qualitative research reflective journal

Reflexive journals in qualitative research

Daniel Turner

It is common practice for researcher to keep a journal or diary during the research process, regardless of discipline or methodology. These are sometimes called reflexive diaries, self-reflexive journals, research journals or research diaries. They are all basically the same thing – a written (or verbal) record written by the researcher during the research process, detailing what they did and why.

Lincoln and Guba (1982) wrote a classic paper detailing reflexive journals as part of an auditing process for research projects, but with the very specific aim of improving the reliability of research and removing bias. Smith (1999) also describes research journals as an important part of ‘enhancing ethical and methodologic rigour’, but there much more to them than this, regardless of the rather positivistic terminology.

Qualitative research projects are complex to design, manage and analyse, and can take many years to complete. Keeping a personal record of the process, key decisions and feelings offers the researcher the opportunity to learn from the research process (Thorpe 2010) and better remember how things came to pass. When writing up, this log can become as a vital a source of data as a participant interview.

There are lots of papers and textbooks that give examples of what research journals look like (eg Silverman 2013 has several from former students), however few detail what they should contain, or how to keep them.

Lincoln and Guba (1982), offers one of the few good published guidelines for what should actually be in a reflexive journal. They define it as “analogous to the anthropologists field journals and is the major means for an inquirer to perform a running check on the biases, which he (sic) carried with him into the context”. The paper lists 4 major things to record in the diary:

1. A log of evolving perceptions

2. A log of day-to-day procedures

3. A log of methodological decision points

4. A log of day-to-day personal introspections

But as Janesick (1998) notes, another important role is to “refine the understanding of the responses of participants in the study, much like a physician or health care worker might do”. In other words, to also record the researchers own observations about the participants and their lives, when doing interviews, focus groups or ethnography, that will enrich and give context to other more ‘formal’ methods of data collection. She defines a different set of 4 roles for research journals which are more focused towards typical qualitative projects and philosophies:

1. Refine the understanding of the role of the researcher through reflection and writing, much like an artist might do;

2. Refine the understanding of the responses of participants in the study, much like a physician or health care worker might do;

3. Use a journal as an interactive tool of communication between the researcher and participants in the study, as a type of interdisciplinary triangulation of data;

4. View journal writing as a type of connoisseurship by which individuals become connoisseurs of their own thinking and reflection patterns, and indeed their own understanding of their work as qualitative researchers.

Reflexive diaries can also be used by those performing research that contains ethnographic methods, and diaries or journals are very commonly used in ethnography. See for example Barry and O’Callaghan (2009), using diaries to record the experiences of student therapists in a hospital setting. Reflexive journals can also be used in autoethnography, or other qualitative research that focuses on the researcher as the participant or main focus of the study or context.

But it’s important to not confuse these with diaries or journals which are given to participants as data collection of the lives and experiences of respondents. There is much more written in the literature on this topic, see our own post on participant diaries , and Janesick (1998) has written about distinguishing and triangulating these in her article.

So what does a reflective journal look like? Many people prefer to write a physical diary, in a paper journal or notebook (eg Nadin and Cassell 2006), or you can just use any standard word-processor like Word. There are advantages to having it digitally: it does make it easier to search, and easier to back up (by saving it in multiple places). Vicary, Young and Hicks (2016) recommend writing a research diary directly in qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS), in their case using Nvivo 10, but any qualitative software has the same basic capability.

The latest version of Quirkos (2.3) contains a new feature which can help with a reflexive journal. For the live collaboration in Quirkos cloud, we added a chat feature so that people can communicate, either in real time, or when working sequentially on their project. But we also added this feature to the offline version as well, not just to keep feature parity, but to give a space to write project wide notes. While you can attach memos to sections of text, and use a source property to have notes attached to a section of text, there wasn’t an designated to write generally in the project file.

Banner - Qualitative analysis made simple with Quirkos

Previously we’ve suggested that people created a blank source and write in there, which gives the advantage that you can treat it like any other data source – coding it and including (or excluding) it from search and query results. However, the chat function works as a great journaling system Even though you are just ‘talking’ to yourself, each entry has a date and time stamp, and you can scroll up and down the list and remove specific entries if needs be. It’s also right there, in the same window you are using to analyse, which makes it very easy to keep quick comments as you work.

If you want to see how intuitive and simple Quirkos makes qualitative analysis, you can try either it with Cloud storage or offline storage for free, for Windows, Mac or Linux . You can also get a good idea of what it’s like to work with Quirkos by watching a short tutorial video right here:

Barry, P., O’Callaghan, 2009, Reflexive Journal Writing: A Tool for Music Therapy Student Clinical Practice Development, Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 17(1) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08098130809478196

Janesick, V., 1998, Journal Writing as a Qualitative Research Technique: History, Issues, and Reflections, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED420702.pdf

Lincoln, Y., Guba, E., 1982, ESTABLISHING DEPENDABILITY AND CONFIRMABILITY IN NATURALISTIC INQUIRY THROUGH AN AUDIT, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED216019.pdf

Nadin, S., Cassell, C., 2006, The use of a research diary as a tool for reflexive practice: Some reflections from management research, Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management 3:208-217, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227430125_The_use_of_a_research_diary_as_a_tool_for_reflexive_practice_Some_reflections_from_management_research

Silverman, D., 2013, Doing Qualitative Research, Sage, London

Smith, B., 1999, Ethical and methodologic benefits of using a reflexive journal in hermeneutic-phenomenologic research., Image Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 1999;31(4):359-63.

Thorpe, K. (2010) Reflective learning journals: From concept to practice Reflective Practice; International and multidisciplinary perspectives Vo 5 Issue 3 pp 327-343

Vicary, Young and Hicks, 2016, A reflective journal as learning process and contribution to quality and validity in Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, Qualitative Social Work, 16(4), 550–565. https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/27234596/POST-PEER-REVIEW-NON-PUBLISHERS.PDF

Sign up for more like this.

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.

Qualitative Research

Preview this book.

Description
Aims and Scope
Editorial Board
Abstracting / Indexing
Submission Guidelines

Qualitative Research publishes papers with a clear methodological focus. We invite scholarship that has multi-disciplinary appeal, that debates and enlivens qualitative methods, and that pushes at the boundaries of established ways of doing qualitative research. We are interested in papers that are attentive to a wide audience, that are alive to new and diverse ways of thinking about qualitative methods, and that contribute to discussions within the pages of this journal. These discussions can be brought to life through empirical studies and research encounters, but we do not accept papers that focus on reporting the findings from qualitative research studies.

We see our journal as contributing to the community of academics across different fields who use qualitative methods as a way of making sense of the world. We understand methods and methodology as a practice and as a perspective, and welcome contributions that reflect on and critically engage with both aspects. Qualitative Research is a space where ideas and understandings are used to open up methodological issues for reflection and debate, and we work hard to provide a supportive environment to foster this ethos.

Academic Search Premier
Anthropological Index Online
Anthropological Literature
Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)
British Education Index
Business Source Corporate
CD-ROM - International Bibliography of Book Reviews of Scholarly Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences
CD-ROM - International Bibliography of Book Reviews of Scholarly Lterature on the Humanities and Social S
CD-ROM International Bibliography of Periodical Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences
CD-ROM International Bibliography of Periodical Literature on the Humanities and Social Sciences
Caredata CD (Discontinued)
Combined Health Information Database (CHID)
Contents Pages in Education
Criminal Justice Abstracts
Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature CINAHL
Current Contents / Social and Behavioral Sciences
Current Contents/ Social and Behavioral Sciences
Current Index To Statistics
EBSCO: Human Resources Abstracts
Educational Research Abstracts Online - e-Psyche
Family Index
Family Index Database
IBZ: International Bibliography of Periodical Literature
IBZ: International Bibliography of Periodical Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences
International Bibliography of Book Reviews of Scholarly Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences
International Bibliography of Book Reviews of Scholarly Literature on the Humanities and Social Sciences
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences
Journal Citation Reports Social Sciences
Journal Citation Reports/Social Sciences Edition
MasterFILE Premier
Online - International Bibliography of Book Reviews of Scholarly Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences
Online - International Bibliography of Book Reviews of Scholarly Literature on the Humanities and Social
Online - International Bibliography of Periodical Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences
Online - International Bibliography of Periodical Literature on the Humanities and Social Sciences
PAIS Bulletin
Psychological Abstracts
Public Administration Abstracts
Research Alert
Research Into Higher Education Abstracts
Social Care Online
Social SciSearch
Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)
Social Sciences Index
Social Services Abstracts
Social Work Abstracts
Sociological Abstracts
Sociology of Education Abstracts
Worldwide Political Science Abstracts

Manuscript Submission Guidelines: Qualitative Research

This Journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics

Please read the guidelines below then visit the Journal’s submission site http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/qrj to upload your manuscript. Please note that manuscripts not conforming to these guidelines may be returned.

Only manuscripts of sufficient quality that meet the aims and scope of Qualitative Research will be reviewed.

There are no fees payable to submit or publish in this Journal. Open Access options are available - see section 3.3 below.

As part of the submission process you will be required to warrant that you are submitting your original work, that you have the rights in the work, and that you have obtained and can supply all necessary permissions for the reproduction of any copyright works not owned by you, that you are submitting the work for first publication in the Journal and that it is not being considered for publication elsewhere and has not already been published elsewhere. Please see our guidelines on prior publication and note that the journal may accept submissions of papers that have been posted on pre-print servers; please alert the Editorial Office when submitting (contact details are at the end of these guidelines) and include the DOI for the preprint in the designated field in the manuscript submission system. Authors should not post an updated version of their paper on the preprint server while it is being peer reviewed for possible publication in the journal. If the article is accepted for publication, the author may re-use their work according to the journal's author archiving policy. If your paper is accepted, you must include a link on your preprint to the final version of your paper.

What do we publish? 1.1 Aims & Scope 1.2 Article types 1.3 Writing your paper
Editorial policies 2.1 Peer review policy 2.2 Authorship 2.3 Acknowledgements 2.4 Funding 2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests 2.6 Research Data
Publishing policies 3.1 Publication ethics 3.2 Contributor's publishing agreement 3.3 Open access and author archiving
Preparing your manuscript 4.1 Formatting 4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics 4.3 Supplemental material 4.4 Reference style 4.5 English language editing services
Submitting your manuscript 5.1 ORCID 5.2 Information required for completing your submission 5.3 Permissions
On acceptance and publication 6.1 Sage Production 6.2 Online First publication 6.3 Access to your published article 6.4 Promoting your article
Further information

1. What do we publish?

1.1 Aims & Scope

We see our journal as contributing to the community of academics across different fields who use qualitative methods as a way of making sense of the world. We understand methods and methodology as a practice and as a perspective, and welcome contributions that reflect on and critically engage with both aspects. QR is a space where ideas and understandings are used to open up methodological issues for reflection and debate, and we work hard to provide a supportive environment to foster this ethos.

1.2 Article Types

Qualitative Research publishes articles, notes and reviews. Most of our submissions follow formal academic publishing guidelines, but we welcome creative and imaginative ways to explore qualitative methods and are open to conversations about the format and presentation of submissions.

We publish articles that are original, critical and creative engagements with qualitative methods. Articles must have a clear methodological focus, and not simply present findings from qualitative studies. They should be between 7,500 and 8,500 words, excluding references. Any articles that fall below or above that range will be returned.

Notes is a new format for short, engaging and imaginative submissions. It offers a more playful space for critical reflection on the craft of qualitative research. Authors are encouraged to experiment with styles of writing, and submissions can take the form of stories, anecdotes, or lessons that impart original methodological insights. Submissions should be between 2,000 and 4,000 words, excluding references.

Reviews are an important contribution to Qualitative Research. We welcome proposals that connect with the aims and the scope of our journal by offering reflective readings of key contributions to methodological debates and discussions in qualitative research. Specifically, we invite traditional book reviews that critically engage with titles and identify connections to wider literature, as well as provide a more descriptive account of content. Here, reviewers should not be afraid to (kindly) consider the significance and clarity of the contribution.

While our book reviews are usually around 800 to 1000 words and tend to focus on a single title, we also welcome longer review essays that explore two or three publications. If you would like to submit a proposal for a book review on the latest contribution or a classic of the genre, please get in touch with the editors, [email protected] . Your proposal should include a statement on why you would like to review the title(s) and how the piece relates to your own interests and expertise.

Beyond the traditional book review, we also invite reviews of events, cultural artifacts, and other dissemination platforms. Here we welcome reviews of relevant conferences and colloquia, podcasts and radio programmes, novels, and documentary series. As with the book review, the word count should be 800 to 1000 words and explicitly relate to how the event/artifact furthers debates in qualitative research. Again, please contact the editors at [email protected] with an outline of your proposal.

Please note that Qualitative Research does not accept unsolicited reviews.

1.3 Writing your paper

The Sage Author Gateway has some general advice and on how to get published , plus links to further resources. Sage Author Services also offers authors a variety of ways to improve and enhance their article including English language editing, plagiarism detection, and video abstract and infographic preparation.

1.3.1 Make your article discoverable

For information and guidance on how to make your article more discoverable, visit our Gateway page on How to Help Readers Find Your Article Online

2. Editorial policies

2.1 Peer review policy

Sage does not permit the use of author-suggested (recommended) reviewers at any stage of the submission process, be that through the web-based submission system or other communication. Reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Our policy is that reviewers should not be assigned to a paper if:

• The reviewer is based at the same institution as any of the co-authors

• The reviewer is based at the funding body of the paper

• The author has recommended the reviewer

• The reviewer has provided a personal (e.g. Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail) email account and an institutional email account cannot be found after performing a basic Google search (name, department and institution).

2.2 Authorship

All parties who have made a substantive contribution to the article should be listed as authors. Principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits should be based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. For any multiple-authored publication that substantially derives from the student’s dissertation or thesis the student should normally be named as first author.

Please note that AI chatbots, for example ChatGPT, should not be listed as authors. For more information see the policy on Use of ChatGPT and generative AI tools .

2.3 Acknowledgements

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support.

2.3.1 Third party submissions

Where an individual who is not listed as an author submits a manuscript on behalf of the author(s), a statement must be included in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript and in the accompanying cover letter. The statements must:

Disclose this type of editorial assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input
Identify any entities that paid for this assistance
Confirm that the listed authors have authorized the submission of their manuscript via third party and approved any statements or declarations, e.g. conflicting interests, funding, etc.

Where appropriate, Sage reserves the right to deny consideration to manuscripts submitted by a third party rather than by the authors themselves .

2.4 Funding

Qualitative Research requires all authors to acknowledge their funding in a consistent fashion under a separate heading. Please visit the Funding Acknowledgements page on the Sage Journal Author Gateway to confirm the format of the acknowledgment text in the event of funding, or state that: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests

Qualitative Research encourages authors to include a declaration of any conflicting interests and recommends you review the good practice guidelines on the Sage Journal Author Gateway

2.6 Research Data

At Sage we are committed to facilitating openness, transparency and reproducibility of research. Where relevant, the journal encourages authors to share their research data in a suitable public repository subject to ethical and methodological considerations and where data is included, to add a data accessibility statement in their manuscript file. Authors should also follow data citation principles. For more information please visit the Sage Author Gateway , which includes information about Sage’s partnership with the data repository Figshare. For more information, including FAQs please visit the Sage Research Data policy pages .

We acknowledge this practice is not always relevant or appropriate for ethically sound qualitative inquiry, and so would encourage you to consider the unfolding ethical, legal and moral obligations linked to your research data on a case by case basis.

3. Publishing Policies

3.1 Publication ethics

Sage is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. We encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ International Standards for Authors and view the Publication Ethics page on the Sage Author Gateway .

3.1.1 Plagiarism

Qualitative Research and Sage take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarised other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.

3.1.2 Prior publication

If material has been previously published it is not generally acceptable for publication in a Sage journal. However, there are certain circumstances where previously published material can be considered for publication. Please refer to the guidance on the Sage Author Gateway or if in doubt, contact the Editor at the address given below.

3.2 Contributor's publishing agreement

Before publication, Sage requires the author as the rights holder to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement. Sage’s Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement is an exclusive licence agreement which means that the author retains copyright in the work but grants Sage the sole and exclusive right and licence to publish for the full legal term of copyright. Exceptions may exist where an assignment of copyright is required or preferred by a proprietor other than Sage. In this case copyright in the work will be assigned from the author to the society. For more information please visit the Sage Author Gateway

3.3 Open access and author archiving

Qualitative Research offers optional open access publishing via the Sage Choice programme and Open Access agreements, where authors can publish open access either discounted or free of charge depending on the agreement with Sage. Find out if your institution is participating by visiting Open Access Agreements at Sage . For more information on Open Access publishing options at Sage please visit Sage Open Access . For information on funding body compliance, and depositing your article in repositories, please visit Sage’s Author Archiving and Re-Use Guidelines and Publishing Policies .

4. Preparing your manuscript for submission

4.1 Formatting

Attach to every submission a letter confirming that all authors have agreed to the submission and that the article is not currently being considered for publication by any other journal.
Include a title page with full title and subtitle (if any). For the purposes of blind refereeing, full name of each author with current affiliation and full address/phone/fax/email details plus short biographical note should be supplied on a separate sheet. The editors will not inspect the manuscript until this information is given.
Also for the purposes of blind refereeing, authors should replace all self-citations in the text and reference list with anonymous citations, in the style (Author, 2009), etc.
Any citation that includes any of the authors should be replaced with (Author A and others, 2003) in the text, and in the reference list at 'Au' put 'Author A and others (2003), details withheld for peer review' followed by Author B and others, if necessary.
Abstract of 100-150 words.
Up to 10 key words.
All authors must provide a full word count for their paper. The minimum word count is 7500 and the maximum is 8500 words excluding all references. Papers under the minimum and over the maximum word count will be unsubmitted.
The journal uses notes where necessary. Historical, documentary or archival sources should be cited in endnotes. Discursive endnotes are also allowed. Endnotes are signalled in the text by superscript numbers.
References in both the text and in any endnotes should follow Sage Harvard style. References are cited in the text thus: (author, date: page).
An alphabetical References section should follow the text (and endnotes, if any) using the Sage Harvard system.
All artwork, graphics, line diagrams and photographs are termed 'Figures' and should be referred to as such in the manuscript. They should be numbered consecutively. All figures should have short descriptive captions at the end of the document.
Articles must be written in English. Use a clear, readable style, avoiding jargon. If technical terms or acronyms must be included, define them when first used.
Non-discriminatory language is mandatory
UK or US spellings may be used with '-ize' spellings as given in the Oxford English Dictionary (e.g. organize, recognize).
Use single quotation marks with double quotes inside single quotes.
Dates should be presented in the form 1 May 2010. Do not use points in abbreviations, contractions or acronyms (e.g. AD, USA, Dr, PhD)
Qualitative Research adheres to the Sage Harvard reference style. View the Sage Harvard guidelines to ensure your manuscript conforms to this reference style.
If you use EndNote to manage references, you can download the Sage Harvard EndNote output file .

4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics

Qualitative Research welcomes the inclusion of figures. There is no word count equivalent for figures, but images should be carefully selected and will be reviewed for their quality and suitability.

For guidance on the preparation of illustrations, pictures and graphs in electronic format, please visit Sage’s Manuscript Submission Guidelines .

