I’ll be talking about triangulation and…
I’ll be talking about triangulation and the group leadership survey, feel free to start another thread or add to this one! First off, I think that triangulation is a really interesting method of research that addresses some of the problems of various scales– either aggregate data that says very little about each individual, or smaller-scale research that does not illuminate the bigger picture. The differences between Craig’s survey and focus group data was striking, and it seems likely that many of us may encounter this effect as well if we are using more than one data collection method. Craig’s differing results did not invalidate any of his findings, but they did give him a perspective that he could not have gotten elsewhere. It was a good reminder to me that even though we use empirical methods and work to find the “truth”, this truth is almost always going to be framed differently by different people or kinds of data, and we should be aware of this in our research.
The leadership survey would be such an interesting place to use triangulation– while the researchers collected the survey results, I imagine that an interview or focus group with the participants might produce a different picture about their views of masculinity and femininity, and could get into some of the issues we discussed, like how personal experience shapes opinions. A further angle might be to interview someone about their combined choices of traits for an ideal leader, because the holistic picture could be different than each trait individually. If anyone wants to talk more about the gender associations, I think they’re equally fascinating and frustrating! I was surprised at how some of the traits were gendered– any particular surprises for you?
Emily Dunn 4:51 pm on March 9, 2016 Permalink |
I definitely agree with you Mielle, triangulation is a valuable method and one I wouldn’t have considered before Craig’s talk. The only downside I could see to it would be costs in terms of time as exploring different methods and avenues isn’t always an option during research, although it depends on the specifics of projects. I thought his point about surveys and the cost of them was an interesting one too as I have never considered that cost before and how it may limit research undertaken by academics – as well as any future research I may do in the future. However, with triangulation, I do believe that the benefits outweigh the cost and I think it’s an avenue I’ll definitely pursue in any future research. Even for our research at Williams Lake, the fact that we are now aware of it as a method has definitely made me more receptive to questioning assumptions I have and refusing to take any data at face value without a more social interface in order to be sure of my research.
As for the leadership survey, the gendering of the traits didn’t surprise me in the slightest – although some of the percentages (such as 96% vs 4% for confidence) did surprise me as I had thought – especially among students – that gender associations weren’t as prevalent in society as the leadership survey made them out to be. I think part of that can be explained in the categorization of the survey though – with only two categories, male or female, people were forced into a polarizing decision. I feel that if there had been a box for ‘both genders’ the results may not have been as divided and extreme as they were. I think what would be really interesting if interviews and focus groups had been conducted would be to find out how each gender expressing the trait would come across in a leadership context e.g. would an aggressive male be perceived more positively as a leader than an aggressive female? All in all, I thought it was an extremely interesting activity that has many implications for the way we perceive these issues,
Eleanor Shorrock 5:10 pm on March 10, 2016 Permalink |
I agree with Mielle that triangulation methodology can address problems on varying scales. Although one methodology cannot invalidate the other, having a second method with differing results can either highlight potential biases or raise awareness of potential phenomenon that we had not yet considered. Adding a third methodology on top can increase the validity of findings if they point to similar conclusion. Craig noted that using a range of research methodologies enabled him to attain general data through census, get expert opinions of his initial findings using interviews, and finally, challenge assumptions he had initially made through the use of focus groups. Whilst we may not have the time/resources in to conduct such a large scale project in Williams Lake, it is important that we do not just use one method and label our findings as ‘truth’. The mining team will be using surveys which we intend to analyse prior to our visit and then use these findings to construct interviews during our visit. Whilst it would be convenient for these two methods to provide us with the same outcome, what is most exciting about field work is that initial assumptions can be challenged!
ernielly leo 9:37 am on March 11, 2016 Permalink |
I can’t seem to start a new thread in discussing gender, and in particular our conversation around International Women’s Day but thanks for bringing this up Mielle. There weren’t any surprises for me in terms of the experiment we did in class, it was a relief to see that our class’ response was slightly different than what is usually the case at large. However as we discuss and celebrate international Women’s day, I can’t help but consider the conversations and the meaning behind these worldwide celebration. I feel that we must consider intersectionality and how it further convoluted the conversation on genderization of characteristics. What does it mean to be a person of colour who are also assigned gendered characteristics on top of assigned characteristics due to ethnicity? Where do trans bodies fit in this space? What does it mean to be a woman in certain places where values, cultural practices, and relationship holds a different meaning from our North American context? I think it’s important to think about how we are celebrating International Womens Day, keeping in mind that its initial conception was at a very different time and that it was meant to celebrate a certain type of women. I think decolonizing our celebration and engaging with the intersectionality of gender, race, and sexual orientation is difficult but also so important! That being said, it is a very tricky thing to be doing, any ideas on how may broaden the conversation surrounding international Women’s day?
