[FIELDS] Finlay, Barrett, Breakwell

[Finlay] reflexivity

• thoughtful, conscious self-awareness where researchers engage in an explicit, self-aware meta-analysis of the research process

• Response to post-positivism; detached from the data and research 

• Problem if too much subjectivity

[F] researcher’s role

• qualitative researchers must acknowledge that they are central figures who influence the collection, selection, and interpretation of data

[F] components

• Research is viewed as a joint product of the participants, researcher, relationship, meaning the process itself can transform the phenomenon being studied

[F] purpose

• transform subjectivity from a problem into an opportunity thereby increasing the integrity and trustworthiness of the research 

• Involves examining the impact of the researcher’s position and perspective, empowering others, and evaluating the research process and outcomes

[F] reflection

• thinking about an object in a distanced way, often taking place after the event has occurred

[F] reflexivity

 immediate, continuing, dynamic, and subjective self-awareness

[F] lived experience

• to be reflexive is to engage in an ongoing conversation about an experience while simultaneously living in that moment 

  • The researcher tries to make conscious the connections by which the subject (researcher) and object (participants/data) influence and constitute one another

• Making connections with each other

[F] core focus of phenomenological views

• phenomenologist investigate how the subject and object are enmeshed in pre-reflective existence 

• researchers use their own reflecting, intuiting, and thinking as primary evidence to understand the phenomenon

  • Arrive at the connections between you and your participants 

  • Don’t detach yourself but keep feelings

[F] subjectivity as essential

• subjectivity is not eliminated but embraced; understanding results from the dialectic between the researcher’s pre-understandings and the research process

  • Make sense of the experiences

  • Different experimentists

[F] bracketing

•  bracket out existing beliefs and assumptions to genuinely attend to the participant’s view, a process that requires reflexive awareness of one’s own implicit frameworks

  • Niche view: more for a specific framework

  • not necessarily a need

[F] social constructionist views

• Social constructionists invite researchers to look outward into the realm of interaction, discourse, and shared meanings 

• Different forms of analysis - default

• Social constructionists emphasize that a different researcher would produce a different story/analysis because the researcher-researched relationship fundamentally shapes the results 

  • Emerge in interactions

  • Interactions are embedded in cultural contexts and histories

  • Privilege, prejudice, and entrapment

[F] reflexive identity

• identity is viewed as a reflexive project, where individuals gain self-awareness through social interactions 

[F] political awareness

• reflexivity in this context can open the way to a more socially oriented consciousness regarding the political dimensions of field work, such as gender, class, and race

[F] psychodynamic views

• Psychodynamic approaches to reflexivity explore how unconscious processes and transferences structure the relationship between the researcher and participant

• Researchers are encouraged to analyze their own emotional responses, such as feelings of helplessness or alienation, as data that sheds light on the participant’s world

• View kind of relationship with the participant

[F] participative views

• Participants are seen as able to also engage in reflexivity; they can be enlisted as co-researchers who also possess the capacity to be reflexive beings 

• Step off from automatic authority; diffusing tension between participants

• Reduce power imbalance: acknowledging the researcher’s position helps mute the distance and alienation often built into conventional notions of objectivity

[F] reflexivity process

1. before the research

2. data collection

3. data analysis

4. conclusion

[F] before the research

• Reflexive analysis should begin as soon as the project is conceived, with the researchers examining their relationship to that topic 

• Researchers must identify their motivations, symptoms, and interests to see how these might affect the research 

• By bringing implicit frameworks into relief, researchers can attempt to become relatively independent of them and avoid imposing them on participants 

• Researchers can jot down notes about their own personal experiences with the topic to become aware of assumptions and expectations before interviewing subjects

• Talk about these with fellow researchers

• It’s okay to admit that you[re looking for specific outcomes -> noticing what we want with things that are connected to that 

[F] data collection

• The researcher’s presence in observations and interviews can lead to omissions and fabrications or just affect the interview in general 

• Look at where the irritation comes from -> expectations are not met 

• The process and outcomes of data collection depend fundamentally on how the relationship between the researcher and participant evolves 

