Irwin, S, Bornat, J and Winterton, M (2014) Qualitative secondary analysis in austere times: A reply to Coltart, Henwood and Shirani. Historical Social Research, 39 (3). 347 - 354. ISSN 0172-6404
Abstract
In their article, published in FQS, as well as in HSR 38 (2013) 4, Coltart, Henwood and Shirani raise a number of issues regarding the effective and ethical conduct of qualitative secondary analysis. In doing so they seek to exemplify general points about secondary analytic practice and ethics with reference to the UK Timescapes research programme in which they were involved as primary researchers and we were involved as secondary analysts. They position our work in ways we find unrecognisable, and potentially misleading. We briefly re-describe aspects of our work, and our key arguments, with reference to the timing of secondary analysis, knowledge claims and the contextual embeddedness of qualitative data.
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Keywords: | Qualitative secondary analysis; qualitative research ethics; Timescapes |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Leeds |
Academic Units: | The University of Leeds > Faculty of Education, Social Sciences and Law (Leeds) > School of Sociology and Social Policy (Leeds) |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Publications |
Date Deposited: | 18 Aug 2015 11:11 |
Last Modified: | 18 Aug 2015 11:11 |
Published Version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.12759/hsr.39.2014.3.347-354 |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | GESIS |
Identification Number: | 10.12759/hsr.39.2014.3.347-354 |
Related URLs: | |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:86333 |