Abstract
In this chapter, I look at two examples of research which bear on gender relations and which try to contribute to shifting stereotypical conceptions thereof (Woldegies in Economic empowerment through income generating activities and social mobilization: the case of married Amhara women of Wadla Woreda, North Wollo Zone, Ethiopia, 2014, Woldegies in South Afr Rev Sociol 47(1):58–80, 2016; Ssali & Theobald in South Afr Rev Sociol 47(1):81–98, 2016). In the first example, the research concerned women’s empowerment via income-generating activities and social mobilization in a region of Ethiopia. In the second example, the research was around gendered experiences of the civil war in Northern Uganda and post-war reconstruction. I discuss in some detail Woldegies’s account of research exploring (and trying to strengthen) women’s experiences of empowerment. I draw out and extrapolate from his exposition the responsibilities he assumed in trying to make a constructive difference to the life-worlds of participants (in their communities) and to wider audiences via the research. I concentrate on how one might judge research in terms of considerations of the involvement of the research endeavor in the becoming of the “realities” being explored. I move on to discuss (in less detail) Ssali and Theobald’s research—in this case, drawing out additional issues relating to the responsibilities of researchers, especially when conducting research asking people to recall and recount traumatic experiences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In any case, I do not believe that any interpretation of a text—or conversation—can refer to some “real” meaning, independently of the interpretive effort (cf. Romm, 1997, 1998). What I did was check with Belete Woldegies and with Sarah Ssali and Sally Theobald whether they wished to modify any of my interpretations of the work. Woldegies indicated in reply to my draft account that “I like the way you presented the research in your book entitled ‘Responsible Research Practice’” (pers. comm. via email, 10 January 2017). Ssali, who replied on behalf of Theobald too (10 October 2016), clarified for the research ethics section that they had had counsellors on board in case this was needed, as required by their Institutional Review Board.
- 2.
I had been mentor to Woldegies for some parts of his studies under the leadership program at the University of Antioch in USA (under the direction of Philomena Essed, whose position on race and gender I pointed to in my narrative in Chap. 2, Sect. 2.2). Subsequent to his handing in his doctorate, I suggested to him that he could submit a paper toward a special issue of the South African Review of Sociology, of which I was guest editor (vol. 47, 1, 2016), and so we continued our virtual interactions/discussions around the value of his research. In the case of Ssali and Theobald, our communications began when they submitted (unsolicited) an article for the special issue of the South African Review of Sociology.
- 3.
This became better elucidated in the article he wrote toward a special edition of the South African Review of Sociology (vol. 47, 1, 2016), of which I was guest editor. See also fn 5.
- 4.
Ssali and I had some personal communication via email, sparked by her sending an abstract for her proposed paper for the special issue of the South African Review of Sociology, which I was guest editing. Subsequent interaction followed in which I suggested how she might direct the paper in order to make it suitable for the issue. Further to this, I interacted with her in regard to the reviews on the article that had been submitted by her and co-author Theobald. One of the reviewers asked the question, “how can life history interviewing be transformative?” This directed Ssali and Theobald to consider this question in more depth.
- 5.
A summary account, drawing out the implications for research directed toward social development, is provided in Woldegies (2016).
- 6.
Wollo is one of the 11 zones in the Amhara Regional State and is situated in the Northeast of the region. The North Wollo Zone has 13 administrative Woredas, nine rural and four ketema woredas: Wadla, Dawnt, Meket, Bugina, Lasta, Gubalafto, Habiru, Giedan, and Kobo are the rural woredas; and the ketema administrations are Woldiya, Lalibela, Kobo, and Mersa (Woldegies, 2014, p. 32, citing Amhara Regional State, 2010).
- 7.
Nurture Education and Development (NED) is a not-for profit, non-partisan and indigenous non-governmental organization officially established in 1999 and re-registered by the Charities and Societies Agency on October 7, 2009, according to the New NGO law of Ethiopia (Woldegies, 2014, p. 16).
- 8.
Puebla, Faux, and Mey aver that “most published interviews do not reflect the amount of effort and thought that went into it” (2004, para 31). I suggest that indeed a lot of (hidden and not reported-upon) effort and thought went into the construction of these interviews (as I also am cognizant of, from mentoring Woldegies at an earlier stage of the project, when I was asked to act as mentor for him on behalf of Antioch University).
- 9.
Organization for Rehabilitation and Development in Amhara (ORDA). This was one of the charity organizations with which Woldegies worked closely.
- 10.
This is of course not the only context in which the weak voice of (especially rural) women has been noticed. Wang, Burris, and Ping note that “in developing countries, rural women are often neither seen nor heard, despite their extra-ordinary contribution to the labor force (1996, p. 1391). In view of this, they developed a method which was used initially in Chinese rural villages to encourage Chinese village women to become, as they put it, “visual anthropologists”. The research process involved “putting cameras in the hands of rural women and other constituents who seldom have access to those who make decisions over their lives” (1996, p. 1391). It was hoped that in this way the women could develop a louder voice in policy-making circles. Wang, Burrie and Ping contend that the “photonovella” research approach has the potential to be impactful in that “through exhibitions in public spaces, their photographs and voices reach broader audiences in general, including policy makers in particular” (1996, p. 1393). Nonetheless, subsequent research on how such photovoice research might influence policy making suggests a variety of mechanisms that need to be put in place such as (a) longstanding relationships between researchers and community; (b) intensive training to build community capacity; (c) an iterative cycle of community documentation and critical dialogue; and (d) multilevel outcomes including engaging community members in action and advocacy, enhancing understanding of community needs and assets, and facilitating individual empowerment (see Catalani & Minkler, 2010, p. 448).
