首页> 外文OA文献 >Researcher safety? Ethnography in the Interdisciplinary World of Audit Cultures
【2h】

Researcher safety? Ethnography in the Interdisciplinary World of Audit Cultures

机译:研究员安全吗?跨学科审计文化世界中的民族志

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Anthropologists intermittently reflect on the danger and risk that ethnography can involve. Here, we advance this question in a contemporary research environment where the regulatory logics of occupational safety and health (OSH) encroach increasingly on anthropological practice through institutional research governance. We draw on our research into workplace OSH in the construction, healthcare, and logistics sectors – a research field dominated by behavioural theories that support the preventative logics of OSH regulation. Taking an autoethnographic approach, we explore how researching in potentially dangerous environments requires ethnographers to learn how to be safe through others’ situated safety logics and through those of researcher safety. It is, we argue, through these engagements with the improvisory ways that workers generally, and researchers specifically, engage with safety, that another set of inconsistencies between OSH preventative logics and our anthropological understanding of how ethnographic knowing emerges become visible.
机译:人类学家断断续续地思考民族志学可能涉及的危险和风险。在此,我们在当代的研究环境中提出了这个问题,在该环境中,职业安全与卫生(OSH)的监管逻辑通过机构研究治理日益蚕食人类学实践。我们利用对建筑,医疗保健和物流部门的工作场所职业安全与卫生的研究–该研究领域以行为理论为主导,这些行为理论支持职业安全与卫生法规的预防逻辑。我们采用自动人种志方法,探索在潜在危险环境中的研究如何要求民族志学家通过他人的处所安全逻辑以及研究人员的安全性来学习如何安全。我们认为,通过这些与工人(尤其是研究人员)通常即兴进行的即兴活动的接触,OSH预防逻辑与人类学对人种学知识如何形成的人类学理解之间又出现了另一组矛盾。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号