reflexivity statement qualitative research example

Know Thyself: How to Write a Reflexivity Statement

More self-awareness will help you on your path to being a better psychologist..

Posted May 22, 2018 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan

• What Is a Career
• Find a career counsellor near me

Physicists have known for decades that the process of observing and measuring phenomena changes those very phenomena—the so-called “observer effect." It does not even matter whether the “observer” is a human or some mechanical apparatus—there is an unavoidable impact on what is being measured, even at the quantum level. Further, the more watching, the greater the effect.

Social scientists know that researchers can affect outcomes too. This is the reason for double-blind studies because it turns out that experimenters can unconsciously give cues to participants and bias study results. This is one way to create a placebo effect .

Really, despite how incredibly well-known these researcher effects are, it’s kind of remarkable the extent to which social scientists still adopt the cloak of objectivity. The cloak of objectivity basically involves pretending that pure, objective reason guides every aspect of psychological research—the choice of topic, the research questions, the measures, the analyses, the interpretation.

In some circles, it is so important to maintain this charade of impartiality that we even avoid using pronouns in our sentences. We say things such as “the surveys were administered” in a way that suggests that humans were not the actors passing out the surveys. (As an aside, disguising the role of researchers through the extensive use of passive tense is also one reason why so many research articles are so difficult and dull to read.)

In research on social problems, we can be particularly sensitive about the issue of neutrality. “Advocacy research” is hurled like a slur at people who study violence, who—shocking!—are openly against violence.

I’ve always found this to be especially ridiculous. Researchers are not typically neutral about their topics. The cancer researcher is not neutral about whether a new drug makes a tumor shrink or grow. The rocket scientist is not neutral about whether the rocket reaches the moon.

We need to abandon the cloak of objectivity. Social scientists are part of the social contexts that they study. A physicist may create an artificial vacuum in the lab (and still not be fully immune from the observer effect), but social science has never and will never exist in a vacuum.

Social scientists cannot step outside of culture, nor their place in history. We cannot get “outside” of the phenomena we are attempting to study. Or, more pithily, “wherever you go, there you are.” 1 Awareness of your place in the social-cultural context can help keep you from inadvertently reinforcing harmful hierarchies or social dynamics.

However, lack of objectivity is not just a problem, it is also an opportunity. For decades, feminist and post-modern scholars have encouraged researchers to acknowledge their cultural, political and social context, and to “reflect on” (hence the term “reflexivity”) the ways that these contexts influence research and scholarship.

One way to do that is by preparing and disseminating a reflexivity statement (also sometimes called a positionality statement ). Reflexivity statements are becoming more common. My team and I were required to prepare a reflexivity statement for a recent foundation grant, and I was recently encouraged to include one in a peer-reviewed journal article.

In addition to the influence of your social position with respect to gender, race, age, sexual orientation and other characteristics, your own values, ethics , and training affect how you conduct research as well.

All of these can be strengths—they may give you unique insights that others do not have and are part of what you have to contribute as a scientist or scholar. However, they can be weaknesses as well, and you may be making assumptions or not noticing aspects of the phenomenon you are studying. More awareness can help you make use of the strengths and minimize weaknesses.

Although you may want to prepare a reflexivity statement that is customized for every project (for example, here’s one I prepared for a project that focused on boys and men or color) , it can also be helpful to have a more general one that reflects who you are as a researcher.

Key Questions

The personal characteristics that define your social position.

Start with the basics. In a lot of mainstream professional settings, it can feel pretty radical just to acknowledge your basic social position, such as something like “I am a white, upper-middle class, cisgender, straight, non-disabled female.”

If that feels like an incredibly strong statement to include in a research article, then you have had your first glimpse of how bound you are by professional conventions. As the saying goes, “This is water.” You are swimming in social conventions all the time, even when you are conducting science, and it can be hard to realize that.

Once you have acknowledged these characteristics, you can start to ponder their meaning for your work. How are your personal characteristics sources of power and privilege, or, alternatively, marginalization and disadvantage?

Many of us have a mix of characteristics, some of which confer privilege, others marginalization. What does the recognition of the power that you have mean for your work? How can you take steps to make sure that you don’t reinforce the social context from which you come in your work?

Ask yourself: What characteristics orient you in society? Age, gender, race (as a social construct), sexual orientation, gender identity , social class, and health status are some of the key characteristics that will situate almost everyone in their broader social context.

How do you define yourself? Has that changed over time? Has your awareness of the impact of these characteristics changed over time? Think about how your characteristics may confer power, privilege, or marginalization and ways characteristics can “intersect” with each other to create your unique viewpoint.

The settings where you grew up and relevant family information.

For me, it feels a little easier to acknowledge some historical facts about my upbringing, perhaps because these are more commonly discussed in casual conversation between acquaintances. These are also important to understand as sources of potential insights and potential blindspots.

In my case, I grew up in the south, have been living in Appalachia for 10 years, and have multi-generational roots in Appalachia and in the southern U.S. more broadly. I have spent most of my adult life living in rural areas and small towns. My father went to college on the GI bill and became the first person in his family to get a college education . I was the first person to get a graduate degree (my sister was the second).

I think this history is one of the reasons that I have focused a lot of my work on marginalized and disadvantaged communities. My background has also given me “code-switching” skills—or the ability to shift language, dialect, or other communication features from one setting to another, as I learned to navigate the working-class Southern culture of my extended family and the professional classes of the Washington, D.C .suburbs where I grew up after my father’s engineering degree took him to NASA.

Code-switching is an under-appreciated skill and one that I have used to try to bring the perspectives of marginalized people to a more prominent place in research. See for example, this article on Appalachian resistance to modern technology.

More recently, but no less significantly, becoming a parent had a profound impact on the ways that I see many aspects of dealing with adversity and navigating social services.

For example, when I first started working in domestic violence , many shelters did not take male children, even as young as age 6. Adolescent sons are still not welcome in some settings. Still, I used to encourage women to consider these options, for their own safety.

However, now, as the mother of an adolescent son, I realize I would never leave him alone in a dangerous environment. When I was a young professional without a family of my own, I had a blind spot about parenthood that I had not recognized. Becoming a parent has fundamentally changed the ways that I think about many aspects of coping with family violence.

Ask yourself: How did your early childhood experiences affect your career choices? Your scholarship choices? How has your upbringing and positionality influenced the opportunities available to you? As you think about your own course of development over the lifespan, have these impacts changed as you have moved through adolescence , young adulthood, middle adulthood, and late adulthood?

The frame offered by your discipline or institution.

Whenever I go to the American Psychological Association convention, I have the constant experience of thinking I see someone I know out of the corner of my eye. I have many colleagues outside of psychology and consider my work multidisciplinary, but these trips to APA always remind me of how much of a psychologist I am. Or, even more specifically, a clinical psychologist.

My colleagues and I have manners of dressing, walking, and expressing ourselves that reflect our training as clinicians. More cardigans than blazers, and those cardigans reflect a worldview as much as a sartorial choice.

On the positive side, my clinical training helps keep me focused on application of research. How can people use the latest scientific findings? What do providers need to know? On the negative side, psychology has a tendency to be too focused on individuals and not social systems, and I still struggle with having to remind myself to look at systems and not just people.

Recognizing and acknowledging the professional lens through which you approach any given research question is also part of self-awareness.

Related to this will be the specifics of any given project. Did you choose qualitative or quantitative methods (or both)? Are you relying on self-report, observation, official records, medical tests, or other measures? Are you focusing on a specific age group or another subgroup in the population?

All of these choices will affect the kind of information you obtain and what you end up thinking are the answers to your research questions. Qualitative researchers are used to justifying their approach in papers, but it is something that all researchers could benefit from.

Ask yourself: What does it mean to see your research questions through the lens of your discipline, whether it be psychology, social work, public health, medicine, law, criminal justice, or something else? Are there ways that your research or scholarship methods affect the information that you gain or create potential blind spots in your work? How are these conventions upholding the status quo or reinforcing the privileges of people in positions of power and influence? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these professional lenses?

Professional Spaces Versus Therapeutic Spaces

Finally, one last issue to consider is navigating the boundary between professional and therapeutic spaces and deciding how personal to get.

The most important thing to remember is that you are entitled to control your own narrative. You are not obligated to make any disclosures you do not want to make, nor are you obligated to keep silent about issues that you want to address.

In reflexivity or positionality statements, people often mention where they grew up, but seldom go into details about their parents’ divorce . There’s a balance there. You do not have to sacrifice your professional persona in order to be reflective about what you are bringing to the work as a real-life person.

It is also important that you not use these statements as a substitute for any healing that you need—these are for research, not therapy .

As a poly -victimization researcher, I have learned that virtually everyone who survives to adulthood will eventually experience adversity. In our samples, it typically runs 98 to 100 percent of the sample reporting at least one significant adversity, and more than 8 out of 10 report some form of victimization, especially when one includes childhood bullying , property crime , and other widespread offenses.

There is also the very real issue of stigma , and it is important to be intentional about the choices you make regarding disclosing potentially stigmatizing information, such as a history of trauma . As we have recently seen in the #metoo movement and also others before it, it can be powerful to disclose, especially with others’ support, but it can also be risky.

For example, some of my recent work focuses explicitly on Appalachia, and I have experienced a lot more stereotyping when I talk about having roots in that community—from questions about my lack of accent (see the code-switching skills noted above) to one professor’s total surprise that I had (of all things) the same Fitbit as her (as if people from Appalachia can’t access or afford modern technology).

Most reflexivity statements focus on more public sorts of information—the sort of information that many of your acquaintances or casual friends might know about you. However, that can depend on the setting. In Indian country, for example, where I have worked some, more personal disclosures are the norm and I often disclose a lot more about the details of my own history in those settings than I do elsewhere.

Ask yourself: How do you want to control your narrative? What would you like people to know about you? What are the advantages and disadvantages around particular disclosures? Are there different settings where different levels of disclosure make sense? (Be aware that your choices for disclosure may not work for someone else, even in the same setting.) Are there ways that you can use your social capital and/or professional privilege to help you navigate disclosures about adversity or marginalization? This is how I see my current work in Appalachia—as a chance to use my professional privilege to push back against common stereotypes. (On a somewhat different topic, it is also worth thinking about ways that you can use your own social capital or professional privilege to help others who are more marginalized or disadvantaged.)

Conclusions and Implications

It can be a very powerful experience to prepare a reflexivity (aka positionality) statement—one that tells your professional autobiography and how you came to be the researcher you are today. A longer statement, of approximately three to five pages, can give you space to really explore some of these issues.

I have personally found it to be a powerful professional and personal exercise to write a detailed reflexivity statement. Sometimes, only a brief reflexivity statement is warranted in the space available. An example of a shorter one is below.

Once you have written it, there are several steps you can take to put it to use. In addition to simple acknowledgment, the statement might give you ideas about alternative research questions or measures.

Consider research methods, such as community-based participatory research (CBPR) that include the voices of participants as stakeholders and more explicitly recognize researchers as part of the context of any project. Reach out to colleagues who have a range of characteristics, and make sure you do not unintentionally only find yourself collaborating with people who are very similar to you in key personal, social, or educational characteristics.

Examples and Resources

Here’s a recent example of a brief reflexivity statement included in a peer-reviewed article in a prominent communications journal .

This research is based in the Appalachian Center for Resilience Research (ACRR), which seeks to improve the study of this unique region of the country. Not only is Appalachia understudied, but much of its portrayal is still governed by stereotypes. The ACRR mission is to present a more evidence-based portrayal of the region. The first three authors were residents of the community when the study was conducted. S.H. has multigenerational roots in Appalachia. She has spent most of her adult life in rural communities and has lived on the Cumberland Plateau, in the southernmost region of Appalachia, for nine years. E.T. and A.S. are newer residents of the area, who came for work and school (respectively). E.T. had lived in the area for two years and A.S. for four years at the time of the study. Both were raised in the southern United States. K.M. and L.J. are experts in online behavior and are from New England. This is their first study based in Appalachia.

Thanks to Martha Dinwiddie for her comments on an earlier draft of this article.

© 2018 Sherry Hamby. All rights reserved.

1 The origin of the quote “Wherever you go, there you are” is much debated online, with a popular reference in the cult classic movie Buckaroo Banzai getting many mentions, but the original source appears to be Thomas à Kempis, ca 1420, in the devotional entitled The Imitation of Christ . A best seller for six centuries, it has numerous passages that can appeal to many people seeking insight and wisdom, whether or not they are particularly religious. (p 49, William Creasy translation, Mercer University Press, 1989/2007).

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has a good website with an overview of reflexivity . Here’s another example that is not behind a paywall.

In an early article on reflexivity , Sue Wilkinson (1988) described three types: personal, functional, and disciplinary. Each of these entails analyzing the particular lens that is brought to a problem. Personal reflexivity explores the lens related to the identity and experiences of the researcher. Functional reflexivity explores how the form and nature of the specific study impacts the knowledge that is obtained, while “disciplinary” reflexivity explores the impact of approaching an issue from a specific field of inquiry.

Sherry Hamby, Ph.D. , is a research professor of psychology at Sewanee, the University of the South.

• Find Counselling
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United Kingdom
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

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.

Further Readings

Barry, Christine A., Nicky Britten, Nick Barbar, Colin Bradley, and Fiona Stevenson. 1999. “Using Reflexivity to Optimize Teamwork in Qualitative Research.”  Qualitative Health Research  9(1):26–44. The coauthors explore what it means to be reflexive in a collaborative research project and use their own project investigating doctor-patient communication about prescribing as an example.

Hsiung, Ping-Chun. 2008. “Teaching Reflexivity in Qualitative Interviewing.” Teaching Sociology 36(3):211–226. As the title suggests, this article is about teaching reflexivity to those conducting interviews.

Kenway, Jane, and Julie McLeod. 2004. “Bourdieu’s Reflexive Sociology and ‘Spaces of Points of View’: Whose Reflexivity, Which Perspective?” British Journal of Sociology of Education 25(4):525–544. For a more nuanced understanding of Bourdieu’s meaning of reflexivity and how this contrasts with other understandings of the term in sociology.

Kleinsasser, Audrey M. 2000. “Researchers, Reflexivity, and Good Data: Writing to Unlearn.” Theory into Practice 39(3):155–162. Argues for the necessity of reflexivity for the production of “good data” in qualitative research.

Linabary, Jasmine R., and Stephanie A. Hamel. 2017. “Feminist Online Interviewing: Engaging Issues of Power, Resistance and Reflexivity in Practice.” Feminist Review 115:97–113. Proposes “reflexive email interviewing” as a promising method for feminist research.

Rabbidge, Michael. 2017. “Embracing Reflexivity: The Importance of Not Hiding the Mess.” TESOL Quarterly 51(4):961–971. The title here says it all.

Wacquant, Loïc J. D. 1989. “Towards a Reflexive Sociology: A Workshop with Pierre Bourdieu.” Sociological Theory 7(1):26–63. A careful examination of Bourdieu’s notion of reflexivity by one of his most earnest disciples.

• Someone might ask me if I have truly been able to “stand” in the shoes of more privileged students and if I might be overlooking similarities among college students because of my “biased” standpoint. These are questions I ask myself all the time. They have even motivated me to conduct my latest research on college students in general so that I might check my observations that working-class college students are uniquely burdened ( Hurst 2019 ). One of the things I did find was that middle-class students, relative to upper-class students, are also relatively disadvantaged and sometimes experience (feel) that disadvantage. ↵
• Unless, of course, one is engaged in autoethnography! Even in that case, however, the point of the study should probably be about a larger phenomenon or experience that can be understood more deeply through insights that emerge in the study of the particular self, not really a study about that self. ↵
• I mentioned Pierre Bourdieu earlier in the chapter. For those who want to know more about his work, I’ve included this advanced section. Undergraduates should feel free to skip over. ↵

The practice of being conscious of and reflective upon one’s own social location and presence when conducting research.  Because qualitative research often requires interaction with live humans, failing to take into account how one’s presence and prior expectations and social location affect the data collected and how analyzed may limit the reliability of the findings.  This remains true even when dealing with historical archives and other content.  Who we are matters when asking questions about how people experience the world because we, too, are a part of that world.

The branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge.  For researchers, it is important to recognize and adopt one of the many distinguishing epistemological perspectives as part of our understanding of what questions research can address or fully answer.  See, e.g., constructivism , subjectivism, and  objectivism .

A statement created by the researcher declaring their own social position (often in terms of race, class, gender) and social location (e.g., junior scholar or tenured professor) vis-à-vis the research subjects or focus of study, with the goal of explaining and thereby limiting any potential biases or impacts of such position on data analyses, findings, or other research results.  See also reflexivity .

Reliability is most often explained as consistency and stability in a research instrument, as in a weight scale, deemed reliable if predictable and accurate (e.g., when you put a five-pound bag of rice on the scale on Tuesday, it shows the same weight as when you put the same unopened bag on the scale Wednesday).  Qualitative researchers don’t measure things in the same way, but we still must ensure that our research is reliable, meaning that if others were to conduct the same interview using our interview guide, they would get similar answers.  This is one reason that reflexivity is so important to the reliability of qualitative research – we have to take steps to ensure that our own presence does not “tip the scales” in one direction or another or that, when it does, we can recognize that and make corrections.  Qualitative researchers use a variety of tools to help ensure reliability, from intercoder reliability to triangulation to reflexivity.

In mostly quantitative research, validity refers to “the extent to which an empirical measure adequately reflects the real meaning of the concept under consideration” ( Babbie 1990 ). For qualitative research purposes, practically speaking, a study or finding is valid when we are measuring or addressing what we think we are measuring or addressing.  We want our representations to be accurate, as they really are, and not an artifact of our imaginations or a result of unreflected bias in our thinking.

A method of ensuring trustworthiness where the researcher shares aspects of written analysis (codes, summaries, drafts) with participants before the final write-up of the study to elicit reactions and/or corrections.   Note that the researcher has the final authority on the interpretation of the data collected; this is not a way of substituting the researcher’s analytical responsibilities.  See also peer debriefing . 

The process of strengthening a study by employing multiple methods (most often, used in combining various qualitative methods of data collection and analysis).  This is sometimes referred to as data triangulation or methodological triangulation (in contrast to investigator triangulation or theory triangulation).  Contrast mixed methods .

Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods Copyright © 2023 by Allison Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Melbourne Medical School

• Our Departments
• Medical Education
• Qualitative journeys

Reflexivity

Reflexivity is about acknowledging your role in the research. As a qualitative researcher, you are part of the research process, and your prior experiences, assumptions and beliefs will influence the research process. Researcher reflexivity is a type of critical reflection about the position you are taking as a researcher and how you have taken this stance into account in your research. It is an important way to establish rigour in qualitative research, similar to the processes of defining measurement tools for validity in quantitative research.

Being reflexive means being attentive to:

• Cultural, political, social, and ideological origins of your own perspective and voice.
• The perspectives and voices of those you interview or observe.
• The perspectives of those to whom you report your research.

For example, Nabreesa spoke about how her past experiences as a medical doctor and studies in public health influenced her research and interest in pursuing her research topic.

Leonie similarly referred to her experiences encountering ethical challenges in veterinary practice and how she wanted to make a difference in the ethics education for veterinarians. A small excerpt from Leonie's thesis shows how reflexivity might be included within the methods section of the research:

As a practising small animal veterinarian I was aware that when interviewing my colleagues I needed to try and remain neutral, setting aside my own views and reactions and to listen from the perspective of a researcher. It was however difficult for me to be totally objective and to set aside my personal experience, and thus taking an insider position.

In discussing how he developed his survey questions, Cameron also illustrated an example of researcher reflexivity (acknowledging his experience in simulation education influencing the development of the survey questions):

I initially devised the survey questions based on my experience of simulation education teaching. I also referred to literature about current known SBE practice.

• Watt, D. (2007). On Becoming a Qualitative Researcher: The Value of Reflexivity. Qualitative Report, 12(1), 82-101. Retrieved from http://go.unimelb.edu.au/dm56
• Hiller, A. J., & Vears, D. F. (2016). Reflexivity and the clinician-researcher: managing participant misconceptions. Qualitative Research Journal, 16(1), 13-25 .
• Gillam, L., & Guillemin, M. (2018) Overcoming mistrust between Research Ethics Committees and Researchers. In Iphofen, R., & Tolich, M. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics (pp. 263-276). London, UK: Sage.
• Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences
• Baker Department of Cardiometabolic Health
• Clinical Pathology
• Critical Care
• General Practice and Primary Care
• Infectious Diseases
• Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Newborn Health
• Paediatrics
• Rural Health
• News & Events
• Medical Research Projects by Theme
• Department Research Overviews
• General Practice
• Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Graduate Research
• Medical Research Services
• Our Degrees
• Scholarships, Bursaries and Prizes
• Our Short Courses
• Current Student Resources
• Melbourne Medical Electives
• Welcome from the School Head
• Honorary Appointments
• MMS Staff Hub
• Current Students

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Br Paramed J
• v.7(2); 2022 Sep 1

Identity, positionality and reflexivity: relevance and application to research paramedics

Caitlin wilson.

University of Leeds; North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9854-4289

Gillian Janes

Manchester Metropolitan University ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1609-5898

Julia Williams

South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust; University of Hertfordshire ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0796-5465

This article introduces the reader to the concepts of identity, positionality and reflexivity and outlines their relevance to research paramedics. We outline how a researcher’s identity and positionality can influence all aspects of research, including the research question, study design, data collection and data analysis. We discuss that the ‘insider’ position of paramedics conducting research with other paramedics or within their specific clinical setting has considerable benefits to participant access, understanding of data and dissemination, while highlighting the difficulties of role duality and power dynamics. While positionality is concerned with the researcher clearly stating their assumptions relating to the research topic, the research design, context and process, as well as the research participants; reflexivity involves the researcher questioning their assumptions and finding strategies to address these. The researcher must reflect upon the way the research is carried out and explain to the reader how they moved through the research processes to reach certain conclusions, with the aim of producing a trustworthy and honest account of the research. Throughout this article, we provide examples of how these concepts have been considered and applied by a research paramedic while conducting their PhD research studies within a pre-hospital setting, to illustrate how they can be applied practically.

Introduction

Positionality and reflexivity are concepts that are discussed in great detail in research methods literature and are widely acknowledged to be an important consideration when planning and conducting research ( Huberman & Miles, 2002 ; Savin-Baden & Major, 2013 ). However, in the limited body of evidence pertaining to paramedic research methods, these concepts are only briefly mentioned ( Williams, 2012 ). We found several examples of positionality statements and reflexivity considerations in published articles and masters/doctoral theses by paramedics conducting research ( Eaton-Williams et al., 2020 ; Horrocks, 2020 ; Mausz et al., 2022 ; Whitley, 2020 ; Wolff, 2019 ). Often these statements and discussions vary in the detail provided, with many paramedic research outputs not including any discussions around the researcher’s positionality and reflexivity. This may be due to the stringent word count limits of journal articles but could also indicate a limited understanding or lack of awareness of these complex concepts among paramedics conducting research.

Increasingly, we are seeing articles by clinician-researchers and clinical academics in nursing and the allied health professions highlighting the relevance and applicability of identity, positionality and reflexivity to their respective professions ( Hiller & Vears, 2016 ; Hunt et al., 2011 ; Marshall & Edgley, 2015 ; McNair et al., 2008 ). The aim of this article is to outline the relevance of identity, positionality and reflexivity to research paramedics by offering a definition and explanation of these concepts, including illustrated examples of how they have been applied by the lead author during their PhD research studies.

Definitions

In this article, identity refers to professional identity, which is a dynamic concept describing how an individual perceives themselves within their occupational context and how they communicate this to others ( Neary, 2014 ). Although not clearly defined in the literature, professional identity encompasses the ability to perform profession-specific functions, have profession-specific knowledge, identify with a community of practice and act in accordance with the values and ethics of the profession ( Fitzgerald, 2020 ).

Positionality refers to the position a researcher has chosen to adopt within a given research study ( Savin-Baden & Major, 2013 ). It necessitates the researcher consciously examining their own identity to allow the reader to assess the effect of their personal characteristics and perspectives in relation to the study population, the topic under study and the research process.

Reflexivity is a form of critical thinking that involves addressing the issues of identity and positionality by making the researcher’s assumptions explicit and finding strategies to question these ( Lazard & McAvoy, 2017 ). The researcher must reflect upon the way research is carried out and explain to the reader how they moved through the research processes to reach certain conclusions, with the aim of producing a more trustworthy and honest account of the research ( Corlett & Mavin, 2018 ).

The processes and connections between identity, positionality and reflexivity have been summarised visually in Figure 1 .

Research paradigms and methodologies

The concepts of positionality and reflexivity are most frequently mentioned in connection with qualitative research and particularly within the critical theories paradigm, where researchers are encouraged to be aware of their position and the way this shapes the production and interpretation of knowledge ( Kincheloe & McLaren, 2008 ). Qualitative research involves a complex interaction between the researcher and the research subject, in which the researcher’s relationship with participants and the research process influences the findings ( Pelias, 2011 ).

However, increasingly it is being acknowledged that researchers’ positionality plays a role across the whole range of research paradigms, including quantitative and mixed-methods research ( Knoblauch, 2021 ; Walker et al., 2013 ). Jafar (2018) argues that all researchers direct their research based on countless factors and that leaving out the positionality of the research team and context deprives the reader of the opportunity to determine how important these factors might be. Within this article, we have taken the stance that identity, positionality and reflexivity are important concepts for researchers to understand regardless of which research paradigm they align themselves with; although, the specific nuances and applications may vary.

Interactive workshop

In preparation for this article, we conducted an interactive workshop on research paramedic identity, positionality and reflexivity at the College of Paramedics Annual International Research Conference on 29 November 2021. The online workshop lasted for 45 min and was facilitated by CW and JW. The number of attendees fluctuated throughout the workshop from eight to 12, with the majority being from the United Kingdom and holding a dual role of paramedic and early career researcher. Definitions of ‘early career researcher’ vary in the literature, but we are using this term to describe individuals in the transition phase from being a post-graduate student to becoming an independent senior researcher. Workshop attendees were presented with some of the information discussed in this article and invited to share their experiences relating to identity, positionality and reflexivity.

Workshop attendees were informed of the facilitators’ intention to write a journal article on this topic and invited to share any concerns regarding this at the time or by contacting the facilitators via the provided email address. However, no concerns were raised. While writing the journal article, we have referred at times to the collective experience of the workshop attendees to aid explanation and demonstrate relevance; however, we have not included verbatim quotes or individual stories consistent with a research study and therefore did not require ethical approval, as this is a methodological discussion article.

The paramedic profession

The paramedic profession has undergone significant change in the United Kingdom and internationally, with many countries now offering paramedic registration and academic pathways to becoming a paramedic ( McCann & Granter, 2019 ; Reed et al., 2019 ). A recent global Delphi study provided a definition of paramedicine, which acknowledged paramedics’ specialist skillset and wide range of potential working locations ( Williams et al., 2021 ). Despite this variety, paramedics – including student paramedics – have been found to have a strong and positive image of their professional identity ( Eaton et al., 2021 ; Johnston & Bilton, 2020 ; Lloyd-Jones, 2015 ).

The research on paramedic identity is a welcome development following a paper by O’Meara (2011) which emphasised the need for paramedics to examine their role and place in society. This establishment of a true professional identity for paramedics is thought to facilitate the development of paramedics’ own research base ( Rosser, 2012 ), which raises questions about what we should call paramedics who conduct research.

Research paramedics

Research is a recognised career pathway for paramedics which is increasingly gaining popularity. The concept of identity is especially important for paramedics conducting research because the identity of the researcher informs every aspect of the research process – from guiding research questions to the collection and analysis of data ( Castelló et al., 2021 ).

However, there does not appear to be a consensus regarding the terminology used for paramedics who conduct research. Our workshop attendees from the United Kingdom utilised the term ‘research paramedic’, but this did not appear to be commonplace in other countries, where descriptive phrases such as ‘paramedic and researcher’ and ‘paramedic who does research’ were used. Depending on an individual’s job description and daily tasks, terms such as ‘paramedic research fellow’ or ‘paramedic lecturer’ were felt to provide a more accurate picture. The term ‘clinical academic’ was also used, which was believed to potentially translate better when communicating with people from a medical background or drawing parallels with clinical academics from other allied health professions.

A similar dilemma is faced by paramedics making the transition to academia, where the term ‘no man’s land of professional identity’ ( Munro et al., 2018 , p. 33) is used to describe paramedic academics struggling to fuse their paramedic and academic identities. The difficulties surrounding the transition experience from clinician to academic, as well as the boundary-spanning role of clinical academics, have also been described for nursing and allied health professionals ( Kluijtmans et al., 2017 ; Murray et al., 2014 ). In addition to ‘clinical academic’, research-active healthcare professionals are sometimes referred to as ‘clinician-researchers’ or ‘clinician-scientists’ in the broader literature ( Kluijtmans et al., 2017 ; Newington et al., 2022 ).

A personal account of the corresponding author’s difficulty in describing her identity as a paramedic and a researcher is provided in Table 1 .

Illustrated example – identity.

Positionality

Definition and relevance to research.

In order for the reader to assess the effect of the researcher’s identity on the research process and results, researchers must account for the identity they have chosen to adopt within a given research study, known as positionality ( Savin-Baden & Major, 2013 ). Positionality is normally identified by locating the researcher’s position in relationship to three areas: the topic under investigation; the research participants; and the research design, context and process ( Holmes, 2020 ). However, positionality is not only affected by the position the researcher themselves chooses to adopt but also by the way they are positioned by others ( Arber, 2006 ). This includes study participants, gatekeepers and other collaborators in the research.

Insider, outsider or in-betweener

Researcher positionality is commonly discussed in the literature as a clear distinction between insider (emic) and outsider (etic) perspectives ( Huberman & Miles, 2002 ). Insiders are considered part of the community within which they are conducting research while outsiders are considered to be outside of the group they are studying. Some scholars warn against this binary distinction, arguing instead that insider and outsider perspectives are two ends of a positionality continuum along which researchers move back and forth during the research process in a dynamic, continuous way ( Arber, 2006 ). Others have argued for the concept of an ‘in-betweener’ researcher, who identifies as neither entirely inside or outside ( Chhabra, 2020 ; Milligan, 2014 ).

Conducting research as an insider, for example a paramedic conducting research on or with paramedics within their specific clinical setting, has the advantage that the researcher is already immersed in the organisation and has built up knowledge of the organisation ( Brannick & Coghlan, 2007 ). Consequently, access to participants may be easier when interviewing other paramedics or people known to the researcher in a professional context ( Chew-Graham et al., 2002 ). During data collection, participants may be less cautious or guarded than they would be with an outsider researcher, resulting in more genuine data ( Chew-Graham et al., 2002 ).

However, prior knowledge can affect the way that the researcher is perceived, the information that participants provide and the analysis of those data ( Chew-Graham et al., 2002 ). Participants may assume that the insider researcher sees things the way they do because of their common profession, or may even seek to impress or agree with the researcher based on their perceived connection ( Chew-Graham et al., 2002 ).

The role duality experienced by clinicians and researchers who are acting as ‘double agents’ ( Yanos & Ziedonis, 2006 , p. 249) raises questions around power dynamics, as participants may be concerned about giving the right answers ( Wiles et al., 2006 ). The researcher should continually reflect upon which position they are adopting throughout the research and how this may influence data collection and analysis. An illustrated example of this is provided in Table 2 .

Illustrated example – positionality.

Reflexivity

Purpose and process.

Addressing the issues of researcher identity and positionality requires reflexivity throughout the planning and conducting of a research study, in order to produce a trustworthy and honest account ( Probst, 2015 ). Reflexivity involves the researcher building on the recognised and clearly stated assumptions (i.e. identity and positionality), by questioning and addressing these assumptions using strategies pertaining to: the research topic; the research design, context and process; and the research participants.

Practical recommendations for strategies that our workshop attendees utilised to question and address their underlying assumptions were: researcher diaries; involving non-clinicians in the research project; pre-registration of the research study; respondent validation/member-checking; triangulation of data sources; and positionality statements. Other examples from the literature include using a social identity map for practising explicit positionality, debriefing with other researchers to work through problems, returning to the raw data, consulting the broader literature to situate findings in existing knowledge and practising collaborative reflexivity between team members to contribute to a multi-faceted understanding ( Jacobson & Mustafa, 2019 ; Probst, 2015 ). Specifically for pre-doctoral or doctoral clinician-researchers conducting interviews, McNair et al. (2008) suggests having experienced research supervisors, arranging pilot interviews that include active feedback on interviewing style and being reflexive during interviews.

Reflexivity versus reflective practice

Paramedics will be familiar with the concept of reflective practice; therefore, it is important to highlight how reflexivity differs from this. Reflective practice is an ongoing way of thinking, which involves the clinician looking inwards and reflecting on what they have learnt and what it means to them ( Bolton & Delderfield, 2018 ). In contrast, reflexivity is about the researcher finding strategies to question their attitudes in an outward-looking perspective, while considering the implications of what they have learnt for the wider context they work with ( Bolton & Delderfield, 2018 ; Mathers, 2019 ).

