International Journal of Qualitative Methods

This is a written version of a lecture delivered at the Gevirtz Graduate School of Eduction at the University of California, Santa Barbara. The original series of lectures can be viewed at http://www.education.ucsb.edu/thematicschool/. In this “culture” lecture, the author explores the difficulties in using the concept in contemporary research with particular reference to its relational nature, its partiality, and the various problems that ethnography now addresses. In the end, the concept might have outlived its technical use, even as popular use increases.

Rural populations experience higher rates of illness, less access to health care resources, and lower rates of health insurance coverage than do urban populations. A need exists to identify and address the health care needs of rural communities and other isolated populations and to contextualize the findings in the larger rural health environment. Critical ethnography combined with community-based action research is a constructive approach for improving the health status of rural elders as well as other members of isolated communities. Detailed guidelines on how to initiate an ethnographic community-based action study, as shown through a study that explores the definitions of health, health care perceptions, and health care issues for rural elders in the southwestern United States, highlight the value of this type of research for the study of the health care issues of rural populations.

In this article, the authors discuss what students are doing to reconcile the differences between institutional ethical review standards and the reality of community-based, qualitative research, particularly in northern Canada. They examine the experiences of 12 students who are currently undertaking or have recently completed qualitative research in the North. Students raised concerns about what informed consent really mean; the contentiousness of obtaining written consent, and modified consent forms and the flexibility of research ethics board (REB) standards. The authors demonstrate that significant judgment is required in the introduction of ethics procedures in northern Canadian research. More work is needed to guide novice researchers and help build their agency for making ethical judgments in the field.

What happens when a clinical psychologist, a grounded theorist, an ethnographer, and a phenomenologist meet to collaborate on an interdisciplinary grant proposal on childhood loneliness? Excerpts of an imaginary dialogue reveal how different disciplines can be thought of as different “cultures,” because each has its own way of doing things, deeply embedded assumptions about knowledge and the construction/representation of reality, and different specialized languages. Some of these differences might be incommensurable and call for cultural negotiation if a coherent approach is to be adopted. Cultural negotiation helps to make differences more accessible and understandable rather than creating inflexible or polarized ideological camps. This process might help methodologists think about researching across disciplines in new and more effective ways.

In this article, the author describes the various issues that need to be considered in minority research when the researcher is of the same cultural background as the participants of the study but not of the same religious background. She discusses the methodological dilemmas faced by minority researchers who research minority ethnic communities of which they are not directly a part. The observations are based on her recent qualitative research with 24 Indo-Canadian young adults exploring their perceived supports and barriers in their career decision-making process to study sciences at the postsecondary level.

Although it has long been understood that a well-constructed data set ought to be filled with complexities and contradictions, observations that challenge or contradict analytic interpretations are not often given sufficiently serious attention in the methodological qualitative health literature. When researchers attempt to produce comprehensive or “holistic” findings, they all too often set aside or gloss over the negative cases that fail to conform to their emerging interpretive generalizations. In this article, the authors challenge fellow qualitative health researchers to engage actively in identifying and exploiting both actual and theoretical exceptions as a valuable analytic strategy. They argue that heightened sensitivity for negative cases uncovers the assumptive claims deriving from our various methodological orientations and illuminates alternative explanations. They propose that thoughtful attention to contradictory or challenging observations can deepen our expectations about the kinds of knowledge products that qualitative research ought to yield, thereby helping us advance the credibility of our findings and the ultimate utility of our empirical conclusions.

In this article, the authors critically examine the use of language in organizational research. A literature review of management articles since the 1950s reveals that qualitative research is increasingly using quantitative methods to bolster arguments and argue for increased reliability. The authors found relatively few articles that included any analysis of the language or context embedded in any empirical study. They offer suggestions for the creation of alternative research paradigms that incorporate language and provide a voice to previously muted methods and voices.

In this article, the authors embrace talk as space for emergence and possibilities. They flirt with the part reading plays (or might play) in conversations within the academy, recognizing such readings take multiple forms: individual, shared, in response, and in reaction (to name a few). To confront oneself with the not yet known is to witness what is forming or being called forth as its shaping emerges. Using co-constructed reading responses, the authors present examples from King's (2003) The Truth about Stories as illustrations of their work together, where work, like talk, is about pushing the edges of what can be known and, more particularly, about what can(not) be said. The authors maintain finding voice through reading, research, and self-study helps shape collaborative work within the academy. This reveal encourages the mapping of unmapped but taken for granted parts of academic life, an already querying of method.

The purpose of this article is to examine lessons learned through the process of a community-based participatory research (CBPR) project that attempted to implement an innovative approach to community research in partnership with a clinical outcomes research project. Principal investigators were convinced that collaboration would be workable and mutually beneficial. When they reached the point where they were entering the community to begin their work, however investigators came to realize the full implications of the divergence of their respective research principles and methods. Approaches that benefited both teams initially brought them to see that neither project would be able to achieve its individual research goals if the two teams continued to operate in tandem. The design that brought these teams together ultimately proved unworkable. The reflective and iterative process of CBPR empowered investigators to recognize and learn from both their success and failures and thus gain better control over their respective projects.

Remaining faithful to the conceptual underpinnings of philosophy, methodological approach, and language can present researchers with dilemmas when a researcher exercises the freedom to choose mixed-method approaches to make meaning from inquiry. In this article, the author explores one approach to maintaining consistency while deriving outcomes that are trustworthy and have authenticity. She demonstrates how a researcher can remain grounded in the world of the research subject and thereby maintain authenticity and transferability. The discussion of computer-aided data management by programs such as NVivo illustrates how these tools can be usefully employed in constructivist methods to assist the researcher with the extensive bulk of qualitative research data.

Autoethnography is an emerging qualitative research method that allows the author to write in a highly personalized style, drawing on his or her experience to extend understanding about a societal phenomenon. Autoethnography is grounded in postmodern philosophy and is linked to growing debate about reflexivity and voice in social research. The intent of autoethnography is to acknowledge the inextricable link between the personal and the cultural and to make room for nontraditional forms of inquiry and expression. In this autoethnography, the author explores the state of understanding regarding autoethnography as a research method and describes the experience of an emerging qualitative researcher in learning about this new and ideologically challenging genre of inquiry.