Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:40:16.326Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rush to Transparency: DA-RT and the Potential Dangers for Qualitative Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 February 2018

Kristen Renwick Monroe
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What is the impact of the recent Data Access and Research Transparency (DA-RT) initiative and the Journal Editors Transparency Statement (JETS) on scholars working with qualitative data? Analysis finds DA-RT insufficiently sensitive to the needs of qualitative data and focuses on four inter-related reasons why DA-RT needs to be revised before being widely adopted by political science journals: (1) space constraints that hinder full journal presentation of the analysis of qualitative data; (2) ethical concerns about protecting human subjects, and the time needed to prepare such data before publicly sharing them; (3) costs of data collection and the right of first usage; and (4) a potentially chilling effect of DA-RT on certain types of research topics. Analysis of the author’s own journey from econometric and survey analysis to narrative interviews with people in vulnerable situations, facing moral dilemmas, illustrates why DA-RT needs additional safeguards for qualitative data and methods. Given the increasing importance of qualitative data, and its ability to lend insight into critical political topics, the author argues that implementing the current version of the DA-RT initiative could hinder political science’s ability to address important political questions. Thus DA-RT must be modified to address the special needs of qualitative data.

Type
Reflections
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 141 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Greenblatt, Stephen. 2017. “Can We Ever Master King Lear?” New York Review of Books, February 23, 63, 3.Google Scholar
Hauser, Marc. 2006. Moral Minds: How Nature Designed a Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. New York: Harper Collins/Ecco.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Albert. 1997. The Passions and the Interests. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick. 1996. The Heart of Altruism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick. 2004. The Hand of Compassion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick. 2012. Ethics in an Age of Terror and Genocide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick, Lampros-Monroe, Chloe, and Pellechia, Jonah. A Darkling Plain: Stories of Conflict and Humanity during War. 2015. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Myers, Milton. 1983. The Soul of Modern Economic Man. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Nowotny, Helga. 2015. “The Radical Openness of Science and Innovation: Why Uncertainty Is Inherent in the Openness towards the future.” Science and Society, November 9.Google Scholar
Tönnies, Ferdinand. 2001. Community and Civil Society. Ed. Harris, Jose. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripp, Aili. 2017. “Transparency and Integrity in Conducting Research in Non-Democratic Contexts.” Presented at the 2017 Annual meetings of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, August 31–September 3.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos and Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.” Science 185(4157): 1124–31.Google Scholar
Wilson, James Q. 1997. The Moral Sense. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Women’s Caucus for Political Science. 2017. “Statement on DA-RT.” Available at http://www.apsanet.org/RESOURCES/For-the-Public/Political-Science-Organizations/Caucuses-in-Political-Science/Womens-Caucus-for-Political-Science Google Scholar