Although the strategies applied as part of reflexivity will vary according to the needs of the researcher and the research study, the principles of questioning and addressing assumptions remain the same. Rae and Green (2016) offer a useful model for supporting reflexivity in health services research, which influenced the lead author when devising the strategies to address reflexivity as part of their doctoral studies, depicted in Table 3 .

Illustrated example – reflexivity.

Conclusions

Paramedics carrying out research in their immediate clinical setting and within their broader work environment need to have an appreciation and understanding of their identity, positionality and reflexivity. We have outlined how a researcher’s identity and positionality can influence all aspects of research, including the research question, study design, data collection and data analysis. We have discussed that the insider position of paramedics conducting research with paramedics or within their specific clinical setting has considerable benefits to participant access, understanding of data and dissemination, while highlighting the difficulties of role duality and power dynamics. Pre-hospital and out-of-hospital research is a relatively novel area of clinical research, which paramedics are well-placed to pursue, given their insider position. Throughout this article, we have provided examples of how the concepts of identity, positionality and reflexivity have been considered and applied by a research paramedic while conducting their PhD research studies within the paramedic community, to illustrate how they can be practically applied.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the vital contributions made by the attendees at the interactive workshop on research paramedic identity and positionality at the College of Paramedics Annual International Research Conference 2021. CW would like to thank Greg Whitley for his assistance in refining Figure 1 , and acknowledge the support received from members of the Manchester Metropolitan University Research Methods Community of Practice led by Prof. Karen Sage and Dr. Gillian Janes, when CW presented this work in January 2022.

Author contributions

CW conceived the idea for this manuscript and drafted the initial version under guidance and supervision from GJ and JW. CW and JW hosted the interactive workshop. All authors revised the manuscript and approved the final version to be published. CW acts as the guarantor for this article.

Conflict of interest

CW and JW are on the editorial board of the BPJ .

Ethics approvals were not required for this manuscript as it is a methodological discussion article and does not constitute research according to the Health Research Authority Decision Tool. Ethics approvals were obtained for the PhD research studies referred to in this article as illustrative examples of identity, positionality and reflexivity.

This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Yorkshire and Humber Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (YHPSTRC) and an NIHR Short Placement Award for Research Collaboration (SPARC) awarded to CW. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Contributor Information

Caitlin Wilson, University of Leeds; North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9854-4289.

Gillian Janes, Manchester Metropolitan University ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1609-5898.

Julia Williams, South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust; University of Hertfordshire ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0796-5465.

