on reflexivity in qualitative research two readings and a third

Reflexivity and Positionality in Qualitative Research: On Being an Outsider in the Field

First Online: 29 November 2023

Cite this chapter

on reflexivity in qualitative research two readings and a third

Gülay Türkmen 9

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Political Psychology ((PSPP))

277 Accesses

10 Altmetric

Positionality matters in social scientific research. Qualitative scholars have long drawn attention to the impact of researchers’ multiple identities on research findings and knowledge production. They have also highlighted the intersectional, fluid, and context-dependent nature of positionality. In dialogue with this literature, this chapter acknowledges the ambivalence surrounding the insider/outsider dichotomy and focuses on being an “outsider”—as an ideal-typical category—when conducting ethnographic field research. Building on the author’s research experience among Kurdish religious elites in Southeastern Anatolia, where she was an outsider on many levels, it inquires about the challenges and advantages of the “outsider” position. Through vignettes and dialogues from the field it provides insight into how to navigate the fragile ground of such a position.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Available as EPUB and PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Durable hardcover edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

“Kurdish movement” includes the complex set of legal and illegal Kurdish organizations associated with the Kurdish struggle for greater political and cultural rights and political autonomy. It comprises the illegal PKK (Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan/Kürdistan İşçi Partisi/Kurdistan Workers’ Party), and TAK (Teyrêbazên Azadiya Kurdistan/Kurdistan Özgürlük Şahinleri/ Kurdistan Freedom Hawks), a PKK offshoot, and the legal HDP (Halkların Demokratik Partisi/Peoples’ Democratic Party), DBP (Demokratik Bölgeler Partisi/Democratic Regions Party), DTK (Demokratik Toplum Kongresi/Democratic Society Congress), and HDK (Halkların Demokratik Kongresi/Peoples’ Democratic Congress). The PKK is listed as a terrorist organization by the government of Turkey, the USA, EU and NATO.

My field research encompassed three cities in total: Diyarbakır, Batman, and İstanbul. However, for the purposes of this piece, I will be focusing only on my time and experiences in the former two (especially in Diyarbakır), as I did not occupy the same “outsider” position in İstanbul

Note, however, that there were also Kurdish revolts in the Ottoman Empire, which took place as early as the nineteenth century, mostly against the centralizing reforms of the empire at the time (see Chailand, 1993 ).

See details at: https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/turkeys-pkk-conflict-visualexplainer . Accessed January 10, 2020.

There is no official ban on Kurdish language in Turkey but Kurdish has been de facto criminalized since the very early days of the Republic. (The speaking of Kurdish in public was outlawed between 1983 and 1991.) The current constitution, penned in 1980, recognizes only Turkish as the country’s official language and article 42 of the constitution states that no language other than Turkish can be taught as a native tongue to Turkish citizens. Moreover, since the coup attempt in 2016, scores of Kurdish-language TVs, newspapers, and Kurdish-language courses have been closed down by emergency decrees.

While Kurds call Southeastern Anatolia “Northern Kurdistan” (Bakur), the Turkish media and politicians have, for a long time, called it “the region.”

Not connected to the Lebanese Hizbullah, the Kurdish Hizbullah was engaged in armed conflict with the PKK throughout the 1990s. In 2000, the leader of the organization, Hüseyin Velioğlu, was killed in a police raid in İstanbul and hundreds of Hizbullah members were detained. They have managed to survive as an underground organization and in 2013 founded an Islamist political party with the name of Hür Dava Partisi (Free Cause Party).

The Adıyaman-based Menzil has its roots in the Naqshbandi-Khalidi order and is currently one of the most influential religious orders in Turkish politics, with extensive networks all over the country.

Sohbet means conversation in Turkish. In this context, it refers to pious reading circles where informal conversations with religious overtones take place.

Established in the 1970s by Fethullah Gülen, a preacher in self-exile in the US since 1999 (due to charges of engaging in anti-secular activities), the Gülen movement used to be the largest religious network in Turkey. Called Hizmet (Service) by its followers, Cemaat (Jamaat) by some journalists and researchers, and Fethullah Terör Örgütü (Fethullah Terrorist Organization), FETÖ, by the government, the movement follows the teachings of Said-i Nursi, a Kurdish Sunni Muslim theologian who lived at the turn of the twentieth century. Between 2002 and 2012 they allied with the AKP to facilitate the latter’s takeover of key political institutions. At the time, the movement was accused of and criticized for using wiretapping, blackmail and fraud in eliminating rivals. The alliance started to crack in 2011 and reached a climax in 2016 when a clique in the Turkish Armed Forces attempted to undertake a coup to topple the government. Accusing Gülen for masterminding the coup the AKP has since started an all-out-war against Gülenists; thousands have been imprisoned and exiled, and the assets of Gülenist companies have been confiscated.

Acar, Y. G, Moss, S. M., & Uluğ, Ö. M. (Eds.). (2020). Researching peace, conflict, and power in the field: Methodological challenges and opportunities. Springer Nature.

Google Scholar

Acar, Y. G. & Uluğ, Ö. M. (2018). Straddling the insider-outsider divide: Challenges of Turkish identity as an outsider researcher in the context of Kurdish-Turkish conflict. In B. Başer, M. Toivanen, B. Zorlu & Y. Duman (Eds.), Methodological approaches in Kurdish studies: Theoretical and practical insights from the field (pp. 183–199). Lexington Books.

Adida, C. L., Ferree, K. E., Posner, D. N., & Robinson, A. L. (2016). Who’s asking? Interviewer coethnicity effects in African survey data. Comparative Political Studies , 49(12), 1630–1660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016633487

Barnes, G-J. (2021). Researcher positionality: The liquid inbetweener. PRACTICE: Contemporary Issues in Practitioner Education https://doi.org/10.1080/25783858.2021.1968280 .

Book Google Scholar

Başer, B., Toivanen, M., Zorlu, B. & Duman, Y. (Eds.). (2018). Methodological approaches in Kurdish studies: Theoretical and practical insights from the field. Lexington Books.

Başer, B. & Toivanen, M. (2018). Politicized and depoliticized ethnicities, power relations and temporality: Insights to outsider research from comparative and transnational fieldwork. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(11), 2067–2084.

Article Google Scholar

Benson, M. & O’Reilly, K. (2022). Reflexive practice in live sociology: Lessons from researching Brexit in the lives of British citizens living in the EU-27. Qualitative Research, 22(2), 177–193.

Bourdieu, P. (1990). In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology. Stanford University Press.

Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press.

Bourke, B. (2014). Positionality: Reflecting on the research process. The Qualitative Report, 19(33), 1–9.

Brah, A. & Phoenix, A. (2004). Ain’t I a woman? Revisiting intersectionality. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 5(3), 75–86.

Breen, L. 2007. The researcher ‘in the middle’: Negotiating the insider/outsider dichotomy. Australian Community Psychologist, 19(1), 167–174.

Bruinessen, M.V. (1984). Popular Islam, Kurdish nationalism and rural revolt: The rebellion of Shaikh Said in Turkey (1925). In J.M. Bak & G. Banecke (Eds.), Religion and revolt (pp. 281–295). Manchester University Press.

Bucerius, S.M. (2013). Becoming a trusted outsider: Gender, ethnicity, and inequality in ethnographic research. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 42(6), 690–721.

Burawoy, M. (2004). Public sociologies: Contradictions, dilemmas, and possibilities. Social Forces, 82(4), 1603–1618.

Burr, V. (2003). Social Constructionism (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Carling, J., Erdal, M.B & Ezzati, R. (2014). Beyond the insider-outsider divide in migration research. Migration Studies, 2(1), 36–54.

Caron, C.O. (2013). Reflexivity at work: Making sense of Mannheim’s, Garfinkel’s, Gouldner’s, and Bourdieu’s sociology. [Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University]. https://curve.carleton.ca/system/files/etd/56b4a992-07be-4a1a-a63c-5c6183424894/etd_pdf/4b2839e2e39b75b437917475160bf471/caron-reflexivityatworkmakingsenseofmannheimsgarfinkels.pdf.

Carstensen-Egwuom, I. (2014). Connecting intersectionality and reflexivity: Methodological approaches to social positionalities. Erdkunde, 68(4), 265–276.

Celestina, M. 2018. Between trust and distrust in research with participants in conflict context. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(3), 373–383.

Chailand, G. (Ed.). (1993). A people without a country: The Kurds and Kurdistan. Zed Books.

Chakravarty A. (2012). ‘Partially trusting’ field relationships: Opportunities and constraints of fieldwork in Rwanda’s postconflict setting. Field Methods, 24(3), 251–271.

Clifford, J. & Marcus, G. (1986). Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. University of California Press.

Coffey, A. (1999). The ethnographic self: Fieldwork and the representation of identity. Sage Publications.

Cohen, N. & Arieli, T. (2011). Field research in conflict environments: Methodological challenges and snowball sampling. Journal of Peace Research, 48(4), 423–435.

