Qualitative Reasearch: Autoethnography - Essay Example

Qualitative research differs from quantitative research in one very basic way. Qualitative research uses language as data while quantitative research uses numbers. The data in qualitative research consists of the accounts related to researchers by those participating in the study (Polkinghorne, 2005). Qualitative data is gathered using various methods such as biography, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography and case study. While there are many ways of knowing beyond the quantifiable, qualitative data have been shown to have limitations. Because the accounts are self-reported, everything shared is filtered by language, ethnicity and gender. This reality keeps individuals from having a clear view of their inner lives. The qualitative researcher can enhance the relevance of gathered data by selecting participants with a designed purpose and using an iterative rather than a static system of selection. Relevance of data is also enhanced when time and care is taken in analyzing the interview results. Interviews are the main source of information for qualitative research. When qualitative research gained importance in the 1980s, it was well accepted that a caring and supportive interview setting was best for eliciting responses that helped people more clearly view their inner lives. As qualitative research expanded, researchers began to worry about the ethics and biased nature of these interviews. The asymmetrical relationship of power in an interview due to the dominance of the interviewer no matter how egalitarian they attempt to be can skew the data collected. When an individual is in any threatening situation, a phenomenon known as identity shift can take place. Parts of an individual’s self, such as age or body image that were not a conscious part of the individual’s self concept are brought to the fore during an identity shift. This causes the individual to respond to questions or behave in ways they might not otherwise. In our case, the interviewer is interviewing his girlfriend about her experience as a Judo athlete. The fact that they have an existing romantic relationship is a factor in this interview because an interview is inherently asymmetrical in power. This could possible affect the data if the interviewer or interviewee experiences identity shift during the interview. Gaining the most relevant data is critical in an interview is critical, so alternative agonistic interview techniques, such as the platonic dialogue, can be used to elicit different data from participants in the study (Kvale, 2006) to guard agains identity shift. Understanding that forming a caring, egalitarian atmosphere for an interview is not enough to ensure good data is important for those conducting qualitative research. One way qualitative research has been presented in recent years is through the writing of autoethnography. Autoethnography is writing and research that connects the personal to the cultural, placing the self within a social context. The author uses their own accounts to gain insight into their own inner lives placed within the context of their own culture. Autoethnography has been dismissed by many researchers as narcissistic and lacking the rigor of other types of research writing. Others however are excited about the possibilities for this type of qualitative research. These researchers feel strongly that qualitative researchers are storytellers at heart. Autoethnography is a very personal type of storytelling based in self-evaluative research (Holt, 2003). One strength of autoethnography is the flexibility of the genre. Autoethnography has been described as a way to do something good for yourself and the world. This good comes from sharing a portion of your inner life with others as you perceive it, while connecting this new understanding to your own culture. While this approach lets the author/researcher experiment with delivery and structure in writing, this very flexibility is also a weakness. Where is the line between outright fiction and an autoethnography? Some would contend that all stories are fiction due to the existence of multiple realities. This makes all autoethnography qualify as research. Most however reject this view and feel that even nascent research methods like autoethnography need to adhere to certain tests of validity and relevance (Walford, 2004). Writing an autoethnography presents some unique challenges that are not present when other forms of research writing are employed. The fact that the center of the story is the author and that this form of writing is inviting people to connect with the main character (you) can produce a certain level of anxiety. Sharing very personal experiences for the sake of gaining a deeper understanding of the self in a manner that also enhances our understanding of society is at the very heart of autoethnography. By submitting these experiences for publication, one is opening ones self for criticism and rejection by publishers and critics. Coupled with this is questions concerning objectivity and ethics. In our interview, the interviewer must consider the concept of reflexitivty, specifically personal reflexivity, when interviewing the subject. As was mentioned earlier, the interviewer in engaged in an ongoing romantic relationship with the subject of the interview. The concept of reflexivity states that the researcher can never totally remove personal feelings or even bias from their qualitative research. As a result, they must be aware of these feelings during the research so they can remain as objective as possible. The interviewer and the authors must take this important point into consideration when analyzing the data from this interview. The author must constantly question the context of the events described in the autoethnography. Ethical concerns such as including others in the autoethnography without their permission must constantly be weighed against the perceived good that writing the autoethnography will produce (Wall, Easier Said than Done: Writing an Autoethnography, 2008). The advantages of the flexible nature of autoethnography have been realized in many different fields of study and industries. These are not confined to the social sciences but have been used in areas such as writing computer programs that are more user friendly. Using autoethnography, students in an HCI class became both "users" and "analysts" for a class project (Cunningham, 2005). They began by first examining their own use of the product they were to design; in this instance it was an MP3 player. By gaining insight into how they currently used their MP3 player and what value this device held for them, the students were able to approach the design aspect from a personal perspective. Instead of designing the MP3 player that dictated how the user should use the product, they were able to inform their design decisions with their own experiences. In conclusion, autoethnography is an emerging genre that mixes a highly personalized style of writing with established scientific theory. It is closely aligned with postmodern thought and, while not rejecting the scientific method, it does call into question the dominance this approach currently holds in all of the sciences (Wall, An autoethnography on learning about autoethnography, 2006). Autoethnography is regarded by some as lacking scientific validity, but proponents argue that many of the same critical editorial checks used in other forms of qualitative research can be used in autoethnography as well. While some researchers seem tempted to consider any story to be a fiction, authors of autoethnographies stand by their claim that the intent to better understand the self while placing that understanding in the context of the existing culture as a whole. The concerns surrounding the writing of an autoethnography relative to objectivity and ethics is an opportunity for the author to gain even further insight into the authors inner life. Autoethnography allows for learning and understanding the selfs position in and relationship to society in a very refreshing and personal way. Works Cited Boufoy-Bastick, B. (2004). Auto-Interviewing, Auto-Ethnography and Critical Incident. Qualitative Social Research . Cunningham, S. J. (2005). Autoethnography:A tool for practice and education. CHINZ , 1-8. Holt, N. L. (2003). Representation, Legitimation, and Autoethnography: An Autoethnographic. International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 1-22. Kvale, S. (2006). Dominance Through Interviews and Dialogues. Qualitative Inquiry , 480-500. Polkinghorne, D. E. (2005). Language and Meaning: Data Collection in Qualitative Research. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 137-145. Walford, G. (2004). University of Oxford. Qualitative Research , 403-417. Wall, S. (2006). An autoethnography on learning about autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 1-12. Wall, S. (2008). Easier Said than Done: Writing an Autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 38-53. Read More