Methodologically Becoming: Power,knowledge and team research

This article explores the path of methodological and epistemological negotiation travelled by a team of four geographers conducting research among people with transnational connections between northern New Jersey and El Salvador. Having illustrated that all data are contextual, feminist scholars have explored the power relations in which data collection is embedded in order to situate knowledge. The relationship between the dynamics of research teams and the broader political struggles with which they engage, however, remains a blind spot within feminist field methods and writing strategies deployed to 'see accountably'. The authors argue that there is an undertheorised relationship between the politics of academic research projects and the broader political movements with which they engage that may serve as a fertile intersection for feminist research. They explore relationships between team, field, and institutions in the context of negotiating difference among team members and their aspirations for the project. The article contributes to discussions of power, knowledge construction, and the politics of conducting fieldwork as a team by relaying experiences both from the perspective of individuals on the team and the team as a whole. The authors depict their objectives, successes, failures, and research politics; all part of a process of methodological becoming.     

UNCERTAINTY AND THE HISTORY OF IDEAS

Intellectual historians often make empirical claims, but can never know for certain if these claims are right. Uncertainty is thus inevitable for intellectual historians. But accepting uncertainty is not enough: we should also act on it, by trying to reduce and report it. We can reduce uncertainty by amassing valid data from different sources to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of competing explanations, rather than trying to “prove” an empirical claim by looking for evidence that fits it. Then we should report our degree of certainty in our claims. When we answer empirical questions in intellectual history, we are not telling our readers what happened: we are telling them how strong we think our evidence is—a crucial shift of emphasis. For intellectual historians, then, uncertainty is subjective, as discussed by Keynes and Collingwood; the paper thus explores three differences between subjective and objective uncertainty. Having outlined the theoretical basis of uncertainty, the paper then offers examples from actual research: Noel Malcolm's work shows how to reduce and report uncertainty about composition, and David Wootton's work shows how to reduce and report uncertainty about beliefs.     

Contemporary Sorted Patterned Ground in Low Altitude Areas of Tasmania

This paper summarises the distribution of patterned ground phenomena in Tasmania. It presents observations of low altitude sorted stone circles forming on glacial and alluvial deposits in the vicinity of Queenstown, Western Tasmania. Evidence suggests that freeze‐thaw derived patterned ground could develop in most inland valleys in Tasmania where cold air drainage causes sub‐zero ground temperatures in winter and permits the formation of ground and segregation ice to low elevations. Field observations suggest that patterned ground can only develop where freeze‐thaw processes are not inhibited by vegetation. The occurrence of patterned ground below altitudes of 900 m asl in Tasmania is largely a result of anthropogenic disturbance.