The Ethos of Citation in Qualitative Research  Methodology

Elliott Kuecker

doi:10.7577/rerm.4684

Authors

Elliott Kuecker https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5567-3841

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7577/rerm.4684

Abstract

Framed through Kenneth Burke’s famous parlor metaphor, this article considers how decisions related to citation are foundational to scholarly communication, with particular emphasis on qualitative research logics. Each citation decision implicates academicians in complex rhetorical and ethical situations that have material impact on other scholars, students receiving curriculum, and even existential notions related to the very survival of ideas. Believing that the texts we produce matter—both as objects of care and material constructions in themselves—this inquiry walks through theoretical and practical considerations for citation. Additionally, this article incorporates writing activities, and three writing artifacts from contributors, into the text to explore simple ways to play with citation in the classroom and research.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Arendt, H. (1968). Introduction. In H. Arendt (Ed.) Illuminations: Essays and reflections. (p. 1-58). New York, NY: Shockton Press.

Benjamin, W. (1996). One-way street. In Marcus Bullock and Michael W. Jennings (Eds.)Walter Benjamin Selected Writings Volume 1 1913-1926. (pp. 444-488). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1921).

Benjamin, W. (1996) Task of the Translator. In Marcus Bullock and Michael W. Jennings (Eds.)Walter Benjamin Selected Writings Volume 1 1913-1926. (pp. 253-263). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1928).

Booth, W. C. (1988). The company we keep. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Bridges, Rhoads, S. (2018). Philosophical fieldnotes. Qualitative Inquiry, 24 (9), 646-660.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417733498

Burke, K. (1941). The Philosophy of Literary Form. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

The Care Collective (2020). The care manifesto: The politics of interdependence. Brooklyn, NY: Verso Books.

Carey, M. (1997). Outside. On Butterfly. New York, NY: Columbia Records.

Carroll, D. (1990). Forward in Heidegger and ‘the jews.’ Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Cave, N. (2021, May). Should we separate the artist from his art? The Red Hand Files, Issue#149. https://www.theredhandfiles.com/should-we-separate-the-artist-from-the-art/

Collins, P. H. (2002). What’s going on? Black feminist thought and the politics of postmodernism. In E. St. Pierre and W. S. Pillow (Eds.) Feminist Poststructural Theory and Methods in Education (pp. 41-73). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417733498

Daniels, G., Grandy, C., Gervais, R. Merchand, S., and Carell, S. (2009). Broke [Television series episode]. In G. Daniels, (producer), The Office. New York: NBC.

Dickinson, E. (1960/1862). Poem 499. In: Johnson, T. (Ed.) The complete poems of Emily Dickinson. Boston: Little Brown and Company.

Denzin, N. (2016). Critical qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416681864

Dorst, J. (1987). Rereading Mules and Men: Toward the death of the ethnographer. Cultural Anthropology, 2(3), 305-318. https://doi.org/10.1525/can.1987.2.3.02a00030

Foucault, M. (1969). What is an author? In J. D. Faubion (Ed) Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology (pp. 205-222). New York, NY: New York Press.

Fullagar, S., Pavlidis, A., & Stadler, R. (2017). Critical Moments of (un)doing Doctoral Supervision: Collaborative Writing as Rhizomatic Practice. Knowledge Cultures, 5(4), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.22381/KC5420173

Gale, K., & Wyatt, J. (2017). Working at the Wonder: Collaborative Writing as Method of Inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(5), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416659086

Gallop, J. (2012). The death of the authors: Reading and writing in time. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Gallop, J. (2000). The ethic of reading: Close encounters. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 16(3), 7-17.

Henderson, L., & Black, A. L. (2018). Splitting the World Open: Writing Stories of Mourning and Loss. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(4), 260–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417728958

Hurston, Z. N. (1990). Mules and men. New York, NY: First Perennial. (Original work published 1935).

Jackson, A. Y. and Mazzei, L. (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research. New York, NY: Routledge.

jjoque. (2020, October 10). Just went for a walk in a cemetery and a guy has a QR code on his grave stone that links to a list of his publications and citation metrics [Tweet]. Retrieved from: https://twitter.com/jjoque/status/1314954067077144577?lang=en

Keenan, T. (1997). Fables of responsibility: Aberrations and predicaments in ethics and politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Krell, D. F. (2015). Ecstasy, catastrophe: Heidegger from Being and Time to the Black Notebooks. Albany, NY: State University of New York.

Lather, P. (2001). Ten years later, yet again: Pedagogy and its complicities. In K. Weiler (Ed), Feminist Engagements (pp. 183-195). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press.

Lu, M-Z (1999). Redefining the literature self: The politics of critical affirmation. College Composition and Communication, 51(2), 172-194. https://doi.org/10.2307/359038

Lunsford, A. (1991). Collaboration, control, and the idea of a writing center. The Writing Center Journal, 12(1), 3-10.

Lincoln, Y. and Guba, E. (1987). Ethics: The failure of positivist science. In Y. Lincoln and N. Denzin (Eds) Turning Points in qualitative research: Tying knots in a handkerchief. (pp. 219-238). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.

Linek, S., et al. (2017). It’s all about information? The following behaviour of professors and PhD students on Twitter." The Journal of Web Science 3(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1561/106.00000008

Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science 159(3810), 56-63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56

Montgomery, N. and bergman, c. (2017). Joyful militancy: Building thriving resistance in toxic times. Chico, CA: AK Press.

Mott, C. and Cockayne, D. (2017) Citation matters: mobilizing the politics of citation toward a practice of ‘conscientious engagement’. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(7), 954-973. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2017.1339022

Parrish, J. (2009). You show your Smith and I'll show mine: Selection, exegesis, and the politics of citation. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 21(4), 437-459. https://doi.org/10.1163/094330509X12568874557252

Richardson, L. (1997). Fields of play (constructing an academic life). New Brunswick, NY: Rutgers University Press.

Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2005). Writing: A Method of Inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (p. 959–978). Sage Publications Ltd.

Russell, C. (2016). Farewell Letter: On open access, the politics of citation, and generous scholarship. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 21, 5-12.

Seeger, P. (2017). What is a folk song? In J. R. Freedman (Ed.) Peggy Seeger: A Life of Music, Love, and Politics (pp. 133-143). Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Smissart, C. and Jalonen, K. (2018). Responsibility in academic writing: A dialogue with the dead. Qualitative Inquiry 24(9), 704-711. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417734008

Stewart, K. (1991). On the politics of cultural theory: a case for 'contaminated' cultural critique. Social Research, 58(2), 395-412.

Van Cleave, J. and Bridges-Rhoads, S. (2013). ‘As cited in’ writing partnerships: The (im)possibility of authorship in postmodern research. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(9), 674-685. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800413500932

Weiler, K. (2001). Introduction. In K. Weiler, K. (Ed) Feminist Engagements (pp. 1-12). Abingdon, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203902653

Wyatt, J., & Gale, K. (2018). Writing to It: Creative Engagements with Writing Practice in and with the Not yet Known in Today’s Academy. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 31(2), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1349957