Qualitative Research

For centuries the autopsy has been a key technology in Western culture for generating clinical/medical as well as cultural knowledge about bodies. This article hails the anato-medical autopsy as a generative trope and apparatus in reconfiguring Western humanist knowledge of bodies and bodies of knowledge and takes up the possibilities of working with the concept of autopsy in disrupting qualitative research methodology. In doing so, the article outlines and returns (to) a series of research-creation experiments assembled at an academic conference, which engaged with the challenges for social science knowledge laid out by Law’s (2004) After Method book. Our research-creation experiments centred autopsy as a theoretical-methodological gaze and apparatus for de-composing qualitative research methodology by engaging with post-humanist and new material feminist thinking.

This paper explores the methodological possibilities of listening to more-than-human sounds as an entry point to critical analysis. Through attending to the sound of a leafblower as it resonates across a university campus, this article draws lines between the resonances of the leafblower, higher education, and white supremacy to explore how sounds become embedded in bodies and spaces. In addition, this article offers a methodology of listening as a process of attunement that provokes readings beyond what is immediately heard, seen, or felt. To listen to the sound of the leafblower and what it does, how it resonates is to attune to how that sound works, how it operates in the production and discourses of place. In other words, this article wonders how listening, as a methodological practice, provokes critical questions about place and space, and how sound (and particularly nonhuman or more than human sounds) functions in qualitative methodology.

This article focuses on the communicative, cultural, and practical aspects of being a hard-of-hearing (HH) researcher who studies D/deaf people’s smartphone use through 20 in-depth interviews. This context presents the conflict between seeing deafness as a disability and seeing Deaf people as members of a cultural minority. This complexity of ‘subaltern-researcher’ concept combines with the limitations caused by conducting research as a marginal member of the academy, which in turn prompts the researcher’s conflict between the commitment to marginalized research participants and the able-bodied academic obligation to act according to able-bodied research, analysis, and standards for publication of findings. This paper suggests a reflexive description of identity, culture, senses, and communication, which interacts with the social responsibility of the disabled researcher, and the interviewees’ expressed agency. As such, this article contributes methodological and communicative insights on inclusive qualitative methods regarding both disabled participants and researchers.

This article discusses methodological adaptations to participatory methods for reflexive environmental management. Reflexive approaches to research methods as process, this article contends, can elucidate social dynamics that standard sampling frames and rote procedures may elide. This argument is supported through a discussion of key insights from scholarship about participatory research methods, as well as auto-reflections on methodical adaptations undertaken while conducting photovoice research on environmental management in peri-urban villages of Southwest China. Reflexive adaptations to participatory methods discussed in this paper include ethnographic attention to forms of refusal, suspended participation, and individual interviews with and without visual aids. These methodological adaptations highlight relations of power between researchers and participants, as well as amongst participants. They also highlight diverse social needs and uneven environmental management processes. Although reflexive approaches to participatory methods are key to producing more widely representational findings and socially just sustainability practices, they are not a panacea for universal inclusivity. Reflexive methodological adaptations have their own limitations and introduce new power relations between participants and researchers. The article concludes with a discussion of how reflexive methodological adaptations bear on research praxis. In particular, the conclusion highlights how reflexive adaptations to research methods are crucial to socially just environmental management and sustainability practices.

In recent decades, postmodern, poststructuralist, and social constructivist theories, and the methodologies and methods they have informed, have been criticized for focusing primarily on human actors, discourses, and actions. Simultaneously, so-called posthuman theories have been developed that decentralize the human, reject an unquestioned use of the dualism of human/nonhuman, and emphasize the importance of the material world in the production of the social. A key concern for current qualitative inquiry is to develop methods that contribute to the critique of human-centered analysis. In this article, I explore what we learn about the material world when we do not use verbal methods or written data but image details of moveable formations, which are made into silhouettes using Karen Barad’s agential realism. After introducing posthuman methodology I perform a silhouettes analysis focusing on old age. The intention is to demonstrate that silhouettes analysis makes it possible to gain new insights into the features of materialities of old age in a way that classical image analysis would not allow. In addition, silhouettes analysis produces an alienation effect that disturbs practiced viewing habits and assumptions, and can thus serve as a research tool promoting reflection. I conclude with a discussion of the advantages and limitations of silhouettes analysis for gerontological and posthuman research.

This paper highlights a methodological vagueness within the existing qualitative research interview literature related to reflecting where interviews takes place. The aim is to interrogate how the use of the concept of emplaced participation can account for the multisensory constitution of place within interviews as well as how the place can provide an opportunity to generate knowledge about participants’ everyday practices. Casey’s understanding of place as a gathering and Pink’s perspectives on emplaced participation provide a sensitive epistemological approach that can be applied by researchers outside the field of ethnography. Based on empirical ethnographic material from fieldwork in Denmark, this paper makes a novel contribution to how researchers can use sensory and emplaced experience before and during an interview. We argue that, if we cease taking emplaced dimensions for granted, new methodological techniques can be developed, which, in turn, can lead to new types of knowledge of practice.

In this article, we discuss how co-research – two researchers working together at each stage of the research process – can be used to analyse narratives created from qualitative interviews (drawing on Brown and Gilligan’s Listening Guide). We argue that co-research affords a richness and depth of analysis and propagates multiple, layered interpretations through a process of co-reflection. To illustrate our approach, we present an analysis of two case studies from the ‘From Adversity to University’ project, a longitudinal qualitative study evaluating the effectiveness of a bridging module as a way into higher education for students who have been affected by homelessness in England. We co-reflect on how our participants, our relationship with our participants and our relationship with each other as researchers has changed over time. We conclude that a co-researcher approach to analysing narratives is textually and emotionally enriching, as the co-constructed multiple interpretations transform not just the analysis of the text but also the relationship between researchers and their participants in new and unexpected ways.

This paper, coauthored by mother and son (aged 10 at the time of writing, 12 at time of revisions), reports on the collaborative research experience during a 2.5-year-long autoethnographic study, which focused on bringing back the family heritage language after a 2-year break. Through a joint research diary, we regularly and rigorously chronicled both language-related conversations and our emotions linked to the process of bringing back the heritage language. Frustration, guilt, joy, exasperation, and pride were jointly discussed via what we call an un/familiar space. This paper explores the evolution of this space, linking it to Bhabha’s third space theory and Gadamer’s fusion of horizons. We present the un/familiar space both as an epistemological stance and as a methodological tool for intergenerational autoethnography, enabling both parents and children to engage with each other in a more neutral space, deliberately removed from traditional family roles. Further, we critically engage with the role of children as co-creators of knowledge within this space, contributing longitudinal data of co-construction and critical reflection from two generations to the research community.