Briefly Noted

The federal Department of Justice (DOJ) is impeding efforts to produce high‐quality marijuana for research purposes, according to a report published on Vox. In particular, California entrepreneur George Hodgin, who wants to grow it, and researchers who want to use what he grows are frustrated. “We only want to provide clean, consistent, compliant cannabis for researchers,” Hodgin, CEO of Biopharmaceutical Research Company, told Vox. “We're sitting on one of the most sophisticated cannabis production facilities in the United States. And it's empty, because the federal government is playing politics with something that is apolitical.” Because marijuana is still illegal under federal law, despite the fact that it is legal for medical and recreational purposes in some states, growing the plant for research purposes is only allowed by the federal government by the University of Mississippi. Critics say that is not of high enough quality. “I feel like the government I fought to protect doesn't understand the urgency of this problem,” said Hodgin, a retired Navy SEAL. “My story should be the American dream: A Navy SEAL uses the GI Bill to get a graduate education and start a company that helps Americans and creates jobs. But sadly, the DOJ and DEA are playing politics with science and lives, and instead big government inertia and red tape are blocking critical research.” He added: “Democrats and Republicans have both argued the need for more marijuana to be produced for research. Why would [the Justice Department] ignore them?” Indeed. It's hypocritical for the federal government to say there's no proof marijuana works as medicine, and no proof that it's safe, and at the same time ban what would make it possible to find out whether those things are true.     

An Underestimated Alternative: America and the Limits of “Critical Theory”

The main goal of this paper is to examine the intellectual and biographical reasons why the theorists of the Frankfurt school did not embrace pragmatism. This goal is pursued in four areas: (1) the epistemological area of the debate about subjective and objective “reason”—here the misleading character of Horkheimer's and Mar-cuse's writings on pragmatism is demonstrated; (2) the area of political theory—here the tension between the American democratic tradition and a quasi-Marxist functionalism is exposed; (3) the area of social psychology—here the inability of the Frankfurt school to incorporate symbolic interactionism becomes evident; (4) the elitist relationship to American mass culture. The paper ends with brief remarks on Habermas' ambivalent position between pragmatism and “Critical Theory” and with a perspective of transcending this ambivalence.     

Moral bureaucracies and social network research

In the wake of Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), research ethics governance does not just affect the ethical dimensions of social research but also the range of scientific decisions available to researchers. Because of the sensitive status of personal data and the aversion to even minimal risk by what we call “moral bureaucracies”, we are concerned that social network researchers will increasingly limit their research decisions to “safe” options, like reusing anonymized datasets, choosing target populations based on convenience rather than theoretical relevance, and routinely subcontracting fieldwork to professional data collection companies, among others. We also suggest that scientific associations and social scientists in general need to adopt a proactive role in preserving both scientific freedom and genuine ethics advice within this new regulatory framework.     

“VY Mudimbe: from the ‘Nation’ to the ‘Global’ – ‘Who is the Master?' ”

This article examines Valentin Yves Mudimbe's work form the early 1970s, in the neo-colonial era, to the present day, a period marked by the advent of “Empire”, as conceived by Michael Hardt and Toni Negri. The investigation appraises the way in which Mudimbe's epistemological excavation of African discourses and discourses about Africa serves wider ethical and political objectives resonating with critiques of anthropology as formulated by Benoît Verhaegen and Johannes Fabian in the 1960s and 1970s. Part I focuses on Zairian nationalism (“Zairianization”) and the ambition, on the part of the Mobutu regime, to develop an authentic national culture. This examination of the birth of a Zairian “community” is developed through a comparison between Mudimbe's little-studied Autour de la “nation” (1972) and Kangafu Kutumbagana's Discours sur l'authenticité (1973) and is argued on the basis of a number of propositions formulated by Jean-Luc Nancy in The Inoperative Community (1991). The second part of the article focuses on Mudimbe's On African Fault Lines (2013); it examines Mudimbe's attempts, in his analyses of contemporary works by Deepa Rajkumar and Geert Hofstede, to reflect on globalization and to assess the political and ethical relevance of critical tools developed in the neo-colonial period to denounce the unequal basis of anthropology.     

Beyond anonymity: temporality and the production of knowledge in a qualitative longitudinal study

Anonymisation processes are an embedded, if contested, element of ethical research practice. Current debates, highlighting various challenges to anonymity, suggest the importance of situated ethics and negotiated solutions. However, the strategies adopted are necessarily mediated by the researcher’s epistemological positions. Longitudinal studies with their extended timeframes and intensive research relationships tend to amplify ethical dilemmas and highlight the contingency and fluidity of ethical processes. Here we explore how temporality intersects with epistemology in a qualitative longitudinal (QL) study of organisations located in a contemporary policy context. We reflect on the confidentiality and anonymity dilemmas that develop and change over time, the strategies adopted and the implications of these for the type of knowledge produced. We suggest that QL studies entail flexibility within epistemological frameworks. These issues have particular resonance and consequences for researchers in light of contemporary pressures around public scrutiny of academic performance and wider debates around public sociology.     

Sexual Harassment and the Construction of Ethnographic Knowledge

It is not uncommon for women researchers to experience sexualized interactions, sexual objectification, and harassment as they conduct fieldwork. Nevertheless, these experiences are often left out of ethnographers’ “tales from the field” and remain unaddressed within our discipline. In this article, we use women's experiences with harassment in the field to interrogate the epistemological foundations of ethnographic methodology within the discipline of sociology. Based on more than 50 qualitative interviews, we examine three “fixations” of contemporary ethnography that inform women ethnographers’ understandings of and reactions to harassment in the field. These fixations are solitude, danger, and intimacy. Our data show that these fixations not only put researchers in danger but also have implications for the construction of ethnographic knowledge. They contribute to silence surrounding sexual harassment, and are motivated by and reproduce androcentric norms that valorize certain types of fieldwork. We argue that acknowledging and analyzing experiences with harassment and other unwanted sexual attention in the field is part of a more fully developed understanding of ethnographic research itself.     

Can we,should we,measure ethnicity?

Feminist social science is marked by its diversity, its ethos of inclusiveness and its critical power. These qualities are best exemplified in feminisms' acknowledgement, at the epistemological level, that men as well as women are crucial participants in the feminist enterprise. Moreover, epistemological justifications for positioning men within feminism is matched by a commitment to think through the methodological implications of men's involvement as both researchers and researched. In particular, inclusiveness pushes at the boundary of what counts as feminist methodology, and it forces us to rethink the underlying principles of feminist research work. In this article, two key feminist methodological principles—rapport and empathy, and democracy—are interrogated in the light of a series of in-depth interviews with a group of powerful, authoritative and uniformed men (senior police officers). It is suggested that while there may be a temptation to dismiss the interviewing relations which evolved as ‘non-feminist’, they are also indicative of feminist methodological vitality and strength as well as its capacity to accommodate the fractured subjectivities of research participants. The paper concludes by positing a re-conceptualization of interviewing principles which not only appreciate diversity in feminist epistemological and methodological commitments, but also variability and difference in feminist research relationships.     

Complicating Patriotism in the Elementary Grades: An Examination of Rugg and Krueger's Overlooked Textbooks

In the late 1930s several prominent self-described patriotic groups attacked social studies pioneer Harold Rugg as “un-American.” The largest instance of textbook censorship in American history unfolded. Yet little attention was given (and continues to be given by scholars) to Rugg's elementary textbooks that he wrote with Louise Krueger. This article examines Rugg and Krueger's complete “Elementary Series” in light of the un-American criticisms levied at Rugg. It documents how, despite critics’ claims, the books were immediately celebratory of the United States and its people, teaching a traditional patriotism that casts the nation as the supreme level of social analysis through an unquestioning, best-story approach. Furthermore, it shows how the books lack Rugg's justice-oriented philosophy of the “American Problem.” The article concludes by charging elementary social studies teachers, teacher educators, and researchers to consider critical questions related to the teaching of patriotism in the elementary grades.     

