There is great potential for the integration of qualitative
research (in multiple disciplines) with GIS in the areas of data
representation, software interoperability, conceptual integration, the
establishment of common ground between the methodologies and epistemologies,
and issues of social responsibility in research; this priority seeks to explore
emerging advances in this area.
Justification
In both 2001 and 2002 there were organized sessions at the annual meetings of
the AAG that had as their topic “GIS and Qualitative Research”. The
Qualitative Research Specialty Group of the AAG receives dozens of queries per
year from scholars interested in combining qualitative research with GIS.
Researchers in many disciplines who are already combining these methods are
looking for scholarly literature to deepen their findings. These and other
indicators suggest that this area is ripe for exploration, theorization, and
curriculum development.
Explanation
The integration of these methodologies has several layers of interest that
dovetail well with existing issues being pursued by the UCGIS (e.g.
interoperability, scale, GI & society):
1.
Data
representation Currently, qualitative data can be represented in
various ways through standard GIS packages (coding, multi-media, photos, etc.).
What can be done to push the technology further to include the variety of
possible representations? How can new software be developed to aid in
integrated forms of data representation? How can these techniques be included
in new curriculum development?
2.
Software
interoperability There is interest in
facilitating the integration of qualitative analysis software packages (such as
NUD*IST / N-Vivo and Atlas.ti)
with GIS packages.
3.
Conceptual
integration
Qualitative research is based
on principles fundamentally different than quantitative work. Because GIS have
generally evolved from processes focused on quantitative techniques, the
underlying operations of GIS need to be re-conceptualized from the perspective
of qualitative research to facilitate integration of methods and
epistemologies.
4.
Common
ground There are already research practices
in both qualitative research and GIS work that are similar; these should be
explored and built upon. For example, interview-based research develops
simultaneously along inductive and deductive lines, which is parallel to the
practice of mapping quantitative data to identify patterns and then conducting
new inquiries into the underlying processes that generate those patterns.
Efforts to build upon common ground should be pursued in order to integrate
analyses and enhance the rigor of all research.
5.
Epistemologies Many qualitative researchers argue that there are
multiple versions of “truth” that can be equally valid; this is
opposed to principles that underlie much of spatial science. Cross-discussions
from varied epistemological views should address how methodologies are imbued
with different ways of knowing and what this means for their utility. We also need
to consider how these views should be a part of the curriculum in technology
coursework.
6.
Social
Responsibility Because qualitative work
tends to involve inter-personal connection in some form researchers are
sensitive to the ways that their findings can influence people’s lives,
thus the issue of social responsibility has been at the forefront of recent
discussions among qualitative researchers. These issues, while not completely
ignored, have been less central to the agenda of GIS work. Some issues of
access to and empowerment through GI technologies have been explored but there
is more to be done. We suggest that debate and evaluations of the social
responsibility of research that involves GIS be a central topic in the
discussions of integrating qualitative research with GIS.
Submitted by:
Meghan Cope, Jacqueline A. Housel, and LaDona Knigge
Department of Geography
SUNY-Buffalo
Buffalo, NY 14261
mcope@geog.buffalo.edu;
Jhousel@acsu.buffalo;
lknigge@acsu.buffalo.edu
