Dissertation Dispatch: Pressed for Time and Who You Know
I don’t know about you, but parenthood has done a number on my sleep patterns. Last night was a pretty poor night of sleep for me, so I did something I never do…After putting my kids onto the school bus, I went back to sleep (aided by my beloved wireless noise-canceling headphones). This, combined with a visit to a friend with a new baby made it a less productive day than I’d planned for. But that is OK…my visit was long overdue and it was really fun.
Pressed for Time
Every time I read something by Judy Wajcman, I just love her work more. She just GETS IT. I actually skipped to the last chapter of Pressed for Time, because it piqued my interest. (and, ironically, I knew I didn’t have much reading time today.) Some of my favorite quotes are pictured below, in my dissertation notebook.
I particularly liked her stance on technology that is both adopter and unflinching critic. I think we need to be constantly critiquing whether we’re developing technology and using it ways that make society a better, more democractic, more equitable place.
And her comments on the labor of motherhood are just so spot on. In fact, this weekend (on Mother’s Day) I was doing my 5,000th chore of the day and a thought flitted across my mind: They don’t tell you when you go into labor that it’s not going to end for 18 to 30 years!
Maybe longer…idk :/
Who Do You Know?
I’m doing a phenomenological dissertation. Phenomenology is a form of qualitative research where you gather data (often interviews and other sources) from people who have all shared a particular experience. As the researcher, you then try to analyze and synthesize the data to craft a description of the “phenomenon” (being a nurse during the Covid-19 pandemic could, for example, be one such phenomenon).
Within phenomenology, I’m trying to decide whether to use an interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach or a more general hermeneutic approach. Both acknowledge that separating one’s self as a researcher and being entirely objective is impossible—you handle this by being up front about your positionality and using a range of strategies to make sure that you check your biases—things like member checking (asking your participants to review interview transcripts, versions of your write-up, etc.), triangulation of data (using multiple data sources), and outside review. But IPA incorporates the researcher a bit more and has a fairly specific analytical protocol, which appeals to me for my dissertation work.
The only negative of IPA that I’m contending with is that it also assumes a fairly homogenous group of participants. Because I’m interested in capturing a more “universal” experience of mothering young children, I worry that this could leave a lot of perspectives out. My dissertation committee chair had a much more pragmatic solution: She suggested to look at who might actually be willing and available to participate in my research (thus, my question, Who Do I Know?). I did some initial charting in my notebook, and then decided this would be a good opportunity to do a little R practice.
The small number of participants makes faceting less visually appealing (or necessary, but hey, it’s good practice). However, I do gain a few insights about my mock participant pool from this visualization
Number of children doesn’t seem to impact work status greatly. This is a VERY small n-size so that would need to be interpreted with caution. But I do find this interesting as I think about the specific families I know: Those with larger families where the mother works full-time employ nannies/au pairs, especially at higher income levels. At lower income levels, or with a smaller number of kids, families tend more toward full-time daycare in order to make it work. Reflecting on this, I consider the ways that technology intersects with the procuring and maintaining of childcare and, later, elementary education. Daycare check-in apps, Google classroom, emailing the teacher, keeping up with teacher emails, accessing grades and progress reports and bus routes are all things that spring to mind. (Not to mention the planning of birthday parties…currently causing me some mom angst…I wish I were one of those people who likes planning parties but, in fact, I am a grinch. Please don’t tell my kids.)
Mothers of children with special needs are more likely to be stay-at-home parents. Again, this needs to be interpreted with caution because of the small participant pool. However, I would not be surprised if this played out on a larger scale, given the additional demands of raising children with special needs.
Most families have 2 kids.
I then did some really basic bar graphs to look at a few variables: advanced degree attainment (above), race (below), and use of medical technologies (farther down).
This is a pretty homogenous group so far: mostly White, with high educational attainment and, though not something I know or have asked about, I would presume mostly middle class. So clearly there are people left out here. The homogeneity of the group would lend itself to the IPA methodology but it is necessarily going to leave out certain perspectives on mothering, parenting, technology use, work, and so forth, and perspectives that may be left out more often than they are included. So, not ideal.
One of the technologies that really didn’t even occur to me until I started my literature review (sort of strangely, since I have a healthcare background) was medical technology. Specifically, assisted reproductive technology was a prevalent theme in published research where motherhood, technology, and agency all intersected. However, because of my background in physical therapy, I’m also interested in the wider role that medical technologies—particularly assistive and adaptive technology and things like telehealth--play in families’ lives.
Here I’m guessing a bit, based on what I know of these families, whether medical technologies of any kind have played into their lives—either for mothers or for children. I have no knowledge about engagement with telehealth—unless someone’s specifically mentioned it to me—so that’s not really captured here. The bar graph above suggests that slightly more than half have engaged with medical technology. My hunch is that this is actually a larger proportion. But something to chew on.
And that’s it for this week’s dissertation dispatch. If I’m being honest, my progress feels slow and my mental critic is telling me I should be getting more done (especially as I see the days until my kids’ summer vacation counting down). But the work takes the time it takes, I guess. Tomorrow I’m meeting up with my dissertation writing partner for our first in-person coffee date, so hopefully some caffeine-fueled writing time will make me feel a bit more accomplished!
I hope you’re making progress on your masterpieces too, whatever they may be and at whatever pace life allows.