• During data collection, it is recommended that researchers use strategies like humor and warmth and empathic listening to manage power imbalances inherent in the research process

• defense mechanisms

[F] defense mechanisms

• Defense mechanisms: both researchers and participants may use defenses which shape the interview trajectory

  • Must be reflexively made aware of and adjusted to during data collection

[F] data analysis

• Researchers should pay attention to their own assumptions, expectations, emotions, behaviors, responses, as these often alert the researcher to deeper meanings, especially in relation to your participant’s realities 

  • Ask yourself how were with the participant when hearing their answers with them 

  • Realize that your own actions mirror the realities of the group you are studying 

  • Even confusion is helpful, points you to possible realities of the context the participant is in 

[F] conclusion

• Such criticisms reinforce the point that the reflexive researcher’s task is fraught with ambiguity.

• In the end, reflexivity can only be viewed as one way to begin to unravel the richness, contradictions, and complexities of intersubjective dynamics. It is not the only way, and the process of bringing the self to the fore remains problematic.

• Any reflexive analysis can only ever be a partial, tentative, provisional account. Different researchers will also approach it at different levels, according to the needs of the research at the time.

• Reflexivity: viewed as one way to begin the unravel the richness, contradictions, and complexities of intersubjective dynamics 

[Barrett] From topic to question

• balance between personal interest, topic ,and usefulness

• consider if the requirements of a research are realistic, logistically feasible and/or within professional skills and capabilities

• research questions need to be specific enough to contain phenomena, participants, contexts

• finally, be guided by related literature

  • always related literature even if not exact literature

  • more and more problematic that we are studying this topic because there is no literature

[Ba] participants

• discusses the different sampling types 

• best one is the one that deals directly with your research questions: 

  • What type of participants will get you data to answer your research question?

  • What are their characteristics?

  • How many will you be needing?

  • will they be willing to participate?

  • Are you qualified to interact with them in research?

  • how will you reach these participants?

[Ba] common issues with participants

1. participant attrition

2. participant non-compliance

[Ba] participant attrition

• participant attrition: participants dropping out of while it is in progress

  • participants have every right to cease connection with a study 

[Ba] participant non-compliance

• participant non-compliance: participants don’t comply with the research procedure

• occurrence may increase/decrease depending on research design 

[Ba] reducing attrition and non-compliance

• pre-accommodate for future attrition/non-compliance 

• emphasize parts of the study that participants can identify with 

• ensure privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity

• approach community gatekeepers for assistance in selecting participants 

  • if the topic of the study is conducive to their cooperation 

  • if it is ethical to do so 

[Ba] negotiating research relationships principles

1. sensitivity

2. consistency

3. clarity

[Ba] sensitivity

•  to hierarchies, to permissible types of contact, times of contact

[Ba] consistency

•  in contacting, in objectives/requirements, following rituals

[Ba] clarity

 in research purpose, in what can;’t be done, in the consequences of doing the study

[Ba] developing reserach relationships

1. make reserach studies accessible to reserach groups

2. reciprocity

3. interviewer and participant characteristics

[Ba] make research studies accessible to research groups

• consider appropriate language to use; anticipate and prepare for barriers to participation 

• when interacting/interviewing, be mindful of circumstances of participants possible values, systems and social worlds, sensitivities and emotions

• quali research requires flexibility and adaptability, non-judgmental, respect, and being reflective about participant's social worlds 

[Ba] reciprocity

• ethical principle of justice: how the researcher can give something in return for the assistance, time and thought given by research participants 

• what are the appropriate measures to restore what was lost to participants when they agreed to the interview?

  • ex. cash payment, linking with support groups, copy of report or findings

[Ba] interviewer and participant characteristics

• Interaction – match key socio-demographic criteria (gender, social class, ethnicity), language

• Interviewers need to have knowledge and insight into the research topics

• Anticipate insufficient explanation (of jargon/concepts) because of assumptions of researcher; sensitive issues

• How do the characteristics of researchers intrude or enhance data collection?

