Advertisement

Research Design and Methods: Change for Good

  • Louise Sinden-CarrollEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Having walked in both the hearing and hearing loss worlds offers me a unique auto-ethnographic and, at times, ethnographic research opportunity, which enables the application of multi-method qualitative research.

References

  1. Adams, Tony, E., Ellis, C., & Holman Jones, S. (2017). Auto ethnography The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods. Jörg Matthes (General Editor), Christine S. Davis and Robert F. Potter (Associate Editors). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Araral, E., Fritzen, S., Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2012). Institutional analysis and political economy by McGimms, M.D. and Aligica, P.D. In Routledge handbook of public policy. ISBN 978-0-203-09757-1 (ebk).Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, J. E., (1975). ‘Public Policy-Maker’ Publisher, Praeger. Original from, the University of California. Digitized, Dec 8, 2006. ISBN, 0275846806, 9780275846800. Google Scholar
  4. Bowers, M. (1981). Hearing Impairment in Prisoners. Deafness Research Foundation, Dilworth Clinic, Remuera Road, Auckland.Google Scholar
  5. Brewer, G. D. & DeLeon, P., (1983). The foundations of policy analysis. Chicago, IL: The Dorsey Press. Google Scholar
  6. Brydon-Miller, M., Kral, M., Maguire, P., Noffke, S., & Sabhlok, A. (2011). Jazz and the Banyan tree: Roots and riffs on participatory action research. In N. K. Denizen & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research, part iii: Strategies of inquiry.Google Scholar
  7. Churchman, C. W. (1979). The systems approach and its enemies. New York: Basic Books Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Cordoba, J. R., Midgley, G., & Torres, D. R. (2000). Rethinking stakeholder involvement. An application of the theories of autopoiesis and boundary critique to planning. In Human centered methods in information systems: Current research and practice. London, UK: IDEA Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  9. Delaney, C., (2004). Investigating Culture: An Experiential Introduction to Anthropology. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Denshire, S., (2013). ‘Autoethnography’, Sociopedia.isa,  https://doi.org/10.1177/205684601351.
  11. Ellingson. (2011). Analysis and representation across the continuum. In Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y., Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.)Google Scholar
  12. Ellis, C., Adams, Tony E. & Bochner, A.P. (2011). Autoethnography: An Overview. FQS 12 (1), Art.10.Google Scholar
  13. Fetterman, D. M. (2010). Ethnography step by step (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  14. Fischer, F., Miller, G. J., & Sidney, M. S. (2007). Chapter 4, Theories of the policy cycle by Werner, J. and Wegrich, K. In Handbook of public policy analysis, theory and methods. Boca Raton: CRC Press. ISBN 10: 1-57444-561-8 (Hardcover).Google Scholar
  15. Flyvberg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Francomano, D. C. (Producer). (2012). CSF Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Colloquium. Retrieved from: https://vimeo.com/35531423.
  17. Goodall, H. L., Jr. (2006). A need to know. The clandestine history of a CIA family. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hermann, A. F. (2005). Journal of Loss and Trauma 10 (4). Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  19. Jackson, M. C. (2000). Systems approach to management. University of Hull, UK: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Jenkins, W. (1978). Policy Analysis: A Political and Organisational Perspective (Government and administration series), Publisher: Martin Robertson, ISBN-10: 0855202017, ISBN-13: 978-0855202019.Google Scholar
  21. Kingdon, J. W. (1993a). Agendas and Alternatives: How do Issues get on Public Policy Agenda’s? London, UK: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  22. Kingdon, J. W. (1993b). How do Issues get on public policy agendas? In W. J. Wilson (Ed.), Sociology and the public agenda. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. May, J. V. & Wildavsky, A. B., (1978). Editors: The Policy cycle Beverly Hills: Sage Publications ISBN: 0803908253, ISBN: 0803908261 (pbk.). Google Scholar
  24. Midgley, G. (2000). Systemic intervention, philosophy, methodology, and practice: Contemporary systems thinking. University of Hull, UK: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). The Sage handbook of action: Research participative inquiry and practice (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Rittel, W. H. J., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 6(1), 76–84; 155–169.Google Scholar
  28. Ulrich, W. (1996/2014). A primer to critical systems heuristics for action researchers.Google Scholar
  29. Wadsworth, Y. (2010). Building in research and evaluation: Human inquiry for living systems. Crows Nest, NSW, Australia: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  30. Werner, O. (1998). Short Take 24: Do We Need Standards for Ethnography? Field Methods 10(1), 1–3.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NGO Services LimitedAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations