2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.10.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

“Censorship”, early childhood research quarterly and qualitative research: Not so much aced out as an own goal?

Abstract: As its starting point, this article investigates claims published in Qualitative Inquiry by Ceglowski, Bacigalupa, and Peck (2011) that Early Childhood Research Quarterly censored qualitative research. Unfortunately they assert rather than demonstrate political bias against qualitative research, fail to show that its publication in Early Childhood Research Quarterly has actually declined and ignore alternate hypotheses compatible with their data. After breaking their argument into parts, I find their censorshi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 13 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, authors who specialize in qualitative methodologies have opined that their academic peers, journal editors, and policymakers overlook the importance and legitimacy of their research studies (Ceglowski et al, 2011; Freeman et al, 2007; Schuermans, 2013; Tracy, 2010) in favor of objective, quantitative, and positivist/postpositivist research approaches (Morse, 2015). Such vituperations (Ceglowski et al, 2011; Chattoe-Brown, 2015; Winsler, 2015) are pertinent in understanding the state of ECEC research in Australia.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, authors who specialize in qualitative methodologies have opined that their academic peers, journal editors, and policymakers overlook the importance and legitimacy of their research studies (Ceglowski et al, 2011; Freeman et al, 2007; Schuermans, 2013; Tracy, 2010) in favor of objective, quantitative, and positivist/postpositivist research approaches (Morse, 2015). Such vituperations (Ceglowski et al, 2011; Chattoe-Brown, 2015; Winsler, 2015) are pertinent in understanding the state of ECEC research in Australia.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%