Anticipating and Addressing the Politicization of Research

Chelli, Mohamed; Cunliffe, Ann L.

doi:10.1177/1094428120969884

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, as I did, I weighed the precarious balance of risks and rewards of doing so. Researchers studying “sensitive” or “taboo” topics, including those involving stigmatized groups, have written about the risks associated with such work, such as external criticism or demonization of the researcher for “speaking truth to power” as well as the misrepresentation or politicization of one's research findings (Chelli & Cunliffe, 2022; Lev, 2010; Stahlke, 2018). In turn, I grappled with the question of how my work might be misused in ways that could cause harm to the very families I sought to center and validate.…”

Section: Professionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

From safety in silence to speaking up for LGBTQ+ families: A reflection on the personal, professional, and political through a feminist lens

Goldberg

2023

J of Family Theo & Revie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I employ a feminist perspective in examining the interconnections across my personal, professional, and political activities. Rather than smoothing out the inconsistencies, tensions, and difficult spots, I strive to engage with them as points of entry to deeper knowledge and understanding. I begin by discussing elements of my personal upbringing, and the ways that it shaped my lens on families and my interest in the hidden and less understood aspects of family life. I then examine my professional career and trajectory, and how it has shifted alongside changes in the sociopolitical landscape, the evolution of scholarship in LGBTQ+ families, and my own privilege. I also explore how I have grappled with but also leveraged the politicized and political nature of my research, and sought to be an agent of change beyond the four walls of the university. I end with my thoughts on the benefits of this type of reflexive exercise for new and seasoned scholars.

show abstract

Section: Professionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

From safety in silence to speaking up for LGBTQ+ families: A reflection on the personal, professional, and political through a feminist lens

Goldberg

2023

J of Family Theo & Revie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We should therefore beware of forces, institutions and policies that seek to erect inflexible boundaries around knowledge communitieswhich regulate and constrain the importation of ideas and epistemological agendas from the outside (Feyerabend, 1978). My point is that as researchers, we always need to be reflexive about our own research and the broader institutions that surround it (Chelli and Cunliffe, 2022;Wickert et al, 2021). Therefore, being reflexively aware of the conditions of possibility that may help to foster innovativeness and versatility in a given field, matters much.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The audit society: opening up a meaningful epistemological agenda

Gendron

2022

QRAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to bring to the fore some conditions of possibility surrounding the audit society thesis that might have contributed to construct a sense of distinctiveness around it, thereby facilitating its spread and travel in the accounting research community (and beyond) as a meaningful epistemological agenda. Design/methodology/approach My argument is that the aura of distinctiveness surrounding the audit society thesis as a noteworthy epistemological agenda relates to outsider influences, concept plasticity, and in-depth persuasiveness. I discuss these three features of distinctiveness through excerpts from the book and my own interpretations, the whole analytic process being circumscribed by a disciplined imagination exercise (Weick, 1989). Findings While the webs of unpredictability surrounding social life necessarily influenced the travel of the audit society thesis in academia, it seems to me that the thesis’ journey may have been helped by the author’s outsider status, the malleability of the thesis’ key concepts, and the medium (as a book) through which the thesis was articulated (which provided a persuasive platform to underline and demonstrate the depth of the argument). Originality/value In an age where journal rankings abound, the audit society thesis constitutes a telling demonstration that one can have a meaningful impact in setting an epistemological agenda and consolidate her/his scholarly reputation through the publication of a scholarly book.

show abstract

“…We consider our article as a political intervention (Gabriel, 2016) to the mis-developments that are afoot in terms of reviewer disengagement. Specifically, we paraphrase Chelli and Cunliffe’s (2020) notion of ‘politicisation of knowledge and its consequences for conducting research’ (p. 1) to the ‘politicisation of the review process’ and its consequences for the sustainability of the scholarly community. Given the ethical valence encapsulated in the dual focus that guides our article, this step is, we believe, long overdue and in need for a perhaps provocative reckoning with the status quo.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Publishing more than reviewing? Some ethical musings on the sustainability of the peer review process

Lindebaum

Jordan

2021

Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on our editorial experience, and acknowledging the regular editor grievances about reviewer disengagement at professional meeting and conferences, in this article we argue that the review system is in need of significant repair. We argue that this has emerged because an audit culture in academia and individual incentives (like reduced teaching loads or publication bonuses) have eroded the willingness of individuals to engage in the collective enterprise of peer-reviewing each others’ work on a quid pro quo basis. In response to this, we emphasise why it is unethical for potential reviewers to disengage from the review process, and outline the implications for our profession if colleagues publish more than they review. Designed as a political intervention in response to reviewer disengagement, we aim to ‘politicise’ the review process and its consequences for the sustainability of the scholarly community. We propose three pathways towards greater reviewer engagement: (i) senior scholars setting the right kind of ‘reviewer’ example; (ii) journals introducing recognition awards to foster a healthy reviewer progression path and (iii) universities and accreditation bodies moving to explicitly recognise reviewing in workload models and evaluations. While all three proposals have merit, the latter point is especially powerful in fostering reviewer engagement as it aligns individual and institutional goals in ‘measurable’ ways. In this way, ironically, the audit culture can be subverted to address the imbalance between individual and collective goals.

show abstract

Anticipating and Addressing the Politicization of Research

Cited by 8 publications

References 73 publications

From safety in silence to speaking up for LGBTQ+ families: A reflection on the personal, professional, and political through a feminist lens

From safety in silence to speaking up for LGBTQ+ families: A reflection on the personal, professional, and political through a feminist lens

The audit society: opening up a meaningful epistemological agenda

Publishing more than reviewing? Some ethical musings on the sustainability of the peer review process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About