- 11.
This is used as a form of collective savings and capital accumulation (Woldegies, 2014, p. 111).
- 12.
The acronyms of WWWCYA and TVED refer respectively to the Wadla Woreda Women Children and Youth Affairs Office and the TVED Technical Vocational and Enterprises Development office.
- 13.
Woldegies states that, as he interprets it, “the research benefited the women and their supporting family members to enhance their awareness of women’s rights and gender equality” (2016, p. 68).
- 14.
They discuss this in the context of racism and racial stereotypes, but the general discussion of stereotypes and of the importance of generating counter-narratives is relevant here. See Romm (2010, p. 169) for a fuller account of this argument.
- 15.
He notes that with regard to the credibility of what was said in the FGDs, typically, focus groups have high validity which is due in large part to be the credibility of participants’ comments (p. 90). This is especially so, because in this case, the “data” that were generated in the FGDs constituted an expansion of what had been said in the interview forum.
- 16.
Woldegies did, however, keep secret certain private information that was divulged in some cases, and did not report on it at all: “Information that needs to be kept private or confidential is not reported in this study report” (2014, p. 99).
- 17.
In Chap. 7, I highlight how retroduction can be employed as a mode of inference, which proceeds from the interpretation of observation/experience to the postulation of structures/patterns that affect life chances and are considered to provide leverage for change.
- 18.
When I sent the draft of this chapter to Sarah Ssali (and to Sally Theobald in October 2016), Ssali made the comment (10 October 2016) that upon reflection, the word “international” would also be fitting here “given the international nature of the consortiums and involvement with DFID UK”. (Sally had asked Sarah to respond to my chapter on both of their behalves.)
- 19.
The Consortium also indicates its commitment to pay attention to “gendered implications of policy and expenditure” (http://www.rebuildconsortium.com/).
- 20.
This was part of the process of my inviting texts for the special issue of the South African Review of Sociology which I was guest editing—and deciding whether submission would be suitable for the general or special issue.
- 21.
Cram (2009, p. 316) indicates that in their post facto reflections on research interviews conducted with Māori families that had lost a baby to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), Edwards, McManus, and McCreanor (2005) emphasized as part of their reflections “the important role played by the Māori SIDS Prevention (MSP) care workers who were present during the interviews. The MSP care workers were on hand to offer expert support and comfort to participants during and after the interviews, and their presence helped participants maintain their composure while talking about this grief-laden topic”.
References
Armstrong, A. K. (1992). Struggling over scarce resources: Women and maintenance in Southern Africa. Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications.
Belmont Report: The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1979). Ethical principles and guidelines for research involving human subjects. Washington DC: Office of the Secretary, US Department of Health and Human Services.
Cannella, G. S., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2007). Predatory vs. dialogic ethics: Constructing an illusion or ethical practice as the core of research methods. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(3), 315–335.
Cannella, G. S., & Manuelito, K. D. (2008). Feminisms from unthought locations: Indigenous worldviews, marginalized feminisms, and revisioning an anticolonial social science. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, & L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 45–59). London: Sage.
Castro-Reyes, P., Cooks, J., Drew, E., Edwards, K., Freeman, E., Isaacs, M-L., et al. (2015). Research ethics reconsidered in the context of community-engaged research. American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting and Expo, Oct. 31–4 Nov., APHA.
Catalani, C., & Minkler, M. (2010). Photovoice: A review of the literature in health and public health. Health Education and Behavior, 37(3), 424–451.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. London: Sage.
Chilisa, B. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. London: Sage.
Chilisa, B., Major, T. E., & Khudu-Petersen, K. (2017). Community engagement with a postcolonial, African-based relational paradigm. Qualitative Research, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117696176.
Chilisa, B., & Ntseane, G. (2010). Resisting dominant discourses: Implications of Indigenous, African feminist theory and methods for gender and education research. Gender and Education, 22(6), 617–632.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: Routledge.
Cram, F. (2009). Maintaining Indigenous voices. In D. M. Mertens & P. Ginsberg (Eds.), The handbook of social research ethics (pp. 308–322). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Delgado, R. (1989). Storytelling for oppositionists and others: A plea for narrative. Michigan Law Review, 87(8), 2411–2441.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Deviance, Positive. (2004). A community based approach to solving community problems. Positive Deviance, 1(2), 1–8.
Dzapasi, A. (2015). Educational inputs for grooming a culture of empowerment. In O. Maguvhe & M. D. Magano (Eds.), Disability in context: A socio-educational perspective (pp. 33–46). Hampshire: Cengage Learning.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
Gergen, K. J. (1978). Toward generative theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(11), 1344.
