“Snitches get stitches”: researching both sides of illegal markets

Author:

Potter LisaORCID,Potter Gary R.ORCID

Abstract

PurposeThe question of “taking sides” has received a lot of attention within qualitative criminology. Much of this has focused on the moral-philosophical or value-laden aspects of taking sides, following Becker's 1967 essay “whose side are we on”. However, the question of taking sides also has methodological implications, especially for qualitative researchers who wish to study multiple sides of a criminological problem, such as the perspectives of offenders and law enforcement around a particular illegal activity.Design/methodology/approachThis paper considers some of the practical, ethical and analytical challenges of studying illegal markets from opposing sides – the market participants' perspective on one side and law enforcement on the other. It outlines the advantages of researching both sides: the improved validity and reliability that comes with exploring and trying to reconcile different perspectives and the potential this has for developing theory and policy. It then explores the challenges researchers may face when trying to engage with opposing sides in qualitative fieldwork.FindingsThe paper pays particular attention to some practical and ethical questions researchers may face in this situation: who to research first, whether to be open about researching both sides and whether researchers should ever share information they have received from one side with their participants from the other side.Originality/valueThe authors do not offer absolute answers to these questions. Rather, the authors aim to outline some of the factors researchers may need to consider when juggling qualitative research involving participants on both sides of the law.

Publisher

Emerald

Reference48 articles.

1. Soundtrack to (illegal) entrepreneurship: pirated CD/DVD selling in a Greek provincial city;British Journal of Criminology,2011

2. Like that desmond morris?,1993

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3