Academic literature on the topic 'Researcher subjectivity'

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss researcher subjectivity in social entrepreneurship ethnographies. Previous research has highlighted a need for alternatives to the heroic representations of social entrepreneurship. Ethnographic methods have been mentioned as a relevant direction to create such emerging understandings. Design/methodology/approach This paper shows what followed from a decision of a researcher to do an ethnography of a co-working cooperative established for social innovation. Based on the notion of “working the hyphens” in previous research, further developed by other scholars as “working within hyphen-spaces”, the position of the researcher shifted during the research process between a distant outsider and an engaged insider. In addition, a new hyphen-space of hopefulness – hopelessness emerged based on fieldwork. Findings The shifting positions are manifested in the entanglement of stories of the researcher and the people met during the fieldwork in the hyphen-spaces of insiderness – outsiderness, engagement – distance and hopefulness – hopelessness. The stories reveal how for some the co-working space was a place for hope while for others it caused distress and even burnout. Practical/implications The ethnographic understanding of social enterprises go beyond heroic representations, which affects how the phenomenon is represented in academic and public discussions. Social/implications This study concludes that despite its failure in the form of a bankruptcy, the co-working cooperative succeeded in enabling “social innovation” in the form of hope and personal development – also for the researcher. Originality/value This study contributes to the social entrepreneurship literature in showing how ethnographic fieldwork and acknowledging researcher subjectivity bring up alternative representations of social entrepreneurship. The entangled stories of participants and researchers can be a powerful way to reveal situated understandings.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the fieldwork dilemmas a young, female, heterosexual, indigenous South African researching everyday negotiations around heterosexuality within township families encountered in negotiating her own heteroerotic subjectivity within the field. Design/methodology/approach A heterosexuality studies approach is here combined with a critical feminist research methodological perspective. Findings The paper argues that researchers are often unprepared for having to negotiate their erotic subjectivity within the field and that such negotiations can be compromising to the researcher in a variety of ways. Practical implications The paper suggests that more might be done to prepare researchers for negotiating identity aspects such as sexuality in the field since that negotiation impacts on one’s research and the researcher’s sense of self in the field. Social implications The paper critically interrogates what negotiating one’s erotic subjectivity in the field might mean. Originality/value Little is published on female researchers negotiating their heteroerotic subjectivity in the field. The paper contributes original insights on this from fieldwork carried out by an indigenous heterosexual female researcher in South African townships. It raises important issues about the conduct of fieldwork in (non-)compromising and agentic ways.

This paper discusses adequacy as to the application of Brazilian guidelines, Resolution 196/96¹ and complementaries to qualitative health researches, considering that these are based on non-positivistic paradigms. Frequently, decisions about the research are made together with the studied community. There is a concern with justice and social change. And, since subjectivity can be considered their privileged instrument, such researchers seek a balance between objectivity and subjectivity, discussing how to overcome the researcher's view. We have studied the application and the concept of research found in international and in the Brazilian guidelines. We have noticed that they adopt a positivist conception of research, which establishes 1) the hypothesis test, 2) that all procedures are previously defined by the researcher; 3) neutrality of the researcher and of the knowledge produced. We will present some characteristics of qualitative research; the ethical implications in the way as qualitative research is conceived in non-positivist paradigms and a brief history of these guidelines. Our conclusion: it is inadequate to analyze qualitative researches using these documents, and we suggest the design of specific guidelines for them.

Phenomenology, according to Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty, looks at human beings in the world. Drawing on their perspective, one could argue that inter-subjectivity, like a researcher’s subjectivity, should be explicitly acknowledged in phenomenological studies. In the following pages we explore how using this approach can make findings more transparent and trustworthy. This study is based on a review of five articles focused on subjectivity and inter-subjectivity in phenomenological studies. In addition, we draw on the first author’s experiences as a PhD candidate studying to become a “phenomenological” researcher. Our findings reveal that reflecting explicitly on bodily subjectivity during the research process can reveal connections between the context of the interview, how the material is created socially and textually and how the researcher utilized information from her own body in the interpretation of the material. This, in turn, is likely to make the findings more inter-subjective and transparent, and thus more trustworthy and valid. Our findings point to the value of letting one’s own bodily experiences “count” in the process of determining how to explore the phenomena in question. Although the literature offers guidelines, each project and each researcher is unique. In this light, personal reflections are likely to highlight the value of critically engaging – and making explicit – the researcher’s own experiences, both during and after the interview process.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jer.v3i0.7850Journal of Education and Research March 2013, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 24-40

Qualitative field research can capture the life worlds and definitions of the situation of informants often not reported in quantitative studies. Post hoc reflections of how more seasoned researchers de­fine, assess, and interpret the process of entering the field and the interview dynamic between the researcher’s subjectivity and the subjectivity of informants are widespread in the qualitative research literature. However, seldom are the personal stories and reflections of neophyte researchers voiced in published accounts. This article accounts for my experiences in researching the “dirty work” of front­line caseworkers and the importance of practicing empathy while managing a boundary. I emphasize the practical sense-making challenges of managing a delicate balance between under and over rapport in researching homeless shelter caseworkers as an occupational group. My experiences underscore the challenging dynamics of maintaining a professionally oriented research-role, as well as the crucial importance of boundary work and distancing as practical strategies to qualitative interviewing.

This is another special edition that ETD - Digital Thematic Education –launches for your appreciation! This time, the contribution comes from Sobral, Ceará State. The topic addressed is "Youth, Culture, Diversity and Subjectivity", dossier organized by the professor and researcher Andrea Abreu Astigarraga from State University of Acaraú Valley (UVA). It brings 3 (three) articles, (3) three researches and 1 (one) experience report.