Crapanzano, V. (2010). ‘At the heart of the discipline’: Critical reflections on fieldwork. In J. Davies & D. Spencer (Eds.), Emotions in the field: The psychology and anthropology of fieldwork experience (pp. 55–78). Stanford University Press.

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140, 139–167.

Çakır, R. (2011). Derin Hizbullah: İslamcı Şiddetin Geleceği [Deep Hizbullah: The Future of Islamist Violence]. Metis Yayınları.

Çelebi, E., Verkuyten, M., Köse, T. & Maliepaard, M. (2014). Out-group trust and conflict understandings: The perspective of Turks and Kurds in Turkey. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 40, 64–75.

England, K.V.L. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89.

Ergun, A. & Erdemir, A. (2010). Negotiating insider and outsider identities in the field: ‘Insider’ in a foreign land, ‘outsider’ in one’s own land. Field Methods, 22(1), 16–38.

Faria, C. and Mollett, S. (2016). Critical feminist reflexivity and the politics of whiteness in the ‘field’. Gender, Place & Culture, 23(1), 79–93.

Fenge, L.A., Oakley, L., Taylor, B. & Beer, S. (2019). The impact of sensitive research on the researcher: Preparedness and positionality. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1–8.

Finlay, L. (2002). Negotiating the swamp: the opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Research, 2(2), 209–230.

Folkes, L. (2022). Moving beyond ‘shopping list’ positionality: Using kitchen table reflexivity and in/visible tools to develop reflexive qualitative research. Qualitative Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221098922 .

Frers, L. & Meier, L. (2022). Hierarchy and inequality in research: Practices, ethics and experiences. Qualitative Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221098920 .

Gouldner, A. (1970). The coming crisis in Western sociology. Basic Books.

Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.

Harding, Sandra. (1995). ‘Strong objectivity’: A response to the New objectivity question. Synthese, 104(3), 331–349.

Hill Collins, P. 2019. Intersectionality as critical social theory. Duke University Press.

Howell, S. 2018. Ethnography. In the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Anthropology. https://www.anthroencyclopedia.com/entry/ethnography .

Karasu, M. & Uluğ, Ö. M. (2020). Doing research on Turkish-Armenian relations in Turkey, Armenia, and the Armenian diaspora: The challenges and opportunities of Turkish researchers in the field. In Acar, Y. G, Moss, S. M., & Uluğ, Ö. M. (Eds.). (2020). Researching peace, conflict, and power in the field: Methodological challenges and opportunities (pp. 63–83). Springer Nature.

Kosygina, L. (2005). Doing gender in research: Reflection on experience in field. The Qualitative Report, 1, 87–95.

Kovats-Bernat J.C. (2002). Negotiating dangerous fields: Pragmatic strategies for fieldwork amid violence and terror. American Anthropologist, 104(1), 208–222.

Kurt, M. (2017). Kurdish Hizbullah in Turkey: Islamism, violence and the state. Pluto Press.

Levi-Strauss, C. (1979). Myth and meaning. Schocken Books.

Lichterman, P. (2017). Interpretive reflexivity in ethnography. Ethnography, 18(1), 35–45.

Lord, C. (2018). Religious politics in Turkey: From the birth of the republic to the AKP. Cambridge University Press.

Lynch, M. (2000). Against reflexivity as an academic virtue and source of privileged knowledge. Theory, Culture & Society, 17(3), 26–54.

Marcus, A. 2007. Blood and belief: The PKK and the Kurdish fight for independence . NYU Press.

Marques, J. M., Yzerbyt, V.Y. & Leyens, J-P. (1988). The ‘black sheep effect’: Extremity of judgments towards ingroup members as a function of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(1), 1–16.

McEvoy, J. (2006). Elite interviewing in a divided society: Lessons from Northern Ireland. Politics, 26(3), 184–191.

Mcfarlane-Morris, S. (2020). ‘Home sweet home?’ Struggles of intracultural ‘betweenness’ of doctoral fieldwork in my home country of Jamaica. Area, 52(2), 394–400.

Meray, S. (1970). Lozan Barış Konferansı: Tutanaklar, Belgeler (Takım I, Cilt I, Kitap II) [The Lausanne Peace Treaty: Proceedings, Documents]. SBF Yayınları.

Merton, R. (1972). Insiders and outsiders: A chapter in the sociology of knowledge. American Journal of Sociology, 78(1), 9–47.

Moss, S.M., Uluğ, Ö.M. & Acar, Y.G. (2019). “Doing Research in Conflict Contexts: Practical and Ethical Challenges for Researchers when Conducting Fieldwork.” Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 25(1): 86–99.

Mutlu, Y. (2018). ‘She’s Turkish but good!’ Researching on Kurdish internal displacement as a “Turkish” female researcher.” In B. Başer, M. Toivanen, B. Zorlu & Y. Duman (Eds.), Methodological approaches in Kurdish studies: Theoretical and practical insights from the field (pp. 165–181). Lexington Books.

Myerhoff, B. & Ruby, J. (1982). “Introduction”. In J. Ruby (Ed.), A crack in the mirror: Reflexive perspectives in sociology (pp. 1–35). University of Pennsylvania Press.

Narayan, U. (1997). Dislocating cultures: Identities, traditions, and third world feminism. Routledge.

Narayan, K. (1993). How native Is a ‘native’ anthropologist? American Anthropologist, 95(3), 671–686.

Oyewumi, O. (2002). Conceptualizing gender: The eurocentric foundations of feminist concepts and the challenge of African epistemologies. Jenda-A Journal of Culture and African Women Studies, 2(1), 1–7.

Özkul, D. (2016). Emotive connections: Insider research with Turkish/Kurdish Alevi migrants in Germany. In L. Voloder & L. Kirpitchenko (Eds.), Insider Research on Migration and Mobility: International Perspectives on Researcher Positioning (pp. 117–134). Routledge.

Chapter Google Scholar

Parashar, S. (2019). Research brokers, researcher identities and affective performances: The insider/outsider conundrum. Civil Wars, 21(2), 249–270.

Pels, D. (2000). Reflexivity: One step up. Theory, Culture & Society, 17(3), 1–25.

Reed, I. (2011). Interpretation and social knowledge: On the use of theory in the human sciences. University of Chicago Press.

Reich, J. (2021). Power, positionality, and the ethic of care in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology, 44(3), 575–581.

Reyes, V. (2020). Ethnographic toolkit: Strategic positionality and researchers’ visible and invisible tools in field research. Ethnography, 21(2), 220–240.

Romano, D. (2006). Conducting research in the Middle East’s conflict zones. PS: Political Science and Politics, 39(3), 439–441.

Rose, G. (1997). Situating knowledges: Positionality, reflexivities and other tactics. Progress in Human Geography, 21(3), 305–320.

Rose, J. (2020). Dynamic embodied positionalities: The politics of class and nature through a critical ethnography of homelessness. Ethnography. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138120913061 .

Said, E. (1979). Orientalism. Vintage Books.

Schulz, P. (2021). Recognizing research participants’ fluid positionalities in (post)conflict zones. Qualitative Research, 21(4), 550–567.

Shehata, S. (2006). Ethnography, identity, and the production of knowledge. Routledge.

Simmel, G. (1950). The Stranger. In K.H. Wolff (Ed. and trans.), The Sociology of Georg Simmel (pp. 402–406). The Free Press.

Simandan, D. (2019). Revisiting positionality and the thesis of situated knowledge. Dialogues in Human Geography, 9(2), 129–149.

Solnit, R. (2015). Men explain things to me . Haymarket Books.

Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture (pp. 271–313). University of Illinois Press.

Türkmen, G. (2021). Under the banner of Islam: Turks, Kurds, and the limits of religious unity. Oxford University Press.

Türkmen, G. (2018). Negotiating symbolic boundaries in conflict resolution: Religion and ethnicity in Turkey’s Kurdish conflict. Qualitative Sociology, 41 (4), 569–591.

Turkmen-Dervisoglu, G. (2012, November 20). Açlık grevlerinin ardından [after the hunger strikes]. Başka Haber. http://www.baskahaber.org/2012/11/aclk-grevlerinin-ardndan.html .

Turkmen-Dervisoglu, G. (2009). Religious nationalism vs. nationalist religion: The discourse of martyrdom in Turkey and Palestine. [Master’s thesis, University of Virginia]. https://search.lib.virginia.edu/sources/uva_library/items/u5094433 .

Uluğ, Ö.M., Acar, Y.G. & Kanık, B. (2021). Reflecting on research: Researcher identity in conflict studies from the perspectives of participants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51 (6), 847–861.

Uluğ, Ö.M. & Cohrs, J.C. (2017). “If we become friends, maybe I can change my perspective”: Intergroup contact, endorsement of conflict narratives, and peace-related attitudes in Turkey. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 23 (3), 278–287.

