer writers.

群众观察项目（MOP），由群众观察档案慈善机构（MOA）运行，是一个志愿者写作项目，自1981年以来一直运行，并涉及c。3，500名自我选择的个人根据MOA发出的指令进行写作-主题广泛的问题，每年三次。作者对这些指令的反应提供了个人对与英国社会有关的广泛问题的活动和态度的个人描述。这篇文章有可能引起广大读者的兴趣，包括学者、政策制定者、从业人员、非专业研究人员、社区团体、学校、成人教育团体和个人。然而，一段时间以来，人们一直在争论MOP作家的“代表性”。农业部对其作家进行了一些基本分析，发现在MOP存在的某些时候，作家中50岁以上的东南部妇女所占比例过高。一些学者利用这一发现认为，MOP作家并不代表更广泛的英国人口，他们的写作不应用于研究目的。其他人认为，MOP写作的深度和质量使其成为一个独特的纵向资源，可以被来自不同学科领域的研究人员使用。这场争论影响了对MOP的信任和使用。该项目旨在通过对MOP作家进行复杂的分析来结束这一争论，这些分析提供了对作家及其社会经济特征的明确的、基于证据的描述。这将使档案的所有用户对他们如何以及为什么使用这一资源充满信心。农业部是我们在这个项目中的合作伙伴，他们还没有工具和技能来做这些分析。在最近的另一个涉及使用MOP写作的项目中，我们发现MOA保存了大量关于MOP作者的信息。这包括他们的年龄、性别、职业、他们对哪些指令做出了回应以及这些回应的时间。以目前的形式，这些信息无法分析。但是，我们与MOA合作，制定了一项计划，将这些信息整合到一个可搜索的数据库中，进行一系列分析，以了解更多关于MOP作家的信息。我们将询问MOP作家的特征如何与英国人口的特征进行比较;他们如何与从事积极志愿服务的英国人口进行比较;以及他们的写作行为可以告诉我们什么，例如，女性对男性的不同指令做出反应？除了查看这些统计信息外，我们还将查看MOP对1990年题为“社会分裂”的指令的回应，652名作家对此做出了回应（占活跃/连续回应作家的75%）。作家们谈论他们认为自己是什么阶级，他们是否属于少数群体，以及他们是否歧视其他不同的人。这将使我们能够了解作家如何看待自己，以及他们如何适应更广泛的英国人口。我们还将看看2008年的《你的生命线指令》，其中159位作家讨论了有意义的生活事件。这将使我们看到，例如，在他们的生活过程中，他们决定为MOP写作，以及他们是否分享特定的生活事件，如丧亲之痛，离婚，或孩子离家出走。我们将利用计算机软件，将统计信息与MOP写作联合收割机结合起来，并对这811人进行进一步的深入分析。我们的最终产品将包括推出一个由农业部维护的交互式可搜索数据库，使档案用户能够对作家特征和对不同指令的反应进行各种搜索;以及出版可访问的报告、文章和会议文件，向非专业和学术界读者介绍MOP作家。这些产出将扩大档案的获取渠道，并使人们能够放心地使用档案。

The Mass Observation Project (MOP), run by the Mass Observation Archive Charity (MOA) is a volunteer writing project that has run since 1981, and involved c. 3,500 self-selected individuals writing in response to directives - broadly themed questions sent out by the MOA, three times a year. Writers' responses to these directives provide a personal account of individuals' activities and attitudes towards a broad range of issues relating to British society. This writing has the potential to be of interest to wide audiences including, academics, policy-makers, practitioners, lay researchers, community groups, schools, adult education groups and individuals. However, for some time there has been a debate about the 'representativeness' of MOP writers. The MOA undertook some basic analyses of its writers, finding that at certain points in the lifetime of the MOP, writers have been over-represented by women living in the South East aged 50+. Some academics have used this finding to argue that MOP writers are not representative of the broader UK population, and their writing should not be used for research purposes. Others argue that the depth and quality of MOP writing makes it a unique longitudinal resource that can be used by researchers from different disciplinary fields. The debate has impacted on the trust and use of the MOP. This project seeks to put an end to this debate by producing sophisticated analyses of MOP writers that provide clear, evidence-based descriptions of writers and their socio-economic characteristics. This will enable all users of the archive to be confident about how and why they use this resource.The MOA, who are our partners in this project, have not had the tools and skills to do these sorts of analyses. During recent work on another project involving use of MOP writing, we discovered that the MOA hold lots of information on MOP writers. This includes information about their age, gender, occupation, which directives they have responded to, and how long these responses are. In its current form, this information can't be analysed. But, in collaboration with the MOA, we have developed a plan to integrate this information into one searchable database, to conduct a series of analyses to find out more about MOP writers. We will ask how the characteristics of MOP writers compare with those of the UK population as a whole; how they compare with those of the UK population that engage in active volunteering; and what their writing behaviour can tells us, for example, do women respond to different directives to men? As well as looking at this statistical information, we will look at MOP writing in response to the 1990 directive entitled Social Divisions, which 652 writers responded to (this represents 75% of active/serial responding writers). Writers talk about what class they think they are, whether they belong to a minority group, and whether they discriminate against others that are different. This will enable us to understand how writers perceive themselves, and how they fit with the broader UK population. We will also look at the 2008 Directive Your Lifeline, where 159 writers discussed meaningful life events. This will allow us to see, for example, when in their life-course they decided to write for the MOP, and whether they share particular life events, such as bereavement, divorce, or children leaving home. Using computer software, we will combine the statistical information with the MOP writing, and conduct an additional in depth analysis of these 811 individualsOur end-products will include the launch of an interactive searchable database, maintained by the MOA, enabling archive users to undertake a wide variety of searches of writer characteristics and responses to different directives; and publication of accessible reports, articles and conference papers, describing MOP writers to lay and academic audiences. These outputs will widen access to and enable confident use of the archive.