The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Cultural Insiders and Research Fieldwork: Case Examples From Cross-Cultural Research With Thai People
Open accessAbstract
The status of the insider and outsider is an important concept for cross-cultural research. Being a cultural insider is recognized as a strength that allows the researcher to take part in the everyday lives of local people and to get closer to the participants. We explore these issues using examples from our own research with Thai people in southern Thailand and in Melbourne, Australia. We suggest that insider status has an impact on whether the researchers can conduct successful fieldwork and obtain in-depth understanding of the phenomenon being investigated. Being an insider enables a researcher to conduct research more sensitively. It helps in gaining a deeper understanding of the sociocultural contexts of the research setting. However, there are also challenges associated with insider status. These include the need to reestablish our position in a community, our assumptions about what the participants tell us, and participants’ expectations about us. This article provides case examples for researchers who are interested in conducting research, particularly within the Thai context. It should contribute to a conceptual understanding of real life experiences in a cross-cultural context in general.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 40
- Adler S. M., 2004, Decolonizing research in cross-cultural contexts: Critical personal narratives, 107
- 10.1177/1473325007086413 · DOI
- 10.3102/0013189X027007004 · DOI
- 10.4135/9781412986168.n9 · DOI
- Bishop R., 2008, The landscape of qualitative research, 145
- 10.1177/1094428106289253 · DOI
- 10.1080/1364557032000094560 · DOI
- Chawla D., 2007, International Journal of Qualitative Methodology, 5, 1
- 10.1080/13613320701845749 · DOI
- 10.1177/1077800404265723 · DOI
- 10.1177/1473325011401467 · DOI
- 10.1177/1525822X09349919 · DOI
- Falzon M. A., 2009, Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis and locality in contemporary research, 1
- 10.1080/13645570500436163 · DOI
- 10.1080/13645570210149796 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-1-4020-8567-3_2 · DOI
- 10.1525/si.2003.26.4.591 · DOI
- 10.4135/9781849209861 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511812705 · DOI
- 10.1177/1049732311421680 · DOI
- Madden R., 2010, Being ethnographic: A guide to the theory and practice of ethnography
- 10.1177/160940690600500209 · DOI
- 10.1080/02601370120490 · DOI · Paper page
- Morris T., 2008, What do Buddhists believe?: Meaning and mindfulness in Buddhist philosophy
- Narayan K., 2008, Representing ethnography, 3, 269
- 10.4135/9781446268308 · DOI
- Phillips D. A., 2007, Thailand: Modern world nations
- 10.1177/1440783305053238 · DOI
- Rakhit A., 1998, Researching racism in education: Politics, theory and practice, 55
- 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2007.00184.x · DOI
- 10.1177/1525822X13516838 · DOI
- 10.1177/107780040100700403 · DOI
- 10.1177/0038038595029002004 · DOI
- Spradley J. P., 1979, The ethnographic interview
- 10.1080/09518390600924352 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10900-011-9360-z · DOI
- 10.4135/9781483385686.n2 · DOI
- 10.3102/0013189X031009003 · DOI
- Van Maanen J., 1988, Tales of the field: On writing ethnography
- Walsh-Tapiata W., 2003, Making a difference in families: Research that creates change, 55
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Strunel, A.-M., & Cordoba, S. (2025) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1080/14780887.2025.2505460 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Suwankhong, D., & Liamputtong, P.
- Affiliations
- Thaksin University (TH)
- Western Sydney University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Suwankhong, Dusanee
- Venue
- International Journal of Qualitative Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-12-09
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 5
- ISSN
- 1609-4069 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2285209268
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5
- FWCI
- 8.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Qualitative Methods (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Cross-Cultural and Social Analysis
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture
- Keywords
- insider status, insider-outsider distinction, cross-cultural research, fieldwork, researcher positionality, Thai people, southern Thailand, Melbourne, participant expectations, researcher sensitivity
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