When were asked to read the SSRCH proposal of successful candidates last class we were asked to look for specific things, one of them being the research method. It was then that it hit me, aside from vaguely understanding quantitative methods (questionnaires, surveys, ect), when it came to qualitative methods (?!?)...I really was at a loss.
Good News:
After reading Knight this week, I am at ease...a little at ease (because there is still a lot more for us to get to - but hey, it is only week 4, right?). I was glad to have an overview of the qualitative side of things, which I think Kinght's face-to-face inquiry methods is all about. It is also, thankfully, the more human side of research methodology and something that I can appreciate.Action Interviews and Nominal Group Technique are two of the outlined methods that peaked my interest and warrants further investigation (for that INF1300 assignment that Jessica mentions in her post this week http://uofbigt.blogspot.ca/2012/09/the-importance-of-learning-about.html).
Bad News:
Knight mentions the "insider" and "outsider" under the Special Concerns heading on page 55, and it is something that I can relate to, while also finding it troubling. This dichotomy is especially relevant when the subject matter is sensitive or taboo. As a researcher, you are expected to be an authority in and on the issue at hand. However, it is harder for the outsider, in my opinion, to be that authority and more importantly be an authority the respondent can identify with. On the other hand, the "outsider" may have less of a reason to be biased and assess the situation from a fresh perspective. This is a double edged sword that I am not sure I am comfortable with.
In my introductory American Studies class, I learned about some different methods that could be used to conduct academic research. I became really interested during the ethnography class. One of the readings for the class included Real Country: Music and Language in Working Class Culture. One of the main criticisms my class had of the text was that while Fox was conducting his research, he befriended many people in the community he was looking at in Texas. Fox was also a musician. We spent the majority of the class questioning whether or not Fox was enough of an outsider to be able to study the community without bias. It was an interesting research problem.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I think your insider/outsider question is so interesting Chantel. Now that research requires real, living, subjects, how does one separate themselves enough, but not alienate the human subjects of the study? Is the sympathy/empathy idea that Knight proposes is enough to get people to speak? I think that Knight has a good point when he mentions that fieldwork beforehand, and a good understanding of what the research is may help with outsider research (Knight 2002). Knight seems to think that 'insider' research may be more effective than 'outsider' research to an extent. Without having any experience besides studying this type of research method, it may also be hard for the insider to separate his/herself from their research because of personal attachment to their subject.
I agree that the outsider/insider line can be very hard to walk when one is a) in love with the subject at hand and b) incredibly knowledgeable about said subject. I feel like this is a case where the research journal could be very helpful. I find if I keep notes about my research and refer back to them as I progress, I can see where I began to become very close to the subject (moving from outsider to insider). Of course this is only really helpful if I started my research project with minimal knowledge about my subject. Journals kind of help you see yourself from an outsider perspective in a way, maybe this could help you beat the double-edged sword, Chantel? I agree though, that dichotomy is a challenge. :S
ReplyDeleteChantel, you raise very interesting points. For me, I have to agree with Knight in that "insider" research seems to be more effective than "outsider" research. Common sense would dictate that if you're highly knowledgeable on a topic then you would know which types of questions to ask as well as which not to ask. I also think that we shouldn't overlook the significance of conveying to the individuals we're interviewing that we do have an understanding and comfort level with whatever it is we're exploring. Think about it: if you're unsure of yourself and your understandings, this could affect the interviewee - remember it is our job to put the individual at ease. Although I do find the notion of an "outsider" perspective as "unbiased, offering a fresh perspective" interesting, it would be ideal in a research setting to be well-versed on your topic. Not only will you feel self-assured in your own abilities/knowledge, but through this process hopefully also convince the individual that you "know your stuff" and you take this research seriously.
ReplyDeleteMichelle, I can really relate to what you are saying. Especially when considering sensitive issues, where people are more inclined to be on the defensive. More than "knowing your stuff," it is the issue of trust and fear of judgement that I think is the concern. To gain this trust is also to have a relationship with your subjects, and how close is too close...to both the person you are investigating and what you are investigating?
ReplyDeleteBecause, as Laura says, when you become too close to the people you are researching there is the question of authentic representation and biases that can come up and eventually be criticized. And then there is the issue (or question) you are investigating. When does it become too personal that you cannot see things objectively? I know that this was discussed a bit in our last lecture, but really it comes down to personal perspectives. The insider/outsider war is an interesting and I can't decide whose side I am on.
Journals seem to be the rule of thumb when it comes to research, and Jessica, I can see how helpful it would be too look at your relationship with the subject objectively...depending on how honest you want to be with yourself.