Donna Liu 12:15 pm on March 11, 2016 Permalink |
To continue the discussion on survey and gender, I felt extremely frustrated seeing the results of the perceived masculine and feminine traits! I think that the setup of the survey put pressure on participants to define attitudes and qualities of males and females in a black and white way. There was no opportunity in the participation of the survey for the participants to contextualize their answers and give their reasoning. Thus, we also do not have information either and only see the results of a more traditional culturally defined masculine and feminine traits. With this survey, it may have been interesting for the researchers to continue with a triangulation method and conduct interviews or focus groups to hear what the participants were thinking during the survey activity. Moreover, if I had completed the gender version of the survey, I would have given many positive traits that males scored higher, such as confident, powerful, and strong as a feminine trait. However, I recognize that my choices would be based on my experiences and attitude towards females in my life as well as my role models. I think it is also encouraging to see examples of many women are become strong leaders with leadership styles that don’t necessarily take on male caricatures. Similarly, there are many men who are sensible and relationship oriented!
amy luo 12:48 pm on March 11, 2016 Permalink |
I thought the activity Siobhan conducted with the class regarding gender and leadership was extremely interesting and it hit close to home for me. As a female athlete who has competed at an international level, I face gender issues all the time, especially playing a co-ed sport. Recently, I was playing ultimate at a recreational level with some friends, and oftentimes they look to me for leadership and advice due to my experience in the sport. However, another teammate arrived who has played at as high of a level as I have, but was a male. All of a sudden everyone started turning to him for leadership and advice, despite asking him questions that I was also perfectly capable of providing answers for. After the activity we did in class, I started reflecting on the possibility that these gendered stereotypes of leadership are so deeply engrained in our society that we don’t even realize it happening, as I’m sure my friends were not intentionally deferring to my male counterpart over me. (We were also the same ethnicity if that makes a difference!)
I apologize if my story was a bit of a digression, but I wanted to share this personal experience regarding gender and leadership as it felt very timely with Siobhan’s in class activity.
courtenay desiree crane 12:13 am on March 12, 2016 Permalink |
Just adding to the conversation about gender, I think that the research that was conducted showed less about what traits are characteristic of men and women, but instead reflected how gender is constructed in society. I think that this week’s reading “Navigating the city: gender and positionality in cultural geography research” really complimented this week’s activity as it discusses gender and research. I found it really useful in helping to consider the relationship between gender and the methodology that we employ in our research. The authors write: “When we consider gender, we not only reference the physical qualities associated with gender differences but most importantly also refer to socially constructed gender roles” (Kusek et al., 153).
I think that the results of the survey illustrated the limitations that come with only recognizing two genders, male and female. I believe that gender should not be something that you just tick off in a box as either as male or female; perhaps a blank space for the participant to provide their own way of identifying would be more suitable. In the article “Native gay and lesbian issues: The two-spirited” Terry Tafoya offers a good overview of traditional Indigenous concepts of gender that are quite different from the Canadian constructions of gender that were long imposed on Indigenous peoples. In mainstream Canadian society, gender is often constructed as “polar opposites, or different ends of the same stick. One is either/or, male or female, gay or straight. Native American concepts usually prefer circles to lines. If one takes the line of male/female, gay/straight, and bends it into a circle, there are an infinite number of points. Just so, there are theoretically an infinite number of possible points of gender and sexual identity for an individual who can shift and differ over time and location” (Tafoya, 407).
This article is quite appropriate for our discussion of leadership, which, in Canadian society, has been dominated by men. If I remember correctly the leadership gender survey took place at a university in the states, which, like Canada is a settler colonial society, where males have dominated leadership positions. Prior to contact, many Indigenous communities were matriarchal and women often occupied leadership roles. This changed with the imposition of the Indian Act, which made it mandatory for Indians on reserves to vote in band office elections instead of using traditional forms of Indigenous governance, and denied women the right to vote or to be elected chief until 1951. These imposed Canadian concepts of gender and leadership were very different from traditional Indigenous understandings.
“Historically the status of a two-spirit person was valued in many native communities, since an ordinary male sees the world through male eyes and an ordinary female sees the world through female eyes. However, a two-spirited person (who possesses both a male and female spirit, regardless of the flesh that is worn) will always see further. For this reason, many two-spirited people have become medicine people, leaders, and intermediaries between men and women… Their greater flexibility provides them with greater possibilities of discovering alternative ways of seeing themselves and the world” (Tafoya, 407)
References
Kusek, Weronika A., and Sarah L. Smiley. “Navigating the City: Gender and Positionality in Cultural Geography Research.” Journal of Cultural Geography 31.2 (2014): 152-65. Web
Tafoya, Terry. “Native gay and lesbian issues: The two-spirited.” Psychological perspectives on lesbian, gay, and bisexual experiences (2003): 401-409.