Uluğ, Ö. M., & Cohrs, J. C. (2016). An exploration of lay people’s Kurdish conflict frames in Turkey. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 22 (2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000165 .

Ünlü, B. (2016). The Kurdish struggle and the crisis of the Turkishness contract. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 42(4–5), 397–405.

Vogel, C. & Musamba, J. (2022). Towards a politics of collaborative worldmaking: Ethics, epistemologies and mutual positionalities in conflict research. Ethnography https://doi.org/10.1177/14661381221090895 .

Watters, J.K. & Biernacki, P. (1989). Targeted sampling: Options for the study of hidden populations. Social Problems, 36(4), 416–430.

Weiner-Levy, N. & Abu-Rabia-Queder, S. 2012. Researching my people, researching the ‘other’: Field experiences of two researchers along shifting positionalities. Qual Quant 46, 1151–1166.

Wood, E. (2006). The ethical challenges of field research in conflict zones. Qualitative Sociology, 29, 373–386.

Zhao, Y. (2017). Doing fieldwork the Chinese way: A returning researcher’s insider/outsider status in her home town. Area, 49(2), 185–191.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Berlin, Germany

Gülay Türkmen

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Ankara, Türkiye

Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany

Elif Sandal Önal

Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena

Mete Sefa Uysal

University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK

Yasemin Gülsüm Acar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Türkmen, G. (2023). Reflexivity and Positionality in Qualitative Research: On Being an Outsider in the Field. In: Şen, E., Sandal Önal, E., Sefa Uysal, M., Acar, Y.G. (eds) The Political Psychology of Kurds in Turkey. Palgrave Studies in Political Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33291-3_8

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33291-3_8

Published : 29 November 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-33290-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-33291-3

eBook Packages : Political Science and International Studies Political Science and International Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Chapter 6. Reflexivity

Introduction.

Related to epistemological issues of how we know anything about the social world, qualitative researchers understand that we the researchers can never be truly neutral or outside the study we are conducting. As observers, we see things that make sense to us and may entirely miss what is either too obvious to note or too different to comprehend. As interviewers, as much as we would like to ask questions neutrally and remain in the background, interviews are a form of conversation, and the persons we interview are responding to us . Therefore, it is important to reflect upon our social positions and the knowledges and expectations we bring to our work and to work through any blind spots that we may have. This chapter discusses the concept of reflexivity and its importance for conducting reliable qualitative research.

Reflexivity: What It Is and Why It Is Important

Remember our discussion in epistemology ? Qualitative researchers tend to question assertions of absolute fact or reality, unmediated through subject positions and subject knowledge. There are limits to what we know because we are part of the social worlds we inhabit. To use the terminology of standpoint theorists, we have a standpoint from which we observe the world just as much as anyone else. In this, we too are the blind men, and the world is our elephant. None of us are omniscient or neutral observers. Because of this epistemological standpoint, qualitative researchers value the ability to reflect upon and think hard about our own effects on our research. We call this reflexivity. Reflexivity “generally involves the self-examination of how research findings were produced, and, particularly, the role of the researcher in their construction” ( Heaton 2004:104 ).

There are many aspects of being reflexive. First, there is the simple fact that we are human beings with the limitations that come with that condition. We have likes and dislikes, biases, blind spots, preferences, and so on. If we do not take these into account, they can prevent us from being the best researcher we can be. Being reflective means, first and foremost, trying as best as possible to bracket out elements of our own character and understanding that get in the way. It is important to note that bias (in this context, at least) is not inherently wrong. It just is. Unavoidable. But by noting it, we can minimize its impact or, in some cases, help explain more clearly what it is we see or why it is that we are asking the questions we are asking. For example, I might want to communicate to my audience that I grew up poor and that I have a lot of sympathy and concern for first-generation college students as a result. This “bias” of mine motivates me to do the work I do, even as I try to ensure that it does not blind me to things I find out in the course of my research. [1]

A second aspect of being reflexive is being aware that you yourself are part of the research when you are conducting qualitative research. This is particularly true when conducting interviews, observing interactions, or participating in activities. You have a body, and it will be “read” by those in the field. You will be perceived as an insider or an outsider, as a friend or foe, as empathetic or hostile. Some of this will be wrong. People will prejudge you based on the color of your skin, your presented gender, the accent of your language. People will classify you based on the clothes you wear, and they will be more open to you if you remind them of a friendly aunt or uncle and more reserved if you remind them of someone they don’t like. This is all natural and inevitable. Your research will suffer if you do not take this into account, if you do not reflect upon how you are being read and how this might be influencing what people tell you or what they are willing to do in front of you. The flip side of this problem is that your particular body and presence will open some doors barred to other researchers. Finding sites and contexts where your presented self is a benefit rather than a burden is an important part of your individual research career. Be honest with yourself about this, and you will be more successful as a qualitative researcher. Learn to leverage yourself in your research.

The third aspect of being reflexive is related to how we communicate our work to others. Being honest with our position, as I am about my own social background and its potential impact on what I study or about how I leveraged my own position to get people to open up to me, helps our audiences evaluate what we have found. Maybe I haven’t entirely eliminated my biases or weaknesses, but by telling my audience who I am and where I potentially stand, they can take account of those biases and weaknesses in their reading of my findings. Letting them know that I wore pink when talking with older men because that made them more likely to be kind to me (a strategy acknowledged by Posselt [ 2016 ]) helps them understand the interview context. In other words, my research becomes more reliable when my own social position and the strategies I used are communicated.

Some people think being reflective is just another form of narcissistic navel-gazing. “The study is not about you!” they might cry. True, to some degree—but that also misses the point. All studies on the social world are inevitably about us as well because we are part of that social world. It is actually more dangerous to pretend that we are neutral observers, outside what we are observing. Pierre Bourdieu makes this point several times, and I think it is worth quoting him here: “The idea of a neutral science is fiction, an interested fiction which enables its authors to present a version of the dominant representation of the social world, naturalized and euphemized into a particularly misrecognizable and symbolically, therefore, particularly effective form, and to call it scientific” (quoted in Lemert 1981:278 ).

Bourdieu ( 1984 ) argues that reflective analysis is “not an epistemological scruple” but rather “an indispensable pre-condition of scientific knowledge of the object” ( 92 ). It would be narcissistic to present findings without reflection, as that would give much more weight to any findings or insights that emerge than is due.

The critics are right about one thing, however. Putting oneself at the center of the research is also inappropriate. [2] The focus should be on what is being researched, and the reflexivity is there to advance the study, not to push it aside. This issue has emerged at times when researchers from dominant social positions reflect upon their social locations vis-à-vis study participants from marginalized locations. A researcher who studies how low-income women of color experience unemployment might need to address her White, upper-class, fully employed social location, but not at the cost of crowding out the stories, lived experiences, and understandings of the women she has interviewed. This can sometimes be a delicate balance, and not everyone will agree that a person has walked it correctly.

Examples of Reflexivity in Practice

Most qualitative researchers include a positionality statement in any “methods section” of their publications. This allows readers to understand the location of the researcher, which is often helpful for gauging reliability . Many journals now require brief positionality statements as well. Here are a few examples of such statements.

The first is from an ethnographic study of elite golfers. Ceron-Anaya ( 2017 ) writes about his class, race, and gender and how these aspects of his identity and social location affected his interactions with research participants:

My own class origins, situated near the intersection between the middle and the lower-middle class, hindered cooperation in some cases. For example, the amiable interaction with one club member changed toward the end of the interview when he realized that I commonly moved about in the city by public transportation (which is a strong class indicator). He was not rude but stopped elaborating on the answers as he had been doing up to that point.…Bodily confidence is a privilege of the privileged. My subordinate position, vis-à-vis golfers, was ameliorated by my possession of cultural capital, objectified in my status of researcher/student in a western university. However, my cultural capital dwindled in its value at the invisible but firm boundary between the upper-middle and the upper class. The few contacts I made with members of the upper class produced no connections with other members of the same group, illustrating how the research process is also inserted in the symbolic and material dynamics that shape the field. ( 288 )

What did you learn from Ceron-Anaya’s reflection? If he hadn’t told you about his background, would this have made a difference in reading about elite golfers? Would the findings be different had Ceron-Anaya driven up to the club in a limousine? Is it helpful to know he came by bus?

The second example is from a study on first-generation college students. Hinz ( 2016 ) discusses both differences and similarities between herself and those she interviewed and how both could have affected the study:

I endeavored to avoid researcher bias by allowing the data to speak for itself, but my own habitus as a White, female, middle-class second-generation college student with a few years of association with Selective State [elite university] may have influenced my interpretation. Being a Selective State student at the time of the interviews provided a familiarity with the environment in which the participants were living, and an ease of communication facilitated by a shared institutional culture. And yet, not being a first-gen myself, it seemed as if I were standing on the periphery of their experience, looking in. ( 289–290 )

Note that Hinz cannot change who she is, nor should she. Being aware (reflective) that she may “stand on the periphery” of the experience of those she interviews has probably helped her listen more closely rather than assume she understands what is really going on. Do you find her more reliable given this?