Figures supplied in colour will appear in colour online regardless of whether or not these illustrations are reproduced in colour in the printed version. For specifically requested colour reproduction in print, you will receive information regarding the costs from Sage after receipt of your accepted article.

4.3 Supplemental material

This journal does not currently accept supplemental files.

4.4 Reference style

Qualitative Research adheres to the Sage Harvard reference style. View the Sage Harvard guidelines to ensure your manuscript conforms to this reference style.

If you use EndNote to manage references, you can download the Sage Harvard EndNote output file ..

4.5 English language editing services

Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation, or figure and manuscript formatting to fit the journal’s specifications should consider using Sage Language Services. Visit Sage Language Services on our Journal Author Gateway for further information.

5. Submitting your manuscript

Qualitative Research is hosted on Sage Track, a web based online submission and peer review system powered by ScholarOne™ Manuscripts. Visit http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/qrj to login and submit your article online.

IMPORTANT: Please check whether you already have an account in the system before trying to create a new one. If you have reviewed or authored for the journal in the past year it is likely that you will have had an account created. For further guidance on submitting your manuscript online please visit ScholarOne Online Help .

As part of our commitment to ensuring an ethical, transparent and fair peer review process Sage is a supporting member of ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID . ORCID provides a unique and persistent digital identifier that distinguishes researchers from every other researcher, even those who share the same name, and, through integration in key research workflows such as manuscript and grant submission, supports automated linkages between researchers and their professional activities, ensuring that their work is recognized.

The collection of ORCID IDs from corresponding authors is now part of the submission process of this journal. If you already have an ORCID ID you will be asked to associate that to your submission during the online submission process. We also strongly encourage all co-authors to link their ORCID ID to their accounts in our online peer review platforms. It takes seconds to do: click the link when prompted, sign into your ORCID account and our systems are automatically updated. Your ORCID ID will become part of your accepted publication’s metadata, making your work attributable to you and only you. Your ORCID ID is published with your article so that fellow researchers reading your work can link to your ORCID profile and from there link to your other publications.

If you do not already have an ORCID ID please follow this link to create one or visit our ORCID homepage to learn more.

5.2 Information required for completing your submission

You will be asked to provide contact details and academic affiliations for all co-authors via the submission system and identify who is to be the corresponding author. These details must match what appears on your manuscript. The affiliation listed in the manuscript should be the institution where the research was conducted. If an author has moved to a new institution since completing the research, the new affiliation can be included in a manuscript note at the end of the paper. At this stage please ensure you have included all the required statements and declarations and uploaded any additional supplementary files (including reporting guidelines where relevant).

5.3 Permissions

Please also ensure that you have obtained any necessary permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please see the Copyright and Permissions page on the Sage Author Gateway .

6. On acceptance and publication

6.1 Sage Production

Your Sage Production Editor will keep you informed as to your article’s progress throughout the production process. Proofs will be made available to the corresponding author via our editing portal Sage Edit or by email, and corrections should be made directly or notified to us promptly. Authors are reminded to check their proofs carefully to confirm that all author information, including names, affiliations, sequence and contact details are correct, and that Funding and Conflict of Interest statements, if any, are accurate.

6.2 Online First publication

Online First allows final articles (completed and approved articles awaiting assignment to a future issue) to be published online prior to their inclusion in a journal issue, which significantly reduces the lead time between submission and publication. Visit the Sage Journals help page for more details, including how to cite Online First articles.

6.3 Access to your published article

Sage provides authors with online access to their final article.

6.4 Promoting your article

Publication is not the end of the process! You can help disseminate your paper and ensure it is as widely read and cited as possible. The Sage Author Gateway has numerous resources to help you promote your work. Visit the Promote Your Article page on the Gateway for tips and advice.

7. Further information

Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the manuscript submission process should be sent to the Qualitative Research editorial office. Please email: [email protected]

Read Online
Sample Issues
Current Issue
Email Alert
Permissions
Foreign rights
Reprints and sponsorship
Advertising

Individual Subscription, Print Only

Institutional Subscription, E-access

Institutional Subscription, Print Only

Institutional Subscription, Combined (Print & E-access)

Individual, Single Print Issue

Institutional, Single Print Issue

To order single issues of this journal, please contact SAGE Customer Services at 1-800-818-7243 / 1-805-583-9774 with details of the volume and issue you would like to purchase.

Examining the world through qualitative inquiry

Reflective journals in qualitative inquiry

This week’s guest blogger is Kyu Ha Choi, who is a Ph.D. candidate in the Sport Management and Policy program in the Department of Kinesiology at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA. His research focuses on sport event management with emphasis on the development of sport along with qualitative research methods.

Screencast on reflective journals in qualitative research

I initially had three questions that pertain to the concept of reflective journals in relation to qualitative research. Those three questions were: (1) what is the reflective journal in qualitative research? (2) why do we implement reflective journals in our research? and (3) what are the outcomes of employing reflective journals in research? In response to these questions, the objectives of this essay are to understand the concept of reflective journals within qualitative research and to understand why reflective journals are implemented in qualitative research. This essay has been written for any researcher, but especially novice researchers who are not very familiar with or have a limited knowledge of reflective journals in qualitative research and how they might incorporate them in their research. This essay will help researchers learn about the possible outcomes of employing reflective journals and outline some challenging issues of using reflective journals in research.

The reflective journal in qualitative research is a written record by the researchers themselves and is written throughout the research process. A reflective journal includes the details of what the researchers did, thought, and felt while analyzing the data. Then, the rationale behind those thoughts and percepts are recorded. According to Russell and Kelly (2002), keeping self-reflective journals during the analysis process is a strategy that facilitates reflexivity by using the researchers’ journals to examine “personal assumptions and goals” and to clarify “individual belief systems and subjectivities” (p. 2). By doing so, keeping reflective journals consciously acknowledges the values and experiences of the researchers rather than attempting to control their values through methods. In other words, the reflective practice encourages researchers to talk about the presuppositions, experiences, and actions and rationales behind them during the research process. In this regard, reflective journals are increasingly becoming visible within qualitative research.

As for the attributes of reflective writing, the fact that the reflective journal is written in the first-person point of view makes the writing fundamentally subjective. Through writing in the first-person point of view, the centrality of the researcher is acknowledged. Also, self-awareness and an internal dialogue that help in analyzing important issues in the research are supported. In this regard, Jasper (2005) noted that “the purpose of reflective writing is learning which will precipitate some form of action or change in behaviour… is to facilitate the researcher’s discovery and provide a verifiable audit-trail of the research process.” (p. 250) Reflective writing also develops critical thinking by enhancing higher-level conceptual skills. This development is supported because writing down ideas urges the author or researcher to develop and rationalize, which motivate the author to acquire new knowledge that is associated with the research. Finally, reflective writing, along with critical thinking, enables researchers to broaden their perspectives and discover new thoughts and research practices.

Reflective journals as data mainly fall into two categories. First, the products of reflective writing can be used as primary data. Autobiographies, journals, and logs are examples of the case in which reflective writing is employed as the primary data. Reflective writing as the primary data source is well-established in qualitative research, especially in the field of nursing and education. This essay focuses on reflective journals as the secondary data category, including field notes with reflection-on-action that includes insights and references to other data sources. Smith (1999) highlighted in his study that written reflections on one’s own feelings create an audit trail of one’s reasoning, thus contributing to the trustworthiness of the findings by supporting the researcher’s subjectivity.

One of the main reasons why the qualitative researcher maintains a reflective journal is to achieve a rigorous research process. Issues of rigor in qualitative research refer to the trustworthiness of the study (Guba & Lincoln, 1985), and some attributes of rigor include credibility, dependability, and transferability. According to Jasper (2005), reflective journal writing allows researchers to own centrality of their research process, which contributes to the legitimacy of the knowledge claims. Also, reflective journal writing provides an audit trail which clearly indicates the procedural steps that enhance the transparency of process. Moreover, a reflective journal is particularly useful when things did not happen as planned and as one’s thinking changes.

The primary purpose of using reflective journals is to enable researchers to explicitly map their role as researchers. By allowing the subjectivity of the researchers, reflective journals record one’s experiences, thoughts, opinions, and feelings and make them an acknowledged part within the data analysis and interpretation processes. By doing so, researchers can make a vague and unorganized research process more visible not only for themselves but also for their readers. Also, use of reflective journals affects the research process by changing the research design or approach if necessary. Last, but not least, as previously mentioned, use of reflective journals provides an audit trail of the research design, which enhances the transparency of the research process.

Despite the positive potential outcomes from using reflective journals, several challenging issues are associated with reflective journal writing. One potential issue is on ethical grounds in which confidentiality is hard to account for when reflective writing is practiced poorly. Another noticeable issue is hindsight bias. The practice of reflective journal writing may cause hindsight bias which happens when researchers know the outcome of their research in advance and consequently judge that outcome as more likely if they had not known that outcome knowledge (Rehm & Gadenne, 2013). As a result, researchers must overcome several issues in order to conduct a rigorous and reliable reflective journal writing that contributes positively to the research process.

Use of the reflective journal may seem a bit bothersome and time-consuming to some researchers. However, this practice certainly helps qualitative researchers to have a central role in a research process and enhances the transparency of the research process. I am certain that reflective journals are worthy of the required time, and we should make reflective journaling a priority in any type of research.

Glaze, J. E. (2002). Stages in coming to terms with reflection: student advanced nurse practitioners’ perceptions of their reflective journeys. Journal of Advanced Nursing , 37 (3), 265-272.

Greenwood, J. (1998). The role of reflection in single and double loop learning. Journal of Advanced Nursing , 27 (5), 1048-1053.

Hannigan, B. (2001). A discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of ‘reflection’ in nursing practice and education. Journal of Clinical Nursing , 10 (2), 278-283.

Jasper, M. A. (2005). Using reflective writing within research. Journal of Research in Nursing , 10 (3), 247-260.

Jones, P. R. (1995). Hindsight bias in reflective practice: an empirical investigation. Journal of Advanced Nursing , 21 (4), 783-788.

Koch, T. (1996). Implementation of a hermeneutic inquiry in nursing: philosophy, rigour and representation. Journal of Advanced Nursing , 24 (1), 174-184.

Ortlipp, M. (2008). Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process. The Qualitative Report , 13 (4), 695-705.

Rehm, J. T., & Gadenne, V. (2013). Intuitive predictions and professional forecasts: Cognitive processes and social consequences (Vol. 20). Elsevier.

Russell, G. M., & Kelly, N. H. (2002, September). Research as interacting dialogic processes: Implications for reflexivity. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (Vol. 3, No. 3).

Smith, B. A. (1999). Ethical and methodologic benefits of using a reflexive journal in hermeneutic‐phenomenologic research. Image: The Journal of Nursing Scholarship , 31 (4), 359-363.

Published by qualpage

Kathy Roulston is a professor in the Qualitative Research program in the Department of Lifelong Education, Administration and Policy at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA. She teaches qualitative research methods, and has written on qualitative interviewing. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9429-2694 Kathryn J. Roulston on ResearchGate My books include: Interviewing: A guide to theory and practice, see: https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/interviewing/book272521 Interactional studies of qualitative interviews. See: https://benjamins.com/catalog/z.220 View all posts by qualpage

Using the Research Journal during Qualitative Data Collection in a Cross-Cultural Context

This article shows how a research journal can be used as a tool to reflect on issues arising during the phase of data collection. Especially in cross-cultural comparative research, unexpected cultural issues are likely to arise. The most critical is the phase of data collection, where decisions have to be made quickly. This article demonstrates how to establish and maintain a research journal during cross-cultural face-to-face interviewing with entrepreneurs. It provides ten suggestions for “what” and “why” to take notes on during five phases of data collection. Furthermore, the article elaborates on how a research journal could be used to deal with emotions as well as methodological and ethical issues that may arise.

Introduction

In sociological research, there is a long tradition of providing accounts of the research process ( Quilgars et al. 2009 ). Unfortunately, in entrepreneurship journal articles, researchers hardly mention issues that arise during the actual phase of data collection. Gómez and Kuronen (2011) refer to this phase as the “grass-root level”, where the work is actually done and decisions are made. Especially in cross-cultural comparative entrepreneurship research, this is the level where most unexpected cultural issues and differences arise. Reflective data is often omitted from the final written report because the researcher may seek to conceal and suppress certain relevant, and at times, personal aspects during research. These missing voids affect the findings and their reading, even if the reader is unaware of its existence or influence ( Weiner-Levy and Popper-Giveon 2013 ). If present, reflections are mainly on practical issues and research design, such as whether or not to hire a translator (see for example Williamson et al. 2011 ) and not on the phase of interviewing itself.

So far, little is written about the role of the research journal as a learning tool and how to establish and maintain it ( Engin 2011 ). For these reasons, the complexity of comparative research on entrepreneurship requires greater attention, particularly when the study is conducted by a single researcher. This article aims to explain how a journal can be used to reflect on issues arising during the phase of data collection. This article is based on a case study and uses practical examples from conducting interviews with entrepreneurs in various countries. Entrepreneurship researchers may benefit from using a research journal and improve the transparency and quality of cross-cultural interview studies in entrepreneurship research.

In cross-cultural qualitative research (which can be multicultural, multilingual, multinational, or multiregional), the main aim is to study entrepreneurs in different cultural settings. This research often takes place at the level of local practices, entrepreneur’s everyday life, and experiences. A major advantage of the in-depth qualitative cross-national approach is that it enables the researcher to analyze the entrepreneurial phenomena “from inside”, in their cultural and social context, in actual local practices, and in entrepreneur’s everyday life. This is more difficult, if not impossible, in large-scale multi-national comparisons ( Gómez and Kuronen 2011 ).

Comparative research methods have long been used in cross-cultural studies to identify, analyze, and explain similarities and differences among entrepreneurs. These methods serve as a means of gaining a better understanding of different structures and institutions influencing entrepreneurship. More recently, as greater emphasis has been placed on contextualization. Cross-national comparison, which has been encouraged by (European) government and research funding bodies to monitor, report, and evaluate developments, has coincided with the growth of interdisciplinary and international collaboration and networking in entrepreneurship research ( Hantrais 2008 ).

Yet, relatively few entrepreneurship researchers feel they are well equipped to conduct studies that to cross national boundaries. In case they do, it is most common to have a multi-national team of researchers with local researchers collecting data from their home country and in their native language ( Hantrais 2008 ; Mangen 1999 ). Although teamwork in cross-cultural research benefits from theoretical, methodological, and practical discussions between researchers, Agar (1980) argues that the feeling of being “the professional stranger” is missing. By contrast, solo-researchers conducting cross-cultural comparative research by themselves are able to see things from a different perspective when in a foreign culture and society, but also in one’s own country after taking distance from it. Especially in this type of research setting, reflection is important.

I will start this article by elaborating on the importance of reflection and keeping a journal as a tool do to so. I will then demonstrate how to establish and maintain such a journal during five phases of cross-cultural face-to-face interviewing with entrepreneurs. I provide ten suggestions of “what” and “why” to take notes on during these five phases. Furthermore, I elaborate on how a research journal could be used to deal with emotions during the phase of data collection. Lastly, crucial issues such as compliance to the study protocol and ethical issues will be addressed.

The Importance of Reflection

Reflexivity emphasizes an awareness of the researcher’s own presence in the research process, with the aim of improving the quality of the research. Over the past few years, a researcher’s positionality, his identity, conceptions, origin, and gender have been considered factors likely to influence the choice of research topic, field work, data analysis, and presentation ( Weiner-Levy and Popper-Giveon 2013 ). Gokah (2006) argues, based on his own experiences, how (naïve) researchers are likely to be confronted with field realities that may threaten their well-being or research work. Borg (2001) notes that emotions too are an undeniable part of the human researcher’s work. Usually, reflexivity in the literature is discussed as an individual activity. Furthermore, thinking reflexively is often portrayed as an afterthought in qualitative analysis, an exercise to conduct once the data has been collected and the results have been written up ( Browne 2013 ). Reflective data, however, may show relevant findings that would otherwise have been missed ( Weiner-Levy and Popper-Giveon 2013 ).

The Research Journal as a Tool for Reflection

Reflection by solo researchers is often done in written forms such as journals (or diaries) and case records ( Boutilier and Mason 2012 ).The case record is based on a problematic situation and includes a factual description of an event and reflection on the nature of the situation, the action taken, the alternatives considered, and the possible outcomes ( Kottkamp 1990 ). Journal writing expands the scope of such reflection beyond problematic situations. In addition to a case record, it contains a critical analysis of the (political) context in which actions unfold, the researchers’ knowledge, skills, expertise, values, assumptions, and the emotions evoked by the research. The research journal is a tool for observing, questioning, critiquing, synthesizing, and acting. The specific elements it may contain are: (1) data obtained by observation, interviews, and informal conversations; (2) additional items such as photographs and letters; (3) contextual information; (4) reflections; and (5) ideas and plans for subsequent research steps ( Altrichter and Holly 2005 ).

By integrating these elements and using the journal throughout the research, it becomes a tool for reflection in the midst of making choices, which is also referred to as reflection-in-action ( Boutilier and Mason 2012 , 200). Newbury ( 2001 , 3) argues that the research journal can be seen as “a melting pot for all of the different ingredients of a research project – prior experience, observations, readings, ideas – and a means of capturing the resulting interplay of elements”. Browne (2013) shows that it may also become a tool to air grievances, to rationalize decision making processes at times of great uncertainty, and an opportunity for researchers to be open and honest about their personal transformation during the fieldwork process. The research journal can assist the researcher in acknowledging these emotions, expressing them, and particularly where these emotions threaten the progress of the research, analyzing and reacting to them. It may contain conversations, poetry, drawings, and songs that may assist in making feelings and thoughts more clear ( Boutilier and Mason 2012 ). After introducing the case study in the next section, this article continues by demonstrating how to establish and maintain a research journal.

A Case Study Approach

I use examples from my own research about the work-life balance of independent professionals, who are highly skilled solo independent professionals and engaged in service activities ( Leighton and Brown 2013 ; Rapelli 2012 ). This explorative comparative case study, conducted in three European countries as a solo researcher, was designed to understand, in-depth, how social support increases the independent professionals’ abilities for work-life balance. Data was collected by a semi-structured questionnaire based on the capability approach adjusted to work-life balance ( Hobson 2014 ) and literature on social support and work-life balance. I interviewed 50 entrepreneurs in total in The Netherlands ( N =16), Spain ( N =17), and Sweden ( N =17) and worked and lived in each country for minimum of three months. In each country, I approached the owners of several co-working spaces to invite independent professionals to participate in the research. Next, the interviewees were asked to forward our invitation to colleagues who worked from home via the snowball method. A pro of this method is that it allowed us to ensure variation in the sample, for example in location of the work place, occupation, gender, and parental status. Data was collected through audio taped interviews, lasting approximately one hour. The interviews took place between January and August 2015 at co-working spaces, cafés, or at homes in Rotterdam, Valencia, and Malmö. In the next section, I will elaborate on how I established and maintained a research journal during this research project.

Establishing and Maintaining a Research Journal

During my research project, I kept a digital journal in Microsoft Word and Excel in a folder on my laptop. The Word document contained the methodological steps taken to gather my data, including key persons and organizations. In an Excel file, I recorded the important contact details of participants during the period of fieldwork. The Excel file contained three sheets with one for each country. The columns contained information such as date of the interview, email address, web page, telephone number, age, family situation, and work location. Later, I added numerical data from the exercises I did with participants, but also, for example, descriptive data about the setting in which we met. I updated this file as soon as I got home after the interview or, for example, when I received a confirmation email from participants. Besides a digital, practical journal, I bought a small notebook which I always carried with me in my bag, because I noticed that ideas often come at moments you do not expect them. In this small notebook I would write down patterns I discovered across the interviews, but also ideas on persons to contact, suggested books to read, or websites to check. During the interviews, I used a printed out a topic list on which I scribbled down answers or ideas. Because I obviously needed to focus on the participant and the conversation, I would work out these ideas in my note book directly after the interview.

Using the Research Journal During the Various Phases of Data Collection

In this paragraph, I will illustrate what I wrote down in my research journal and why this was useful during five phases: before data collection, while contacting participants, after the first interviews, during interviews, and after the interviews are conducted. This description results in a flow chart at the end of this paragraph ( Figure 1 ), showing five phases and ten suggestions for keeping a research journal.

Before Data Collection

Before I started to collect data, I wrote down in my journal how I perceived the world at that point of time and how I could understand the work-life balance of the entrepreneurs under study. For example, an important assumption in my research was that the national context would influence the entrepreneur’s abilities to achieve work-life balance. A reflexive position statement was a valuable start, since it served as a starting point to come back to and it allowed me to compare it to my stance afterwards.

Contacting Participants

During the phase of contacting participants, I felt low in energy because I was simultaneously settling down in a new country and meeting new people. Meeting so many new people and contacting possible participants meant having to introduce myself and constantly taking part in small talk, so the first week or two, I was too tired to work. Finding participants took a lot of time as well, which made me feel very unproductive. I used my journal to set priorities and remind myself of what I had to accomplish during my stay abroad. I struggled with my perfectionism – wanting to do more and better. Writing in my journal made me become aware of my thoughts, taught me to focus, as well as work according to my given energy level. The results confirmed my belief that individuals cannot be studied separate from their (national) context. Furthermore, I found out that it is not only national context, but also work characteristics that influence work-life balance experiences.

After the First Interviews

In the phase of the first explorative interviews, I used my journal to write down (cultural) customs and the participant’s expectations regarding timing and relational aspects. When I scheduled most of my interviews and I was ready to meet participants, I noticed that timing is important to take into account. In the Netherlands, for example, it is seen as polite to show up a little early for your appointment. When I arrived 10 min before my interview appointment in Spain, I unintendedly stressed the participant. She opened the door by saying “I should have known, since you’re Dutch. I thought we would meet at 11.00 and I need some time to clean up, collect my stuff, and make some coffee. Just sit down there, will you?”. I got the impression she felt rushed, which was not a good start to the interview. In Sweden, I found out that it is common to take of your shoes off before entering someone’s home. These taken for granted customs might cause moments of confusion if not taken into account. I used my journal to prevent myself from making the same mistakes again and making participants feel uncomfortable.

Regarding relational aspects, I made notes on the effects of bringing gifts for participants as I brought Dutch caramel waffles as a small gift for the participants. Although the gifts were very much appreciated, I did not feel as if a gift was necessary. Participants were most often happy to share their stories and to benefit from a moment of reflection. Because I travelled by plane, I could not bring caramel waffles for everyone and had to buy local chocolates instead. Because these were not Dutch, I felt they were less appreciated and therefore I stopped bringing them. Because I took notes on relational aspects in my Excel file, I found out that the gift only contributed if authentically given.

In the same phase of the first explorative interviews, I took notes on my interview techniques. Reflecting on my techniques afterwards allowed me to see what went well and what did not. In the beginning, I noticed that I sometimes posed more questions at the same time. I found that especially non-native speakers would only answer the last question they heard. Furthermore, the Spanish entrepreneurs would answer negative questions different from what I expected (i. e. with “yes” where I would have expected “no” in the Netherlands).

During Interviews

The research journal appeared to be especially helpful during the actual interview phase. First, I took notes on context such as the interview and work location. The interview location was chosen by the participants, which often provided me with background information on where and how they worked. I always took notes on these workspaces on my topic list. Workspaces could be separate offices or the kitchen table, which, for example, gave me a sense of whether participants were organized or messy. Another example is the presence of pets. After I noticed that a participant held her cat during the entire interview, I started to realize that pets could play an important role in the work-life balance of self-employed workers. Dogs, for example, provide temporal structure because the owners need to walk them at fixed times. After the interview, I transferred my notes on the work location and the presence of pets to a table in Excel, which allowed me to clearly see relationships between their work context and work-life balance.

I took notes on language issues such as the interviewee’s use of dictionaries or a translator. At the beginning of the interview, I noticed that participants often apologized for their level of English. Some of them made use of Google translate if they could not find the right word. Most of the times I could offer a suggestion – in English or Spanish – for the word I thought they meant. In one case, the participant felt he needed someone to translate, who in this case was the owner of the co-working space he was working at as well. Halfway through the interview, we decided that we could suffice without a translator. I marked this moment on my topic list. When I analyzed the interview, I could see that the participant talked much more freely about his personal experiences. This was probably related to anonymity issues. Reflecting on this practical issue reassured me in my decisions to do all the interviews myself, without the help of a translator.

During the interviews I noted long pauses, gaps, and contradictions. Pauses most often meant that participants were thinking, but sometimes they were thinking about the meaning of the question, instead of the answer. Long pauses or gaps might indicate difficulties with interpretation, resulting in short or irrelevant answers. Afterwards, reflecting on these notes of long pauses, I noticed that they occurred after the use of abstract concepts. Terms such as “work-life balance” and “autonomy” were too abstract for participants, regardless of me explaining what I meant by these terms at the beginning of the interview. Concepts might have different meanings or connotations across cultures, because of which I decided not to use them at all but stick to the language respondents used themselves. My research journal entries helped me to avoid misunderstandings.

Cultural differences in body language sometimes made me feel uncomfortable. In Spain, for example, it is common to kiss someone when you first meet them. Furthermore, during the interviews participants sometimes touched me, in a friendly manner, on the arm when they were emotional or wanted to thank me. A few times, male respondents flirted with me or made ambiguous remarks. Because I did not expect these remarks and did not know how to respond to them in the moment, I mostly ignored them until the interview was over. When the interview was concluded I would sit down and write how I felt and why. Later, when I compared my notes to the transcription, I found out that body language and ambiguous remarks were most often made when we discussed difficult issues or emotions. With the help of my journal, I found out that body language sometimes is used to distract the attention from key issues.

In Spain, I especially felt I had to interrupt respondents to prevent them from floating away from the key issue. This was challenging, as the Spanish participants often used expressive body language and hand gestures while telling their stories. In the beginning I would just observe them and make notes on my topic list, but later I tried to mirror them and use more body language myself. Although this felt as a barrier in the beginning, later I noticed that it feels more comfortable if both interlocutors have similar communication styles. In Sweden, on the contrary, one respondent told me that he felt uncomfortable talking about himself all the time, until he realized that he was the object of study. After taking note of this, I explained to all Swedish participants that I was mostly interested in their daily experiences and feelings. Thanks to my notes, I also found out that younger participants were more likely to share their personal experiences with me than older participants. The latter sometimes made remarks like “you will understand when you have children yourself” or “it’s much more difficult to make real good friends after your thirties, you will see”. Reviewing my notes helped me to prepare for similar situations in the future. For example, I would then start talking about common contacts, networks, or interests first. Another strategy was to tell them that I had run my own business too. The effect was that participants would think that “I knew what I was talking about”. In short, body language often signals difficult issues or emotions and is sometimes used to distract from key issues. Encouragements or interruptions may be helpful in making participants feel more at ease or remaining on topic, but the researcher might risk missing out on relevant stories.

There were more moments I had to pretend I knew what the participant was talking about in order to keep them talking. My research journal notes showed me my limited knowledge of the country context the participants were living in and the importance of comparative analysis to detect contextual influences. I had assumed beforehand that culture would influence the participant’s experiences of work-life balance. However, I noticed that I could not ask respondents directly about culture, simply because they had no reference point. Similarly, unless they had lived in another country before, they were unaware of work-life arrangements in other countries and therefore could hardly judge their own system. Furthermore, participants would only talk about government support if I explicitly asked about it. Apparently, this was not a pressing issue in individuals’ experiences. Participants would only bring up issues they were not satisfied with (such as tax systems).

My notes also showed me my own limited awareness of current political debates, business forms, and registration and tax payment systems. I did not experience this lack of knowledge as an obstacle during the interviews, but I was aware of having to pretend I knew. During the interview, I would note in my journal to check certain websites or to ask someone later. Making notes on my lack of knowledge on a topic allowed me to pretend as if I knew and keep participants talking.

After Interviews

During the last phase of data collection, and also immediately after the interviews, I would sit down in a café, read the notes I made in my notebook, and try to discover patterns. I distanced myself from the individual interviews and analyzed the information across occupations, gender, parents, and non-parents, and so on. I supplemented these ideas with my personal observations as a Dutch researcher working and living in a foreign country, which I had made throughout the whole interviewing phase. Because I went back and forth between analyzing within and between countries, I also needed to put my work away for a while to distance myself from the data. Because I worked and lived in the countries myself too, I noticed that I got adjusted to the context. I started to take things for granted myself. Taking notes on the context was especially difficult in the Netherlands, where I was not the “professional stranger” as termed by Agar (1980) . However, cross-cultural differences came up after constant comparisons between countries. My research journal allowed me to discover patterns across individuals and countries and to adjust interview questions if necessary ( Figure 1 ).

Flow chart showing what and why to enter in a research journal during the various phases of data collection.

Journaling Emotions

Besides improving the quality of data collection, maintaining a research journal provides the opportunity to record the emotional highs and lows of the process ( Engin 2011 ). Browne (2013) argues that fear, worry, anxiety, loneliness, and apprehension ultimately inform many of the major choices made in the field. Although these issues might be more severe in an insecure and volatile research context, they were present in my research period abroad too.

At some point during the interviewing phase, I felt lonely. When I read Browne’s (2013) description on how he developed an evening routine revolving around Skype by calling friends and family and catching up on other people’s lives, I felt very relieved. I was not the only one Skyping and texting my friends regularly, while I felt like I should go out every night to enjoy this adventure to the maximum. A feeling of loneliness is not necessarily caused by being alone, but can also be experienced when surrounded by new colleagues, a flat mate, and entrepreneurial participants in an unknown city. I especially missed friends, family, and colleagues who knew me and with whom I could talk about something other than work in my mother tongue.

At times, feelings of loneliness prevented me from being focused on what I was doing in the moment. I struggled with whether or not to invest in new relationships as I knew that I would “only” stay for a few months. This became especially apt after six months, towards the end of my research period. I was aware of cultural differences too, in the sense that it was more difficult to start social relationships in Sweden than in Spain. Reflections on my own journal entries made me decide to focus on a few persons I felt connected with. Although I felt supported by relatives via Skype and email, I stopped communicating with them in order to be able to focus my attention on the people around me.

Being away from home also meant that I did not work at an office surrounded by colleagues. On one hand, I experienced a feeling of freedom as I did not have to attend department meetings and nobody would ask if I did not work for a day. On the other hand, I missed being able to check whether I was doing the right thing and making the right decisions. I started to write down in my journal how and why I was doing this project.

My journal also taught me to tap into my intrinsic motivation. For example, I wrote that participants were often surprised by their own answers. After the interview, participants told me how this interview had made work-life related issues more clear to them. Realizing that I could contribute to improving one’s quality of life made me feel better than publishing as much articles as possible on it. I learned that I felt most fulfilled by being able to offer a moment of reflection to participants. This motivated me even more to focus on the quality of the work I was doing.

To conclude, besides using the research journal for improving the quality of data collection, it could help you to deal with emotions. I suggest to: (1) take notes on feelings of loneliness because it helps you to focus on being “here and now” and to connect with people around you; and (2) to take notes on how and why you are doing this project because it helps you to tap into your intrinsic motivation, especially if you are conducting this research alone.

Methodological Considerations

Regardless of their philosophical background, qualitative researchers have distinct criteria by which to ensure and judge the trustworthiness of findings. The qualitative data collection and analysis is based on a research protocol. The protocol is an explicit guide on all aspects of the proposed methodology. However, in the phase of qualitative data collection, unexpected issues may arise that are not mentioned in the protocol. Here, it becomes extra important to ensure the rigor of qualitative research.

Rigorous data analysis may be achieved through providing the reader with an explanation about the process by which the raw data is collected, transformed, and organized into the research report ( Tracey 2010 ). Furthermore, Tracey (2010) argues that qualitative research should be characterized by sincerity. Sincerity means that “the research is marked by honesty and transparency about the researcher’s biases, goals, and foibles as well as about how these played a role in the methods, joys, and mistakes of the research” ( 2010 , 841). It can be achieved by: (1) transparency about the methods and challenges; and (2) self-reflexivity about subjective values, biases, and inclinations. Transparency requires a case record or an “audit trail” which provides “clear documentation of all research decisions and activities” throughout the account or in the appendices ( Creswell and Miller 2000 , 28). An account of self-reflexivity is seldom provided, but could be based on the research journal. Whereas the research protocol is written before the phase of data collection, research journal entries are made unexpectedly and not separated and structured such as a research protocol. A research journal includes different types of entries such as data, additional items, contextual information, reflection, and ideas ( Altrichter and Holly 2005 ). This may raise the question whether reflection impacts on replicability of the protocol and the transferability of the results.

As I have shown before, the research journal can be used for reflection-in-action ( Boutilier and Mason 2012 ). The research journal allows the researcher to reflect on these issues in the midst of making choices. Instead of ignoring or going over issues because they were not in the protocol, the researcher reports on unexpected issues without wanting to improve the status of the data. Using a research journal allows the researcher to remember these issues and reduces the chances of the researcher sweeping issues under the carpet.

Furthermore, the research journal may contain notes on methodological issues or ideas on alternative methods and procedures. More specifically, researchers may reflect on the conditions under which they used particular research methods, possible biases, the role of the researcher, and what decisions they made about the future course of the research and why. These reflections may help to develop the quality of the research project, the competence of the researcher and future research ( Altrichter and Holly 2005 ). Rather than a replacement of the protocol, the research journal may be seen as a valuable addition to ensure sincerity and rigor. In the next paragraph, ethical considerations will be discussed.

Ethical Considerations

Being reflexive, or holding up research activities to ethical scrutiny, is an important part of research ethics ( Israel and Hay 2006 ). Ethical decision-making is influenced by ethical frameworks, professional guidelines, and ethical and legal regulation ( Wiles 2012 ). This becomes clear when a researcher submits a research manuscript and is asked to declare that the independence of research is clear and any conflicts of interest or partiality must be explicit. The most common aspects of ethical frameworks are respect for people’s autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Respect for autonomy relates to issues of voluntariness, informed consent, confidentiality, and anonymity. Beneficence concerns the responsibility to do good, non-maleficence concerns the responsibility to avoid harm, and justice concerns the importance of the benefits and burdens of research being distributed equally ( Israel and Hay 2006 ).

Some of these ethical issues can be considered prior to the research commencing, but many are emergent and become apparent only as the research proceeds, mainly during the phase of data collection. Furthermore, researchers may have a “gut feeling” about the morally right course of action when they encounter issues. This is why Wiles (2012) argues that ethical issues should be approached from a situational relativist perspective. This means that the ethical issues should be managed when they emerge in research, rather than solely adhere to a set of principles or rules. From this perspective, ethical frameworks do not determine decision-making but rather provide researchers with a means of thinking systematically about moral behavior in research. In addition, a journal may help researchers to think about, evaluate, and justify these issues and their “gut feelings”.

By writing down issues in a research journal during the phase of data collection, researchers are able to manage them in considered and reflexive ways ( Israel and Hay 2006 ). For example, researchers might write and reflect on why one guideline might need to be chosen over another ( Israel and Hay 2006 ; Hammersley and Traianou 2012 ). During my research project, I reflected on whether I should be honest and tell participants I did not know which policies they were talking about, or whether I could lie and tell them I knew in order to keep them talking. Because it would not harm the participants, I decided I would pretend I knew. Reflexivity may also help to maintain the ethics of the power relationship between researcher and the researched. Reflexivity is likely to situate the researcher as non-exploitative and compassionate toward the research subjects ( Pillow 2003 ). Being self-reflective helps the researcher to identify questions and content that he or she tends to emphasize or shy away from. It increases awareness of one’s own reactions to interviews, thoughts, emotions, and triggers ( Berger 2015 ). To conclude, the research journal may function as a tool for honesty and awareness of ethical issues and to reflect on them, but also a log if consent from ethical committees is required afterwards ( Pillow 2003 ).

Conclusions

In this article I have argued that keeping a research journal is a suitable method to reflect on issues arising during the phase of data collection. This is important especially if there are no colleague researchers within reach to discuss issues with, because unexpected issues may arise and decisions have to be made quickly in the phase of data collection.

I used examples from my own research project to show how a research journal may effectively help one to reflect on issues during face-to-face interviews with entrepreneurs in three different countries. I would like to encourage qualitative entrepreneurship researchers to establish a journal on your laptop, on printed-out topic lists, and in a notebook that can always be kept in your bag. A research journal should always be at hand and ready to use, since ideas often come at unexpected moments. Smartphones or tablets could serve this purpose very well too. Based on a case study, I provided ten suggestions for what and why to write down in a research journal during five phases of data collection: before you start, while contacting participants, after the first interviews, during interviews, and after the interviews are conducted.

Besides improving the quality of data collection, maintaining a research journal also provides researchers with the opportunity to deal with emotions. I suggest to: (1) take notes on feelings of loneliness because it helps you to focus on being “here and now” and to connect with people around you; and (2) take notes on how and why you are doing this project because it helps you to tap into your intrinsic motivation, especially if you are conducting this research alone.

Researchers may increase the rigor of qualitative research by providing the reader with an explanation about the methodological process ( Tracey 2010 ). The research journal may be seen as a valuable addition to the research protocol, because it allows researchers to reflect on arising issues which are not included in the protocol and require immediate decision making. Besides methodological choices, researchers in the field need to deal with ethical considerations. Keeping a research journal stimulates researchers to note down their thoughts and considerations. These notes are likely to provide clarity and stimulate researchers to be honest and compassionate toward the research participants. Lastly, the research journal may function as a log if consent from ethical committees is required afterwards ( Pillow 2003 ).

To conclude, the journal helps researchers to reflect on unexpected issues, emotional challenges, and methodological and ethical issues at the “grass-root level of qualitative research”, which undoubtedly will arise in a cross-cultural context. Although in this case study cross-cultural refers to cross-national, entrepreneurship researchers conducting face-to-face interviews in local or regional multicultural and multilingual settings can benefit from keeping journals too. The research journal may be seen as a valuable addition to the research protocol, which will improve the rigor and sincerity of qualitative entrepreneurship research.

Funding statement: Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) (Grant/Award Number: “4010002.006”).

