Action Research: An Opportunity for Revitalizing Research Purpose and Practices

Qualitative Social Work

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 155-175

  Bradbury, Hilary ^a   Reason, Peter ^b  

^a CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BATH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

action research; participation; research methods; useful research

Indexed keywords

EID: 84997995822     PISSN: 14733250     EISSN: 17413117     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1473325003002002003     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Allen, J. (2001) ‘The Switch’, On Wisconsin 102(3): 38-43.
2. Bandura, A. (1977) Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Bright, S.B. (1997) ‘Counsel for the Poor: The Death Sentence not for the Worst Crime but for the Worst Lawyer’, in H. A. Bedau (ed.) The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies, pp. 275-309. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Brodsky, S.L. (1999) The Expert Expert Witness: More Maxims and Guidelines for Testifying in Court. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
5. Brodsky, S.L. and Anderer, S.J. (2000) ‘Serving as an Expert Witness: Evaluations, Subpoenas, and Testimony’, in F. Kaslow (ed.) Handbook of Couple and Family Forensics: A Sourcebook for Mental Health and Legal Professionals, pp. 475-490. New York: Wiley.
6. Clines, F.X. (2002) ‘Death Penalty is Suspended in Maryland’, New York Times (10 May): A16.
7. Equal Justice Initiative of Alabama, http://www.eji.org/index.html (consulted Nov. 2002).
8. Finn, D. (2002) ‘Death Row U.S.A. Spring 2002’, A Quarterly Report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/DEATHROWUSA (consulted June 2002).
9. Greenhouse, L. (2002 a) ‘Citing “National Consensus,” Justices Bar Death Penalty for Retarded Defendants’, New York Times (21 June): A1.
10. Greenhouse, L. (2002 b) ‘Hedging Bets: Ruling Barring Execution of Retarded may not lead to Further Restrictions’, New York Times (22 June): A7.
11. Greenhouse, L. (2002 c) ‘Justices say Death Penalty is up to Juries, not Judges’, New York Times (25 June): A1.
12. Kirby, B. (2002) ‘Jury Recommends Life Sentence for Murderer’, Mobile Register’ (19 March) http://www.al.com/news/mobileregister (consulted March 2002).
13. Liptak, A. (2002) ‘Fewer Death Sentences likely if Juries make Ultimate Decision, Experts say’, New York Times (25 June): A19.
14. Liptak, A. and Rimer, S. (2002) ‘With Little Guidance, States Face Hard Debate on who is Retarded’, New York Times (21 June): A1.
15. Prejean, H. (1993) Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States. New York: Random House.
16. Reed, J.G. and Rohrer, G.E. (2000) Death Penalty Mitigation: A Challenge for Social Work Education’, Journal of Teaching in Social Work 20(1-2): 187-199.
17. Reynolds, T.S. and Bernstein, T. (1989) ‘Edison and ‘the Chair”’, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 8(1): 19-28.
18. Rimer, S. (2002) ‘In Similar Cases, One Inmate is Executed, One Wins Stay’, New York Times (29 May): A11.
19. Witkin, S. (2002) ‘“ New Voices”: A Column in Search Of Authors’, Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice 1(2): 141.