Nine Rules of Engagement: Reflections on Reflexivity

• Published in: Qualitative report Vol. 24; no. 2; pp. 228 - 241
• Main Author: Owren, Thomas
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Fort Lauderdale Nova Southeastern University, Inc 01.02.2019; The Qualitative Report
• Subjects: Academic Probation; Analysis; Audiences; Beliefs; Bourdieu, Pierre (1930-2002); Eno, Brian; Hermeneutics; Informers; Intellectual disabilities; Intellectual Disability; Intellectually disabled people; Interviews; Labels; Labor Market; Mentors; Methods; Musicians; Professional training; Qualitative research; Reflexivity; Reflexivity (Logic); Researchers; Social justice; Social research; Sociology; Theory; Workers; Chicago Illinois; United Kingdom > UK; Norway; United States > US
• ISSN: 1052-0147; 2160-3715
• DOI: 10.46743/2160-3715/2019.3683

Wishing to be reflexive, to critically examine our assumptions, is easy. Doing it is less so. For researchers doing a study in their own professional field, it represents a particular challenge. In this essay, I explore this challenge using my own study as exemplar. I am researching workplace inclusion of workers with intellectual disability. As a professional, I have worked with and for people with intellectual disability for many years. The knowledge I bring to my inquiry – about the inabilities, vulnerabilities and needs ascribed to persons labelled thus – is deeply entrenched in common culture, as well as in my professional training. How can I handle this knowledge in my research? To what extent may, or must, it command my perceptions and interpretations? How may I challenge and look beyond it? Exploring this, I consult a handful of researchers who have examined pitfalls of involving informants with intellectual disability in research. I also call upon four giants of social science – Hans-Georg Gadamer, Charles Taylor, Pierre Bourdieu and Michel Foucault – as well as Brian Eno, British musician and producer extraordinaire. Departing from a concrete situation, the essay winds its way through nine discussions, each generating a “rule of engagement.” Although the discussions are specific to my project, these nine methodological suggestions, ranging from seemingly trivial to decidedly non-trivial, are not. My belief is that they may hold some interest for any qualitative researcher.