These statements can be quite long, especially when found in methodological appendixes in books rather than short statements in articles. This last lengthy example comes from my own work. I try to place myself, explaining the motivations for the research I conducted at small liberal arts colleges:

I began this project out of a deep curiosity about how college graduates today were faring in an increasingly debt-ridden and unequal labor market. I was working at a small liberal arts college when I began thinking about this project and was poised to take a job at another one. During my interview for the new job, I was told that I was a good fit, because I had attended Barnard College, so I knew what the point of a liberal arts college was. I did. A small liberal arts college was a magical place. You could study anything you wanted, for no reason at all, simply for the love of it. And people would like you for it. You were surrounded by readers, by people who liked to dress up in costume and recite Shakespeare, by people who would talk deep into the night about the meaning of life or whether “beauty” existed out there, in nature, or was simply a projection of our own circumstances. My own experience at Barnard had been somewhat like that. I studied Ancient Greek and Latin, wrote an undergraduate thesis on the legal standing of Vestal Virgins in Ancient Rome, and took frequent subway rides to the Cloisters, the medieval annex of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, where I sketched the courtyard and stared at unicorn tapestries. But I also worked full-time, as a waitress at a series of hectic and demanding restaurants around the city, as a security guard for the dorm, as a babysitter for some pretty privileged professors who lived in doorman buildings along Riverside Park, and at the library (the best job by far). I also constantly worried I would not be able to finish my degree, as every year I was unsure how I would come up with the money to pay for costs of college above and beyond the tuition (which, happily, was covered by the college given my family’s low income). Indeed, the primary reason I studied the Classics was because all the books were freely available in the library. There are no modern textbooks—you just find a copy of the Iliad. There are a lot of those in a city like New York. Due to my fears, I pushed to graduate one year early, taking a degree in “Ancient Studies” instead of “Classics,” which could have led on to graduate training. From there, I went to law school, which seemed like a safe choice. I do not remember ever having a conversation with anyone about how to find a job or what kinds of job one could do with a degree in Ancient Studies. I had little to no social networks, as I had spent my time studying and working. And I was very lucky, because I graduated with almost zero debt. For years, until that job interview, I hadn’t really thought my Barnard experience had been that great or unusual. But now it was directly helping me get a job, about fifteen years after graduation. And it probably had made me a better person, whatever that means. Had I graduated with debt, however, I am not so sure that it would have been worth it. Was it, on balance, a real opportunity and benefit for poor students like me? Even now? I had a hunch of what I might find if I looked: small liberal arts colleges were unique places of opportunity for low-income first-generation working-class students who somehow managed to find and get in to one of them (no easy task). I thought that, because of their ethos, their smallness, the fact that one could not hide from professors, these colleges would do a fair job equalizing opportunities and experiences for all their students. I wanted to tell this story. But that is not the story that I found, or not entirely. While everyone benefits from the kind of education a small liberal arts college can offer, because students begin and continue so differently burdened and privileged, the advantages of the already-advantaged are amplified, potentially increasing rather than decreasing initial inequalities. That is not really a surprising story, but it is an important one to tell and to remember. Education doesn’t reduce inequality. Going to a good college doesn’t level the playing field for low-income, first-generation, working-class students. But perhaps it can help them write a book about that. ( Hurst 2019:259–261 )

What do you think? Did you learn something about the author that would help you, as a reader, understand the reasons and context for the study? Would you trust the researcher? If you said yes, why?

How to Do It

How does one become a reflective researcher? Practice! Nearly every great qualitative researcher maintains a reflexive journal (there are exceptions that prove the rule), a type of diary where they record their thinking on the research process itself. This might include writing about the research design (chapter 2), plotting out strategies for sample selection (chapter 6), or talking through what one believes can be known (chapter 3). During analysis, this journal is a place to record ideas and insights and pose questions for further reflection or follow-up studies. This journal should be highly personal. It is a place to record fears, concerns, and hopes as well. Why are you studying what you are studying? What is really motivating you? Being clear with yourself and being able to put it down in words are invaluable to the research process.

Today, there are many blogs out there on writing reflective journals, with helpful suggestions and examples. Although you may want to take a look at some of these, the form of your own journal will probably be unique. This is you, the researcher, on the page. Each of us looks different. Use the journal to interrogate your decisions and clarify your intent. If you find something during the study of note, you might want to ask yourself what led you to note that. Why do you think this “thing” is a “thing”? What about your own position, background, or researcher status that makes you take note? And asking yourself this question might lead you to think about what you did not notice. Other questions to ask yourself include the following: How do I know “that thing” I noted? So what? What does it mean? What are the implications? Who cares about this and why? Remember that doing qualitative research well is recursive , meaning that we may begin with a research design, but the steps of doing the research often loop back to the beginning. By keeping a reflective journal, you allow yourself to circle back to the beginning, to make changes to the study to keep it in line with what you are really interested in knowing.

One might also consider designing research that includes multiple investigators, particularly those who may not share your preconceptions about the study. For example, if you are studying conservative students on campus, and you yourself thoroughly identify as liberal, you might want to pair up with a researcher interested in the topic who grew up in a conservative household. If you are studying racial regimes, consider creating a racially diverse team of researchers. Or you might include in your research design a component of participatory research wherein members of the community of interest become coresearchers. Even if you can’t form a research team, you can reach out to others for feedback as you move along. Doing research can be a lonely enterprise, so finding people who will listen to you and nudge you to clarify your thinking where necessary or move you to consider an aspect you have missed is invaluable.

Finally, make it a regular part of your practice to write a paragraph reporting your perspectives, positions, values, and beliefs and how these may have influenced the research. This paragraph may be included in publications upon request.

Internal Validity

Being reflexive can help ensure that our studies are internally valid. All research must be valid to be helpful. We say a study’s findings are externally valid when they are equally true of other times, places, people. Quantitative researchers often spend a lot of time grappling with external validity , as they are often trying to demonstrate that their sample is representative of a larger population. Although we do not do that in qualitative research, we do sometimes make claims that the processes and mechanisms we uncover here, in this particular setting, are likely to be equally active in that setting over there, although there may be (will be!) contextual differences as well. Internal validity is more peculiar to qualitative research. Is your finding an accurate representation of what you are studying? Are you describing the people you are observing or interviewing as they really are? This is internal validity , and you should be able to see how this connects with the requirement of reflexivity. To the extent that you leave unexamined your own biases or preconceptions, you will fail at accurately representing those people and processes you study. Remember that “bias” here is not a moral failing in the way we commonly use bias in the nonresearch world but an inevitable product of our being social beings who inhabit social worlds, with all the various complexities surrounding that. Because of things that have happened to you, certain things (concepts, quotes, activities) might jump out at you as being particularly important. Being reflexive allows you to take a step back and grapple with the larger picture, reflecting on why you might be seeing X (which is present) but also missing Y (which is also present). It also allows you to consider what effect/impact your presence has on what you are observing or being told and to make any adjustments necessary to minimize your impact or, at the very least, to be aware of these effects and talk about them in any descriptions or presentations you make. There are other ways of ensuring internal validity (e.g., member checking , triangulation ), but being reflective is an essential component.

Advanced: Bourdieu on Reflexivity

One researcher who really tackled the issue of reflexivity was Pierre Bourdieu. [3] Known in the US primarily as a theorist, Bourdieu was a very capable and thorough researcher, who employed a variety of methods in his wide-ranging studies. Originally trained as an anthropologist, he became uncomfortable with the unreflective “outsider perspective” he was taught to follow. How was he supposed to observe and write about the various customs and rules of the people he was studying if he did not take into account his own supposedly neutral position in the observations? And even more interestingly, how could he write about customs and rules as if they were lifted from but outside of the understandings and practice of the people following them? When you say “God bless you” to someone who sneezes, are you really following a social custom that requires the prevention of illness through some performative verbal ritual of protection, or are you saying words out of reflex and habit? Bourdieu wondered what it meant that anthropologists were so ready to attribute meaning to actions that, to those performing them, were probably unconsidered. This caused him to ponder those deep epistemological questions about the possibilities of knowledge, particularly what we can know and truly understand about others. Throughout the following decades, as he developed his theories about the social world out of the deep and various studies he engaged in, he thought about the relationship between the researcher and the researched. He came to several conclusions about this relationship.

First, he argued that researchers needed to be reflective about their position vis-à-vis the object of study. The very fact that there is a subject and an object needs to be accounted for. Too often, he argued, the researcher forgets that part of the relationship, bracketing out the researcher entirely, as if what is being observed or studied exists entirely independently of the study. This can lead to false reports, as in the case where a blind man grasps the trunk of the elephant and claims the elephant is cylindrical, not having recognized how his own limitations of sight reduced the elephant to only one of its parts.

