The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
People can talk about their practices
Abstract
This paper considers the value of using interviews to research routine practices. Interviewing could easily be framed as inappropriate for this task, either because such practices are too difficult for respondents to talk about as a result of having sedimented down into unthinking forms of embodied disposition or because this method is out of step with a current enthusiasm for research styles that do not focus unduly on the representational. The discussion starts with how some key proponents of social practice theory have characterised the possibility of talking with people about these matters before turning to my own experience with two interview projects that attempted to do so inside city offices and older person households. I conclude that people can often talk in quite revealing ways about actions they may usually take as a matter of course and offer suggestions about how to encourage them.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bourdieu, P. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621749 · Cited by 17,271
Hybridizing Habitus and Reflexivity: Towards an Understanding of Contemporary Identity?
Adams, M. (2006) · Sociology · doi:10.1177/003803850663672 · Cited by 418
Cited by
Wieser, H., & Tröger, N. (2018) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.106 · Cited by 205
Contextualising food waste prevention-Decisive moments within everyday practices
Hebrok, M., & Heidenstrøm, N. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.141 · Cited by 170
Why do users (not) repair their devices? A study of the predictors of repair practices
Jaeger-Erben, M., Frick, V., & Hipp, T. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125382 · Cited by 134
Bell, S. L., Phoenix, C., Lovell, R., & Wheeler, B. W. (2015) · Area · doi:10.1111/area.12152 · Cited by 111
Metadata
- Authors
- Hitchings, R.
- Venue
- Area
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-10-19
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-67
- ISSN
- 0004-0894 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-4762
- OpenAlex
- W2112518969
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 37.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.