In search of a critical stance: Applying qualitative research practices for critical quantitative research in psychology

Hope, Elan C.; Brugh, Christine S; Nance, Abby

doi:10.1285/i24212113v5i2p63

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such practice is more common in qualitative studies than in quantitative studies given the qualitative tradition of contextualizing research, including the researchers themselves (e.g., Levitt et al, 2018). However, contextualizing research and researchers is useful across all methodologies because no approach is immune to the dynamics of power (Giliborn et al, 2018;Hope et al, 2019;Suzuki et al, 2021). To be clear, we do not advocate positionality statements that simply list an expected set of researcher identities.…”

Section: The Results Sectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hidden Curriculum of Academic Writing: Toward Demystifying Manuscript Preparation in Counseling Psychology

Moradi¹,

Brewster²,

Grzanka³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we aim to unpack some of the hidden curriculum in publishing successfully in the Journal of Counseling Psychology (JCP) and other academic outlets. The many unspoken and implicit considerations behind writing a successful academic article can reinforce epistemic exclusions around class, gender, race, sexuality and other axes of power that ultimately limit who gets to publish in academic journals and about what. Thus, we work to articulate the processes behind writing an academic article. Specifically, we offer suggestions for (a) writing compelling, precise, and parsimonious introductions, (b) clearly addressing the goals of the study via an accurate and detailed description of the method, (c) aligning analytic decisions with the research questions or hypotheses and the data parameters at hand, and (d) discussing the story of data in the context of prior scholarship, study limitations, and real-world implications. Where applicable, we provide concrete examples of published studies to “unhide” writing processes and to illustrate the invisible narratives and intentions behind key writing practices. We also present a checklist as an easy-to-reference companion to this article to help demystify the writing process. This article aligns with the commitment of JCP’s editorial leadership to play an active role in opening up the scholarly publication process so that the pipeline of manuscripts submitted to and accepted by JCP shapes a more inclusive future for the field.

show abstract

Section: The Results Sectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hidden Curriculum of Academic Writing: Toward Demystifying Manuscript Preparation in Counseling Psychology

Moradi¹,

Brewster²,

Grzanka³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Part of our responsibility in qualitative open science-and, arguably, all open science-is to ensure that we are not only transparent with our data, but with the materials, context, and strategies we use to interpret and conclude findings. While these recommendations are echoed in current quantitative critical theory (QuantCrit; e.g., Gillborn et al, 2018), they still tend to be heeded more often by qualitative researchers (Hope et al, 2019).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking Transparency and Rigor from a Qualitative Open Science Perspective

Steltenpohl¹,

Lustick²,

Meyer³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discussions around transparency in open science focus primarily on sharing data, materials, and coding schemes, especially as these practices relate to reproducibility. This fairly quantitative perspective of transparency does not align with all scientific methodologies. Indeed, qualitative researchers also care deeply about how knowledge is produced, what factors influence the research process, and how to share this information. Explicating a researcher’s background and role allows researchers to consider their impact on the research process and interpretation of the data, thereby increasing both transparency and rigor. Researchers may engage in positionality and reflexivity in a variety of ways, and transparently sharing these steps allows readers to draw their own informed conclusions about the results and study as a whole. Imposing a limited, quantitatively-informed set of standards on all research can cause harm to researchers and the communities they work with if researchers are not careful in considering the impact of such standards. Our paper will argue the importance of avoiding strong defaults around transparency (e.g., always share data) and build upon previous work around qualitative open science. We explore how transparency in all aspects of our research can lend itself toward projecting and confirming the rigor of our work.

show abstract

“…It is important that such approaches in within-group designs do not internalize the White supremacist ideal that comparative work should establish a hierarchy where one group is positioned (or reinforced) as the standard for normative development. Instead, to acknowledge and investigate variation among Black adolescents, we recommend a critical epistemological approach (i.e., an approach that examines the role of power in the knowledge generation process) that uses comparative designs to uncover differences in access to resources and power among Black populations ( Fine, 2012 ; Hope, Brugh, et al, 2019 ; Moradi & Grzanka, 2017 ). In this way, between-group comparative approaches could be used responsibly to reframe developmental “deficits” as failures of larger societal systems and to redistribute wealth and resources to attend to the needs of overlooked and underserved communities ( Del Toro & Wang, 2021 ).…”

Section: Cautions Against Invoking the Assumption Of Homogeneity In W...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In qualitative research, these formal practices are often referred to as positionality and reflexivity ( Milner, 2007 ; Ravitch & Carl, 2016 ). This self-reflective work is meant to raise awareness of the ways in which the studies that one designs is steeped in their assumptions, training, lived experiences, and societal power and privilege (see Hope, Brugh, et al, 2019 , for more details on including positionality and reflexivity in quantitative work).…”

Section: Recommendations For Sampling Decisions In Within-group Designsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These issues include excluding Black participants (i.e., members of the African diaspora), comparing Black urban families facing poverty to White middle-class suburban families, and using theoretical frameworks that position differences in Black adolescent development as individual deficits rather than systemic failures (e.g., Baldridge, 2014 ; Boykin & Allen, 2002 ; Tamis-LeMonda, Briggs, McClowry, & Snow, 2008 ). Black scholars have led efforts to reshape research with Black adolescents by calling developmental scientists to move away from deficit framing, and advancing the field via improvements in theory (e.g., Spencer et al, 1997 ; Stevenson, 1998 ) and methods (e.g., Hope, Brugh, & Nance, 2019 ; Neblett et al, 2016 ) that center the experiences of Black adolescents in social-ecological contexts. Indeed, a growing number of scholars have embraced an assets-based approach to understanding the lived experiences of Black adolescents in context (e.g., Anderson & Stevenson, 2019 ; Butler-Barnes, Chavous, Hurd, & Varner, 2013 ; Cooper et al, 2015 , 2020 ; Gaylord-Harden et al, 2018 ; Gaylord-Harden, Burrow, & Cunningham, 2012 ; Hurd & Sellers, 2013 ; Smith, Witherspoon, & Osgood, 2017 ; Smith-Bynum, Anderson, Davis, Franco, & English, 2016 ; Williams & Deutsch, 2016 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Centering the Heterogeneity of Black Adolescents' Experiences: Guidance for Within‐Group Designs among African Diasporic Communities

Volpe

Smith

Skinner

et al. 2022

J of Research on Adolesc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite notable improvements in theory and methods that center the lived experiences of Black adolescents, White supremacy endures in developmental science. In this article, we focus on one methodological manifestation of White supremacy—sampling decisions that assume Black adolescents are a homogeneous group. We examine overlooked concerns about within‐group designs with Black adolescents, such as the erasure of some African diasporic communities in the United States. We first describe the homogeneity assumption and join other scholars in advocating for within‐group designs. We next describe challenges with current approaches to within‐group designs. We then provide recommendations for antiracist research that makes informed within‐group design sampling decisions. We conclude by describing the implications of these strategies for researchers and developmental science.

show abstract

In search of a critical stance: Applying qualitative research practices for critical quantitative research in psychology

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

The Hidden Curriculum of Academic Writing: Toward Demystifying Manuscript Preparation in Counseling Psychology

The Hidden Curriculum of Academic Writing: Toward Demystifying Manuscript Preparation in Counseling Psychology

Rethinking Transparency and Rigor from a Qualitative Open Science Perspective

Centering the Heterogeneity of Black Adolescents' Experiences: Guidance for Within‐Group Designs among African Diasporic Communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About