As mentioned previously, Bourdieu ( 1984 ) argued that “reflective analysis of the tools of analysis is not an epistemological scruple but an indispensable precondition of scientific knowledge of the object” ( 92 ). It is not that researchers are inherently biased—they are—but rather that the relationship between researcher and researched is an unnatural one that needs to be accounted for in the analysis. True and total objectivity is impossible, as researchers are human subjects themselves, called to research what interests them (or what interests their supervisors) and also inhabiting the social world. The solution to this problem is to be reflective and to account for these aspects in the analysis itself. Here is how Bourdieu explains this charge:

To adopt the viewpoint of REFLEXIVITY is not to renounce objectivity but to question the privilege of the knowing subject, which the antigenetic vision arbitrarily frees, as purely noetic, from the labor of objectification. To adopt this viewpoint is to strive to account for the empirical “subject” in the very terms of the objectivity constructed by the scientific subject (notably by situating it in a determined place in social space-time) and thereby to give oneself awareness and (possible) mastery of the constraints which may be exercised on the scientific subject via all the ties which attach it to the empirical “subject,” to its interests, motives, assumptions, beliefs, its doxa, and which it must break in order to constitute itself . ( 1996:207 ; emphases added)

Reflexivity, for Bourdieu, was a trained state of mind for the researcher, essential for proper knowledge production. Let’s use a story from Hans Christian Andersen to illustrate this point. If you remember this story from your childhood, it goes something like this: Two con artists show up in a town in which its chief monarch spends a lot of money on expensive clothes and splashy displays. They sense an opportunity to make some money out of this situation and pretend they are talented weavers from afar. They tell the vain emperor that they can make the most magnificent clothes anyone has ever seen (or not seen, as the case may be!). Because what they really do is “pretend” to weave and sew and hand the emperor thin air, which they then help him to put on in an elaborate joke. They tell him that only the very stupid and lowborn will be unable to see the magnificent clothes. Embarrassed that he can’t see them either, he pretends he can. Everyone pretends they can see clothes, when really the emperor walks around in his bare nakedness. As he parades through town, people redden and bow their heads, but no one says a thing. That is, until one child looks at the naked emperor and starts to laugh. His laughter breaks the spell, and everyone realizes the “naked truth.”

Now let us add a new thread to this story. The boy did not laugh. Years go by, and the emperor continues to wear his new clothes. At the start of every day, his aides carefully drape the “new clothes” around his naked body. Decades go by, and this is all “normal.” People don’t even see a naked emperor but a fully robed leader of the free world. A researcher, raised in this milieu, visits the palace to observe court habits. She observes the aides draping the emperor. She describes the care they take in doing so. She nowhere reports that the clothes are nonexistent because she herself has been trained to see them . She thus misses a very important fact—that there are no clothes at all! Note that it is not her individual “biases” that are getting in the way but her unreflective acceptance of the reality she inhabits that binds her to report things less accurately than she might.

In his later years, Bourdieu turned his attention to science itself and argued that the promise of modern science required reflectivity among scientists. We need to develop our reflexivity as we develop other muscles, through constant practice. Bourdieu ( 2004 ) urged researchers “to convert reflexivity into a disposition, constitutive of their scientific habitus, a reflexivity reflex , capable of acting not ex poste , on the opus operatum , but a priori , on the modus operandi ” ( 89 ). In other words, we need to build into our research design an appreciation of the relationship between researcher and researched.

To do science properly is to be reflective, to be aware of the social waters in which one swims and to turn one’s researching gaze on oneself and one’s researcher position as well as on the object of the research. Above all, doing science properly requires one to acknowledge science as a social process. We are not omniscient gods, lurking above the humans we observe and talk to. We are human too.

Maintaining reflexivity in qualitative nursing research

Monica peddle.

1 School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne Australia

Reflexivity is central to the construction of knowledge in qualitative research. This purpose of this paper was to outline one approach when using reflexivity as a strategy to ensure quality of the research process.

In this exploratory research, reflexivity was established and maintained by using repeated questionnaires, completed online. Using the approach presented by Bradbury‐Jones (2007) and Peshkin's I’s, the aim of the research was to identify the researcher's values, beliefs, perspectives and perceptions prevalent in the research.

Qualitative data were collected in online reflexive questionnaires, completed monthly by the researcher from January 2017 to December 2018. Data analysis used interpretive and reflective reading and inductive processes.

Seventeen questionnaires were analysed. Data indicated use of questionnaires enabled and detailed development of specific strategies to ensure trustworthiness. Importantly, reflexivity, supported by questionnaires, brought about transformation through self‐awareness and enlightenment.

1. INTRODUCTION

Reflexivity is the process of reflecting critically on oneself as a researcher (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007 ) and is central to the construction of knowledge in qualitative research (Narayanasamy, 2015 ). It requires the process of knowledge construction to be the subject of investigation (Flick, 2013 ). Reflexivity assists researchers to consider their “continuing engagement with participants and revelations of the self as the researcher enters the various stages of the research process” (Narayanasamy, 2015 , p. 238). It acknowledges the partnership between the participants and researcher (Narayanasamy, 2015 ), the impact that the participants and the researcher have on each other (Darawsheh, 2014 ) and the need to understand what the effects were and how they impacted on the data (Patton, 2015 ). During reflexivity, the research process and end product are examined relative to the researchers’ praxis, role and social position (Flick, 2013 ).

Reflexivity is also a process that can be transformative for the researcher, developing personal self‐awareness and enlightenment (Narayanasamy, 2015 ). This process can be challenging, as the researcher has to act ethically and employ skilful and illuminative insight through a process of “critical self‐reflection on one's biases, theoretical predispositions, preferences” (Engward & Davis, 2015 ). However, despite the importance of reflexivity, it is suggested that reflexive accounts in nursing research are “under‐addressed” (Narayanasamy, 2015 ).

Reflexivity can be viewed as a criterion, a tool or a strategy of rigour in qualitative studies (Darawsheh, 2014 ). When viewed as a criterion, reflexivity is a marker of quality and is used to increase the confidence, congruence and credibility of findings (Darawsheh, 2014 ). When viewed as a tool reflexivity promotes quality of qualitative research, impacting on the judgement of the significance of the findings (Patton, 2015 ). When viewed as a strategy, reflexivity enables the researcher to ensure credibility of data, dependability of the study and conformability of findings (Darawsheh, 2014 ). This paper will outline one approach when using reflexivity as a strategy to ensure quality of the research process.

In this paper, I will use the first person to outline the personal self‐reflective process used to examine my perceptions, that are the origins of my own voice and perspectives (Patton, 2015 ). This paper will outline the strategies I used to create “a continual internal dialogue and critical self‐evaluation of [my] positionality, and active acknowledgement and explicit recognition that this position may affect the research process and outcome” (Berger, 2015 , p. 220). Examining my own thoughts, actions and assumptions allowed me to bring these to a conscious level and develop an awareness of how these may influence the research process (Darawsheh, 2014 ). Furthermore, reflexivity supported credibility by making the decisions made and the research process transparent (Darawsheh, 2014 ; Patton, 2015 ).

1.1. Background

1.2. research project summary.

The purpose of the research project in which this reflexivity was situated was to explore the influence of virtual patients on the development of non‐technical skills in first‐ and third‐year nursing students. Non‐technical skills are defined as the cognitive, social and interpersonal skills that contribute to safe and efficient task performance (Flin et al., 2013 ). Research now recognizes that non‐technical skills such as communication, teamwork and leadership are critically important in safe patient care in the clinical setting (Flin et al., 2013 ). However, literature identifies there is a deficit in undergraduate health professional education curricula of explicit teaching and learning activities and resources enabling development of NTS critical for maintaining patient safety in clinical practice (DeTata, 2015 ).

The Virtual Simulated Patient Resource (VSPR) ( www.vspr.net.au is a free interprofessional web‐based resource that provides undergraduate health professionals the opportunity to engage in simulation based, interactive learning activities to develop and apply foundational knowledge and skill of non‐technical skills. Knowledge and skill are developed in online modules and applied to realistic virtual patient scenarios using a simulation based and “play your own adventure game” approach. The resource is student centred where the learner controls and manages their learning experience from the “driver's seat” to meet their individual needs. Integration of the resource is based on constructivist theory supported by Kolb's Experiential Learning Model (1984). The author has led the design, development, implementation and research of the Virtual Simulated Patient Resource.

Using a case study methodology, the influence of virtual patients on the development of non‐technical skills in first‐ and third‐year nursing student was explored. A purposive convenience sample was used with first‐ ( n = 45) and third‐year ( n = 31) nursing students across two education facilities in Victoria, Australia. Ten focus groups and one individual interview were conducted with first‐year students and 6 focus groups and one individual interview, with third‐year students. Data analysis used framework analysis.

