Why do we need it?
The SRA felt that research practitioners had a wealth of experience to share in developing and applying different methods but did not have sufficient opportunities to publish their methodological work. Formal technical reports on research projects are an important resource but can be difficult to obtain and are not always very readable. Writing for traditional academic journals can be off-putting, especially for those social researchers working outside academic institutions such as independents and practitioners in research agencies, government and public bodies, and charities. The format and guidelines for the journal – for example, shorter word limits and not requiring articles to include a full literature review – were designed to make the task of writing less daunting. But to ensure high quality each article considered for publication is first reviewed by members of our editorial board or invited referees.
The latest issue features our customary eclectic mix of articles and research notes:
Issue 9
In ‘From headline statistics to lived experiences: a new approach to measuring the poverty premium’ Andrea Finney and Sara Davies describe their ingenious study to obtain more realistic and disaggregated estimates of the ‘poverty premium’ – i.e. those additional costs poor households incur as a direct result of having very low incomes. The study used a creative combination of conceptual work, costing exercises, surveys and cluster-analysis to understand the heterogeneity of people’s experiences of the poverty premium.
In ‘Using Vignettes to examine preferences for paying for long term social care in on-line and interview surveys’ Bob Erens and colleagues focus on one of the most vexed policy questions of today: how to pay for social care. They’ve used a series of ‘vignettes’ to examine people’s preferences. At the same time they were able to compare the validity of two different survey approaches for eliciting the views of older people: an on-line panel and a face-to-face omnibus survey based on a random location sample design.
Using objects to help elicit responses in qualitative interviews is a well-established technique, especially for discussions with children. But how much does it matter what types of objects are used and how they were made? In ‘Handmade Object Elicitation: Using handmade objects to prompt richer interview data’, Ian Blackwell explores the advantages of using objects hand-made by young children and their fathers at four ‘dads’ groups’.
Two Research Notes look at different aspects of the research process itself. Firstly, the advantages and challenges of using co-productive approaches in research (‘Co-producing research with people who have experienced severe and multiple disadvantages’ by Kerry Dowding). Secondly, the views of junior researchers on how research awards can be used more effectively to develop the practical experience and skills of those embarking on research careers (‘Capacity Building in Practice: How Involving Early Career Researchers in Research Awards Can Contribute to their Development?’ by James Fletcher et al.).
Experience so far
To date we have published 30 articles including, since their introduction in 2018, five shorter format ‘Research Notes’. The latter (normally up to 1,500 words in length) are designed for briefer accounts of work in progress, explaining specific research problems or techniques and advocating new approaches, methods and fields of social research.
Of the 96 authors and co-authors who have written for the journal so far, 59% have been based in academic institutions, 24% in research agencies, 11% from voluntary sector or professional bodies plus a small number in government, Think-Tanks and media organisations. Nine of the 30 articles have been collaborations between researchers in different sectors. For example, academics working with research agencies, academics working with the voluntary sector, or agencies with public sector bodies. Very few articles have come from independent researchers as such, though several de facto independent researchers are visiting fellows at universities.
Whatever the institutional background of the authors it is important to emphasise that all our articles have a strong focus on practical research rather than theory, whether describing promising ways of doing research with people living with dementia, investigating the lives and experience of male sex workers, considering the challenges of doing research in conflict zones, or assessing the effects of using smartphones and tablets for on-line surveys.
Where next?
We have covered a very broad range of methods and issues but would welcome even more articles in all categories of social research practice: quantitative and qualitative of all varieties, or combinations of the two, data analysis projects, case study approaches, research using social media, co-productive projects. If you are not sure your research fits our remit just ask me first. It probably will.
As the above analysis suggests, we would like to receive more articles and research notes from independent researchers, though I appreciate the resource constraints independents face. If you have worked with or for an organisation could you persuade them to allow you to write an article on the methodology of the project? I would also welcome more articles from researchers working in the public sector especially in central government. I understand the hurdles which have to be jumped to get agreement but it’s always worth trying – joint articles with research agencies or academics may be possible.
The success of the journal depends heavily on our dedicated team of reviewers. I am very grateful for all their work. We would welcome more. If you are interested in becoming a referee please email me with a brief outline of your areas of expertise and interest. (On average referees receive about two articles a year to review).