[Ba] ethical considerations

1. informed consent

2. anonymity, confidentiality, privacy

3. protecting participants from harm

4. protecting researchers from harm

[Ba] informed consent

• providing participants with the necessary information to help them decide regarding their participation in the study 

• consent from third parties; underage, PWD 

  • obtain from both participant and legal guardian 

  • shorter 

[Ba] anonymity

• participant identity unknown outside source 

[Ba] confidentiality

•  participation response unknown and unmatchable outside of research

[Ba] privacy

• data and responses will only be recorded and used for agreed upon 

[Ba] CAP limitations

• limits; disclosure of illegal and/or harmful activity; must clarified

• put congeniality and harmful 

[Ba] protecting participants from harm

• sensitive topics may uncover painful experiences

• pay attention to signs of discomfort; check willingness to continue

• don’t give advance/evaluate judge the quality and morality of participant responses 

• indication of harm; encourage participants to report themselves and seek help themselves for risk or harm 

  • indicate limits of confidentiality in relation to harm

[Ba] protecting researcher’s from harm

• assess and plan ahead for the risks: commuting risks, being stranded, connection loss, unstable connection, etc. 

• work as a pair at least 

• provide avenues to contact one another- meeting points, checkpoints,scheduled start and end times 

• consider forms of debriefing; discuss the data gathering experience with each other 

• Have notetaker and interviewer roles

[Ba] Items and equipment

• recording device

• a laptop or a notebook

• informed consent 

• interview guide or FGD guide

• small token

• Interview guides and FGD guides must be piloted to check the quality of the questions and if the participants can understand them.

• In general, items and equipment are dependent on the research itself.

• Make and take time to ensure the equipment is working in accordance to the specifications of your research.

• Make and take time to practice the usage of all your items/equipment.

[Br] interviews

• A direct interaction between the researcher and the participants who are researched 

• Interviews are flexible

  • Is not tied to any one ontological and/or epistemological position 

  • Other data gathering methods can be used with interviews

  • Can be used at any stage in the research process

• Constructivist: it is the research = central 

• Positivist = using research?

• Note: must justify why you will be using interviews in a specific way

[Br] introduction section

• Where you provide participants the opportunity for informed consent 

• Verbal: introduce yourself, the general area of the study, privacy, duration of interview, confidentiality, and anonymity clauses 

• Written; informed consent form 

• No need to reveal deeply the prevalent interpretations of the researchers beforehand 

  • Propositions, intuitions, educated guesses

  • Hypothesis (for positivist research)

[Br] interview schedule

•  the series of question asked

[Br] major interview structures

1. fully structured interviews

2. unstructured interviews

3. partially=structured/semi-structured interviews

[Br] fully structured interviews

• close ended questions, positivist, prepared and mixed set of questions, fixed range of answers prepared by the interviewer beforehand 

[Br] unstructured interviews

• Open ended, unprepared questions that center around a topic/context of the interview

• E.g. talkshows

• Answers can be used for further spontaneous questions 

[Br] partially-structured/semi-structured interviews

• Open ended, prepared questions 

• Questions revolve around topic of interest

• Answers can be used for further spontaneous questions 

• Typically does not use quantifiable questions 

• For semi-structured interviews, it is almost always better to prepare and ask open-ended questions than close-ended ones. (exceptions of course, include demographic Qs).

• E.g. ask examples

[Br] question formats to avoid

1. double-barelled questions

2. questions with heavy assumptions

3. jargon-heavy questions

4. leading questions

5. double-negative questions

6. catch-all questions

[Br] double-barreled questions / questions with heavy assumptions

Does addictive binge eating and drinking make you happy?

[Br] jargon-heavy questions

What were the thigns you did during the CMP11/COP212?

[Br] leading questions

Knowing that you practice anarchism, would you say you are against money?

[Br] double-negative questions

How can an athelete not unfollow committee protocol?

[Br] catch-all questions

explain phenomenology to me and how it affects life

[Br] close-ended questions

• Question answerable with a yes or a no; or questions where the participant has to pick from a limited set of answers (ex. “on a scale of 1 – 10…”)

• Limit close-ended questions. If you have to ask a close-ended question, ensure that it is followed up immediately by an open-ended question

[Br] sequence of questions

• Funnel approach to questions 

• Begin first with light and neutral questions 

• Demographics

• Context building questions: How long have you been in the industry?

• Deeper, emotional, and experiential questions are asked towards the end 

• When you switch between question topics, provide a sufficient explanation for asking the next set of questions

[Br] types of questions

1. demographic

2. context-setting

3. deepening

4. abstract

5. wrapping-up

6. concluding

[Br] demographic questions

• Write those relevant to the research topic of

• your group.

• At this point, it is still alright to ask some close-ended questions

[Br] context-setting

• To obtain data about the everyday and/or general experiences of your participants.

• To obtain surface-level and/or beginning narratives

• To ease in participants to share deeper information

[Br] deepening questions

• Deepening questions try to paint a picture of the Phenomenon using the deeper contexts of the participants.

• Sets of questions are a lot more personal, but can start with beliefs; or descriptions that surface beliefs.

• Questions obtain data about the persons emotions , beliefs, contexts, and personal relationships within the boundaries of the phenomenon being studied

[Br] abstract questions

• deal with existence, purpose (in life or in their roles/contexts), and meanings in relation to the phenomenon.

• Not about emotions, about existence/meaning

[Br] wrapping up questions

• To summarize what has been shared while/or looking into future contexts in relation to the phenomenon.

[Br] concluding questions

• To signal the closing of the Interview

• To allow the participant the space to ask any questions to the research team

• To discuss any administrative matters

[Br] debriefing

• Debriefing

  • Have a consistent closing statement.

  • Remind the participant of confidentiality, privacy, anonymity

  • Remind the participant that they can contact you via the details in the informed consent form

  • Thank the participant

[Br] interview conclusion

• Have a prepared referral route in case the participant displays acute emotional distress.

  • You should not be the one to provide therapy/advice.

[Br] Piloting

• Normally done using the same kind of participants you will be interviewing

• Piloting surfaces issues that cannot be typically anticipated by preparation 

• Piloting is part of what forms qualitative validity, trustworthiness and rigor

[Br] stages of piloting

1. Check if explanation/introduction is understood

2. Check which questions produce confused responses from the participants 

3. Amend the introduction and questions 

4. Re-check with new subsample

5. Check if the answers you are getting closely related the answers for your research question

[Br] conducting interviews

• It is imperative to be thoroughly familiar with the interview schedule

• The order of questions

• Why you re asking these questions 

• Ask all the prepared questions to all the respondents, even if they have answered it in a previous question 

• Consistently record verbal and non-verbal responses 

• Again: avoid offering advice or applying therapy

[Br] different ways of interacting

face-to-face

1. place

2. time

3. materials

4. logistics

5. nonverbal cues

[Br] place

1.  have you arranged to meet at a suitable and available place?

• Is the place convenient for the participant?

• Is the place suitable for interviews?

• Does the place ensure confidentiality, anonymity, and privacy>

[Br] time

1. have you told the participant what time to meet and how long the interview will be

[Br] materials

• Do you have IC form 

• Interview sched

• Recorder, ballpen 

• notebook/laptop

• Token on gratitude

[Br] logistics

• Who will take notes 

• How will your materials be arranged for use in the location

[Br] nonverbal cues

• Eye contact: not 3.5 seconds 

• Mirror non-verbal cues: body positions, hand gestures

• repeat/paraphrase: last parts

• Non-directive probing/clarify 

  • Paraphrase + signal of interests

• Summarize; especially before transitioning to another topic 

[Br] validity of interview data

1. piloting

2. active listneing contributes to valditiy

3. dealing with inconsistencies

4. don’t have to include all data in the analysis

[Br] active listening contributes to validity

• The interview approach relies on the ability and willingness of participants to thoroughly answer your questions 

[Br] dealing with inconsistencies

• Social constructivist; inconsistencies are noted and reported = complexity is welcome

• probe/clarify

[Br] don’t have to include all data in the analysis

• Include strongly related to your research 

[Br] other considerations

• Ensure the interviewer is appropriate for the participant’s context

• Record consistency 

• Reflexivity; report your own position/context vis a vis the research and participants