What Do We Mean by a 'Hard-to-Reach' Population? Legitimacy versus Precarity as Barriers to Access
Saved in:
| Title: | What Do We Mean by a 'Hard-to-Reach' Population? Legitimacy versus Precarity as Barriers to Access |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Ellis, Rachel (ORCID |
| Source: | Sociological Methods & Research. Aug 2023 52(3):1556-1586. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 31 |
| Publication Date: | 2023 |
| Sponsoring Agency: | National Science Foundation (NSF) |
| Contract Number: | DGE0822 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Evaluative |
| Descriptors: | Population Groups, Barriers, Institutionalized Persons, Females, Qualitative Research, Research Problems, Ethnography |
| DOI: | 10.1177/0049124121995536 |
| ISSN: | 0049-1241 1552-8294 |
| Abstract: | Numerous articles and textbooks advise qualitative researchers on accessing "hard-to-reach" or "hidden" populations. In this article, I compare two studies that I conducted with justice-involved women in the United States: a yearlong ethnography inside a state women's prison and an interview study with formerly incarcerated women. Although these two populations are interconnected--and both are widely deemed hard-to-reach--the barriers to access differed. In the prison study, hard-to-reach reflected an issue of "institutional legitimacy," in which researchers must demonstrate themselves and their proposed study as legible, appropriate, and worthy to organizational gatekeepers. In the reentry study, hard-to-reach reflected an issue of "structural precarity," in which researchers must navigate the everyday vulnerabilities of research participants' social position to ensure the study is inclusive and feasible. Juxtaposing these two experiences, I propose greater nuance to the term hard-to-reach such that researchers may proactively address institutional and structural barriers to access. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2023 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1390802 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Numerous articles and textbooks advise qualitative researchers on accessing "hard-to-reach" or "hidden" populations. In this article, I compare two studies that I conducted with justice-involved women in the United States: a yearlong ethnography inside a state women's prison and an interview study with formerly incarcerated women. Although these two populations are interconnected--and both are widely deemed hard-to-reach--the barriers to access differed. In the prison study, hard-to-reach reflected an issue of "institutional legitimacy," in which researchers must demonstrate themselves and their proposed study as legible, appropriate, and worthy to organizational gatekeepers. In the reentry study, hard-to-reach reflected an issue of "structural precarity," in which researchers must navigate the everyday vulnerabilities of research participants' social position to ensure the study is inclusive and feasible. Juxtaposing these two experiences, I propose greater nuance to the term hard-to-reach such that researchers may proactively address institutional and structural barriers to access. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0049-1241 1552-8294 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/0049124121995536 |
