Those who lived through the 1960s recall a time of rapid social change and political turmoil. Commentators discern parallels with present times, citing the Arab Spring, the West’s fiscal crisis, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Social science saw its own upheavals in the 1960s—the emergence of Grounded Theory, postmodernism, and perspectives based on the counter-culture, feminism, and minorities. This article sees contemporary equivalents in the growth of “citizen research” and indigenous methods, and consequent struggles over what research is for. We should not see these developments as a crisis in the hegemony of social science but as its coming of age, and qualitative research as its principal arena.
BaronD. (2009). A better pencil: Readers, writers & the digital revolution. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
BarrettM.ShortJ. (2011). Images of European people in a group of five to ten year old English schoolchildren. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10, 339-363.
3.
BriassoulisH. (2010). Online petitions: New tools of secondary analysis?Qualitative Research, 10, 715-722.
4.
CharmazC. (2012, May18). Grounded theory in global perspective [PowerPoint slides]. Presentation to the Eighth International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana–Champaign, IL.
5.
ChilisaB. (2011). Indigenous research methodologies. London, England: SAGE.
6.
Cisneros-PueblaC. (2012, May18). Qualitative inquiry as a global endeavor in the realm of methods-technology dialogue [PowerPoint slides]. Presentation to the Eighth International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana–Champaign, IL.
7.
DenzinN.LincolnY.Tuhiwai SmithL. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
8.
European Commission. (2011). Education statistics. Brussels, Belgium: Eurostat.
9.
EvansM.HoleR.BergL. D.HutchinsonP.SookrajD. (2009). Common insights, differing methodologies: Toward a fusion of indigenous methodologies, participatory action research, and white studies in an urban aboriginal research agenda. Qualitative Research, 15, 893-910.
10.
FieldingN.LeeR. M. (Eds.). (1993). Using computers in qualitative research. London, England: SAGE.
11.
GarretonM. A.MurmisM.de SierraG.TrindadeH. (2005). Social sciences in Latin America: A comparative perspective—Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Uruguay. Social Science Information, 44, 557-593.
12.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
13.
GoboG. (2011). Glocalizing methodology? The encounter between local methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14, 417-437.
14.
GostkowskiZ. (1966). Some assumptions and postulates concerning the empirical research of the research techniques in sociology. Polish Sociological Bulletin, 1, 3-33.
HandD. (2012, July25). Open data creates pitfalls as well as opportunities. Research Fortnight, p. 25.
17.
HardeyM.BurrowsR. (2008). New cartographies of “knowing capitalism” and the changing jurisdictions of empirical sociology. In FieldingN.LeeR.BlankG. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of online research methods (pp. 507-518). London, England: SAGE.
18.
HolsteinJ. A.GubriumJ. (1995). The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
19.
HundleyM.HolbrookT. (2012, May18). Late to the eParty? Academics and the reshaping of author/ity [PowerPoint slides]. Presentation to the Eighth Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana–Champaign, IL.
20.
ItoI. (2011). Globalizing the rural. International Review of Qualitative Research, 4, 279-290.
21.
LatourB. (1988). A relativistic account of Einstein’s relativity. Social Studies of Science, 18, 3-44.
MertensD. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
24.
NichollsR. (2009). Research and indigenous participation: Critical reflexive methods. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12, 117-126.
25.
NielsenM. (2011). Reinventing discovery: The new era of networked science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
26.
OstlerN. (2005). Empires of the word. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
27.
PeneffJ. (1988). The observers observed: French survey researchers at work. Social Problems, 35, 520-535.
28.
RobertsonR. (1992). Social theory and global culture. London, England: SAGE.
29.
RobertsonR. (2000). Social theory, cultural relativity and the problem of globality. In KingA. (Ed.), Culture, globalization and the world system (pp. 69-90). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
30.
RudolphL.RudolphS. (1959). Survey in India: Field experience in Madras State. Public Opinion Quarterly, 22, 235-250.
31.
Show scholars how to tap potential of digital research tools. (2010, July1). Times Higher Education, pp. 26-27.
32.
SmithS. N.FisherS. D.HeathA. (2011). Opportunities and challenges in the expansion of cross-national survey research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14, 485-502.
33.
ThimblebyH. (2011, December1). Relight the fire of the mind, online. Times Higher Education, p. 58.
34.
TonniesF. (1955). Community and association. London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
35.
TufeckiZ. (2008). Grooming, gossip, Facebook and MySpace. Information, Communication & Society, 11, 544-564.
36.
Tuhiwai SmithL. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
37.
UckanO. (2003). E-Devlet, E-Demokrasi ve Turkiye [e-Government and e-Democracy in Turkey]. Istanbul, Turkey: Literatur Yayinevi.
38.
Van MaanenJ. (2011). Tales of the field (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
39.
XanitoudouM.GilbertN. (2010). The processes of methodological innovation: Successful development and diffusion. Guildford, UK: University of Surrey Press.
40.
YappR. (2011, June20) “Brazil to create ‘botanical Wikipedia’ to catalog the Amazon.” The Daily Telegraph, p. 6.
