Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37359214›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in sociology2023

Discomforting surplus: gender, sexualization, and omissions in ethnographic fieldwork.

Phung N Su, Phi Hong Su

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in sociology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Phung N Su *Department of Sociology, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, United States.
Phi Hong Su *Department of Anthropology and Sociology, Williams College, Williamstown, MA, United States.
Williams College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As sisters and sociologists, we shared an unnerving experience of sexual harassment in one of our preliminary field sites. Our research pursuits split thereafter, with one of us leaning into questions of gender and sexuality and the other steering clear. Despite our diverging interests, we both encountered discomforting moments that raise questions about what data we render surplus in our analysis. In this article, we draw on ethnographic and interviewing data from our respective projects to conceptualize "discomforting surplus" as ethnographic data that we omit from our analyses. We offer two types of discomforting surpluses: those that reveal dissonance between our actions and self-conceptions, and those that seem not just uncomfortable, but inconsequential. We mine these discomforting surpluses, calling for introspection about our subject positions and the potential benefits of trying out analytical frames we have ignored. We conclude with practical suggestions for reflecting meaningfully on our relationships to the field and engaging in thought experiments that center discomforting surplus. These contradictions, omissions, and unnerving questions in ethnographic research are important to grapple with as we encounter a push for greater transparency and open science.

Indexed as

data surplusembodimentgenderpositionalitysexual harassment

Identifiers

PMID37359214
PMCPMC10288187
OpenAlexW4380080084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.