1.3. Methods

A descriptive exploratory approach was employed in this research. Qualitative data that promoted self‐reflection were collected using repeated questionnaires, completed online using Qualtrics. The research question posed was as follows: what are the nature of my values, beliefs perceptions and perspectives prevalent in the research?

1.4. Data collection

Online reflective questionnaires enabled an examination of the internal dialogue and a critical self‐evaluation of my skills, commitment and framing in and towards the research enabling me to be self‐aware. This approach to reflexivity allowed application of skills and attributes to support further exploration of the phenomenon under investigation whilst controlling subjectivity, so as not to impart my views or perceptions on the participants’ data (Darawsheh, 2014 ).

I utilized three avenues to capture my consciousness and self‐commentary when immersed in the research – participants, audience and researcher (Patton, 2015 ). According to Patton ( 2015 ), reflexivity intersects with perspective of those studied, considering how do they know what they know, what has influenced their world view and how do I perceive them? Additionally, outlining the perspectives of the researcher, who is an instrument in qualitative inquiry, to identify what prior knowledge, values and beliefs they bring to the research, and current thoughts and perceptions on the research process and findings is important. Finally, the perspectives of those who will critique and use the findings assists in examining what is clear or unclear or what remains unanswered. The repeated questionnaires enabled me to scrutinize the participants, the audience and myself as the researcher to support a deliberate and planned internal examination of my position relative to the research and the values that I brought to the research. Additionally, it enabled me to consider how these perspectives may have shaped the data. This reflexivity allowed me to capture my self‐commentary during the research and articulate how I was making sense of the data.

The qualitative reflective questionnaire comprised six questions as outlined in Table 1 . The time taken to complete the questionnaire was relative to what was occurring in the research at that time. At times, responses were short and sharp with clearly defined statements whilst at others, responses were more reflective and thoughtful taking more time. I completed these online questionnaires monthly.

Reflexive questionnaire

1.5. Data analysis

The aim of the analysis of the reflective qualitative questionnaire entries was to identify the nature of my values, beliefs, perceptions and perspectives prevalent in the research. This approach uses Peshkin's I’s (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007 ). Peshkin's I’s refers to the work undertaken by Peshkin ( 1988 ), who by recording his thoughts and feelings and then systematically analysing the entries, was able to identify the subjective I’s that may have influenced his research. The outcomes of the research suggested that being aware of your subjectivities in research can improve outcomes.

Analysis of reflective questionnaire responses used interpretive and reflexive reading (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007 ). The first step involved a “process of reading the data for meaning and representation” followed by an inductive process, where I recognized themes that represented the different kinds of values, beliefs, perceptions and perspectives prevalent in the research (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007 ). The nature of these I’s identifies my position in the research and the influence of my internal perspectives on the data.

1.6. Ethics

Ethical approval for the qualitative research in which this reflexivity was situated to ensure trustworthiness was obtained (Ethics approval ID number: CF12/3958 – 20,120,018,910).

1.7. Findings

Questionnaire data were captured from January 2017 to December 2018 during a period of intense data collection, analysis, synthesis and reporting. Reflective questionnaire data were downloaded from Qualtrics in February 2019. A total of 17 responses were recorded. Presented below are the nature of the values, beliefs, perspectives and perceptions identified in the analysis, supported by excerpts from the questionnaire (Table 2 ).

Values, Beliefs, Perspectives and Perceptions present in the research

1.8. Values– Unsettled and Challenged

The worth of being unsettled evidenced by feelings of turbulence, confusion, discomfort, clarity and productivity highlights the value of these feelings to prompt resolution and synthesis of data. It was curious to note how feedback and criticism impacted with being unsettled and aligned with moments of clarity or ambiguity of the research progress.

When emotions were framed in a more negative stance, thoughts about the data were perplexing, unsure and disrupted. Criticism of process or outcome caused feelings of doubt and a lack of direction in how to advance the research.

Questionnaire entry 3/5/2017: “Feeling a little perplexed since meeting yesterday. Thought I was on top of everything and then again derailed by a very confusing meeting.”

However, when emotions were framed positively including invigoration and empowerment thoughts about the data were clear but questioning.

Questionnaire entry 20/2/2017 : “Starting to feel invigorated about potential insights into the learning experience of student and VSPR.” Questionnaire entry 29/5/2017 : “Really enjoying this component of my PhD research. It feels more like real research than the other two stages I have completed.” Questionnaire entry 9/6/2017 : “Feeling empowered and on track .”

Additionally, constructive feedback, strengthened confidence and synthesis of ideas supporting progress.

Questionnaire entry 6/7/2017: “Have felt some real support recently with really helpful feedback and suggestions on how to manage and reduce the data to make it more meaningful. Have actually learnt a lot.”

I experienced a level of challenge not previously encountered when engaging with and in and making sense of the data. However, data revealed the usefulness of that challenge to delve in, work with and wrestle with the data to discover patterns and themes. Curiously reflexive questionnaire data highlight how this challenging experience evolved from one of discomfort to having fun.

Questionnaire entry 6/7/2017 : “I love the data. The complexity that it has revealed regarding the VSPR interactions is exciting and I am really looking forward to delving into the ‘how’ data.” Questionnaire entry 1/8/2017 : “The data is rich and interesting . Love working with it and trying to understand what it is telling me.” Questionnaire entry 22/8/2019 : “Love the qualitative data. It is rich and descriptive and the wrestle with the themes etc. is fun!”

1.9. Beliefs – The champion

The Champion highlights my belief that quality non‐technical skills in clinical practice support safe patient care. It emphasizes my confidence that introducing these fundamental concepts early and explicitly in curricula will enable development of these skills in novice practitioners and support preparation for practice. It clearly states upfront my position relative to the importance of the skills and declared my beliefs that the VSPR would be an effective resource to develop these skills.

Questionnaire entry 11/1/2017: “ I believe that NTS are important and should be developed early on in undergraduate education. This enables students to be aware of these skills in practice and gives them opportunities to critique practice, reflect on skills demonstrated and integrate and develop their own skills, as a result. I believe that virtual learning offers an alternative to face to face and can be as effective in most areas. I have a small area of doubt if this is true for NTS as there are emotions and feelings also involved with these which can be hard to replicate in online learning. I believe that VSPR is an innovative resource to develop student awareness of practice and what to expect. It presents practice as not perfect and real.”

The Champion enabled me to declare my position relative to non‐technical skills and VSPR and to be aware of how this position would resonate with the data as I progressed with the research. Being conscious of my position prompted me to pause and consider the data to ensure the data were always “front and centre.” I was mindful to confirm findings were consistent with, and grounded in, the data and to be watchful of the potential of my stance to influence interpretations of the data.

Questionnaire entry 9/6/2017: “ Insight by some participants is fantastic. However, is that because I am hearing what I want to hear? Need to be careful here of subjectivity. Always ensure the data is front and centre.” Questionnaire entry 10/7/2017 : “I know that some of it will change when I discuss but feeling confident that the overarching themes are congruent and make sense of what the data indicates.”

1.10. Perspectives – Structured and Impatient

The Structured perspective emphasizes the desire I have for organization and clarity. Whilst I appreciate and value abstract thought and aspire to be visionary, introspective and immerse myself into the art of qualitative synthesis, in the beginning the ability to participate in this in‐depth thinking appeared beyond me. The reflexive questionnaire data document the struggle experienced during the research to think deeply about the data and what it means.

Questionnaire entry 20/2/2017 : “Limited progress this week ‐ thinking interrupted and no depth to activities completed.” Questionnaire entry 22/6/2017: “Hmm ‐ perplexed with thought in trying to decipher the themes in the data.”

However, as I progressed further into the research, I identified factors that supported and promoted deep thinking whilst supporting a structured perspective. Quarantining time and space both physically and mentally encouraged active participation in and contemplation of deep thought.

Questionnaire entry 22/2/2107 : “Hmm perplexed with thought in trying to decipher the themes in the data. Loving the challenge.” Questionnaire entry 5/11/2017 : “Ok taking its time as this part requires real thinking, rereading and more thinking.”

The Impatient perspective characterizes the inner need to achieve and “get the job done.” It wanted to “kick goals.” At times, this perspective encouraged moving rapidly from one part of the data to the next with emergent findings being considered definitive. At other times, this perspective was a barrier to further reflection and contemplation of all opportunities. Whilst the Impatient and Structured perspectives may be considered complementary, they presented a risk to deep thinking with the opportunity to affect the credibility of the research. Deliberate attention was needed to take my time to revisit and reflect, promoting more thoughtful and innovative insights and to remember this is an iterative process.

Questionnaire entry 19/5/2017 : “I am trying to work hard to progress the outputs. Feeling really pleased.” Questionnaire entry 14/2/2018 : “Need to kick some goals today for the how paper and get a draft happening.” Questionnaire entry 3/5/2017 : “Remember to take my time and that it will be an iterative process.”

