The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Using Mass Observation as a source of qualitative secondary data for interdisciplinary longitudinal research on voluntary action

Using Mass Observation as a source of qualitative secondary data for interdisciplinary longitudinal research on voluntary action
Using Mass Observation as a source of qualitative secondary data for interdisciplinary longitudinal research on voluntary action
In 2014, my colleague Sarah Bulloch and I published an open-access paper (Lindsey and Bulloch, 2014), which looked at some of the challenges we had experienced when designing a longitudinal, mixed methods study of voluntary action which drew on Mass Observation Project (MOP) writing produced between 1981 and 2012. Seven years on, this chapter revisits some of the themes discussed in the 2014 paper, drawing on subsequent experiences of using
MOP writing to undertake longitudinal, cross-sectional, and interdisciplinary studies of voluntary action.
The chapter begins with a brief introduction to MOP writing for those unfamiliar with this secondary data source. It then considers two key issues first raised in the 2014 article. Firstly, it discusses the question of representativeness of those contributing to the MOP, asking ‘who are the MOP writers?’ The chapter draws on recent work to examine whether certain groups are under or over-represented within the MOP writers’ panel. Secondly, it examines some of
the challenges of sampling from the panel. It outlines the development of different infrastructure, tools, and techniques- openly accessible to other researchers- which may help with sampling from large volumes of (longitudinal) MOP writing. The chapter ends with a discussion of more recent work on the importance of context when using the MOP; providing some examples of how context can confirm sampling choices, and/or provide insights into
writers’ lives and identities for researchers researching voluntary action, regardless of disciplinary background.
Voluntary action, methods, innovations, challenges, Mass Observation
84-95
Policy Press
Lindsey, Rosemary
fddef0e2-3584-4b4f-939b-82049b73fcdd
Dean, Jon
Hogg, Eddy
Lindsey, Rosemary
fddef0e2-3584-4b4f-939b-82049b73fcdd
Dean, Jon
Hogg, Eddy

Lindsey, Rosemary (2022) Using Mass Observation as a source of qualitative secondary data for interdisciplinary longitudinal research on voluntary action. In, Dean, Jon and Hogg, Eddy (eds.) Researching Voluntary Action: Innovations and Challenges. (Third Sector Research Series) Policy Press, pp. 84-95.

Record type: Book Section

Abstract

In 2014, my colleague Sarah Bulloch and I published an open-access paper (Lindsey and Bulloch, 2014), which looked at some of the challenges we had experienced when designing a longitudinal, mixed methods study of voluntary action which drew on Mass Observation Project (MOP) writing produced between 1981 and 2012. Seven years on, this chapter revisits some of the themes discussed in the 2014 paper, drawing on subsequent experiences of using
MOP writing to undertake longitudinal, cross-sectional, and interdisciplinary studies of voluntary action.
The chapter begins with a brief introduction to MOP writing for those unfamiliar with this secondary data source. It then considers two key issues first raised in the 2014 article. Firstly, it discusses the question of representativeness of those contributing to the MOP, asking ‘who are the MOP writers?’ The chapter draws on recent work to examine whether certain groups are under or over-represented within the MOP writers’ panel. Secondly, it examines some of
the challenges of sampling from the panel. It outlines the development of different infrastructure, tools, and techniques- openly accessible to other researchers- which may help with sampling from large volumes of (longitudinal) MOP writing. The chapter ends with a discussion of more recent work on the importance of context when using the MOP; providing some examples of how context can confirm sampling choices, and/or provide insights into
writers’ lives and identities for researchers researching voluntary action, regardless of disciplinary background.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 1 March 2022
Keywords: Voluntary action, methods, innovations, challenges, Mass Observation

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 469149
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/469149
PURE UUID: 5036441e-2a96-4faf-be0b-eee5bac19755
ORCID for Rosemary Lindsey: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-7271-9186

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 07 Sep 2022 17:42
Last modified: 08 Jun 2023 01:41

Export record

Contributors

Author: Rosemary Lindsey ORCID iD
Editor: Jon Dean
Editor: Eddy Hogg

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×