Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:40:14.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Annotating Without Anxiety: Achieving Adaptability, Accessibility, and Accountability Through ATI

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2021

Theo Milonopoulos Open the ORCID record for Theo Milonopoulos [Opens in a new window]
Theo Milonopoulos*
Affiliation:
Columbia University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Annotation for Transparent Inquiry (ATI): Transparency in Practice in Qualitative and Multi-Method Research
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 483 - 486
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

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

REFERENCES

Bennett, Andrew. 2015. “Appendix: Disciplining Our Conjectures: Systematizing Process Tracing with Bayesian Analysis.” In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool, ed. Andrew, Bennett and Checkel, Jeffrey 276–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, Andrew, Elman, Colin, and Owen, John. 2014. “Security Studies, Security Studies, and Recent Developments in Qualitative and Multi-Method Research.” Security Studies 23 (4): 657–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elman, Colin, Kapiszewski, Diana, and Lupia, Arthur. 2018. “Transparent Social Inquiry: Implications for Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 21:29–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairfield, Tasha, and Charman, Andrew. 2017. “Explicit Bayesian Analysis for Process Tracing: Guidelines, Opportunities, and Caveats.” Political Analysis 25 (3): 363–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guarino, Cassandra M., and Victor, M. H. Borden. 2017. “Faculty Service Loads and Gender: Are Women Taking Care of the Academic Family?” Research in Higher Education 58:672–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Tom. 1968[2002]. “Notes of the President’s Meeting with General Earle Wheeler, JCS, and General Creighton Abrams.” March 26. In Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume VI, Vietnam, January–August 1968, ed. Kent, Sieg, Document 156. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2002.Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana, and Karcher, Sebastian. 2020. “Transparency in Practice in Qualitative Research.” PS: Political Science & Politics, First View. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana, and Karcher, Sebastian. 2021. “Empowering Transparency: Annotation for Transparent Inquiry (ATI).” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi:10.1017/S1049096521000287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana, and Kirilova, Dessislava. 2014. “Transparency in Qualitative Security Studies Research: Standards, Benefits, and Challenges.” Security Studies 23 (4): 699–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karcher, Sebastian, and Weber, Nicholas. 2019. “Annotation for Transparent Inquiry: Transparent Data and Analysis.” IASSIST Quarterly 43 (2): 1–9.Google Scholar
Mayka, Lindsay. 2021. “Bridging Positivist and Interpretive Approaches through Annotation for Transparent Inquiry.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi:10.1017/S1049096521000184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, and Hesli, Vicki. 2013. “Women Don’t Ask? Women Don’t Say No? Bargaining and Service in the Political Science Profession.” PS: Political Science & Politics 46 (2): 355–69.Google Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick. 2018. “The Rush to Transparency: DA-RT and the Potential Dangers for Qualitative Research.” Perspectives on Politics 16 (1): 141–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravscik, Andrew. 2014. “Transparency: The Revolution in Qualitative Research.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 48–53.Google Scholar
Myrick, Rachel. 2021. “Reflections on Using Annotation for Transparent Inquiry (ATI) in Mixed-Methods Research.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi:10.1017/S1049096521000214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orr, Susan, and Czastkiewicz, Veronica. 2019. “Considering Contingency: A Call to Action.” PS: Political Science & Politics 52 (3): 513–14.Google Scholar
Saunders, Elizabeth. 2014. “Transparency Without Tears: A Pragmatic Approach to Transparent Security Studies Research.” Security Studies 23 (4): 689–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siewert, Markus. 2021. “How Annotation for Transparent Inquiry Can Enhance Research Transparency in Qualitative Comparative Analysis.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi:10.1017/S1049096521000597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Subotic, Jelena. 2016. “DA-RT Controversy: An Old Methodological War in New Clothing.” Newsletter of the International History and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association 1 (2): 2–4.Google Scholar
van Assendelft, Laura, Page Fortna, Gay, Claudine, and Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2019. “‘Would I Do This All Over Again?’ Mid-Career Voices in Political Science.” APSA Preprints. DOI:10.33774/apsa-2019-76m98-v2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westmoreland, William. 1976. A Soldier Reports. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Yom, Sean. 2018. “Analytic Transparency, Radical Honesty, and Strategic Incentives.” PS: Political Science & Politics 51 (2): 416–21.Google Scholar