Pushing back the margins: power, identity and marginalia in survey research with young people

References

• Beresford, B. (1997). Personal accounts: Involving disabled children in research. London: Social Policy Research Unit.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, A., & Statham, J. (2005). Listening to young children: Experts in their own lives. Adoption & Fostering, 29, 45–56.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, H. H., & Schober, M. F. (1992). Asking questions and influencing answers. In J. M. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions: Inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 15–48). New York: Russell Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Clayton, D. K., Rogers, S., & Stuifbergen, A. (1999). Answers to unasked questions: Writing in the margins. Research in Nursing & Health, 22, 512–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, R., Goodwin, J., O’Connor, H., & Phoenix, A. (Eds.) (2017). Working with paradata, marginalia and fieldnotes: The centrality of by-products of social research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• England, K. V. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46, 80–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (2003 [1997]). Society must be defended: Lectures at the College de France, 1975–76 (D. Macey trans.). London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Galasinski, D., & Kozłowska, O. (2010). Questionnaires and lived experience: Strategies of coping with the quantitative frame. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 271–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallacher, L. A., & Gallagher, M. (2008). Methodological immaturity in childhood research? Thinking through participatory methods’. Childhood (Copenhagen, Denmark), 15, 499–516.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallagher, M. (2008). ‘Power is not an evil’: Rethinking power in participatory methods. Children’s Geographies, 6, 137–150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grover, S. (2004). Why won’t they listen to us? On giving power and voice to children participating in social research. Childhood (Copenhagen, Denmark), 11, 81–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14, 575–599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harding, S. G. (Ed.) (1987). Feminism and methodology: Social science issues (introduction to chapter six). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harnois, C. E. (2013). Feminist measures in survey research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J., & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people’s engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood (Copenhagen, Denmark), 17, 360–375.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt, L. (2004). The ‘voices’ of children: De-centring empowering research relations. Children’s Geographies, 2, 13–27.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, H. J. (2001). Marginalia: Readers writing in books. London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kreuter, F., & Casas-Cordero, C. (2010). “Paradata”, Working Paper Series of the German Council for Social and Economic Data, Working Paper No. 136. Germany: Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
   Google Scholar
• Liamputtong, P. (2007). Researching the vulnerable: A guide to sensitive research methods. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, J., & Hood, S. (2011). Exploring issues of children as actors in social research. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 490–495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mauss, M. (2002). The gift: The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Maynard, M. (1994). Methods, practice and epistemology: The debate about feminism and research. In M. Maynard & J. Purvis (Eds.), Researching women’s lives from a feminist perspective (pp. 10–26). Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• McClelland, S. I. (2016). Speaking back from the margins: Participant marginalia in survey and interview research. Qualitative Psychology, 3, 159–165.
   Google Scholar
• Morse, J. M. (2005). Evolving trends in qualitative research: Advances in mixed-method design. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 583–585.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muddiman, E., Taylor, C., Power, S., & Moles, K. (in press). Young people, family relationships and civic participation. Journal of Civil Society.
   Google Scholar
• Nicolaas, G. (2011). Survey paradata: A review (Publication No. NCRM/017). ESRC National Centre for Research Methods (NatCen). Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/1719/1/Nicolaas_review_paper_jan11.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Olsen-Smith, S., Norberg, P., & Marnon, D. C. (Eds.) (2008). Melville’s Marginalia Online Retrieved from. http://melvillesmarginalia.org/
   Google Scholar
• Orgel, S. (2015). The reader in the book. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Powel, L. L., & Clark, J. A. (2005). The value of the marginalia as an adjunct to structured questionnaires: Experiences of men after prostate cancer surgery. Quality of Life Research: an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 14, 827–835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price, K. (2011). It’s not just about abortion: Incorporating intersectionality in research about women of color and reproduction. Women’s Health Issues, 21, 55–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M. V. (2008). Pain experience and the imagined researcher. Sociology of Health and Illness, 30, 992–1006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stacey, J., & Thorne, B. (1985). The missing feminist revolution in sociology. Social Problems, 32, 301–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinbugler, A. C., Press, J. E., & Dias, J. J. (2006). Gender, race, and affirmative action: Operationalizing intersectionality in survey research. Gender & Society, 20, 805–825.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroudt, B. (2016). Conversations on the margins: Using data entry to explore the qualitative potential of survey marginalia. Qualitative Psychology, 3, 186–208.
   Google Scholar
• Tilbury, F., Gallegos, D., Abernethie, L., & Dziurawiec, S. (2008). ‘Sperm milkshakes with poo sprinkles’: The challenges of identifying family meals practices through an online survey with adolescents. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11, 469–481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truman, C. (1999). New social movements and social research. In B. Humphries & C. Truman (Eds.), Research and inequality (pp. 33–45). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Valentine, G. (1999). Being seen and heard? The ethical complexities of working with children and young people at home and at school. Ethics, Place and Environment, 2, 141–155.
   Google Scholar