Jo Campling Essay Prize, Postgraduate Winner, 2019

References

• Ackerly, B., and J. True. 2008. “Reflexivity in Practice: Power and Ethics in Feminist Research on International Relations.” International Studies Review 10: 693–707. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2486.2008.00826.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Back, L. 2007. The Art of Listening. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, J. 2010. Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-Time Researchers in Education, Health and Social Science. 5th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beresford, P. 2003. It's our Lives. A Short Theory of Knowledge, Distance and Experience. London: OSP.
   Google Scholar
• Black, E. W. 2008. “Wikipedia and Academic Peer Review: Wikipedia as a Recognized Medium for Scholarly Communication?” Online Information Review 32: 73–88. doi: 10.1108/14684520810865994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boote, D. N., and P. Beile. 2005. “Scholars Before Researchers: On the Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation.” Educational Researcher 34 (6): 3–15. doi: 10.3102/0013189X034006003
   Google Scholar
• Bruce, C. 1994. “‘Research Students’ Early Experience of the Dissertation Literature Review.” Studies in Higher Education 19 (2): 217–229. doi: 10.1080/03075079412331382057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coolican, H. 2004. Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology. London: Hodder Education.
   Google Scholar
• Cope, B., and M. Kalantzis. 2014. “Changing Knowledge Ecologies and the Transformation of the Scholarly Journal.” In The Future of the Academic Journal, edited by B. Cope, and A. Phillips, 9–84. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Cotterell, P., and C. Morris. 2012. “The Capacity, Impact and Challenge of Service Users’ Experiential Knoweldge.” In Critical Perspectives on User Involvement, edited by M. Barnes, and P. Cotterell, 57–69. Bristol: The Policy Press, University of Bristol.
   Google Scholar
• Ess, C. 2002. Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the Aoir Ethics Working Committee.
   Google Scholar
• Goodley, D. 2000. Self-Advocacy in the Lives of People with Learning Difficulties. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodley, D. 2017. Disability Studies. An Interdisciplinary Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Guillemin, M., and L. Gillam. 2004. “Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 10 (2): 261–280. doi: 10.1177/1077800403262360
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heilferty, C. 2009. “Toward a Theory of Online Communication in Illness: Concept Analysis of Illness Blogs.” Journal of Advanced Nursing 65 (7): 1539–1547. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.04996.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewson, C., P. Yule, D. Laurent, and C. Vogel. 2003. Internet Research Methods. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hill Collins, P. 1990. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kara, H. 2017. “Identity and Power in co-Produced Activist Research.” Qualitative Research 17 (3): 289–301. doi: 10.1177/1468794117696033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keen, A. 2006. “Web 2.0 The Second Generation of the Internet has Arrived. It’s Worse Than You Think.” Accessed September 14, 2019. https://methainternet.wordpress.com/2008/01/23/web-20-the-second-generation-of-the-internet-has-arrived-its-worse-than-you-think/.
   Google Scholar
• Keen, A. 2007. The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing our Culture and Assaulting our Economy. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Kitchin, R. 2000. “The Researched Opinions on Research: Disabled People and Disability Research.” Disability & Society 15: 25–47. doi: 10.1080/09687590025757
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, A., and J. Porter. 2004. “Interviewing Children and Young People with Learning Disabilities: Guidelines for Researchers and Multi-Professional Practice.” British Journal of Learning Disabilities 32: 191–197. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3156.2004.00313.x
   Google Scholar
• Machi, L., and B. McEvoy. 2016. The Literature Review: six Steps to Success. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Madge, C. 2012. “Developing a Geographers’ Agenda for Online Research Ethics.” In Sage Internet Research Methods. Volume 1: Core Issues, Debates and Controversies in Internet Research, edited by J. Hughes, 251–278. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• McGuire, H. 2008. Why Academics Should Blog. HuffPost. Accessed September 26, 2019. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-academics-should-blog_b_138549?.
   Google Scholar
• Mewburn, I., and P. Thomson. 2013. “Why do Academics Blolg? An Analysis of Audiences, Purposes and Challenges.” Studies in Higher Education 38 (8): 1105–1119. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2013.835624
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munford, R., J. Sanders, B. Merfin Veitch, and J. Conder. 2008. “Ethics and Research: Searching for Ethical Practice in Research.” Ethics and Social Welfare 2 (1): 50–66. doi: 10.1080/17496530801948754
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. 1992. “‘Changing the Social Relations of Research Production.” Disability, Handicap and Society 7 (2): 101–114. doi: 10.1080/02674649266780141
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. 1997. “‘Emancipatory Research: Realistic Goal or Impossible Dream?” In Doing Disability Research, edited by C. Barnes, and G. Mercer, 15–31. Leeds: The Disability Press.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, L. 2010. Unlearning the Colonial Cultures of Planning. Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Ridley, D. 2012. The Literature Review. A Step-by-Step Guide for Students. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Robson, C. 2011. Real World Research. 3rd ed. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. K. [2003] 2009. Jean Lave, Etienne Wenger and Communities of Practice. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education. Accessed February 8. www.infed.org/biblio/communities_of_practice.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Snee, H. 2008. Web 2.0 as a Social Science Research Tool.
   Google Scholar
• Stalker, K. 1998. “Some Ethical and Methodological Issues in Research with People with Learning Difficulties.” Disability and Society 13: 5–19. doi: 10.1080/09687599826885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, E., and M. Priestley. 1996. “Parasites, Pawns and Partners: Disability Research and the Role of Nondisabled Researchers.” British Journal of Sociology 47 (4): 699–716. doi: 10.2307/591081
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swain, J., B. Heyman, and M. Gillman. 1998. “Public Research, Private Concerns: Ethical Issues in the use of Open-Ended Interviews with People who Have Learning Difficulties.” Disability and Society 13: 21–36. doi: 10.1080/09687599826894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ure, C. 2018. “Exploring Breast Cancer Bloggers’ Lived Experiences of ‘Survivorship’. The Ethics of Gaining Access, Analysing Discourse and Fulfilling Academic Requirements.” In Doing Research in and on the Digital. Research Methods Across Fields of Enquiry, edited by C. Costa and J. Condie, 66–82. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• von Benzon, N. 2018. “ Post 2 of #GPCat25: Mothers’ Blogs: Researcher's Analysis as Valid use or Abuse?” Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography 2019. Accessed September 26. https://genderplaceandculture.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/post-2-of-gpc25-mothers-blogs-researchers-analysis-as-valid-use-or-abuse-by-nadia-von-benzon/
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger-Trayner, E., and B. Wenger-Trayner. 2015. Introduction to Communities of Practice; A Brief Overview of the Concept and Its Uses. Accessed February 9. http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/.
   Google Scholar
• Wiles, R. 2013. What are Qualitative Research Ethics? London: Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, E. 2018. My Blurred World: The Importance of Disabled Bloggers. Accessed August 31, 2018. https://myblurredworld.com/2018/03/11/the-importance-of-disabled-bloggers/.
   Google Scholar