CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 132Qualitative Research Methods and EthicsQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsQualitative research in health

Identity, positionality and reflexivity: relevance and application to research paramedics

Open access
Wilson, Caitlin, Janes, Gillian, Williams, Julia·2022·British Paramedic Journal
DOI 10.29045/14784726.2022.09.7.2.43PMC PMC9662153
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article introduces the reader to the concepts of identity, positionality and reflexivity and outlines their relevance to research paramedics. We outline how a researcher’s identity and positionality can influence all aspects of research, including the research question, study design, data collection and data analysis. We discuss that the ‘insider’ position of paramedics conducting research with other paramedics or within their specific clinical setting has considerable benefits to participant access, understanding of data and dissemination, while highlighting the difficulties of role duality and power dynamics. While positionality is concerned with the researcher clearly stating their assumptions relating to the research topic, the research design, context and process, as well as the research participants; reflexivity involves the researcher questioning their assumptions and finding strategies to address these. The researcher must reflect upon the way the research is carried out and explain to the reader how they moved through the research processes to reach certain conclusions, with the aim of producing a trustworthy and honest account of the research. Throughout this article, we provide examples of how these concepts have been considered and applied by a research paramedic while conducting their PhD research studies within a pre-hospital setting, to illustrate how they can be applied practically.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.29045/14784726.2022.09.7.2.43

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Researcher positionality is a way to safeguard against any partiality that can be questioned at the conclusion of a study.

    “Researcher positionality is a way to safeguard against any partiality that can be questioned at the conclusion of a study (Wilson et al., 2022).”

    From Researcher Positionality: Ways to Include it in a Qualitative Research Design (2025) · cites this paper as Wilson et al., 2022

    The Positionality section (‘Definition and relevance to research’; page not provided) says that stating positionality lets readers assess how a researcher’s identity affected the research process and results. The Reflexivity section (‘Purpose and process’; page not provided) says that questioning assumptions throughout a study helps produce a trustworthy account. Neither says positionality safeguards against any partiality or that concerns arise only at the study’s conclusion. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Declaring the relationship between the researcher(s) and the chosen topic helps the audience understand the true nature of the researcher's positionality.

    “The relationship between the researcher(s) and the chosen topic is declared which helps the audience understand the true nature of the researcher ' s positionality (McMullin, 2023; Wilson et al., 2022; Yip, 2024).”

