IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/femeco/v3y1997i2p99-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Poor Women Survey Poor Women: Feminist Perspectives in Survey Research

Author

Listed:
  • Marlene Kim

Abstract

This essay examines how applying feminist principles in scientific inquiry changes both the process and the results of research. Overall, I find that including feminist perspectives improves research. Involving a women's community in the research process and allowing poor women to interview poor women may reduce interviewer bias, improve response rates and facilitate trust in answering questions that are often quite sensitive. Including poor women in the interviewing process also enables these women to learn about scientific inquiry and to participate in the research process.

Suggested Citation

  • Marlene Kim, 1997. "Poor Women Survey Poor Women: Feminist Perspectives in Survey Research," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 99-117.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:3:y:1997:i:2:p:99-117
    DOI: 10.1080/135457097338717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/135457097338717
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/135457097338717?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martha A. Starr, 2014. "Qualitative And Mixed-Methods Research In Economics: Surprising Growth, Promising Future," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 238-264, April.
    2. Sabine O'Hara, 1999. "Economics, Ecology, and Quality of Life: Who Evaluates?," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 83-89.
    3. Rose Brewer & Cecilia Conrad & Mary King, 2002. "The Complexities and Potential of Theorizing Gender, Caste, Race, and Class," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 3-17.
    4. Niklas Egels-Zandén, 2007. "Suppliers’ Compliance with MNCs’ Codes of Conduct: Behind the Scenes at Chinese Toy Suppliers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 45-62, September.

    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:taf:femeco:v:3:y:1997:i:2:p:99-117. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFEC20 .

    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.