Name
Instructor
Law
31st August 2020
The Impact of a Researcher’s Positionality on the Substance and Structure of a Research Investigation
- Thesis
McCorkel and Myers’ study “What difference does difference make? Position and privilege in the field” fundamentally discusses the impact of a researcher’s positionality on a research investigation’s substance and structure. The two researchers primarily argue that social, educational, gender, racial, and religious status of social scientists often affect interviewers’ responses, and hence the results.
- Three Key Methodologies chosen by the Author
- Ethnographic approach
- Grounded theory approach
- Case study approach
- How Methodological Choices Shaped the Findings
- Through an ethnographic study of imprisoned women, McCorkel embraced the fact that this group was indeed out of control and rejected the construction that they were dangerous.
- Through grounded theory and ethnography, Myers established that the problems he experienced when collecting data from African American women as opposed to white women were because of his whiteness.
- The researchers managed to register more objective and unbiased findings because they considered the effect of their positionality.
- “Zoom in” vs. “Zoom out.”
- “Zoom out” represents the bigger picture. It merely refers to the ability to have an open mind and to embrace diversity.
- This strategy significantly helps the author’s argument. It enables the researcher to consider all the circumstances surrounding a study, including the effect of positionality.
- Compared to the three methodological approaches – ethnography, grounded theory, and case study – above, the “zoom in” vs. “zoom out” approach is more comprehensive. It considers both narrow and broad-based factors that affect a research study.
Bibliography
McCorkel, Jill A., and Kristen Myers. “What difference does difference make? Position and privilege in the field.” Qualitative Sociology 26.2 (2003): 199-231.