A methodological note on quantitative field research in conflict zones: get your hands dirty
Research in areas affected by armed conflict presents many challenges beyond those normally encountered by social scientists. This enhanced complexity has resulted in the conventional academic view that serious quantitative field research has to wait until the fighting stops. Those studies that were...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of social research methodology 2012-01, Vol.15 (1), p.1-13 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 13 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 1 |
| container_title | International journal of social research methodology |
| container_volume | 15 |
| creator | Haer, Roos Becher, Inna |
| description | Research in areas affected by armed conflict presents many challenges beyond those normally encountered by social scientists. This enhanced complexity has resulted in the conventional academic view that serious quantitative field research has to wait until the fighting stops. Those studies that were conducted in a conflict area fail to discuss how insecurity affects the methodological side of the research process. In this article, the authors argue that valid and reliable quantitative fieldwork is possible even in the most dangerous contexts, but it requires some methodological flexibility. In discussing this flexibility, the authors devote attention to two major components of quantitative survey research: the sampling process and the data collection. In doing so, this article focuses in particular on face-to-face interviews as the mode of data collection. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1080/13645579.2011.597654 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1347783039</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1136145050</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-2ee588573d9de47cc8debf89efbeaafe3e2ef7af4e55e090ad099c7acb71ff223</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU9LXDEUxR_SQq36DboIuOlmxpt_k5duikjVguDG7oSQSW6cSCbRJFMZP33fMHbTRXF1z-J3DtxzhuELhTmFEc4oXwgplZ4zoHQutVpIcTAcUrEQM8kBPkya7_TEfBo-t_YIwCil7HC4Pydr7KviSyoP0dlEculISibPG5t77LbH30hCxORJxYa2uhWJmbiSQ4quk9eSsX0jD9jJtmwqWdnsG_Gx9u3x8DHY1PDk7R4Nvy5_3F1cz25ur35enN_MnOCizxiiHEepuNcehXJu9LgMo8awRGsDcmQYlA0CpUTQYD1o7ZR1S0VDYIwfDV_3uU-1PG-wdbOOzWFKNmPZNEO5UGrkwPX70Il9T-rUKRUSJEzo6T_o41RFnn42DGDUUjOxo8SecrW0VjGYpxrXtm4NBbMb0vwd0uyGNPshJ9v3vS3mUOravpSavOl2m0oN1WYXm-H_TfgD4bilBQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2008959240</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A methodological note on quantitative field research in conflict zones: get your hands dirty</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Haer, Roos ; Becher, Inna</creator><creatorcontrib>Haer, Roos ; Becher, Inna</creatorcontrib><description>Research in areas affected by armed conflict presents many challenges beyond those normally encountered by social scientists. This enhanced complexity has resulted in the conventional academic view that serious quantitative field research has to wait until the fighting stops. Those studies that were conducted in a conflict area fail to discuss how insecurity affects the methodological side of the research process. In this article, the authors argue that valid and reliable quantitative fieldwork is possible even in the most dangerous contexts, but it requires some methodological flexibility. In discussing this flexibility, the authors devote attention to two major components of quantitative survey research: the sampling process and the data collection. In doing so, this article focuses in particular on face-to-face interviews as the mode of data collection.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1364-5579</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-5300</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2011.597654</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Routledge</publisher><subject>Armed conflict ; Conflict ; Data collection ; Fieldwork ; Flexibility ; Insecurity ; Methodology (Data Collection) ; Polls & surveys ; Quantitative analysis ; quantitative field research ; Research methodology ; Research methods ; Risk ; Sampling ; Security ; Social research ; Social Scientists ; survey research ; Surveys</subject><ispartof>International journal of social research methodology, 2012-01, Vol.15 (1), p.1-13</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 2012</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-2ee588573d9de47cc8debf89efbeaafe3e2ef7af4e55e090ad099c7acb71ff223</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-2ee588573d9de47cc8debf89efbeaafe3e2ef7af4e55e090ad099c7acb71ff223</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904,33753,33754</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Haer, Roos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becher, Inna</creatorcontrib><title>A methodological note on quantitative field research in conflict zones: get your hands dirty</title><title>International journal of social research methodology</title><description>Research in areas affected by armed conflict presents many challenges beyond those normally encountered by social scientists. This enhanced complexity has resulted in the conventional academic view that serious quantitative field research has to wait until the fighting stops. Those studies that were conducted in a conflict area fail to discuss how insecurity affects the methodological side of the research process. In this article, the authors argue that valid and reliable quantitative fieldwork is possible even in the most dangerous contexts, but it requires some methodological flexibility. In discussing this flexibility, the authors devote attention to two major components of quantitative survey research: the sampling process and the data collection. In doing so, this article focuses in particular on face-to-face interviews as the mode of data collection.</description><subject>Armed conflict</subject><subject>Conflict</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Fieldwork</subject><subject>Flexibility</subject><subject>Insecurity</subject><subject>Methodology (Data Collection)</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Quantitative analysis</subject><subject>quantitative field research</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Research methods</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>Security</subject><subject>Social research</subject><subject>Social Scientists</subject><subject>survey research</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><issn>1364-5579</issn><issn>1464-5300</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU9LXDEUxR_SQq36DboIuOlmxpt_k5duikjVguDG7oSQSW6cSCbRJFMZP33fMHbTRXF1z-J3DtxzhuELhTmFEc4oXwgplZ4zoHQutVpIcTAcUrEQM8kBPkya7_TEfBo-t_YIwCil7HC4Pydr7KviSyoP0dlEculISibPG5t77LbH30hCxORJxYa2uhWJmbiSQ4quk9eSsX0jD9jJtmwqWdnsG_Gx9u3x8DHY1PDk7R4Nvy5_3F1cz25ur35enN_MnOCizxiiHEepuNcehXJu9LgMo8awRGsDcmQYlA0CpUTQYD1o7ZR1S0VDYIwfDV_3uU-1PG-wdbOOzWFKNmPZNEO5UGrkwPX70Il9T-rUKRUSJEzo6T_o41RFnn42DGDUUjOxo8SecrW0VjGYpxrXtm4NBbMb0vwd0uyGNPshJ9v3vS3mUOravpSavOl2m0oN1WYXm-H_TfgD4bilBQ</recordid><startdate>20120101</startdate><enddate>20120101</enddate><creator>Haer, Roos</creator><creator>Becher, Inna</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7UB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120101</creationdate><title>A methodological note on quantitative field research in conflict zones: get your hands dirty</title><author>Haer, Roos ; Becher, Inna</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-2ee588573d9de47cc8debf89efbeaafe3e2ef7af4e55e090ad099c7acb71ff223</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Armed conflict</topic><topic>Conflict</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Fieldwork</topic><topic>Flexibility</topic><topic>Insecurity</topic><topic>Methodology (Data Collection)</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Quantitative analysis</topic><topic>quantitative field research</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Research methods</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>Security</topic><topic>Social research</topic><topic>Social Scientists</topic><topic>survey research</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Haer, Roos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becher, Inna</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>International journal of social research methodology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Haer, Roos</au><au>Becher, Inna</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A methodological note on quantitative field research in conflict zones: get your hands dirty</atitle><jtitle>International journal of social research methodology</jtitle><date>2012-01-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>13</epage><pages>1-13</pages><issn>1364-5579</issn><eissn>1464-5300</eissn><abstract>Research in areas affected by armed conflict presents many challenges beyond those normally encountered by social scientists. This enhanced complexity has resulted in the conventional academic view that serious quantitative field research has to wait until the fighting stops. Those studies that were conducted in a conflict area fail to discuss how insecurity affects the methodological side of the research process. In this article, the authors argue that valid and reliable quantitative fieldwork is possible even in the most dangerous contexts, but it requires some methodological flexibility. In discussing this flexibility, the authors devote attention to two major components of quantitative survey research: the sampling process and the data collection. In doing so, this article focuses in particular on face-to-face interviews as the mode of data collection.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/13645579.2011.597654</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1364-5579 |
| ispartof | International journal of social research methodology, 2012-01, Vol.15 (1), p.1-13 |
| issn | 1364-5579 1464-5300 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1347783039 |
| source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
| subjects | Armed conflict Conflict Data collection Fieldwork Flexibility Insecurity Methodology (Data Collection) Polls & surveys Quantitative analysis quantitative field research Research methodology Research methods Risk Sampling Security Social research Social Scientists survey research Surveys |
| title | A methodological note on quantitative field research in conflict zones: get your hands dirty |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T03%3A18%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20methodological%20note%20on%20quantitative%20field%20research%20in%20conflict%20zones:%20get%20your%20hands%20dirty&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20social%20research%20methodology&rft.au=Haer,%20Roos&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=13&rft.pages=1-13&rft.issn=1364-5579&rft.eissn=1464-5300&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/13645579.2011.597654&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3E1136145050%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2008959240&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |