Page 146 - Dark Shades of Istria
P. 146
Methodology: An Introduction
practices known as positivism – see Balarabe Kure (2012, pp. 4–6) and
Babones (2016). From this aspect, positivism is marked with internal and
external validity, reliability, and objectivity, and, according to Kiser and
Hechter (1998, p. 790), it is not in line with causality.
These orientations are encountered in the quantitative section of the
study, which is oriented toward theoretical and empirical analyses and
the interpretation of both memory practices and dark tourism (sites) in
a specific Istrian context. From the point of view of axiology, this part
should be less sensitive to the influences of the researchers’ philosophical
views.
In this context, Roediger and Wertsch (2008) claim that rigorous quan-
titative and qualitative methods are applicable to collective memory stud-
ies. In addition to traditional historiographical and other post-structural
approaches, historian Kansteiner (2002) thus suggests the employment of
methods of communication and media studies in particular, with which
Bosch (2016, pp. 5–6) also agrees.² Moreover, according to many cited
authors, Bosch (2016) provides a wide range of methods for memory
studies, i.e. studying primary historical and archival sources, oral his-
tories, case studies, interviews and surveys. In this respect, dark tourism
studies do not significantly differ from (collective) memory studies. Light
(2017, p. 292) made a review of the research methods adopted over the
1996–2016 period, and found that the most common research approach
involves qualitative methods, including authors’ observations, and to a
lesser extent quantitative (positivist) ones with questionnaire surveys
with large samples; mixed quantitative and qualitative methods were also
used by dark tourism scholars, although not very often. The author also
established the growing importance of a range of web sources, includ-
ing attraction websites, discussion forums, and travel blogs, as well as
the occasional use of written sources, including fiction, travel writing,
guidebooks, and visitor comment books, all of which can provide an in-
teresting insight into the motivations and experiences of visitors. Web
sources can thus also be interesting for the investigation of memorial and
dark tourism practices in Istria.
Based on this compilation, we can determine that memory and dark
tourism studies are methodologically compatible research fields, which
² An interesting example of such a mixed approach related to Jasenovac is the research of
Pavlaković and Perak (2017); media, politics and memory in Croatia are also analysed by
Mustapić and Balabanić (2018) in an interesting manner.
146
practices known as positivism – see Balarabe Kure (2012, pp. 4–6) and
Babones (2016). From this aspect, positivism is marked with internal and
external validity, reliability, and objectivity, and, according to Kiser and
Hechter (1998, p. 790), it is not in line with causality.
These orientations are encountered in the quantitative section of the
study, which is oriented toward theoretical and empirical analyses and
the interpretation of both memory practices and dark tourism (sites) in
a specific Istrian context. From the point of view of axiology, this part
should be less sensitive to the influences of the researchers’ philosophical
views.
In this context, Roediger and Wertsch (2008) claim that rigorous quan-
titative and qualitative methods are applicable to collective memory stud-
ies. In addition to traditional historiographical and other post-structural
approaches, historian Kansteiner (2002) thus suggests the employment of
methods of communication and media studies in particular, with which
Bosch (2016, pp. 5–6) also agrees.² Moreover, according to many cited
authors, Bosch (2016) provides a wide range of methods for memory
studies, i.e. studying primary historical and archival sources, oral his-
tories, case studies, interviews and surveys. In this respect, dark tourism
studies do not significantly differ from (collective) memory studies. Light
(2017, p. 292) made a review of the research methods adopted over the
1996–2016 period, and found that the most common research approach
involves qualitative methods, including authors’ observations, and to a
lesser extent quantitative (positivist) ones with questionnaire surveys
with large samples; mixed quantitative and qualitative methods were also
used by dark tourism scholars, although not very often. The author also
established the growing importance of a range of web sources, includ-
ing attraction websites, discussion forums, and travel blogs, as well as
the occasional use of written sources, including fiction, travel writing,
guidebooks, and visitor comment books, all of which can provide an in-
teresting insight into the motivations and experiences of visitors. Web
sources can thus also be interesting for the investigation of memorial and
dark tourism practices in Istria.
Based on this compilation, we can determine that memory and dark
tourism studies are methodologically compatible research fields, which
² An interesting example of such a mixed approach related to Jasenovac is the research of
Pavlaković and Perak (2017); media, politics and memory in Croatia are also analysed by
Mustapić and Balabanić (2018) in an interesting manner.
146
