CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,937Qualitative Research Methods and EthicsQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsPosthumanist Ethics and Activism

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

“Outing” the Researcher: The Provenance, Process, and Practice of Reflexivity

Finlay, Linda·2002·Qualitative Health Research
DOI 10.1177/104973202129120052
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

To increase the integrity and trustworthiness of qualitative research, researchers need to evaluate how intersubjective elements influence data collection and analysis. Reflexivity— where researchers engage in explicit, self-aware analysis of their own role—offers one tool for such evaluation. The process of engaging in reflexive analysis, however, is difficult, and its subjective, ambiguous nature is contested. In the face of challenges, researchers might retreat from engaging in the process. In this article, the author seeks to “out” the researcher’s presence by exploring the theory and practice of reflexivity. Examples from research illustrate its problematic potential.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/104973202129120052

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Coffey, A., 1996, Making sense of qualitative data analysis: Complementary strategies
  2. DeVault, M. L., 1997, Reflexivity and voice, 216
  3. Dilthey, W., 1985, Poetry and experience: Selected Works
  4. Ellis, C., 1997, Reflexivity and voice, 119
  5. Gough, B., International Human Science Conference
  6. Harré, R., 1983, Personal being
  7. Hertz, R., 1997, Reflexivity and voice
  8. Jorgenson, J., 1991, Research and reflexivity, 210
  9. Marshall, H., 1998, Standpoints and differences, 115
  10. Outhwaite, W., 1985, The returnof grand theory in the human sciences, 21
  11. Reason, P., 1988, Human inquiry in action
  12. Reinharz, S., 1997, Reflexivity and voice, 3
  13. Wasserfall, R. R., 1997, Reflexivity and voice, 150
  14. Wertz, F. J., 1984, Exploring the lived world: Readings in phenomenological psychology, 29
  15. Willot, S., 1998, Standpoints and differences, 174

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 901–998 of 998

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Finlay, L.
Affiliations
The Open University (GB)
Corresponding author
Finlay, Linda
Venue
Qualitative Health Research
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2002-04
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
531-545
ISSN
  • 1049-7323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7557
DOI
10.1177/104973202129120052
OpenAlex
W2133094746
Cited by
1,937
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 345 · 2025: 184 · 2024: 125 · 2023: 121 · 2022: 113 · 2021: 119 · 2020: 94 · 2019: 115 · 2018: 77 · 2017: 77 · 2016: 76 · 2015: 85 · 2014: 79 · 2013: 59 · 2012: 56
FWCI
27.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Qualitative Health Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Posthumanist Ethics and Activism
Keywords
reflexivity, researcher reflexivity, researcher presence, intersubjectivity, research trustworthiness, researcher positionality
MeSH terms
Data Collection, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Health Services Research, Research Design, Research Personnel, Professional Role

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review