Changing Research Context Research Articles

Qualitative Research Studies Online: Using Prompted Weekly Journal Entries During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Solicited journal entries are a qualitative research method with a fairly strong tradition in sociological research and particularly in qualitative health research. However, the practices and strengths associated with solicited journal entries have not been explored as frequently or comprehensively as more conventional qualitative research methods, such as interviews. During the COVID-19 pandemic we carried out two online studies employing solicited written journal entries and photos. One study focused on pregnancy and health care experiences during the pandemic and the other on everyday life while working from home due to public health restrictions. Here, we discuss solicited online journal entries as a qualitative method and reflect on the strengths and challenges we encountered, including those related to using the online survey tool LimeSurvey for a qualitative diary-based study. The richness of data and the ability to solicit participants’ contemporaneous reflections over the course of a set length of time, the ability to reach people across time zones and in multiple places, and the ability to adapt prompts in a quickly changing research context are major strengths of online journaling. The level of commitment required by participants, the potential for attrition, the need for literacy and technology access, and the large amount of data from each participant are potential limitations for researchers to consider.

The changing research context: implications for leadership

Within the changing tertiary environment, research activity and performance are coming under greater pressure and scrutiny. External policy and funding directives are resulting in revised institutional objectives, requiring variations to organisational structures and processes. These changes have an impact on the relationship between the institution and the individual. Institutional executives provide benchmarks for revised activity and performance, while academic staff respond to new internal directives and accountability requirements by reprioritising their responsibilities. At the same time, there will inevitably be an informal evaluation of the resourcing and support provided for staff as they experience the institutional push to attain greater research outputs. Within this dynamic environment there is the potential for tensions and negative outcomes if interactions are not carefully directed. The implications for leadership are obvious. What is less evident is whether the strategic intent of the institution resonates through the institution in alignment with the development of a supportive research culture.

Interdisciplinary researching: Exploring the opportunities and risks of working together

The aim of this paper is to explore the issues that present both opportunities and risks when working in an interdisciplinary research project. As the research context changes in the social reform environment, some scientists suggest it is time to forge new scientific working relationships, to open up the boundaries between disciplines. Interdisciplinary research is an alternative approach for nurses who might develop different ways of working with health researchers from other disciplines. The ideas in this paper come from a larger, grounded theory study on interdisciplinary teamwork. The changing research context, the meaning of interdisciplinary working, collaboration, and competence, integrating different disciplinary perspectives, interprofessional learning opportunities, and the relevance for nurses are explored in relation to interdisciplinary researching. Interdisciplinary researching is complex and potentially risky; however, it does offer nurses the opportunities for professional growth, development, and research work satisfaction. Many nurses are already well-trained researchers and might consider developing roles as interdisciplinary research project managers as well.

“Leveling the playing field” in the contested Territory of the South African past: A “public” versus a “people’s” form of historical archaeology outreach

In South Africa, the legacy of colonialism and apartheid includes a history of partisan concepts of ethnic and social identity. The long charged, sociopolitical context has also affected research questions, as well as public interpretations, about the past. Today, there are calls for a new past for the new South Africa. Historical archaeology can provide both a methodology and raw materials which South Africans can use to form their own interpretations of their past helping, in turn, to engender pride through a historical consciousness emancipated from colonial and apartheid ideology. This article presents an overview of this complex and changing research context and its implications for a historical archaeology study of South African frontier identity. Research and “public” archaeology efforts concerning material and mythical perspectives of ethnicity are discussed. Employed in a cross-context comparison with African-American research, this study highlights the need for decolonized historical archaeology outreach.