ABSTRACT

As reliable and unfiltered access to Russia and Russians becomes a fraught issue for social scientists who wish to conduct surveys, focus groups, do ethnographies, or interview elite actors, the war presents scholars with an opportunity to reflect on questions of what data collection means, and on better communication between quantitative and qualitative scholars. Similarly, it forces us confront the extractive and colonial nature of knowledge production; the war reveals how social science has always relied on, but not really acknowledged, the labor of native scholars, but can no longer ignore indigenously produced work, particularly qualitative research. In this review piece, the author highlights both blind spots in the potential communication between political scientists and other social scientists, and already-existing points of connection that can be further expanded, precisely because of, not despite the war.

摘要

对于希望进行调查、焦点小组、做人种学或采访精英演员的社会科学家来说，可靠和未经过滤地接触俄罗斯和俄罗斯人成为一个令人担忧的问题，战争为学者们提供了一个机会来思考数据收集意味着什么的问题，以及定量和定性学者之间更好的沟通。同样，它迫使我们面对知识生产的榨取性和殖民性；这场战争揭示了社会科学如何一直依赖但并未真正承认本土学者的劳动，但不能再忽视本土学者的工作，尤其是定性研究。在这篇评论文章中，作者强调了政治科学家和其他社会科学家之间潜在交流中的两个盲点，