You Have to Make Something of All That Rubbish,Do You? An Empirical Investigation of the Social Process of Qualitative Research

Abstract

In this article, we examine participants' talk about qualitative research. We provide empirical support for post-structural theorizations of the interview and propose three distinct but related dimensions of qualitative research: emotional, purposive/relational, and epistemic/ontological. In this study, participants often became upset but constructed participation as enjoyable and cathartic. The purpose of participation was to assist the communities to which one belonged. Participation was an active, reflexive practice that reconstructed the self and changed knowledge about one's self. This latter epistemic/ontological dimension of participation appeared to be the most compelling for participants, but it is also the hardest to observe, with implications for how we consider the costs and benefits of participation. We suggest two practical measures for researchers and institutional review boards to consider in light of our findings: routinely asking questions about the research experience in qualitative studies and reformulating patient information statements to particularize them to qualitative research.

Keywords

emotions epistemology ethics qualitative research,general research participation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Beck, C.T. (2005). Benefits of participating in Internet interviews: Women helping women. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 411-422.

Burns, M.L. (2006). Bodies that speak: Examining the dialogues in research interactions. Qualitative Research in Psychology , 3(1), 3.

Carter, S.M. (2006, December). Longitudinal qualitative research design: Experience over time. Paper presented at the Australian Consortium of Social and Political Research Incorporated Social Science Methodology Conference, Sydney, Australia. Available from http://www.acspri.org.au/conference2006//proceedings

Carter, S.M. , & Little, M. (2007). Justifying knowledge, justifying method, taking action: Epistemologies, methodologies, and methods in qualitative research . Qualitative Health Research, 17, 1316-1328.

Cartwright, J. , & Limandri, B. (1997). The challenge of multiple roles in the qualitative clinician researcher-participant client relationship. Qualitative Health Research, 7, 223-235.

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.

Cheek, J. (1996). Taking a view: Qualitative research as representation . Qualitative Health Research, 6, 492-505.

Cheek, J. (1999). Influencing practice or simply esoteric? Researching health care using postmodern approaches. Qualitative Health Research, 9, 383-392.

Davies, B. , Browne, J. , Gannon, S. , Honan, E. , Laws, C. , Mueller-Rockstroh, B. , et al. (2004). The ambivalent practices of reflexivity . Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 360-389.

10.

Dyregrov, K. (2004). Bereaved parents' experience of research participation . Social Science & Medicine, 58, 391-400.

11.

Exley, C. , & Letherby, G. (2001). Managing a disrupted lifecourse: Issues of identity and emotion work. Health, 5(1), 112-132.

12.

Finlay, L. (2002). "Outing" the researcher: The provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12, 531-545.

13.

Goodwin, D. , Pope, C. , Mort, M. , & Smith, A. (2003). Ethics and ethnography: An experiential account . Qualitative Health Research, 13, 567-577.

14.

Grinyer, A. (2004). The narrative correspondence method: What a follow-up study can tell us about the longer term effect on participants in emotionally demanding research. Qualitative Health Research, 14, 1326-1341.

15.

Guillemin, M. , & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and "ethically important moments" in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 261-280.

16.

Hynson, J.L. , Aroni, R. , Bauld, C. , & Sawyer, S.M. (2006). Research with bereaved parents: A question of how not why. Palliative Medicine, 20, 805-811.

17.

Jordens, C.F.C. , & Little, M. (2004). "In this scenario, I do this, for these reasons": Narrative, genre and ethical reasoning in the clinic. Social Science & Medicine, 58, 1635-1645.

18.

Kaplan, A. (1964). The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. San Francisco: Chandler .

19.

Kvale, S. (2006). Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 480-500.

20.

Lather, P. (1993). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism . Sociological Quarterly, 34, 673-693.

21.

Little, M. , Jordens, C.F.C. , McGrath, C. , Montgomery, K. , Kerridge, I. , & Carter, S.M. (2007). Pragmatic pluralism: Mutual tolerance of contested understandings between orthodox and alternative practitioners in autologous stem cell transplantation. Social Science & Medicine, 64, 1512-1523.

22.

Manderson, L. , Bennett, E. , & Andajani-Sutjahjo, S. (2006). The social dynamics of the interview: Age, class, and gender. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 1317-1334.

23.

Nunkoosing, K. (2005). The problems with interviews. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 698-706.

24.

Nussbaum, M.C. (2001). Upheavals of thought: The intelligence of emotions . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

25.

Owens, E. (2006). Conversational space and participant shame in interviewing. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 1160-1179.

26.

Peel, E. , Parry, O. , Douglas, M. , & Lawton, J. (2006). "It's no skin off my nose": Why people take part in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 1335-1349.

27.

Power, E.M. (2004). Toward understanding in postmodern interview analysis: Interpreting the contradictory remarks of a research participant. Qualitative Health Research, 14, 858-865.

28.

Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. London: Sage.