Abstract
The reliability of individual experience has always been a controversial issue in oral history research. Existing studies tended to randomly sample an oral object to ensure that the materials obtained are representative, or compare oral historical materials to archives to ensure their effectiveness, but none of these methods are aware of the unique value of oral history research. The validity of oral history cannot only show that the individual experience could verify the historical facts, but also reflect the “social facts” defined by Emile Durkheim. Therefore, in the selection of oral objects, the collection of oral materials, the in-depth interaction of the interview process, and the interpretation and analysis of the data process, researchers should fully comprehend the relationship between and among position and relation, content and context, as well as perception, action and structure.The process of tracing how individuals connect to form society, so as to bring individual experience into recording “formal history”. These three aforesaid tensions constitute the basic analysis frame of oral history research.
口述史研究中一直存在着个体经验是否具有信度的争议。既有研究往往通过抽样,随机性地获取口述对象,从而保证所获取的材料具有可代表性;或是将口述史资料与档案资料进行比对来保证其有效性。但这些方法都未意识到口述史研究的独特价值所在。口述史研究的效度不仅体现在个体的经验能够证实历史事实,更在于它能够反映埃米尔·涂尔干(émile Durkheim)所说的"社会事实"。因此,研究者应该在口述对象的选择、口述资料的搜集、访谈过程的深入互动以及对资料的解读和分析等环节中充分把握好:1.位置与关系之间;2.内容和语境之间;3.感知、行动和结构之间的关系,追溯个体如何联结而构成社会的过程,从而让个体经验进入"大写...
口述史研究中一直存在着个体经验是否具有信度的争议。既有研究往往通过抽样,随机性地获取口述对象,从而保证所获取的材料具有可代表性;或是将口述史资料与档案资料进行比对来保证其有效性。但这些方法都未意识到口述史研究的独特价值所在。口述史研究的效度不仅体现在个体的经验能够证实历史事实,更在于它能够反映埃米尔·涂尔干(émile Durkheim)所说的"社会事实"。因此,研究者应该在口述对象的选择、口述资料的搜集、访谈过程的深入互动以及对资料的解读和分析等环节中充分把握好:1.位置与关系之间;2.内容和语境之间;3.感知、行动和结构之间的关系,追溯个体如何联结而构成社会的过程,从而让个体经验进入"大写...