At the ASIS&T Annual Meeting 2023 I will be presenting a poster based on one of the contributions of my PhD. Specifically, I'll be presenting on a novel way to determine trustworthiness in qualitative research: community validation. The name of the method is just a description of what I felt I conducted at the time, though if someone asks I can go down a rabbit hole of whether I now think the word validation is appropriate and/or if it gives a false impression of what the method can and can't do. However, I don't think you are here to read about that, and it is perhaps better as a topic of conversation rather than the topic of a blog post. At the ASIS&T poster presentation session my poster as well as some handout sheets will be available. In fact, you may have made it to this page because you followed the QR code on the poster. If that's the case, please do ask me some questions in person but also feel free to download the handout sheet or a digital image of the poster at the end of this post. At the presentation I'll give a brief run-through of how community validation can address some of the limitations of two classic methods of determining trustworthiness. As a sneak peek, community validation addresses these limitations by leaning into them in order to increase interpretive power of the results (warning: the method should probably only be used within particular research paradigms). I think there is still some work to be done on the method as a whole, but hope that it can be used by researchers in the future to dig deeper into their results. The development of community validation as a method stemmed from the limitations of my initial data collection, caused in part by COVID-19 complications, where there were difficulties connecting with the community of interest. As a result, my initial work was focused on information gatekeepers of that community. The community validation was a way to ensure that I still made a place in my findings where the voices of those who are marginalised could be highlighted, and that is another strength of the method compared to other classical methods. Research with gatekeeper communities in place of (or addition to) the communities of interest are sometimes necessary, particularly in Library and Information Science (LIS) research. Community validation can be particularly useful in these situations, and I hope that it will be useful to other researchers and practitioners in the future. I end with a big thank you to Dr. Frances Ryan for helping me organise my poster in a way that catches the eye. Keep apprised of this space later this week for updates on my presentation and to learn about what information scientists get up to in London!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
A Second Blog Page?This is the part of the blog specifically about my PhD. It will include updates, musings, and advice. Archives
August 2022
Categories |