CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 153Qualitative Research Methods and EthicsQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsPosthumanist Ethics and Activism

A Reflexive Lens: Exploring Dilemmas of Qualitative Methodology Through the Concept of Reflexivity

Open access
Day, Suzanne·2012·Qualitative Sociology Review
DOI 10.18778/1733-8077.8.1.04
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Reflexivity has emerged as a central and critical concept in the methodology of qualitative social research. However, the concept of reflexivity is defined and taken up in a wide variety of ways, and the assumptions underlying each incarnation have particular implications for research outcomes. This paper argues that these various conceptualizations of reflexivity offer the qualitative researcher a critical lens through which to analyze key methodological dilemmas. Exploring the concept of reflexivity in its various forms provides an entry-point for understanding key dilemmas in the epistemology of qualitative methodology, qualitative research relationships, and the evaluation of qualitative research. These dilemmas present important challenges in terms of the complex issues of power, knowledge production and subjectivity. This paper thus demonstrates that a reflexive exploration of methodological dilemmas can provide a starting point for assessing the consequences and transformative potential of our qualitative research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18778/1733-8077.8.1.04

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Reflexivity involves an observation of the power imbalance between researcher and participant.

    “Furthermore, reflexivity involves an observation of the power imbalance between researcher and participant.”

    From Challenging perspectives: Reflexivity as a critical approach to qualitative social work research (2024) · cites this paper as Day, 2012

  • Power is not intrinsically held by persons but by peoples and groups; they are positioned differently within power structures, and power is not equally distributed.

    “Power is not something that is intrinsically held by persons but by peoples and groups; they are positioned differently within power structures, and power is not equally distributed (Day, 2012).”

    From Challenging perspectives: Reflexivity as a critical approach to qualitative social work research (2024) · cites this paper as Day, 2012

  • Reflexivity has become significant in the production of qualitative research, but the necessary techniques may not be clear.

    “On the other hand, while reflexivity has become significant in the production of qualitative research, the necessary techniques may not be clear (Day, 2012), and it can be considered too subjective (Finlay, 2002) leading to questioning the validity of the research.”

    From Challenging perspectives: Reflexivity as a critical approach to qualitative social work research (2024) · cites this paper as Day, 2012

  • Reflexive researchers are encouraged to manage power differences by empowering and collaborating with research participants.

    “Reflexive researchers are encouraged to manage power differences by empowering and collaborating with research participants (Day, 2012).”

    From Challenging perspectives: Reflexivity as a critical approach to qualitative social work research (2024) · cites this paper as Day, 2012

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Day, S.
Affiliations
York University (CA)
Corresponding author
Day, Suzanne
ORCID
Day, Suzanne
Venue
Qualitative Sociology Review
Publisher
Uniwersytet Lodzki (University of Lodz)
Published
2012-04-30
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
60-85
ISSN
1733-8077 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.18778/1733-8077.8.1.04
OpenAlex
W4206026463
Cited by
153
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5
FWCI
8.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Qualitative Sociology Review (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
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, qualitative research methodology, epistemology of qualitative research, research relationships, power in research, knowledge production, researcher subjectivity, methodological dilemmas

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