Agar, Michael. 1980. “Stories, Background Knowledge and Themes: Problems in the Analysis of Life History Narrative.” American Ethnologist 7 (2):223–39. 10.1525/ae.1980.7.2.02a00010 Search in Google Scholar

Altrichter, Herbert, and Mary Louise Holly. 2005. “Research Diaries.” In Research Methods in the Social Sciences , edited by Bridget Somekh and Cathy Lewin, 24–32. London: Sage Publications. Search in Google Scholar

Berger, Roni. 2015. “Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research.” Qualitative Research 15 (2): 219–234. 10.1177/1468794112468475 Search in Google Scholar

Borg, Simon. 2001. “The Research Journal: A Tool for Promoting and Understanding Researcher Development.” Language Teaching Research 5 (2):156–77. 10.1177/136216880100500204 Search in Google Scholar

Boutilier, Marie, and Robin Mason. 2012. “The Reflexive Practitioner in Health Promotion: From Reflection to Reflexivity.” In Health Promotion in Canada: Critical Perspective on Practice , edited by Irving Rootman, Sophie Dupéré, Ann Pederson and Michel O’Neill, 196–207. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press Inc. Search in Google Scholar

Browne, Brendan Ciaran. 2013. “Recording the Personal: The Benefits in Maintaining Research Diaries for Documenting the Emotional and Practical Challenges of Fieldwork in Unfamiliar Settings.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 12 (1):420–35. 10.1177/160940691301200121 Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, John, and Dana Miller. 2000. “Determining validity in qualitative inquiry.” Theory into practice 39 (3): 124–130. 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 Search in Google Scholar

Engin, Marion. 2011. “Research Diary: A Tool for Scaffolding.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 10 (3):296–306. 10.1177/160940691101000308 Search in Google Scholar

Gokah, Theophilus. 2006. “The Naïve Researcher: Doing Social Research in Africa.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 9 (1):61–73. 10.1080/13645570500436163 Search in Google Scholar

Gómez, Maria Victoria, and Marjo Kuronen. 2011. “Comparing Local Strategies and Practices: Recollections from Two Qualitative Cross-National Research Projects.” Qualitative Research 11 (6):683–97. 10.1177/1468794111413366 Search in Google Scholar

Hammersley, Martyn, and Anna Traianou. 2012. Ethics in Qualitative Research: Controversies and Contexts . London: Sage Publications. 10.4135/9781473957619 Search in Google Scholar

Hantrais, Linda. 2008. International Comparative Research: Theory, Methods and Practice . Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978-1-137-06884-2_5 Search in Google Scholar

Hobson, Barbara. 2014. Worklife Balance : The Agency and Capabilities Gap . Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681136.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

Israel, Mark, and Iain Hay. 2006. Research Ethics for Social Scientists . London: Sage Publications. 10.4135/9781849209779 Search in Google Scholar

Kottkamp, Robert B. 1990. “Means for Facilitating Reflection.” Education and Urban Society 22 (2):182–203. 10.1177/0013124590022002005 Search in Google Scholar

Leighton, Patricia, and Duncan Brown. 2013. Future working: The rise of Europe’s independent professionals . London: Professional Contractors Group (PCG). Search in Google Scholar

Mangen, Steen. 1999. “Qualitative Research Methods in Cross-National Settings.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 2 (2):109–24. 10.1080/136455799295087 Search in Google Scholar

Newbury, Darren. 2001. “Diaries and Fieldnotes in the Research Process.” Research Issues in Art Design and Media 1:1–17. Search in Google Scholar

Pillow, Wanda. 2003. “Confession, Catharsis, or Cure? Rethinking the Uses of Reflexivity as Methodological Power in Qualitative Research.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 16 (2):175–96. 10.1080/0951839032000060635 Search in Google Scholar

Quilgars, Deborah, Marja Elsinga, Anwen Jones, Janneke Toussaint, Hannu Ruonavaara, and Päivi Naumanen. 2009. “Inside Qualitative, Cross‐National Research: Making Methods Transparent in a EU Housing Study.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12 (1):19–31. 10.1080/13645570701804292 Search in Google Scholar

Rapelli, Stéphane. 2012. European I-Pros: a study . London: Professional Contractors Group (PCG). Search in Google Scholar

Tracy, Sarah J. 2010. “Qualitative Quality: Eight ‘Big-Tent’ Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 16 (10):837–51. 10.1177/1077800410383121 Search in Google Scholar

Weiner-Levy, Naomi, and Ariela Popper-Giveon. 2013. “The Absent, the Hidden and the Obscured: Reflections on “Dark Matter” in Qualitative Research.” Quality & Quantity 47 (4):2177–90. 10.1007/s11135-011-9650-7 Search in Google Scholar

Wiles, Rose. 2012. What Are Qualitative Research Ethics? London: Bloomsbury Academic. 10.5040/9781849666558 Search in Google Scholar

Williamson, Deanna L., Jaeyoung Choi, Margo Charchuk, Gwen R. Rempel, Nicole Pitre, Rhonda Breitkreuz, and Kaysi Eastlick Kushner. 2011. “Interpreter-Facilitated Cross-Language Interviews: A Research Note.” Qualitative Research 11 (4):381–94. 10.1177/1468794111404319 Search in Google Scholar

X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

EndoSRR: a comprehensive multi-stage approach for endoscopic specular reflection removal

Original Article
Published: 20 April 2024

Cite this article

Wei Li 1 , 2 ,
Fucang Jia ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0075-979X 2 , 3 &
Wenjian Liu 1

Specular reflections in endoscopic images not only disturb visual perception but also hamper computer vision algorithm performance. However, the intricate nature and variability of these reflections, coupled with a lack of relevant datasets, pose ongoing challenges for removal.

We present EndoSRR, a robust method for eliminating specular reflections in endoscopic images. EndoSRR comprises two stages: reflection detection and reflection region inpainting. In the reflection detection stage, we adapt and fine-tune the segment anything model (SAM) using a weakly labeled dataset, achieving an accurate reflection mask. For reflective region inpainting, we employ LaMa, a fast Fourier convolution-based model trained on a 4.5M-image dataset, enabling effective inpainting of arbitrarily shaped reflection regions. Lastly, we introduce an iterative optimization strategy for dual pre-trained models to refine the results of specular reflection removal, named DPMIO.

Utilizing the SCARED-2019 dataset, our approach surpasses state-of-the-art methods in both qualitative and quantitative evaluations. Qualitatively, our method excels in accurately detecting reflective regions, yielding more natural and realistic inpainting results. Quantitatively, our method demonstrates superior performance in both segmentation evaluation metrics (IoU, E-measure, etc.) and image inpainting evaluation metrics (PSNR, SSIM, etc.).

The experimental results underscore the significance of proficient endoscopic specular reflection removal for enhancing visual perception and downstream tasks. The methodology and results presented in this study are poised to catalyze advancements in specular reflection removal, thereby augmenting the accuracy and safety of minimally invasive surgery.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Pan J, Li R, Liu H, Hu Y, Zheng W, Yan B, Yang Y, Xiao Y (2023) Highlight removal for endoscopic images based on accelerated adaptive non-convex RPCA decomposition. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 228:107240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.107240

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Funke I, Bodenstedt S, Riediger C, Weitz J, Speidel S (2018) Generative adversarial networks for specular highlight removal in endoscopic images. In: Medical imaging 2018: image-guided procedures, robotic interventions, and modeling, vol 10576. SPIE, Houston, pp 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2293755

Oh J, Hwang S, Lee J, Tavanapong W, Wong J, de Groen PC (2007) Informative frame classification for endoscopy video. Med Image Anal 11(2):110–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2006.10.003

Alsaleh SM, Aviles AI, Sobrevilla P, Casals A, Hahn JK (2016) Adaptive segmentation and mask-specific sobolev inpainting of specular highlights for endoscopic images. In: EMBC. IEEE, Lake Buena Vista, pp 1196–1199. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2016.7590919

Wang X, Li P, Yongzhao D, Lv Y, Chen Y (2019) Detection and inpainting of specular reflection in colposcopic images with exemplar-based method. In: ASID. IEEE, Xiamen, pp 90–94, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASID.2019.8925202

Arnold M, Ghosh A, Ameling S, Lacey G (2010) Automatic segmentation and inpainting of specular highlights for endoscopic imaging. EURASIP J Image Video Process 2010:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/814319

Article Google Scholar

Li R, Pan J, Si Y, Yan B, Hu Y, Qin H (2019) Specular reflections removal for endoscopic image sequences with Adaptive-RPCA decomposition. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 39(2):328–340. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2019.2926501

Monkam P, Wu J, Lu W, Shan W, Chen H, Zhai Y (2021) Easyspec: automatic specular reflection detection and suppression from endoscopic images. IEEE Trans Comput Imaging 7:1031–1043. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCI.2021.3112117

Ali S, Zhou F, Bailey A, Braden B, East JE, Lu X, Rittscher J (2021) A deep learning framework for quality assessment and restoration in video endoscopy. Med Image Anal 68:101900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2020.101900

Chwyl B, Chung AG, Wong A, Clausi DA (2015) Specular reflectance suppression in endoscopic imagery via stochastic bayesian estimation. In: ICIAR. Springer, Canada, pp 385–393, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20801-5_42

Daher R, Vasconcelos F, Stoyanov D (2023) A temporal learning approach to inpainting endoscopic specularities and its effect on image correspondence. Med Image Anal 90:102994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2023.102994

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Mazurowski MA, Dong H, Gu H, Yang J, Konz N, Zhang Y (2023) Segment anything model for medical image analysis: an experimental study. Med Image Anal 89:102918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2023.102918

Kirillov A, Mintun E, Ravi N, Mao H, Rolland C, Gustafson L, Xiao T, Whitehead S, Berg AC, Lo WY, Dollar P, Girshick R (2023) Segment anything. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.02643 , https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.02643

Liu W, Shen X, Pun CM, Cun X (2023) Explicit visual prompting for low-level structure segmentations. In: CVPR, pp 19434–19445

