101010.pl is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
101010.pl czyli najstarszy polski serwer Mastodon. Posiadamy wpisy do 2048 znaków.

Server stats:

534
active users

#reflexivity

0 posts0 participants0 posts today
Dr Julia Molinari PhD SFHEA<p>I really enjoyed reading this dialogue with <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/chatGPT" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>chatGPT</span></a>, on <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/ArtificialIntelligence" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ArtificialIntelligence</span></a> <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/Sociology" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Sociology</span></a> <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/ScienceAndTechnology" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ScienceAndTechnology</span></a> <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/Emotions" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Emotions</span></a> <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/Reflexivity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Reflexivity</span></a> <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/AcWri" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>AcWri</span></a> <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/KnowledgeCreation" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>KnowledgeCreation</span></a></p><p><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00380385231169676?s=09" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.11</span><span class="invisible">77/00380385231169676?s=09</span></a></p>
Isaura Castelao-Huerta<p>Hello everyone! 🙂 I am so happy to share that my latest article has been published in the current issue of British Journal of Sociology of Education. In this article, I propose the concept of 'complex reflexivity', building on Margaret Archer's work on <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/reflexivity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>reflexivity</span></a>, to explain the ambivalences of the practices of <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/women" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>women</span></a> professors in <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/academia" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>academia</span></a>. Here is the link: <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01425692.2023.2203358" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://www.</span><span class="ellipsis">tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10</span><span class="invisible">80/01425692.2023.2203358</span></a><br>20 eprints in the first comment.<br><span class="h-card"><a href="https://a.gup.pe/u/sociology" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">@<span>sociology</span></a></span> <span class="h-card"><a href="https://a.gup.pe/u/edutooters" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">@<span>edutooters</span></a></span> <span class="h-card"><a href="https://a.gup.pe/u/academicchatter" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">@<span>academicchatter</span></a></span> <span class="h-card"><a href="https://a.gup.pe/u/academicsunite" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">@<span>academicsunite</span></a></span></p>
Nathaniel D. Porter<p>Qualitative research epistemologies keep popping up today for some reason. First this nuanced critique of <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/openscience" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>openscience</span></a> ties to <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/postpositivism" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>postpositivism</span></a>, then discovering a positivist-leaning checklist for <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/qualitative" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>qualitative</span></a> research reporting. I don't expect I'll ever be a critical realist or anything, but I appreciate <a href="https://sciences.social/tags/reflexivity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>reflexivity</span></a> more over time. <a href="https://markrubin.substack.com/p/opening-up-open-science-to-epistemic?r=2bqjb7" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">markrubin.substack.com/p/openi</span><span class="invisible">ng-up-open-science-to-epistemic?r=2bqjb7</span></a> <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17872937/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/178729</span><span class="invisible">37/</span></a></p>
Mark Rubin<p>Reflexivity is not just for qualitative researchers:</p><p>“In this paper, we make the case for integrating reflexivity across all research approaches, before providing a ‘beginner's guide’ for quantitative researchers wishing to engage reflexively with their own work.”</p><p>Jamieson et al. (2023):</p><p>Published (shareable?) version: <a href="https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/share/SU2KRDNH8NGVDQ2IZYFX?target=10.1111/spc3.12735" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.co</span><span class="invisible">m/share/SU2KRDNH8NGVDQ2IZYFX?target=10.1111/spc3.12735</span></a></p><p>Preprint: <a href="https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/xvrhm" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="">doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/xvrhm</span><span class="invisible"></span></a> </p><p><span class="h-card"><a href="https://a.gup.pe/u/socialpsych" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">@<span>socialpsych</span></a></span><br><a href="https://fediscience.org/tags/OpenScience" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>OpenScience</span></a><br><a href="https://fediscience.org/tags/MetaScience" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>MetaScience</span></a><br><a href="https://fediscience.org/tags/ResearcherBias" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ResearcherBias</span></a><br><a href="https://fediscience.org/tags/Reflexivity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Reflexivity</span></a><br><a href="https://fediscience.org/tags/Quantitative" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Quantitative</span></a><br><a href="https://fediscience.org/tags/Qualitative" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Qualitative</span></a> <br><a href="https://fediscience.org/tags/Positionality" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Positionality</span></a></p>
Luke Smith<p>Popper, Soros and the Open Society <a href="https://videos.lukesmith.xyz/videos/watch/b6160554-6f0e-408b-ba65-994edc46ef88" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">videos.lukesmith.xyz/videos/wa</span><span class="invisible">tch/b6160554-6f0e-408b-ba65-994edc46ef88</span></a></p>