Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Researcher bias in participatory rural appraisal

832

Published on

Published in: Education
7 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Canada's IDRC is a unique institution and it has been an early leader in participatory research. IDRC's work has been able to appreciate the use of mixed methods (qual+quant) and as you state in slide 8 the importance of triangulation for validation and in slide 9 researcher reflexivity. A couple of examples of how their PR approach benefited the countries where they work would be great additions to this PPT. Maybe comments on this slideshare could be shared by IDRC supported researchers?? This is a nice summary - thanks!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Very well researched and great use of the IDRC as the example throughout, it helped contextualize your key points.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Great Presentation, Brit! I loved that you focused on the IDRC because it placed your topic in context. On a side note, one of your references, Karen McAllister, was a prof of mine at McGill :)
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Really well designed Brit! The information is really focused and clear.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • I really like the slide on combating researcher bias, really sticks outs, especially the bottom graphic. Remember to date your slides as it adds a copy right to your presentation.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
832
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
7
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Examining Researcher Bias in Participatory Rural Appraisal Through an IDRC Perspective BY BRIT ANELLOM S C . C A N D I D AT E , S E D R D , U N I V E R S I T Y O F G U E L P H , C A N A D A
  • 2. Why Focus on the International Development Research Centre? Interdisciplinary approach to international development research Nationally (Canada) funded –  Limits corporate interests in research Excellent database of prior research done  Including research done with different qualitative and quantitative (or mixed) methods “IDRC funds researchers in the developing world so they can build healthier, more prosperous societies” 3/20/2013
  • 3. Why Use Participatory Methods? Researchers and participants can learn from and with each other (Zeeuw and Wilbers, 2004) Participants become stakeholders and “own” the process, becoming engaged and empowered (Dodge and Bennett, 2011) Research can become a catalyst for „social transformation‟ (McAllister and Vernooy, 1999)Participatory Stakeholder SocialResearch Empowerment Transformation 3/20/2013
  • 4. The Qualitative Researcher Researcher must know their personal and cultural bias  Self-reflection to promote objectivity in qualitative research Understand socio-political and cultural context of research participants  Holistic understanding of context will create profound understanding of results As creator of a strong and robust research design, researcher must allow for flexibility  Plan for change 3/20/2013
  • 5. Defining Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) PRA is intended to enable people to conduct and share their own investigations and analysis. (Zeeuw and Wilbers, 2004)  Uses methods which facilitate this discussion such as: participatory video, mapping, network analysis etc. PRA operates under the assumption that local citizens have the knowledge the researcher wants, so it is beneficial to work together (Zeeuw and Wilbers, 2004) Appraisal: learning leading to action (www.caledonia.org.uk)  “...all actors [are] in a continuing process of learning...” (i.e. Including researcher) 3/20/2013
  • 6. Gender and PRA (Zeeuw and Wilbers, 2004) Many issues to consider when conducting research in either gender-specific socio-political „jobs‟ or in contexts where gender is valued differently  Researcher gender must be taken into account – perhaps have a research team with both genders on it  Sensitivity to cultural gender values is essential to harmony in research In rural contexts, is it important to keep in mind the balance of male and female responses and participants – both voices are important 3/20/2013
  • 7. The Possible Problem of Researcher Bias in PRA Language barriers – leads to a misinterpretation during fieldwork or mistranslation in analysis  Ideally initial coding scheme should come in dialogue with local participants (www.caledonia.org.uk) Cultural barriers – leads to disintegration of important relationships with key informants in research context  Loss of guide, supporter or aide is devastating when research is on a timeline Being too emotionally invested in research scenario that ability to think clearly is compromised  Especially important in contexts with vulnerable participants 3/20/2013
  • 8. The Possible Problem of Researcher Bias in PRA (cont.) Reliance on one sole key informant that researcher gets comfortable with  Especially relevant if researcher does not speak local language  Lack of triangulation leads to crumbling of research validity (Kalim for www.bdeduarticle.com) Researcher believes he/she is the expert  Researcher may well be tempted to see participants not as partners, but as students (caledonia.org.uk) 3/20/2013
  • 9. Summary of Researcher Bias All of the aforementioned scenarios fit into 2 categories (Onwuegbuzie et al, 2008):  Effect of researcher on participant unacknowledged  Effect of participant on researcher unacknowledged So, where do we go from here? Onwuegbuzie et al, argue for a systematic, reflexive debriefing of the researcher  To see how researcher bias formed the questions asked in the methodology and provide true clarity within internal logic of research design 3/20/2013
  • 10. Combating Researcher Bias Self-aware researcher will not allow personal/cultural bias influence research analysis or process (Onwuegbuzie et al, 2008) Prior education in research context absolutely essential  Even better if researcher is able to visit research location beforehand  Partaking in research context culture will help gain insight into participants Academic Full Contextual Researcher Understanding Education 3/20/2013
  • 11. Works Referenced de Zeeuw, H.; Wilbers, J. (2004). PRA Tools for Studying Urban Agriculture and Gender. IDRC. Retrieved: http://hdl.handle.net/10625/33988. Dodge, C.P.; Bennett, G. (2011). Changing Minds: A Facilitated Guide to Participatory Planning. IDRC. Retreived: http://hdl.handle.net/10625/4641. McAllister, K.; Vernooy, R. (1999). Action and Reflection: A Guide for Monitoring and Evaluating Participatory Research. IDRC. Retrieved: http://hdl.handle.net/10625/22617 3/20/2013
  • 12. Works Referenced (cont) Onwuegbuzie, A.J.; Leech, N.L.; Collins, K.M.T. (2008). Interviewing the Interpretive Researcher: A Method for Addressing the Crises of Representation, Legitimation and Praxis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 7(4). International Institute of Qualitative Methodology: Alberta, Canada. IDRC images from www.idrc.ca Graphics: author’s own 3/20/2013
  • 13. For Further Research… http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Pages/default.aspx http://www.caledonia.org.uk/pra.htm  Fantastic overview of the methodology, advantages and pitfalls in PRA http://www.bdeduarticle.com/research/192- participatory-rural-appraisal-pra-for-qualitative- research  Great source of list of PRA techniques that could be used http://www.iisd.org/casl/caslguide/pra.htm  Excellent for core PRA ideals and key problems PRA faces 3/20/2013

×