Abstract
<p class="CorpsA">As mobilities studies became a well-respected field in social science, discussions on mobile research designs followed. Usually, these discussions are part of empirical papers and reveal specific methodological choices of individual researchers, or groups of researchers sharing the same objectives and questions. This article starts with a different approach. It is based on continuous discussions between four researchers who developed their own version of mobility-driven projects, starting from different disciplinary backgrounds and using different research techniques. By sharing and contrasting personal fieldwork experiences, we reflect on the doings of mobile methodologies. We engage with the mistakes, dilemmas, and (dis)comforts that emerge from our own mobile research practices, and discuss what this implies for relations of power between the researcher and the research participants, and to what extent mobile research can represent the mobility that we seek to study. Specifically, the article addresses three questions: 1) To what extent do we produce different knowledge with our mobile methodologies? 2) How do our smooth writings about methodology relate to the ‘messy’ realities in the field? 3) How do our practices articulate and transcend difference between researchers and research participants?</p>
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,Social Psychology
Reference47 articles.
1. Adey, P. (2017). Mobility (2nd Ed.). London and New York, NY: Routledge.
2. Aparna, K. (2020). Enacting asylum university: Politics of research encounters and (re)producing borders in asylum relations (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Radboud University, the Netherlands.
3. Aparna, K., Schapendonk, J., & Merlín-Escorza, C. E. (2020). Method as border: Tuning in to the cacophony of academic backstages of migration, mobility and border studies. Social Inclusion, 8(4), 110–115.
4. Benson, M. (2011). The movement beyond (lifestyle) migration: Mobile practices and the constitution of a better way of life. Mobilities, 6(2), 221–235.
5. Blondin, S. (2020). Understanding involuntary immobility in the Bartang Valley of Tajikistan through the prism of motility. Mobilities, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2020.1746146
Cited by
15 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