skip to main content
10.1145/3121113.3121209acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Following the research internationally: what we learned about communication design and ethics in India

Published:11 August 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

As scholars conducting international research for the first time, we found the existing literature allowed us to do some things well but left us lacking in other areas. From our experiences, we learned that researchers should be prepared to study and work in ways that recontextualize their understanding of the world based on the unique place in which they are working. Further, researchers should take into account their own footprint as they transit, stay, eat, and work in areas of the world less familiar to them. Ethical research must also consider the positionality of study participants, accounting for the ways in which they also experience privilege.

References

  1. Rebecca Walton. 2014. Editor's introduction to special issue on intercultural methodology. Rhetoric, Professional Communication, & Globalization 5, 1(2014), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Godwin Y. Agboka. 2014. Decolonial methodologies: Social justice perspectives in interncultural communication research. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 44, 3 (2014), 297--327. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Lucia Dura, Arvind Singhal, and Eliana Elias. 2013. Minga Perú's strategy for social change in the Perúvian Amazon: A rhetorical model for participatory, intercultural practice to advance human rights. Rhetoric, Professional Communication, and Globalization 4, 1 (2013), 33--54.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Angela M. Haas. 2012. Race, rhetoric, and technology: A case study of decolonial technical communication theory, methodology, and pedagogy. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 26, 3 (2012), 277--310. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Natasha N. Jones, Kristen R. Moore, and Rebecca Walton. 2016. Disrupting the past to disrupt the future: An antenarrative of technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly 25, 4 (2016), 211--229. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. James Conklin and George F. Hayhoe. (Eds.). 2010. Qualitative research in technical communication. Routledge, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Carol Gilligan. 1995. Hearing the difference: Theorizing connection. Hypatia 10, 2 (1995), 120--127. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Nel Noddings. 2013. Caring: A relational approach to ethics and moral education. University of California Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Sharlene N. Hesse-Biber. (Ed.). 2013. Feminist research practice: A primer. Sage Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Metti Amirtham. 2011. Women in India: Negotiating body, reclaiming agency. Eugene, OR: Resource Publications, Eugene, Oregon.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Godwin Agboka. 2012. Liberating intercultural technical communication from "large culture" ideologies: Constructing culture discursively. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 42, 2 (2012), 159--181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Homi K. Bhabha. 2004. The location of culture. Routledge, London and New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Ann Russo, and Lourdes Torres. 1991. Third world women and the politics of feminism. Indiana University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Emma J. Rose. 2016. Design as advocacy: Using a human-centered approach to investigate the needs of vulnerable populations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 46, 4 (2016), 427--445. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Amy Propen and Mary Lay Schuster. 2008. Making academic work advocacy work: Technologies of power in the public arena. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 22, 3 (2008), 299--329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Reena Patel and Mary Jane C. Parmentier. 2005. The persistence of traditional gender roles in the information technology sector: A study of female engineers in India. Information Technologies & International Development 2, 3 (2005), 29--45. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Edward A. Malone. 2010. Chrysler's "Most Beautiful Engineer": Lucille J. Pieti in the pillory of fame. Technical Communication Quarterly 19, 2 (2010), 144--183. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Deepika, Nath. 2000. Gently shattering the glass ceiling: experiences of Indian women managers. Women in Management Review 15, 1 (2000), 44--52. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Alison Wylie. 2004. Why standpoint matters. In S. Harding (Ed.), The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies (pp. 339--374). New York, NY: Routledge, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Responsible travel tips. (n.d). Center for Responsible Travel (CREST). Washington, DC. http://www.travelersphilanthropy.org/resources/Responsible_Travel_Tips.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Martha Honey. (Ed.). 2011. Travelers' philanthropy handbook. Center for Responsible Travel (CREST). Washington, DC. http://www.travelersphilanthropy.org/resources/T-Phil%20Handbook/Travelers'_Philanthropy_Handbook_by_CREST.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Shweta Singh and Gretchen Hoge. 2010. Debating outcomes for "working" women: Illustrations from India." Journal of Poverty 14, 2 (2010), 197--215. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Smitha Radhakrishnan. 2009. Professional women, good families: Respectable femininity and the cultural politics of a "new" India." Qualitative Sociology 32, 2 (2009), 195--212. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Rebecca Walton, Maggie Zraly, and Jean Pierre Mugengana. Values and validity: Navigating messiness in a community-based research project in Rwanda. Technical Communication Quarterly 24, 1 (2015), 45--69. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGDOC '17: Proceedings of the 35th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication
    August 2017
    286 pages
    ISBN:9781450351607
    DOI:10.1145/3121113

    Copyright © 2017 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 11 August 2017

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    SIGDOC '17 Paper Acceptance Rate61of77submissions,79%Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)7
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader