Birds of a feather (don’t always) flock together: Critical reflexivity of ‘Outsiderness’ as an ‘Insider’ doing qualitative research with one’s ‘Own People’

IF 3.2 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Qualitative Research Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI:10.1177/14687941221149596
Edward Ademolu
{"title":"Birds of a feather (don’t always) flock together: Critical reflexivity of ‘Outsiderness’ as an ‘Insider’ doing qualitative research with one’s ‘Own People’","authors":"Edward Ademolu","doi":"10.1177/14687941221149596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents self-reflexive elaborations of negotiating ‘outsider’ positionalities as an ‘insider’ conducting a qualitative study of first-and-second-generation Nigerian diaspora communities in London, United Kingdom (UK) and the implications of this for the methodological documentation and interpretation of the research process as well as, the perspicuity of participants’ realities. Within the conceptual framing of ‘critical reflexivity’, this article details the author’s retrospective evaluation of the impact that his positionality – notably his outsiderness, and the biases, presuppositions and awkwardness accompanying this had at each stage of the research proccess. From formulating the research topic, methodological design and participant identification/recruitment, to data collection and analysis, this article reiterates the centrality of researcher reflexivity in qualitative inquiries of one’s ‘own people’. It concludes that while critical reflexivity affords a sensitivity and attention to challenges around methodological rigour and ethical research, ethnoracialised sameness between researchers and their supposed ‘own people’ is not always complementary, ideal and productive. This article makes important and original contributions to positionality debates in its specific application to the Nigerian diaspora advancing Black scholarship in the social sciences.","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":"26 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221149596","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The article presents self-reflexive elaborations of negotiating ‘outsider’ positionalities as an ‘insider’ conducting a qualitative study of first-and-second-generation Nigerian diaspora communities in London, United Kingdom (UK) and the implications of this for the methodological documentation and interpretation of the research process as well as, the perspicuity of participants’ realities. Within the conceptual framing of ‘critical reflexivity’, this article details the author’s retrospective evaluation of the impact that his positionality – notably his outsiderness, and the biases, presuppositions and awkwardness accompanying this had at each stage of the research proccess. From formulating the research topic, methodological design and participant identification/recruitment, to data collection and analysis, this article reiterates the centrality of researcher reflexivity in qualitative inquiries of one’s ‘own people’. It concludes that while critical reflexivity affords a sensitivity and attention to challenges around methodological rigour and ethical research, ethnoracialised sameness between researchers and their supposed ‘own people’ is not always complementary, ideal and productive. This article makes important and original contributions to positionality debates in its specific application to the Nigerian diaspora advancing Black scholarship in the social sciences.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
物以类聚(并不总是):“局外人”作为“内部人”与“自己的人”进行定性研究的批判性反思
这篇文章提出了一种自我反思的阐述,即作为一名“圈内人”进行“局外人”立场的谈判,对英国伦敦的第一代和第二代尼日利亚侨民社区进行定性研究,并对研究过程的方法论文件和解释以及参与者现实的明确性产生影响。在“批判性反身性”的概念框架内,本文详细介绍了作者对他的位置性(特别是他的局外人)的影响的回顾性评估,以及与之相伴的偏见、预设和尴尬在研究过程的每个阶段。从制定研究主题,方法设计和参与者识别/招募,到数据收集和分析,本文重申了研究人员反身性在对“自己人”进行定性调查中的中心地位。它的结论是,尽管批判性反身性提供了对方法论严谨性和伦理研究的挑战的敏感性和关注,但是研究人员和他们所谓的“自己人”之间的种族同一性并不总是互补的、理想的和富有成效的。这篇文章在其具体应用于尼日利亚侨民推进黑人学术在社会科学的位置辩论作出了重要的和原创性的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research is a fully peer reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles on the methodological diversity and multi-disciplinary focus of qualitative research within the social sciences. Research based on qualitative methods, and methodological commentary on such research, have expanded exponentially in the past decades. This is the case across a number of disciplines including sociology, social anthropology, health and nursing, education, cultural studies, human geography, social and discursive psychology, and discourse studies.
期刊最新文献
Creative writing as critical fieldwork methodology Turning the tables or business as usual? COVID-19 as a catalyst in North–South research collaborations Awaiting further consideration ‘You’ll come back another day’ Exploring the challenges of interviewing upper class elites Troubling go-alongs through the lens of care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1