Hendrycks D, Gimpel K (2016) Gaussian error linear units (gelus). arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.08415 , https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1606.08415

Suvorov R, Logacheva E, Mashikhin A, Remizova A, Ashukha A, Silvestrov A, Kong N, Goka H, Park K, Lempitsky V (2022) Resolution-robust large mask inpainting with Fourier convolutions. In: WACV, pp 2149–2159

Chi L, Jiang B, Mu Y (2020) Fast Fourier convolution. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 33:4479–4488

Allan M, Mcleod J, Wang C, Rosenthal JC, Hu Z, Gard N, Eisert P, Fu KX, Zeffiro T, Xia W, Zhu Z, Luo H, Jia F, Zhang X, Li X, Sharan L, Kurmann T, Schmid S, Sznitman R, Psychogyios D, Azizian M, Stoyanov D, Maier-Hein L, Speidel S (2021) Stereo correspondence and reconstruction of endoscopic data challenge. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.01133 , https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2101.01133

Fan DP, Gong C, Cao Y, Ren B, Cheng MM, Borji A (2018) Enhanced-alignment measure for binary foreground map evaluation. In: IJCAI, pp 698–704, https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2018/97

Rezki AM, Serir A, Beghdadi A (2022) Blind image inpainting quality assessment using local features continuity. Multimed Tools Appl 81(7):9225–9244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-11872-2

Download references

Acknowledgements

The present study was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.62172401), the Guangdong Natural Science Foundation (Nos. 2022A1515010439 and 2022A0505020019), the Shenzhen Key Basic Research Grant (No. JCYJ20220818101802005), the Zhuhai Science and Technology Program (No. ZH22017002210017PWC), the Shenzhen Key Laboratory Program (No.ZDSYS201707271637577), and the Education Science Planning Program of Guangdong Department of Education (Higher Education Special Project) (No. 2022GXJK325).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Data Science, City University of Macau, Macau, China

Wei Li & Wenjian Liu

Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China

Wei Li & Fucang Jia

The Key Laboratory of Biomedical Imaging Science and System, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Fucang Jia or Wenjian Liu .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest with regard to this study.

Ethical approval

The data used in this paper are a public dataset.

Informed consent

Additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Li, W., Jia, F. & Liu, W. EndoSRR: a comprehensive multi-stage approach for endoscopic specular reflection removal. Int J CARS (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-024-03137-8

Download citation

Received : 29 February 2024

Accepted : 28 March 2024

Published : 20 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-024-03137-8

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Specular reflection
Reflection detection
Image inpainting
Endoscopic image
Transfer learning
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

IMAGES

Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research
13+ Reflective Journal Templates
sample of reflective journal
4 Reflective Journal FINAL
(PDF) Using reflective journals to assess the research process
Sample Of Reflective Journal

VIDEO

Different types of Research Designs|Quantitative|Qualitative|English| part 1|
How to Prepare Reflective journal। Reflective Journal in Punjabi। ਚਿੰਤਨਸ਼ੀਲ ਰੋਜਾਨਾਮਚਾ।
Qualitative Research Overview, Types and Relevance (Unit 2)
Qualitative Research Reporting Standards: How are qualitative articles different from quantitative?
Roundtable: Qualitative Research in the Asian Context
Reflective Journals in Educational Psychology

COMMENTS

Full article: A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research
As qualitative research has gained credibility in health professions education (HPE) scholarship (Varpio and Meyer 2017), ... These reactions may also form the basis of entries in a journal or other form of reflective writing. The analysis may focus on how the power dynamics between researcher and participant could have influenced both ...
Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research Process
Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research Process . Abstract . The problem of bias in qualitative research particularly is still debated in methodology texts and there is a lack of agreement on how much researcher influence is acceptable, whether or not it needs to be "controlled," and how it might be accounted for.
Challenging perspectives: Reflexivity as a critical approach to
In qualitative research, reflexivity has become a means of understanding knowledge production. The process involves reflecting on the knowledge that researchers produce and their role in producing that knowledge (Braun and Clarke, 2013).Since qualitative social sciences challenge the dominance of realism: 'There are no objective observations, only observations situated in the worlds of the ...
Reflexive journals in qualitative research
Janesick, V., 1998, Journal Writing as a Qualitative Research Technique: History, Issues, and Reflections, https: ... Vicary, Young and Hicks, 2016, A reflective journal as learning process and contribution to quality and validity in Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, Qualitative Social Work, 16(4), 550-565.
Reflectivity in Research Practice: An Overview of Different
Reflection is a very important mental activity, both in private and professional life. This study assumes that reflection is "a turning back onto a self" where the inquirer is at once an observed and an active observer (Steier, 1995, p. 163).Reflection aims at understanding the forms of intelligibility by which the world is made meaningful; in the heuristic context of the research work ...
Chapter 6. Reflexivity
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.
Developing qualitative research questions: a reflective process
This article addresses both the development of initial research questions and how the processes of generating and refining questions are critical to the shaping all phases of a qualitative study the inquiry process. The idea of qualitative inquiry as a reflective process underscores the strengths of a qualitative approach.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods Reflectivity in Research
Reflec-tion aims at understanding the forms of intelligibility by which the world is made meaningful; in the heuristic context of the research work, reflecting means to elucidate the epistemic acts developed in the midst of inquiry process. When the mind thinks on itself, the subject engaged in the reflective practice plays at the same time the ...
Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research
It is widely documented in the literature that reflective journals are sources of qualitative data (Bashan & Holsblat, 2017;Jasper, 2005; Ortlipp, 2008) and they have been increasingly recognized ...
Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research
Whilst keeping a reflective journal is a common practice in qualitative research, particularly reflexive research (Etherington, 2004), there is relatively little literature on the use of reflective journals in the research process, and limited guidance for novice researchers as to the purposes of keeping a reflective journal from a ...
Reflective Journaling
The use of reflective practice (generally) and journaling (specifically) have since become commonplace in many forms of qualitative research, both as a supplement to the research process and as a stand-alone method of inquiry. The increasing mainstream acceptance of reflective journaling as research has, in large part, grown in tandem with ...
Developing qualitative research questions: A reflective process
The reflective and interrogative processes required for developing effective qualitative research questions can give shape and direction to a study in ways that are often underestimated. Good research questions do not necessarily produce good research, but poorly conceived or constructed questions will likely create problems that affect all subsequent stages of a study.
Doing qualitative research: Methodological reflections on researching
European Journal of Education covers all areas of educational research from global contributors, ... an engagement with critical independent reflection, critical friendship, skills development through academic modules and reflexive reading, and communities of practice. ... While there is an ongoing dialogue in qualitative research exploring ...
Reflective journals as a research tool: The case of student teachers
2.1. Reflective journals in teacher education. Journals written by participants or researchers in practical settings constitute a source of narrative research (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Reflective journals comprise an important part of document-ing the practice of diferent professions, such as nursing, and in fields such as musical education ...
Qualitative Research
Qualitative Research was established in 2001 by Sara Delamont and Paul Atkinson. The journal was founded to offer a critical and reflective gaze on methodological approaches, understandings and engagements, and worked to counter tendencies that imagined qualitative research could become a taken for granted set of precepts and procedures.
PDF Development and Implementation of a Reflective Journaling Method for
The purpose of this research paper is to describe the development and implementation of a qualitative method used to study the transition experiences of recent mechanical engineering graduates. The school-to-work transition is a critical point on an engineer's career trajectory and involves substantial changes over a short period of time.
Using Reflexive Interviewing to Foster Deep Understanding of Research
The reflective interview consists of the engagement of the interviewer and interviewee in the process of elaboration and collective understanding of the subjective contents exposed by the ... (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4, 324-327. Crossref. PubMed ...
Reflective journals in qualitative inquiry
The reflective journal in qualitative research is a written record by the researchers themselves and is written throughout the research process. A reflective journal includes the details of what the researchers did, thought, and felt while analyzing the data. Then, the rationale behind those thoughts and percepts are recorded.
Using the Research Journal during Qualitative Data Collection in a
This article shows how a research journal can be used as a tool to reflect on issues arising during the phase of data collection. Especially in cross-cultural comparative research, unexpected cultural issues are likely to arise. The most critical is the phase of data collection, where decisions have to be made quickly. This article demonstrates how to establish and maintain a research journal ...
Qualitative Research: Sage Journals
Qualitative Research is a peer-reviewed international journal that has been leading debates about qualitative methods for over 20 years. The journal provides a forum for the discussion and development of qualitative methods across disciplines, publishing high quality articles that contribute to the ways in which we think about and practice the craft of qualitative research.
EndoSRR: a comprehensive multi-stage approach for endoscopic ...
Through both qualitative and quantitative analysis and comparison, the outcomes of our proposed methods are optimal, excelling in both specular reflection detection and reflection region inpainting. Additionally, we directly apply the inpainting results to segment anything model, as well as visualize the inpainting results in 3D using the depth ...
Full article: Reflective journals as a research tool: The case of
Reflective journals in teacher education. Journals written by participants or researchers in practical settings constitute a source of narrative research (Connelly & Clandinin, Citation 1990).Reflective journals comprise an important part of documenting the practice of different professions, such as nursing, and in fields such as musical education, business administration, psychology and ...
Using reflective writing within research
Thus, this paper considers the features of reflective writing and its use within qualitative research as a method in its own right, as a data source and within the analytical processes. ... Stages in coming to terms with reflection: student advanced nurse practitioners' perceptions of their reflective journeys . Journal of Advanced Nursing ...
Reflexivity in Qualitative Research
All qualitative research is contextual; it occurs within a specific time and place between two or more people. If a researcher clearly describes the contextual intersecting relationships between the participants and themselves (reflexivity), it not only increases the creditability of the findings but also deepens our understanding of the work.