Gergen, K. J. (2015). From mirroring to worldmaking: Research as future forming. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45(3), 287–310.
Gill, R. (2010). Breaking the silence: The hidden injuries of neo-liberal academia. In R. Flood & R. Gill (Eds.), Secrecy and silence in the research process: Feminist reflections (pp. 228–244). London: Routledge.
Goodson, I. F., & Gill, R. S. (2011). Understanding the life history research process. Counterpoints, 386, 35–54.
Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (1995). The active interview. London: Sage.
Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2003). Postmodern interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations, and contexts. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Kuntz, A. M. (2015). The responsible methodologist: Inquiry, truth-telling, and social justice. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 275–289.
Lincoln, Y. S. (2001). Engaging sympathies: Relationships between action research and social constructivism. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 124–132). London: Sage.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2003). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (2nd ed., pp. 253–291). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Magnat, V. (2012). Performative approaches to interdisciplinary and cross cultural research. In L.-H. Smith & A. Narayan (Eds.), Research beyond borders (pp. 157–177). Plymouth, England: Lexington.
Marshall, C., & Young, M. (2006). Gender and methodology. In C. Skelton, B. Francis, & L. Smulyan (Eds.), Handbook of gender and education (pp. 63–78). London: Sage.
Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2003). From clients to citizens: Asset-based community development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice, 13(5), 474–486.
Mayaba, N. N. (2012). Exploring the use of folktales to enhance the resilience of children orphaned and rendered vulnerable by HIV and AIDS. Doctoral thesis, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.
Melrose, S. (2010). Naturalistic generalization. In A. J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclopedia of case study research (pp. 191–193). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Mertens, D. M. (2010). Transformative mixed methods research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 469–474.
Mertens, D. M. (2012). Transformative mixed methods: Addressing inequities. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 802–813.
Minkler, M. (2010). Linking science and policy through community-based participatory research to study and address health disparities. American Journal of Public Health, 100(Supplement 1), 81–87.
Musyoka, M., & Mertens, D. M. (2007). Making research and evaluation our own: Ethical implications for strengthening the foundations for Africa-rooted and Africa-led inquiry. Mosenodi, 13, 104–113.
Peattie, L. (2001). Theorizing planning: Some comments on flyvbjerg's rationality and power. International Planning Studies, 6(3),257–262.
Puebla, C. A. C., Faux, R. B., & Mey, G. (2004). Qualitative researchers—Stories told, stories shared: The storied nature of qualitative research. An introduction to the special issue: FQS interviews. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 5(3), Art. 37.
Redman-MacLaren, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Transformational grounded theory: Theory, voice, and action. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(3), 1–12.
Romm, N. R. A. (1997). Becoming more accountable: A comment on Hammersley and Gomm. Sociological Research Online, 2(3), Art. 2.
Romm, N. R. A. (1998). Caricaturing and categorizing in processes of argument. Sociological Research Online, 3(2), Art. 10.
Romm, N. R. A. (2010). New racism: Revisiting researcher accountabilities. New York, NY: Springer.
Romm, N. R. A. (2014). Active and accountable social inquiry: Implications and examples. Participatory Educational Research, 1(2), 13–20.
Shumbamhini, M. (2005). Storying widowhood in Shona culture. Master’s dissertation, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. New York, NY: Zed Books.
Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Zed Books.
Speer, P. W., & Christens, B. D. (2013). An approach to scholarly impact through strategic engagement in community-based research. Journal of Social Issues, 69(4), 734–753.
Ssali, S. N., & Theobald, S. (2016). Using life histories to explore gendered experiences of conflict in Gulu District, Northern Uganda: Implications for post-conflict health reconstruction. South African Review of Sociology, 47(1), 81–98.
Tanggaard, L. (2009). The research interview as a dialogical context for the production of social life and personal narratives. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(9), 1498–1515.
Wang, C., Burris, M. A., & Ping, X. Y. (1996). Chinese village women as visual anthropologists: A participatory approach to reaching policymakers. Social Science and Medicine, 42(10), 1391–1400.
White, L. (2009). Challenge of research ethics committees to the nature of operations research. Omega, 37(6), 1083–1088.
Wilson, S. (2008). Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Halifax, Canada: Fernwood.
Woldegies, B. (2010). Organizational change project on women’s entrepreneurship development program with nutrition diversification in rural Merhabete, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. Unpublished paper. Yellow Springs, OH: Antioch University.
Woldegies, B. D. (2014). Economic empowerment through income generating activities and social mobilization: The case of married Amhara women of Wadla Woreda, North Wollo Zone, Ethiopia. Doctoral thesis, Antioch University, Yellow Springs, Ohio.
Woldegies, B. D. (2016). Research highlighting options for gender empowerment in Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. South African Review of Sociology, 47(1), 58–80.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Romm, N.R.A. (2018). Actively Facilitating Individual and Focus Group Narrations: Responsibly Foregrounding Gender Stereotyping While Stimulating (Contextual) Empowerment. In: Responsible Research Practice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74386-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74386-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74384-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74386-8
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)