Reflexivity and Researcher’s Positionality in Qualitative Research

Öz

Reflexivity and reflective notes, commonly used in qualitative research, are important for the reliability and validity of data collection and analysis processes. Reflection notes and reflexivity studies applied in different disciplines hold a significant place in making sense of qualitative data and in knowledge claims. Facing one's perspective in data collection and analysis processes, which involves revealing subjective characteristics, plays a critical role in reliability and validity. This article aims to demonstrate how the reflexivity process—where a researcher’s personal values, attitudes, and the influence of these factors on topic selection are examined—contributes to making the research richer and more credible. Additionally, by presenting the experiences of a qualitative researcher focusing on thematic analysis studies, sample applications are shown. This article discusses how reflective notes can be applied in data analysis and collection processes, focusing on the importance of reflective notes for the reliability and validity processes in qualitative research and emphasizing specific issues that arise during the application of reflexivity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Reliability
• Validity
• Qualitative Research
• Reflexivity
• Positionality

Nitel Araştırmalarda Düşünümsellik ve Araştırmacının Konumu

Öz

Nitel araştırmalarda yaygın olarak kullanılan yansıtıcılık düşünümsellik ve yansıtma notları nitel veri toplama ve analiz süreçlerindeki güvenirlilik ve geçerlilik için önemlidir. Farklı disiplinlerde başvurulan düşünümsellik çalışmaları nitel verilerin anlam oluşturmadaki ve bilgi iddialarındaki rolünde önemli bir yer tutmaktadır. Araştırmacının veri toplama ve analiz süreçlerinde kendi bakış açılarıyla yüzleşmesi, öznel ve bireysel özellikleri ortaya çıkarmasını içeren yansıtma düşünümsellik çalışmaları güvenirlilik ve geçerlilik açısından kritik bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu makale, bir araştırmacının kişisel değerleri, tutumları ve konu seçimindeki etkisi gibi bireysel faktörlerin ve motivasyonların incelendiği düşünümsellik sürecinin, araştırmayı nasıl daha zengin ve daha güvenilir hale getirdiğini göstermeyi amaçlamaktadır. Ayrıca, tematik analiz çalışmaları üzerine odaklanan bir nitel araştırmacının deneyimlerini sunarak, örnek uygulamalar gösterilmektedir. Bu makale, düşünümsellik notlarının nitel araştırmalardaki güvenirlilik ve geçerlilik süreçleri için taşıdığı öneme odaklanarak, düşünümselliği uygulama sürecinde ortaya çıkan belirli sorunlara da vurgu yaparak, düşünümsellik notlarının veri analizi ve toplama süreçlerinde nasıl uygulanabileceğini tartışmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Düşünümsellik
• Güvenirlilik
• Geçerlilik
• Konumsallık
• Nitel Araştırmalar

Kaynakça

1. Baez, B. (2002). Confidentiality in qualitative research: Reflections on secrets, power and agency. Qualitative Research, 2(1), 35–58. doi: 10.1177/1468794102002001638.
2. Barrett, A., Kajamaa, A. and Johnston, J. (2020). How to be reflexive when conducting qualitative research. The Clinical Teacher, 17(1), 9–12. doi: 10.1111/tct.13133.
3. Barry, C. A., Britten, N., Barber, N., Bradley, C., and Stevenson, F. (1999). Using reflexivity to optimize teamwork in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 9(1), 26–44. doi: 10.1177/104973299129121677
4. Belur, J. (2013). Status, gender and geography: Power negotiations in police research. Qualitative Research, 14(2), 184–200. doi: 10.1177/1468794112468474.
5. Bourke, B. (2014). Positionality: Reflecting on the research process. The Qualitative Report, 19(33), 1–9. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2014.1026
6. Bover, A. (2013). Reflexivity and positionality tools to promote theoretical-methodological congruency on commencing a qualitative study [Article in Spanish]. Enfermería Clínica, 23(1), 33–37. doi: 10.1016/j.enfcli.2012.11.007
7. Britten, N. (1995). Qualitative interviews in medical research. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 311(6999), 251–253. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.6999.251.
8. Buckner, S. (2005). Taking the debate on reflexivity further. Journal of Social Work Practice, 19, 59–72. doi: 10.1080/02650530500071969

9. Carolan, M. (2003). Reflexivity: A personal journey during data collection. Nurse Researcher, 10(3), 7–14. doi: 10.7748/nr2003.04.10.3.7.c5892
10. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
11. Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: Routledge.
12. Darawsheh, W. (2014). Reflexivity in research: Promoting rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 21(12), 560–68. doi: 10.12968/ijtr.2014.21.12.560.
13. DeVault, M. L., and Gross, G. (2012). Feminist qualitative interviewing: Experience, talk, and knowledge. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
14. Dowling, M. (2006). Approaches to reflexivity in qualitative research. Nurse Researcher, 13(3), 7–21. doi: 10.7748/nr2006.04.13.3.7.c5975.
15. Dwyer, S. C., and Buckle, J. L. (2009). The space between: On being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(1), 54–63. doi: 10.1177/160940690900800105
16. Edwards, R. (1998). A critical examination of the use of interpreters in the qualitative research process. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 24(1), 197–208.
17. England, K. V. L. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.1998.9976626
18. Finlay, L. (2002). ‘Outing’ the researcher: The provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12(4), 531–45. doi: 10.1177/104973202129120052.
19. Freysteinson, W., Lewis, C., Sisk, A., Wuest, L., Deutsch, A., and Cesario, S. (2013). Investigator reflections: A final debriefing following emotionally sensitive mirror research. Holistic Nurse Practice, 2(3), 177–84. doi: 10.1097/HNP.0b013e31828a0968.
20. Gadd, D. (2004). Making sense of interviewee–interviewer dynamics in narratives about violence in intimate relationships. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 7(5), 383–401. doi: 10.1080/1364557092000055077.
21. Gailey, J. A., and Prohaska, A. (2011). Power and gender negotiations during interviews with men about sex and sexually degrading practices. Qualitative Research, 11(4), 365–80. doi: 10.1177/1468794111404315.
22. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). Canada: Longman.: Don Mills, Ontario.
23. Green, J., and Thorogood, N. (2004). Qualitative methods for health research. London: Sage Publications.
24. Gunaratnam, Y. (2003). Researching “race” and ethnicity: Methods, knowledge and power. London: SAGE Publications.
25. Hesse-Biber, S. N. (2004). Feminist approaches to in-depth interviewing. In S. N. Hesse-Biber and M. L. Yaiser (Eds.), Feminist perspectives on social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Oxford University Press.
26. Holloway, I., and Biley, F. C. (2011). Being a qualitative researcher. Qualitative Health Research, 21(7), 968–75. doi:10.1177/1049732310395607
27. Houghton, C., Casey, D., Shaw, D., and Murphy, K. (2013). Rigour in qualitative case-study research. Nurse Research, 20(4), 12–17. doi: 10.7748/nr2013.03.20.4.12.e326.
28. Hsiung, P. (2008). Teaching reflexivity in qualitative interviewing. Teaching Sociology, 36(3), 211–26. doi: 10.1177/0092055X0803600302
29. Jamieson, M. K., Govaart, G. H., and Pownall, M. (2023). Reflexivity in quantitative research: A rationale and beginner’s guide. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 17(4), 1–15. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12735.
30. Kolb, S. M. (2012). Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: Valid research strategies for educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 3(1), 83–86. doi: https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC135409
31. Koopman, W. J., Watling, C. J., and Ladonna, K. A. (2020). Autoethnography as a strategy for engaging in reflexivity. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 7, 1-9. doi: 10.1177/2333393620970508
32. Korteweg, A., and Yurdakul, G. (2009). Islam, gender, and immigrant integration: Boundary drawing in discourses on honour killing in the Netherlands and Germany. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32(2), 218–238. doi: 10.1080/01419870802065218.
33. Lazard, L., and McAvoy, J. (2020). Doing reflexivity in psychological research: What’s the point? What’s the practice? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 17(2), 159–177. Doi: 10.1080/14780887.2017.1400144
34. Liamputtong, P. (2007). Researching the vulnerable: A guide to sensitive research methods. London & Thousands Oaks & New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
35. Liamputtong, P. (2010). Performing qualitative cross-cultural research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Longhurst, R. (2010). Semi-structured groups and focus groups. In N. Clifford, S. French, and G. Valentin (Eds.), Key methods in geography. London: SAGE Publications.
37. Marcus, G. E. (1994). What comes (just) after ‘post’? The case of ethnography. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
38. Merriam, S. B., Johnson-Bailey, J., Lee, M.-Y., Kee, Y., Ntseane, G., and Muhamad, M. (2001). Power and positionality: Negotiating insider/outsider status within and across cultures. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 20(5), 405–16. doi: 10.1080/02601370120490.
39. Mullings, B. (1999). Insider or outsider, both or neither: Some dilemmas of interviewing in a cross-cultural setting. Geoforum, 30(4), 337–50. doi: 10.1016/S0016-7185(99)00025-1.
40. Olmos-Vega, F. M., Stalmeijer, R. E., Varpio, L., and Kahlke, R. (2023). A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Medical Teacher, 45(3), 241–51. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287.
41. Opie, A. (1992). Qualitative research, appropriation of the ‘other’ and empowerment. Feminist Review, 40, 52–69. doi: 10.2307/1395277
42. Patnaik, E. (2013). Reflexivity: Situating the researcher in qualitative research. Humanities and Social Science Studies, 2(2), 98–106. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287
43. Pillow, W. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(2), 175–96. doi: 10.1080/0951839032000060635.
44. Probst, B. (2015). The eye regards itself: Benefits and challenges of reflexivity in qualitative social work research. Social Work Research, 39(1), 37–48. doi: 10.1093/swr/svu028.
45. Russell, C., Touchard, D., and Porter, M. (2002). What’s rapport got to do with it? The practical accomplishment of fieldwork relations between young female researchers and socially marginalised older men. The Qualitative Report, 7(1), 1–21. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2002.1989
46. Russell, G. M., and Kelly, N. H. (2002). Research as interacting dialogic processes: Implications for reflexivity. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-02/3-02russellkelly-e.htm
47. Smith, J. A. (1994). Towards reflexive practice: Engaging participants as co-researchers or co-analysts in psychological inquiry. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 4(4), 253–60. doi: 10.1002/casp.2450040405
48. Song, M., and Parker, D. (1995). Commonality, difference and the dynamics of disclosure in in-depth interviewing. Sociology, 29(2), 241–56. doi: 0803973233.
49. Thapar-Bjorkert, S., and Henry, M. (2007). Reassessing the research relationship: Location, position and power in fieldwork accounts. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 7(5), 363–81. doi: 10.1080/1364557092000045294.
50. Thornberg, R., and Charmaz, K. (2014). Grounded theory and theoretical coding. In The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 153-170). London: SAGE Publications.
51. Walsh, R. (2003). The methods of reflexivity. Humanistic Psychologist, 31(4), 51–66. doi: 10.1080/08873267.2003.9986934.
52. Watt, D. (2015). On becoming a qualitative researcher: The value of reflexivity. The Qualitative Report, 12(1), 82–101. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2007.1645.
53. Wilkinson, S. (1988). The role of reflexivity in feminist psychology. Women’s Studies International Forum, 11(5), 493–502. doi: 10.1016/0277-5395(88)90024-6
54. Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. Berkshire, England: McGraw-Hill Education.
55. Woodby, L. L., Williams, B. R., Wittich, A. R., and Burgio, K. L. (2011). Expanding the notion of researcher distress: The cumulative effects of coding. Qualitative Health Research, 21(6), 830–38. doi: 10.1177/1049732311402095.
56. Zitomer, M., and Goodwin, D. (2014). Gauging the quality of qualitative research in adapted physical activity. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 31(3), 193–218. doi: 10.1123/apaq.2013-0084