Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T01:15:44.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Standing Out and Blending In: Contact-Based Research, Ethics, and Positionality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2021

Carolyn E. Holmes Open the ORCID record for Carolyn E. Holmes [Opens in a new window]
Carolyn E. Holmes*
Affiliation:
Mississippi State University and University of Pretoria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores the ethical difficulties that arise because of the interaction between fieldwork practitioners and their sites, in terms of the positionality of the researcher. What are the ethics of blending in or of standing out? This question stems from my experience of 12 months of fieldwork in South Africa in two distinct locales and among two different populations, one in which I could “pass” and another in which I was marked as various degrees of “outsider.” Drawing on this fieldwork, as well as an overview of the literature in political science on positionality, I argue that our discipline—because of the way it shapes interactions and research outcomes—must take positionality seriously in ethical training and practice.

Type
Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 443 - 447
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adida, Claire L., Ferree, Karen E., Posner, Daniel N., and Robinson, Amanda Lea. 2016. “Who’s Asking? Interviewer Coethnicity Effects in African Survey Data.” Comparative Political Studies 49 (12): 1630–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016633487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, Daniel P. 2009. “The 800-Pound Gaijin in the Room: Strategies and Tactics for Conducting Fieldwork in Japan and Abroad.” PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (2): 299–303. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650909060X.Google Scholar
Blee, Kathleen M. 2003. Inside Organized Racism: Women in the Hate Movement. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Nadia. 2012. “Negotiating the Insider/Outsider Status: Black Feminist Ethnography and Legislative Studies.” Journal of Feminist Scholarship 3 (3): 19–34.Google Scholar
Chavez, Christina. 2008. “Conceptualizing from the Inside: Advantages, Complications, and Demands on Insider Positionality.” The Qualitative Report 13 (3): 474–94.Google Scholar
Cramer, Katherine J. 2016. The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2012. “Research Ethics 101: Dilemmas and Responsibilities.” PS: Political Science & Politics 45 (4): 717–23.Google Scholar
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2013. “Working with Interpreters.” In Interview Research in Political Science, ed. Mosley, Layna, 144–58. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt1xx5wg.Google Scholar
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2014. “Five Stories of Accidental Ethnography: Turning Unplanned Moments in the Field into Data:” Qualitative Research, September. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114548945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2017. Interviewing in Social Science Research : A Relational Approach. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203756065.Google Scholar
Gill, Fiona, and Maclean, Catherine. 2002. “Knowing Your Place: Gender and Reflexivity in Two Ethnographies.” Sociological Research Online 7 (2): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillemin, Marilys, and Gillam, Lynn. 2004. “Ethics, Reflexivity, and ‘Ethically Important Moments’ in Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 10 (2): 261–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403262360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Carolyn E. 2020. The Black and White Rainbow: Reconciliation, Opposition, and Nation-Building in Democratic South Africa. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jamal, Amaney A. 2020. “Building Field Networks in the Era of Big Data.” In Stories from the Field: A Guide to Navigating Fieldwork in Political Science, ed. Krause, Peter and Szekely, Ora, 392. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana, Maclean, Lauren, and Read, Benjamin. 2015. Field Research in Political Science: Practices and Principles. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, Ann Chih. 2002. Reform in the Making: The Implementation of Social Policy in Prison. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Catriona, McDowell, Christopher, and Pittaway, Eileen. 2007. “Beyond ‘Do No Harm’: The Challenge of Constructing Ethical Relationships in Refugee Research.” Journal of Refugee Studies 20 (2): 299–319. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fem008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maclean, Lauren. 2013. “The Power of the Interviewer.” In Interview Research in Political Science, ed. Mosley, Layna, 67–83. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt1xx5wg.Google Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R. 2016. “The Risk of Over-Reliance on the Institutional Review Board: An Approved Project Is Not Always an Ethical Project.” PS: Political Science & Politics 49 (2): 299–303. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651600024X.Google Scholar
Ortbals, Candice D., and Rincker, Meg E.. 2009. “Fieldwork, Identities, and Intersectionality: Negotiating Gender, Race, Class, Religion, Nationality, and Age in the Research Field Abroad: Editors’ Introduction.” PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (2): 287–90. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650909057X.Google Scholar
Schwedler, Jillian. 2006. “The Third Gender: Western Female Researchers in the Middle East.” PS: Political Science & Politics 39 (3): 425–28.Google Scholar
Scoggins, Suzanne E. 2014. “Navigating Fieldwork as an Outsider: Observations from Interviewing Police Officers in China.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (2): 394–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096514000274.Google Scholar
Scott, James C. 2008. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, Atreyee. 2007. Shiv Sena Women: Violence and Communalism in a Bombay Slum. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Shehata, Samer. 2015. “Ethnography, Identity, and the Production of Knowledge.” In Interpretation and Method, ed. Yanow, Dvora and Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, 209–27. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315703275-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Townsend-Bell, Erica. 2009. “Being True and Being You: Race, Gender, Class, and the Fieldwork Experience.” PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (2): 311–14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096509090623.Google Scholar
Tracy, Sarah J. 2012. Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Vitebsky, Piers. 2006. The Reindeer People: Living with Animals and Spirits in Siberia. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
Wedeen, Lisa. 2008. Peripheral Visions: Publics, Power, and Performance in Yemen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanow, Dvora. 2009. “Dear Author, Dear Reader: The Third Hermeneutic in Writing and Reviewing Ethnography.” In Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power, ed. Schatz, Edward, 275–302. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Zirakzadeh, Cyrus Ernesto. 2009. “When Nationalists Are Not Separatists: Discarding and Recovering Academic Theories While Doing Fieldwork in the Basque Region of Spain.” In Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power, ed. Schatz, Edward, 1st edition, 97–118. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar