La recherche-intervention en formation
des adultes : une démarche favorisant l’apprentissage transformateur

Duchesne, Claire; Leurebourg, Rodney

doi:10.7202/1084727ar

Cited by 12 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These data were collected from 2013 to 2015 and for a different set of research questions. Our analysis is, therefore, an example of secondary qualitative analysis (Belot and Van Ingelgom 2017;Duchesne 2017;Hughes and Tarrant 2020) that seeks to contribute to the growing literature in the sociology of health that uses secondary qualitative analysis (Fixsen et al 2022;Ryan and Ziebland 2015). Participants were never explicitly asked about medical authority or doctors, only how they voted for a ballot measure that sought to legalize medical marijuana.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

For Medicinal Purposes: Whose Advice Exerts Authority on Medical Marijuana?

Vila‐Henninger

Larsen

2023

Sociological Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citizens are embedded in legal systems in which the authority of different experts is normally given preference over citizens' opinions about medical marijuana and other medical issues. Yet, citizens may reject expert authority if they consider themselves to be competent based on their knowledge or social position. Thus, we are led to ask: In the context of direct democracy, what forms of expert authority—if any—does a historically privileged subset of citizens recognize when reasoning about medical marijuana? Our analysis is based on rich‐qualitative data that analyzes how white male citizens reason about a medical marijuana ballot initiative in Arizona. By using a comprehensive content coding of citizens' arguments about the ballot initiative, we analyze how this privileged subset of citizens reasons about following or ignoring various authorities on the issue of medical marijuana. The article uses an exploratory abductive analysis of secondary semi‐structured interview data to understand citizens' reasoning on this issue and to expand theories of expert authority in direct democratic settings. We find a variety of different ways in which white male citizens accept or reject expert medical authority on medical marijuana in the context of Arizona Proposition 203 (2010).

show abstract