Content area
Full Text
ABSTRACT
Reflexivity is the concept used in the social sciences to explore and deal with the relationship between the researcher and the object of research. Being reflexive seems to be the favourite word with which to conjure in contemporary research. However, the concept of reflexivity is vague. Reflexivity is used to explore and deal with the relationship between the researcher and the object of research. Reflection means thinking about the conditions for what one is doing, and investigating the way in which the theoretical, cultural and political context of individual and intellectual involvement affects interaction with whatever is being researched. This article explores current discussions of what reflexivity means and how different epistemological and ontological approaches encourage different kinds of reflexivity.
INTRODUCTION
Reflexivity is the concept used in the social sciences to explore and deal with the relationship between the researcher and the object of research. According to the sociologist Goldthrope (2000), at the moment 'reflexive' seems to be the favourite word to conjure with. Pink (2004) agrees that it is something of a buzzword in recent qualitative literature. Goldthorpe goes on to argue that all attempts to delineate the term 'reflexive' remain obscure and vague. Holland (1999) holds a similar view when he says that various authors in the human sciences address different levels and types of reflexive processes and point to different consequences. However he pursues a line of argument that sees reflexivity as an essential human process, attribute or condition.
Many sociological ethnographers have sought a 'third way' which allows them to avoid the equally unacceptable extremes of 'positivism' or the abandonment of science in favour of art. This 'third way', as outlined by Goldthorpe, is characterised as 'critical', 'humanistic' or 'reflexive'. He goes on to pose the question of what differentiates a non-reflexive from a reflexive approach when both approaches accept that the Orientation of researchers will be shaped by their socio-historical locations or that behaviour and attitudes are often not stable across contexts and the researcher may influence the context' (Goldthorpe, 2000: 68-69). Hertz (1997) also draws attention to the epistemological tension between non-reflexive positivism on the one hand, and on the other hand reflexivity referred to as naval gazing. Hertz poses the question: does reflexivity constitute an...