Content area
Full Text
(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.)
This article draws extensively from a multi-researcher project in progress. The authors thank those who participated in the Planning Workshop on a Qualitative Data Repository, held March 28-29, 2009, at Syracuse University (funded by NSF Grant SES 0838716). We especially thank Michele Lamont, Howard Turtle, and Lisa Wedeen.
Political science has witnessed a renaissance in qualitative research methods (Bennett and Elman 2006). Over the last 15 years, the canon has been reworked to systematize and expand the repertoire of qualitative methods, ground them more firmly in contemporary philosophy of science, and illuminate their strengths relative to quantitative and formal methods (Bennett and Elman 2007). A rapidly expanding body of political science research now employs qualitative and multi-method analysis, and institutions dedicated to qualitative and multi-method research have flourished.
New scholarship addressing field and archival research methods is an increasingly important facet of this renaissance. Books (e.g., Feldman, Bell, and Berger 2003; Magnette 2008; Trachtenberg 2006; Schatz 2009), journal symposia (e.g., Leech 2002; Lieberman, Howard, and Lynch 2004; Loaeza, Stevenson, and Moehler 2005; Clark 2006; Read, MacLean, and Cammett 2006; Ortbals and Rincker 2009), and individual journal or reference pieces (e.g., Harrison 1992; Collier 1996; Thies 2002; Wood 2006, 2007; Tansey 2007; Read, forthcoming) on field and archival research are being published with increasing frequency. Further, the Institute for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research (IQMR) has taught field and archival research methods each year since its inception in 2002, and a short course on conducting fieldwork has been offered at the annual meetings of the American Political Science Association (APSA) since 2001.
In tandem with advances in qualitative analysis and an increased focus on field research, an interest in data sharing has been growing among qualitative researchers. These dynamics have highlighted a significant infrastructure gap. In contrast with norms and practices associated with quantitative research, as well as with qualitative work in some other countries, there is currently no dedicated venue or agreed set of practices for storing, sharing, and reusing qualitative social science data in the United States (Heaton 2004, 6). As a result, most qualitative data generated by American social scientists are used only once. Scholars wishing to retrace the steps taken by others typically must repeat the research....