1.11. Perceptions – Insight

Data in the reflexive questionnaire reveal the growth of insight and awareness of the data, and the development of my analytical skills and self‐confidence. The reflexive questionnaire data emphasizes the significance of being able to examine one's performance and identify areas for improvement to ensure deep and detailed data are obtained that focuses on answering the research questions. The excerpts below reflect the growth and development of insight through the research, from identifying anxieties with the quality of data, to when I gained clarification into and an understanding of the research process.

Questionnaire entry 20/2/2017: “Perplexing that I did not do a good job moderating the focus group. Data is limited in its depth. The questions in the interview guide will need to be reviewed as it appears to investigate more along the lines of what is the impact rather than how student learn. Research data could be deeper if moderation techniques developed.” Questionnaire entry 3/5/2017 : “The data analysis process is now clear to me and that the framework analysis approach will be used as part of the case study to see how the VSPR scenarios address prior theory established from the literature.” Questionnaire entry 9/6/2017: “Understanding what I am doing and why. Have some clarity to the research process.”

A “light bulb” moment was the realization and comprehension of the applicability and fit of the research procedures being completed with the chosen research methodology. Through the insight developed, I was able to draw together separate components of the research into one unified case study creating a holistic piece of work answering the research questions and adding new knowledge.

Questionnaire entry 6/3/2017 : “The use of the case study approach really resonates and makes sense. It ties in the rest of my research and will hopefully present my findings and the thesis as a holistic piece of work.” Questionnaire entry 6/3/2017 : “I think that the approach of case study with VSPR as the case really fits with the thesis. The data will enable thick and rich description of the learning involved with VSPR and present it so that themes from the review can be utilised across the research. The data sources should help provide triangulation as required in case study research.”

Further to insight into skills and knowledge of research was the development of insight into myself evidence by self‐assurance and self‐possession, enabling me to uphold a position of clarity in challenging discussions. This reflexive questionnaire data highlight the development of awareness of and into the research and viewing myself as being capable and a growing sense of pride in being true to the data.

Questionnaire entry 6/3/2017 : “This component is really taking shape and actually feel a little proud I could pull it together.” Questionnaire entry 19/5/2017 : “I am more confident in what I am doing and the rationales for why. Have been able to hold my own over the last few weeks and feeling like I am finally coming to grips with this research thingy.”

2. DISCUSSION

The findings of this study suggest that the use of a deliberate and planned strategy through a repeated reflective questionnaire can promote reflexivity. Data indicate that this structured approach enables bringing to the surface thoughts, actions and assumptions of the researcher which reveals how the self‐commentary and internal examination of the researcher develops and its potential to influence the research. Additionally, data suggest that a repeated questionnaire can detail the specific strategies implemented that ensure trustworthiness of the research. These findings align with the position presented by Johnson et al., ( 2020 ) that highlights for reflexivity to be critical to the trustworthiness of a study; it should be an active and ongoing application throughout the study. Furthermore, the use of a thoughtful, deliberate and planned application is supported as an approach to best achieve trustworthiness (Johnson et al., 2020 ). Importantly, reflexivity, that is supported by a deliberate and planned approach, can support researcher transformation through self‐awareness and enlightenment (Narayanasamy, 2015 ).

This structured and deliberate approach recorded the thoughts, decisions, emotions and actions that produced themes and categories during the research. By using a questionnaire to promote reflexivity, assumptions about the research topic, the research and the participants were able to be questioned (Luttrell, 2019 ). This approach enabled decisions made to be openly examined (Sydor, 2019 ). It afforded the ability to distinguish factors that implicitly and explicitly influenced the research which is important in reflexivity (Engward & Davis, 2015 ). Similarly, the organization and construction of the data were able to be interrogated with interpretations of data collected examined (Engward & Davis, 2015 ).

Interestingly, inherent in these findings is the importance of quarantining and observing time for the researcher to go back, reread and reflect on data to ensure findings are grounded in the data obtained. Developing and implementing a deliberately structured and methodical approach to reflexivity require the regular quarantining of time and space, both physically and mentally, for focussed reflection (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007 ). This strategy ensured that the data aligned with and were coherent with themes and categories identified (Nowell et al., 2017 ).

It is suggested that being systematic and orderly is not conducive to creative qualitative research and reflexivity (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007 ). Additionally, the concept of developing deep understanding and internalization of reflexivity appears at odds with a structured and systematic approach (Dodgson, 2019 ). However, the finding of this research indicates that deliberate repetition and practice can develop familiarity and readiness for deep thought, ensuring adequate deliberation of data and consideration of all options. This finding is supported by Dodgson ( 2019 ) who identifies it is the researcher responsibility to succinctly and clearly address issue of reflexivity in qualitative research. This approach supports conviction and strength of findings in qualitative research (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007 ).

Notably, a reflective questionnaire using the avenues of participants, audience and researcher can capture researcher emotions and thoughts on the different stakeholders during various stages of the research. Whilst it is important to track events and record actions, it is likewise important to identify the roles and personas a researcher assumes in research as part of reflexivity (Sydor, 2019 ). This approach can enable periods of negativity characterized by perplexing, unsure and disrupted thinking, to be recognized and addressed, transforming the research (McCabe & O'Connor, 2014 ). During times when negativity prevails, it is important that researchers discover new ways of actively engaged in and interpreting the data “through the practice of awareness” and actively undertake complex data analysis and synthesis (McCabe & O'Connor, 2014 ).

Finally, the insight, understanding and awareness developed through focussed reflection and deliberation enabled by a systematic and repeated reflective questionnaire permits the acknowledgement of the holistic nature of the research method, data and findings. Congruence between the research aims, methods and design affords an assessment of the strength of the research (Noyes et al., 2018 ). To produce trustworthy findings, the development of a critical consciousness in the researcher influences the strength of the research, the researcher role, along with the capability and aptitude to undertake the research (Luttrell, 2019 ). This approach to maintaining reflexivity in qualitative research can be exciting and transformative.

2.1. Strengths and limitations

The research reported in the paper provides an important contribution to establishing trustworthiness in qualitative research by offering an innovative approach to promoting reflexivity. A strength in the research reported in this paper is the attention to methodical rigour when using established data collection approaches and questionnaires, over a sustained period of time. Questionnaires are a recognized method to gain data on attitudes, values beliefs and experiences (Johnson & Christensen, 2019 ). Additionally, the data in the questionnaire represent authentic responses gathered during a time of significant data collection, analysis and synthesis.

However, caution is warranted in generalizing these findings to wider populations as like other studies using qualitative data, the findings are particular to this research. The use of a structured and deliberate approach to reflexivity is time consuming and required commitment to see the approach to conclusion. Whilst the questionnaire was developed based on literature, it did not undergo any external review or testing. Finally, it is acknowledged that the research reported in this paper represents the researcher's perspectives.

3. CONCLUSION

Using the repeated questionnaire as a deliberate and planned strategy to support reflexivity enabled examination of values, beliefs, perceptions and perspectives in the research and how they may have influenced the research. The data obtained in the questionnaire enabled strategies to be developed to ensure credibility of data, dependability of the study and confirmability of findings (Darawsheh, 2014 ). This deliberate systematic approach enabled bringing to the surface thoughts, actions and assumptions to reveal how the researcher's self‐commentary and internal examination develops and its potential to influence the research. This transparent approach to reflexivity supports transparency in the research process and promoted investigation into the construction of knowledge during the research process. The identification of effective strategies in qualitative nursing research that ensures quality research process are maintained, producing trustworthy outcomes, will assist audiences in judging the trustworthiness of research outcomes.

3.1. Impact

What problem did the study address?

Reflexivity in qualitative research is an important strategy to ensure trustworthiness of the research. However, reflexive accounts are underreported in nursing research.

What were the main findings?

The use of a questionnaire enabled and detailed the specific strategies implemented to ensure trustworthiness of the research.

Where and on whom will the research have impact?