Influence of the Huguenot Refugees on English Manufactures

In the late 1930s several prominent self-described patriotic groups attacked social studies pioneer Harold Rugg as “un-American.” The largest instance of textbook censorship in American history unfolded. Yet little attention was given (and continues to be given by scholars) to Rugg's elementary textbooks that he wrote with Louise Krueger. This article examines Rugg and Krueger's complete “Elementary Series” in light of the un-American criticisms levied at Rugg. It documents how, despite critics’ claims, the books were immediately celebratory of the United States and its people, teaching a traditional patriotism that casts the nation as the supreme level of social analysis through an unquestioning, best-story approach. Furthermore, it shows how the books lack Rugg's justice-oriented philosophy of the “American Problem.” The article concludes by charging elementary social studies teachers, teacher educators, and researchers to consider critical questions related to the teaching of patriotism in the elementary grades.     

Return Migrations of African‐Americans to the South: Reclaiming a Land of Promise,Going Home,or Both?*

Abstract Using samples of census data from the University of Minnesota Population Center's “Integrated Public Use Microdata Series” (IPUMS), we describe trends in African‐American migration to the South across recent decades, and explore the applicability of the concept of “return migration” to various demographic patterns. Our findings suggest that the return movement contains multiple migration streams involving African‐Americans of higher socio‐economic status (compared with both origin and destination populations) moving to both urban and rural destinations. These patterns represent clear differences from the earlier 20^th century's “Great Migration” of African‐Americans from South to North. The recent return migration streams suggest that the South may be replacing the North as a “land of promise” for some upwardly mobile African‐Americans, and may also reflect what Carol Stack (1996) has termed a “call to home” as a motivating factor shaping recent African‐American migration to the rural South.     

Prenatal Screening for Down's Syndrome: Parent and Healthcare Practitioner Experiences

This article reviews research on both parent and healthcare practitioner experiences of prenatal screening for Down's syndrome. Whilst studies on Down's syndrome screening are broad in scope and diverge in theoretical and epistemological foundations, their core focus can be classified into two main and intertwining categories: (i) the decision‐making practices of expectant parents and why they do/do not participate in screening and (ii) the interactions between parents and practitioners, particularly the discrepancies of knowledge and the pursuit of “informed choice” and “non‐directive care.” To conclude, I highlight current knowledge gaps and the areas of substantial interest for future critical sociological engagements.     

When the Methodological Shoe is on the Other Foot: African American Interviewer and White Interviewees

Some scholars engaging in the insider/outsider debate have argued that the pairing of researcher and subjects based on racial similarity—i.e., “race matching”—is the most effective means for conducting qualitative research. Although insider/outsider status has been discussed with respect to white researchers' studies of African Americans, I explore the heretofore rarely discussed situation in which an African American is the researcher and whites are the subjects. I argue that insider status with respect to race continues to be based on a presumed connectedness linked to phenotypical characteristics—like skin color or hair texture. Yet, rather than experiencing a solely insider or outsider status, researchers and subjects experience what I call “insider moments” wherein their interests converge and they are able to share in the kinds of interactions that yield important insights. I conclude by evaluating the utility of insider/outsider status in qualitative research.     

Still a “Stalled Revolution”? Work/Family Experiences,Hegemonic Masculinity,and Moving Toward Gender Equality

Hochschild described the “stalled revolution” in the late 1980s: women made great gains in labor force opportunities, particularly in stereotypically “masculine” fields, yet men did not move comparably into “feminine” roles. This article examines the current “stalls” in the gender equality movement regarding gendered experiences at work and home, including occupations, the gender wage gap, career trajectories, and the division of household labor. This article also discusses efforts to “unstall” the gender revolution. Pop culture solutions on the individual‐level and academic research on structural/cultural barriers often focus on women's access to historically “masculine” roles (e.g. representation in STEM fields). There is far less emphasis on men's involvement in historically “feminine” roles. Gender scholars examine hegemonic masculinity as the narrowly constrained expectations for men's “appropriate” behavior. While efforts to “unstall” the gender revolution focus largely on expanding women's opportunities, this article addresses why the gender revolution will remain incomplete and “stalled” without redefining hegemonic masculinity. Cross‐national research demonstrates that changing views of masculinity are critical for greater gender equality at work and home.     

