IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v5y2000i1p5-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Social Work Research as Knowledge/Power in Practice’

Author

Listed:
  • Heather D'Cruz

Abstract

Traditionally, social research is represented as a neutral (objective) search for knowledge as an entity, for which claims of ‘reliability’, ‘validity’ and ‘credibility’ may be made if the researcher follows prescribed techniques of inquiry. From this perspective, techniques of inquiry may cause harm to informants who are subjected to the process of inquiry. Therefore, ethical research is about the legal and moral protection of subjects from the researcher's techniques of inquiry. The research relationship is constituted as one between ‘powerful researcher’ and ‘powerless researched’. Alternative views which foreground the researcher (and informants’) subjectivities as positioned sites of power challenge the unitary identities of ‘more powerful researcher’ and ‘less powerful researched’. In this paper I show through reflection on my PhD research, how the identities of ‘researcher’ and ‘researched’ are fluid, dynamic relations of power, by which ‘knowledge’ is achieved through processes of negotiation and access to ‘sites of knowledge/power’. From this perspective, knowledge is not an entity for which definitive claims of ‘reliability’, ‘validity’ and ‘credibility’ can be made. Nor are ‘research ethics’ simply the responsibility of the researcher but instead are complex and shifting micropractices of power/knowledge between ‘researcher’ and ‘researched’.

Suggested Citation

  • Heather D'Cruz, 2000. "‘Social Work Research as Knowledge/Power in Practice’," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 5(1), pages 5-19, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:5:y:2000:i:1:p:5-19
    DOI: 10.5153/sro.421
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5153/sro.421
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5153/sro.421?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heap, James L., 1995. "Constructionism in the rhetoric and practice of fourth generation evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 51-61.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abma, T. A., 2000. "Stakeholder conflict: a case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 199-210, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:5:y:2000:i:1:p:5-19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.