{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011811023622047244, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.692982456140351, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Anonymity and Place in Qualitative Inquiry

This article examines assumptions embedded in the routine practice of trying to make the places represented in qualitative accounts anonymous. Anonymity is usually seen as an ethical issue, but like any representational strategy, it conceals assumptions about the nature of entities in the world and our relations with them. Focusing on place anonymization, the author argues that the use of pseudonyms and the omission of identifying historical and geographical information align research accounts with certain ontological assumptions, modes of theorizing, and corporate constructions of the public sphere. The author concludes by suggesting ways that place and identification can be rethought in qualitative inquiry.