• Arber A. (2006). Reflexivity: A challenge for the researcher as practitioner ? Journal of Research in Nursing , 11 ( 2 ), 147–157. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolton G. & Delderfield R. (2018). Reflective practice: Writing and professional development . SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brannick T. & Coghlan D. (2007). In defense of being ‘native’: The case for insider academic research . Organizational Research Methods , 10 ( 1 ), 59–74. [ Google Scholar ]
• Castelló M., McAlpine L., Sala-Bubaré A., Inouye K. & Skakni I. (2021). What perspectives underlie ‘researcher identity’? A review of two decades of empirical studies . Higher Education , 81 ( 3 ), 567–590. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chew-Graham C. A., May C. R. & Perry M. S. (2002). Qualitative research and the problem of judgement: Lessons from interviewing fellow professionals . Family Practice , 19 ( 3 ), 285–289. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chhabra G. (2020). Insider, outsider or an in-betweener? Epistemological reflections of a legally blind researcher on conducting cross-national disability research . Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research , 22 , 307–317. [ Google Scholar ]
• Corlett S. & Mavin S. (2018). Reflexivity and researcher positionality . In Cassell C. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative business and management research methods: History and traditions (pp. 377–398). SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eaton G., Wong G., Tierney S., Roberts N., Williams V. & Mahtani K. R. (2021). Understanding the role of the paramedic in primary care: A realist review . BMC Medicine , 19 ( 1 ), 145. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eaton-Williams P., Mold F. & Magnusson C. (2020). Exploring paramedic perceptions of feedback using a phenomenological approach . British Paramedic Journal , 5 ( 1 ), 7–14. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fitzgerald A. (2020). Professional identity: A concept analysis . Nursing Forum , 55 ( 3 ), 447–472. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hiller A. J. & Vears D. F. (2016). Reflexivity and the clinician-researcher: Managing participant misconceptions . Qualitative Research Journal , 16 ( 1 ), 13–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Holmes A. (2020). Researcher positionality. A consideration of its influence and place in qualitative research: A new researcher guide . Shanlax International Journal of Education , 8 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Horrocks P. D. (2020). Preparing Australian paramedics for effective health disaster response: Identifying core competency and a phenomenographic examination of current disaster response education [PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology] . https://eprints.qut.edu.au/202714/1/Peter_Horrocks_Thesis.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Huberman A. M. & Miles M. B. (2002). The qualitative researcher’s companion . SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hunt M. R., Chan L. S. & Mehta A. (2011). Transitioning from clinical to qualitative research interviewing . International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 10 ( 3 ), 191–201. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacobson D. & Mustafa N. (2019). Social identity map: A reflexivity tool for practicing explicit positionality in critical qualitative research . International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 18 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jafar A. J. N. (2018). What is positionality and should it be expressed in quantitative studies ? Emergency Medicine Journal , 35 ( 5 ), 323–324. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnston T. & Bilton N. (2020). Investigating paramedic student professional identity . Australasian Journal of Paramedicine , 17 . https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.17.759 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Kincheloe J. & McLaren P. (2008). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research . In Denzin N. K. & Lincoln Y. S. (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 403–456). SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kluijtmans M., de Haan E., Akkerman S. & van Tartwijk J. (2017). Professional identity in clinician-scientists: Brokers between care and science . Medical Education , 51 ( 6 ), 645–655. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Knoblauch H. (2021). Reflexive methodology and the empirical theory of science . Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung , 46 ( 2 ), 59–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazard L. & McAvoy J. (2017). Doing reflexivity in psychological research – What’s the point? What’s the practice ? Qualitative Research in Psychology , 17 , 159–177. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lloyd-Jones N. (2015). Professionalism in paramedic practice . In Willis S. (Ed.), Fundamentals of paramedic practice: A systems approach (pp. 3–13). Wiley-Blackwell. [ Google Scholar ]
• Marshall L. R. & Edgley A. (2015). Perils and pitfalls for clinicians embarking on qualitative research in physiotherapy . Nursing Research , 22 ( 5 ), 30–34. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mathers B. M. (2019). Reflective vs reflexive practice . https://bryanmmathers.com/reflective-vs-reflexive-practice/ . [ Google Scholar ]
• Mausz J., Donnelly E. A., Moll S., Harms S. & McConnell M. (2022). Role identity, dissonance, and distress among paramedics . International Journal of Environment Research and Public Health , 19 ( 4 ), 2115. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McCann L. & Granter E. (2019). Beyond ‘blue-collar professionalism’: Continuity and change in the professionalization of uniformed emergency services work . Journal of Professions and Organization , 6 ( 2 ), 213–232. [ Google Scholar ]
• McNair R., Taft A. & Hegarty K. (2008). Using reflexivity to enhance in-depth interviewing skills for the clinician researcher . BMC Medical Research Methodology , 8 ( 1 ), 73. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Milligan L. (2014). Insider-outsider-inbetweener? Researcher positioning, participative methods and cross-cultural educational research . Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education , 4 , 1–16. [ Google Scholar ]
• Munro G. G., O’Meara P. & Mathisen B. (2018). Paramedic academics in Australia and New Zealand: The ‘no man’s land’ of professional identity . Nurse Education in Practice , 33 , 33–36. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Murray C., Stanley M. & Wright S. (2014). The transition from clinician to academic in nursing and allied health: A qualitative meta-synthesis . Nurse Education Today , 34 ( 3 ), 389–395. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Neary S. (2014). Professional identity: What I call myself defines who I am . Career Matters , 2 ( 3 ), 14–15. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/46170813.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Newington L., Alexander C. M. & Wells M. (2022). What is a clinical academic? Qualitative interviews with healthcare managers, research-active nurses and other research-active healthcare professionals outside medicine . Journal of Clinical Nursing , 31 ( 3–4 ), 378–389. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Meara P. (2011). So how can we frame our identity ? Journal of Paramedic Practice , 3 , 57. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pelias R. J. (2011). Writing into position: Strategies for Composition and Evaluation . In Denzin N. K. & Lincoln Y. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 659–668). SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Probst B. (2015). The eye regards itself: Benefits and challenges of reflexivity in qualitative social work research . Social Work Research , 39 ( 1 ), 37–48. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rae J. & Green B. (2016). Portraying reflexivity in health services research . Qualitative Health Research , 26 ( 11 ), 1543–1549. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reed B., Cowin L., O’Meara P. & Wilson I. (2019). Professionalism and professionalisation in the discipline of paramedicine . Australasian Journal of Paramedicine , 16 . https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.16.715 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosser M. (2012). Evidence based practice in paramedic practice . In Grffiths P. & Mooney G. P. (Eds.), The paramedic’s guide to research: An introduction (pp. 25–39). McGraw-Hill / Open University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Savin-Baden M. & Major C. (2013). Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice . Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Walker S., Read S. & Priest H. (2013). Use of reflexivity in a mixed-methods study . Nursing Research , 20 ( 3 ), 38–43. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitley G. (2020). Pre-hospital pain management in children: A mixed methods study [PhD thesis, University of Lincoln] . https://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/id/eprint/45827/ . [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiles R., Charles V., Crow G. & Heath S. (2006). Researching researchers: Lessons for research ethics . Qualitative Research , 6 ( 3 ), 283–299. [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams B., Beovich B. & Olaussen A. (2021). The definition of paramedicine: An international Delphi study . Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare , 14 , 3561–3570. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams J. (2012). Qualitative research in paramedic practice: An overview . In Grffiths P. & Mooney G. P. (Eds.), The paramedic’s guide to research: An introduction (pp. 73–89). McGraw-Hill / Open University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wolff D. (2019). A new perspective on continuing mental health education: A case study on how reflective practice can improve resilience in paramedics [MEd thesis, St. Francis Xavier University] . https://davidwolff.ca/sites/default/files/2019-10/WOLFFpaperFinal.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Yanos P. T. & Ziedonis D. M. (2006). The patient-oriented clinician-researcher: Advantages and challenges of being a double agent . Psychiatric Services , 57 ( 2 ), 249–253. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Reflexivity in Qualitative Research

Affiliation.

• 1 1 Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
• PMID: 30849272
• DOI: 10.1177/0890334419830990

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. The issues surrounding the researchers' reflexivity are many and complex; however, journal space for discussing them may be very limited. Therefore the researcher has the responsibility of succinctly and clearly addressing these issues, so the reader can evaluate the research. Some of the ways that researchers can address reflexivity are discussed.

Keywords: Breastfeeding; health services research; qualitative methods.

• Breast Feeding*
• Health Services Research / standards
• Qualitative Research*
• Research Design / standards*