Ritual Power in Interaction*

Research (by a self-styled participant observer) into two fashions of persons—nurses and punks—lends unexpected significance to the ritual “frame” as this appears in Erving Goffman's thought. A new concept that was only implicit in Goffman's ritual frame is demanded by the research experiences. This is “ritual power.” Ritual power, especially when it is strong, is like “presence” or “possession”, and it may well exert a major claim on interactants' consciousnesses (whether the interactants are displaying it or appreciating it). Of course, it must follow that verbal forms which try to define ritual power will do so the more powerfully the more they arrest the reader's attention. So it may not be a good idea to use sociological rhetoric of any sort to suggest that punks and nurses are exemplary referents of “ritual power”, but this last possibility is only latent in what follows.     

Labour pains: Some considerations on the difficulties of researching juvenile prostitution

This paper reflects on an empirical, retrospective study of juvenile prostitution. It aims to explore the ways in which the practical constraints, practical difficulties and ethical considerations that are inevitably encountered in a 'sensitive' area of research, such as young people who are exploited through prostitution, are intrinsically linked to choice of methods and the process of the research. It argues that in such research pragmatism in choice of methods is necessary to achieve the epistemological aims, of allowing the voices of disadvantaged young people who are exploited through their involvement in prostitution to be heard, while maintaining ethical integrity. In addition the paper reflects on the emotional impact of research such as this on researchers and suggests ways in which research design and the collaborative efforts of research teams may minimise potentially negative impacts on researchers. The author suggests that by anticipating problems posed by research into young people who are sexually exploited through prostitution, ethical and practical difficulties might be negotiated to enable research in this field to be taken forward in the future.     

MULTIDIMENSIONAL PROBLEMS: A CRITIQUE OF JEFFREY ALEXANDER'S THEORETICAL LOGIC IN SOCIOLOGY*

This article examines Jeffrey Alexander's effort to overcome the impasse of sociology's entrenchment into opposing utilitarian and normativistic camps. The utilitarian and normativistic perspectives are described, and some of the requirements for a successful synthesis are stated. It is shown that Alexander does not actually attempt such a synthesis himself, but is content to present Weber's and Parsons's efforts in this direction. It is argued that his major contribution is to be found not in the promotion of a “multidimensional” synthetic approach, but in the formulation of an epistemological/methodological rationale for the alleged superiority of a multidimensional sociology over one-dimensional versions. An account is given of the claims of this “postpositivist” methodology, and its de facto treatment of the relationship between theory and data is criticized. Since issues of empirical adequacy are not sufficiently addressed, it is concluded that Alexander's advocacy of multidimensionality is less than convincing.     

The Everyday Drama of Coproduction in Community Mental Health Services: Analyzing Welfare Workers' Performance as the “Undercover Agent”

Current welfare policy encourages “coproduction” between citizens and welfare workers so that “lay expertise” effectively becomes part of the provision of services. Drawing on fieldwork from Danish mental health services, this article analyzes how expertise and authority are organized and performed in a network linking welfare workers and users as well as new participants (e.g., volunteers) and artifacts. Theoretically, the article employs Goffman's dramaturgical distinction between “frontstage” and “backstage.” The findings indicate that welfare workers coproduce services by covering their authority and expertise in “frontstage” meetings with users. However, relational and material resources in encounters “backstage” make welfare workers appear as accountable experts, which both fosters and threatens their credibility.     

Young People Leaving Care: Participatory Research to Improve Child Welfare Practices and the Rights of Children and Young People

Abstract

This paper discusses participatory research with young people who are leaving public care in Finland to begin independent lives. The aim of the research, organised by SOS Children's Villages International, was to bring about change in alternative care arrangements, particularly those involving young people's transition to independence. The project used a participatory research design based on employing care-leaving peers as co-researchers. This paper adheres to the methodological principles of empowerment in analysing the personal experiences of young people leaving alternative care with the goal of informing good practice. The findings suggest that the peer research method can be an effective means of empowering young people to develop research skills and to be involved in knowledge production, as well as serving as a means of promoting improved services for “care-leavers”, those young people who are leaving either foster care or institutional care. The participatory and peer research method challenges the traditional understandings of expertise and knowledge production. Although the hierarchy between adult researchers and young people as co-researchers is still evident, the method provides possibilities for better understanding the social- and health-service systems and their challenges and pitfalls from a user's perspective.