The processes and findings reported in this paper provide useful strategies to support nurse researchers engage with reflexivity in qualitative nursing research.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No conflict of interest has been declared by the author.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Peddle, M. (2022). Maintaining reflexivity in qualitative nursing research . Nursing Open , 9 , 2908–2914. 10.1002/nop2.999 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

No funding was received to support this research. MP conceived of, designed, implemented and drafted the work presented in this manuscript. The data sets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available

Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research . Qualitative Research , 15 ( 2 ), 219–234. 10.1177/1468794112468475 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bradbury‐Jones, C. (2007). Enhancing rigour in qualitative health research: Exploring subjectivity through Peshkin's I's . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 59 ( 3 ), 290–298. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04306.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Darawsheh, W. (2014). Reflexivity in research: Promoting rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research . International Journal of Therapy & Rehabilitation , 21 ( 12 ), 560–568. 10.12968/ijtr.2014.21.12.560 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
DeTata, C. (2015). Teaching and assessing non‐technical skills . The Clinical Teacher , 12 ( 3 ), 219. 10.1111/tct.12352 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Dodgson, J. E. (2019). Reflexivity in qualitative research . Journal of Human Lactation , 35 ( 2 ), 220–222. 10.1177/0890334419830990 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Engward, H. , & Davis, G. (2015). Being reflexive in qualitative grounded theory: Discussion and application of a model of reflexivity . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 71 ( 7 ), 1530–1538. 10.1111/jan.12653 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Flick, U. (2013). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis . SAGE Publications, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/latrobe/detail.action?docID=1707694 [ Google Scholar ]
Flin, R. , O'Connor, P. , & Crichton, M. (2013). Safety at the Sharp End: A Guide to Non‐Technical Skills . Ashgate Publishing Ltd. [ Google Scholar ]
Johnson, B. , & Christensen, L. (2019). Educational Research: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 7th ed., SAGE Thousand Oaks. [ Google Scholar ]
Johnson, J. L. , Adkins, D. , & Chauvin, S. (2020). A review of the quality indicators of rigor in qualitative research . American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education , 84 ( 1 ). 10.5688/ajpe7120 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Luttrell, W. (2019). Reflexive Qualitative Research. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education . [ Google Scholar ]
McCabe, A. , & O'Connor, U. (2014). Student‐centred learning: The role and responsibility of the lecturer . Teaching in Higher Education , 19 ( 4 ), 350–359. 10.1080/13562517.2013.860111 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Narayanasamy, A. (2015). Reflexive account of unintended outcomes from spiritual care qualitative research . Journal of Research in Nursing , 20 ( 3 ), 234–248. 10.1177/1744987115578185 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Nowell, L. S. , Norris, J. M. , White, D. E. , & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria . International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 16 ( 1 ), 1609406917733847. 10.1177/1609406917733847 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Noyes, J. , Booth, A. , Flemming, K. , Garside, R. , Harden, A. , Lewin, S. , Pantoja, T. , Hannes, K. , Cargo, M. , & Thomas, J. (2018). Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series—paper 3: Methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings . Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , 97 , 49–58. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.020 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice , Fourth ed. SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—one's own . Educational Researcher , 17 ( 7 ), 17–21. 10.3102/0013189X017007017 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Sydor, A. (2019). An interpretative phenomenological analysis of young men’s experiences of addressing their sexual health and the importance of researcher reflexivity . Journal of Research in Nursing , 24 ( 1–2 ), 36–46. 10.1177/1744987118818865 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

COMMENTS

On "Reflexivity" in Qualitative Research: Two Readings, and a Third
Reflexivity has become a signal topic in contemporary discussions of qualitative research, especially in educational studies. It shows two general inflections in the literature. Positional ...
On "Reflexivity" in Qualitative Research: Two Readings, and a Third
Abstract. Reflexivity has become a signal topic in contemporary discussions of qualitative research, especially in educational studies. It shows two general inflections in the literature. Positional reflexivity leads the analyst to examine place, biography, self, and other to understand how they shape the analytic exercise.
PDF Qualitative Inquiry
On ''Reflexivity'' in Qualitative Research: Two Readings, and a Third Published by: ... reflexivity in qualitative resear ch, Iwant to characterize and critically discuss
Full article: A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research
Qualitative research relies on nuanced judgements that require researcher reflexivity, yet reflexivity is often addressed superficially or overlooked completely during the research process. In this AMEE Guide, we define reflexivity as a set of continuous, collaborative, and multifaceted practices through which researchers self-consciously ...
Challenging perspectives: Reflexivity as a critical approach to
In qualitative research, reflexivity has become a means of understanding knowledge production. The process involves reflecting on the knowledge that researchers produce and their role in producing that knowledge (Braun and Clarke, 2013).Since qualitative social sciences challenge the dominance of realism: 'There are no objective observations, only observations situated in the worlds of the ...
A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No
In this AMEE Guide, we define reflexivity as a set of continuous, collaborative, and multifaceted practices through which researchers self-consciously critique, appraise, and evaluate how their subjectivity and context influence the research processes. We frame reflexivity as a way to embrace and value researchers' subjectivity.
PDF The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods
Reflexivity can be broadly described as qualitative researchers' engagement of continuous examination and explanation of how they have influenced a research project. It plays a key role in many types of qualitative methodologies, including feminist research, participatory action research, ethnographies, and hermeneutic and poststructural ...
(PDF) A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE
In this AMEE. Guide, we define reflex ivity as a set of continuous, co llaborative, and multiface ted practices. through which researcher s self-consciously critique, app raise, and evaluate how ...
Reflexivity and Positionality in Qualitative Research: On Being an
There is an ever-growing literature on reflexivity in social scientific research (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992; Bourke, 2014; Clifford & Marcus, 1986; Coffey, 1999; Pels, 2000; Reed, 2011).Between 2006 and 2012 110 articles were published annually with the term reflexivity in either the title or the abstract (Caron, 2013, p. 1).It is difficult to provide a single working definition of reflexivity ...
On "Reflexivity" in Qualitative Research: Two Readings, and a Third
Reflexivity has become a signal topic in contemporary discussions of qualitative research, especially in educational studies. It shows two general inflections in the literature. Positional reflexivity leads the analyst to examine place, biography, self, and other to understand how they shape the analytic exercise. Textual reflexivity leads the analyst to examine and then disrupt the very ...
Championing "reflexivities".
In this introductory article, the author offers readers a choice of editorials. Readers can start with the column on the left (the standard academic editorial) or on the right (a more personal accounting of the author's editorial decision-making). Or they could supplement their reading of one by looking across at the alternate section. And the author is curious about readers' response.
Reflexivity in Qualitative Research
All qualitative research is contextual; it occurs within a specific time and place between two or more people. If a researcher clearly describes the contextual intersecting relationships between the participants and themselves (reflexivity), it not only increases the creditability of the findings but also deepens our understanding of the work.
Chapter 6. Reflexivity
Reflexivity "generally involves the self-examination of how research findings were produced, and, particularly, the role of the researcher in their construction" ( Heaton 2004:104 ). There are many aspects of being reflexive. First, there is the simple fact that we are human beings with the limitations that come with that condition.
PDF OpenResearchOnline
processes of reflexivity in qualitative psychological research. Using examples from psychological, feminist and transdisciplinary research, we trace a path around the significance of reflexivity in the identification and selection of a research topic and through designing, conducting, and writing up the research report.
Maintaining reflexivity in qualitative nursing research
1. INTRODUCTION. Reflexivity is the process of reflecting critically on oneself as a researcher (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007) and is central to the construction of knowledge in qualitative research (Narayanasamy, 2015).It requires the process of knowledge construction to be the subject of investigation (Flick, 2013).Reflexivity assists researchers to consider their "continuing engagement with ...
Now I see it, now I don't: researcher's position and reflexivity in
Gerstl-Pepin C, Patrizion K (2009) Learning from Dumbledore Pensive: metaphor as an aid in teaching reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research 9: 299-308. ... On reflexivity in qualitative research: two readings, and a third. Qualitative Inquiry 7: 35-68. Crossref. Google Scholar. Mason J (1996) Qualitative Researching ...
(PDF) Researcher Reflexivity
On "reﬂ exivity" in qualitative research: Two readings, and a third. ... implement the notion of research reflexivity (see Lillis, this book) and thus place researchers at the forefront of ...
PDF Third Edition Reflexive Methodology
Criteria for qualitative research 366 Some recent views 366 Empirical material as argument 369 Criteria for empirical research 370 Richness in points 372 Reflexive interpretation and relativism 374 Metaphors for research 376 Two kinds of emphasis in reflexive research 380 Identifying and challenging assumptions: reflexive problematization 382 1.
Ethical Mindfulness and Reflexivity: Managing a Research Relationship
Reflexivity in the research process: Psychoanalytic observations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(3), 181-197. Crossref. Google Scholar. Coffey A. (1999). ... (2001). On "reflexivity' in qualitative research: Two readings and a third. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 35-68. Crossref. Google Scholar. Mauthner N. S., Doucet A ...
Full article: Positionality and reflexivity: negotiating insider
Positionality and reflexivity. Positionality describes a researcher's worldview and standpoint when conducting research (Rowe Citation 2014).It is the broader social and political contexts that affect interpersonal relations and qualitative research processes (Savin-Baden and Major Citation 2013).It also refers to where a researcher stands in relation to their research participants and ...
Maintaining reflexivity in qualitative nursing research
1 INTRODUCTION. Reflexivity is the process of reflecting critically on oneself as a researcher (Bradbury-Jones, 2007) and is central to the construction of knowledge in qualitative research (Narayanasamy, 2015).It requires the process of knowledge construction to be the subject of investigation (Flick, 2013).Reflexivity assists researchers to consider their "continuing engagement with ...