    From Researcher Positionality: Ways to Include it in a Qualitative Research Design (2025) · cites this paper as Wilson et al., 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Arber A. (2006). Reflexivity: A challenge for the researcher as practitioner? Journal of Research in Nursing, 11(2), 147– 157.
  2. Bolton G. & Delderfield R. (2018). Reflective practice: Writing and professional development. SAGE Publications.
  3. Brannick T. & Coghlan D. (2007). In defense of being ‘native’: The case for insider academic research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59– 74.
  4. Castelló M. McAlpine L. Sala-Bubaré A. Inouye K. & Skakni I. (2021). What perspectives underlie ‘researcher identity’? A review of two decades of empirical studies. Higher Education, 81(3), 567– 590.
  5. Chew-Graham C. A. May C. R. & Perry M. S. (2002). Qualitative research and the problem of judgement: Lessons from interviewing fellow professionals. Family Practice, 19(3), 285– 289. 11978720
  6. Chhabra G. (2020). Insider, outsider or an in-betweener? Epistemological reflections of a legally blind researcher on conducting cross-national disability research. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 22, 307– 317.
  7. Corlett S. & Mavin S. (2018). Reflexivity and researcher positionality. In C. Cassell (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative business and management research methods: History and traditions (pp. 377– 398). SAGE Publications.
  8. Eaton G. Wong G. Tierney S. Roberts N. Williams V. & Mahtani K. R. (2021). Understanding the role of the paramedic in primary care: A realist review. BMC Medicine, 19(1), 145. 34167541 PMC8229679
  9. Eaton-Williams P. Mold F. & Magnusson C. (2020). Exploring paramedic perceptions of feedback using a phenomenological approach. British Paramedic Journal, 5(1), 7– 14. 33456380 PMC7783907
  10. Fitzgerald A. (2020). Professional identity: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum, 55(3), 447– 472. 32249453
  11. Hiller A. J. & Vears D. F. (2016). Reflexivity and the clinician-researcher: Managing participant misconceptions. Qualitative Research Journal, 16(1), 13– 25.
  12. Holmes A. (2020). Researcher positionality. A consideration of its influence and place in qualitative research: A new researcher guide. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 8, 1– 10.
  13. Horrocks P. D. (2020). Preparing Australian paramedics for effective health disaster response: Identifying core competency and a phenomenographic examination of current disaster response education [PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology]. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/202714/1/Peter_Horrocks_Thesis.pdf.
  14. Huberman A. M. & Miles M. B. (2002). The qualitative researcher’s companion. SAGE Publications.
  15. Hunt M. R. Chan L. S. & Mehta A. (2011). Transitioning from clinical to qualitative research interviewing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10(3), 191– 201.
  16. Jacobson D. & Mustafa N. (2019). Social identity map: A reflexivity tool for practicing explicit positionality in critical qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1– 12.
  17. Johnston T. & Bilton N. (2020). Investigating paramedic student professional identity. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 17. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.17.759. · DOI
  18. Kincheloe J. & McLaren P. (2008). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 403– 456). SAGE Publications.
  19. Kluijtmans M. de Haan E. Akkerman S. & van Tartwijk J. (2017). Professional identity in clinician-scientists: Brokers between care and science. Medical Education, 51(6), 645– 655. 28247420 PMC5434929
  20. Knoblauch H. (2021). Reflexive methodology and the empirical theory of science. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 46(2), 59– 79.
  21. Lloyd-Jones N. (2015). Professionalism in paramedic practice. In S. Willis (Ed.), Fundamentals of paramedic practice: A systems approach (pp. 3– 13). Wiley-Blackwell.
  22. Marshall L. R. & Edgley A. (2015). Perils and pitfalls for clinicians embarking on qualitative research in physiotherapy. Nursing Research, 22(5), 30– 34. 25976535
  23. Mausz J. Donnelly E. A. Moll S. Harms S. & McConnell M. (2022). Role identity, dissonance, and distress among paramedics. International Journal of Environment Research and Public Health, 19(4), 2115. PMC8871672 35206301
  24. McCann L. & Granter E. (2019). Beyond ‘blue-collar professionalism’: Continuity and change in the professionalization of uniformed emergency services work. Journal of Professions and Organization, 6(2), 213– 232.
  25. McNair R. Taft A. & Hegarty K. (2008). Using reflexivity to enhance in-depth interviewing skills for the clinician researcher. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 73. 18992167 PMC2644878
  26. Milligan L. (2014). Insider-outsider-inbetweener? Researcher positioning, participative methods and cross-cultural educational research. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 4, 1– 16.
  27. Munro G. G. O’Meara P. & Mathisen B. (2018). Paramedic academics in Australia and New Zealand: The ‘no man’s land’ of professional identity. Nurse Education in Practice, 33, 33– 36. 30223111
  28. Murray C. Stanley M. & Wright S. (2014). The transition from clinician to academic in nursing and allied health: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Nurse Education Today, 34(3), 389– 395. 23827093
  29. Neary S. (2014). Professional identity: What I call myself defines who I am. Career Matters, 2(3), 14– 15. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/46170813.pdf.
  30. Newington L. Alexander C. M. & Wells M. (2022). What is a clinical academic? Qualitative interviews with healthcare managers, research-active nurses and other research-active healthcare professionals outside medicine. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 31(3–4), 378– 389. 33370491
  31. O’Meara P. (2011). So how can we frame our identity? Journal of Paramedic Practice, 3, 57.
  32. Pelias R. J. (2011). Writing into position: Strategies for Composition and Evaluation. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 659– 668). SAGE Publications.
  33. Probst B. (2015). The eye regards itself: Benefits and challenges of reflexivity in qualitative social work research. Social Work Research, 39(1), 37– 48.
  34. Rae J. & Green B. (2016). Portraying reflexivity in health services research. Qualitative Health Research, 26(11), 1543– 1549. 26935721
  35. Reed B. Cowin L. O’Meara P. & Wilson I. (2019). Professionalism and professionalisation in the discipline of paramedicine. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 16. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.16.715. · DOI
  36. Rosser M. (2012). Evidence based practice in paramedic practice. In P. Grffiths & G. P. Mooney (Eds.), The paramedic’s guide to research: An introduction (pp. 25– 39). McGraw-Hill / Open University Press.
  37. Savin-Baden M. & Major C. (2013). Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice. Routledge.
  38. Walker S. Read S. & Priest H. (2013). Use of reflexivity in a mixed-methods study. Nursing Research, 20(3), 38– 43. 23346778
  39. Whitley G. (2020). Pre-hospital pain management in children: A mixed methods study [PhD thesis, University of Lincoln]. https://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/id/eprint/45827/.
  40. Wiles R. Charles V. Crow G. & Heath S. (2006). Researching researchers: Lessons for research ethics. Qualitative Research, 6(3), 283– 299.
  41. Williams B. Beovich B. & Olaussen A. (2021). The definition of paramedicine: An international Delphi study. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 14, 3561– 3570. 35002246 PMC8722816
  42. Williams J. (2012). Qualitative research in paramedic practice: An overview. In P. Grffiths & G. P. Mooney (Eds.), The paramedic’s guide to research: An introduction (pp. 73– 89). McGraw-Hill / Open University Press.
  43. Wolff D. (2019). A new perspective on continuing mental health education: A case study on how reflective practice can improve resilience in paramedics [MEd thesis, St. Francis Xavier University]. https://davidwolff.ca/sites/default/files/2019-10/WOLFFpaperFinal.pdf.
  44. Yanos P. T. & Ziedonis D. M. (2006). The patient-oriented clinician-researcher: Advantages and challenges of being a double agent. Psychiatric Services, 57(2), 249– 253. 16452704 PMC1383049

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilson, C., Janes, G., & Williams, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • Manchester Metropolitan University (GB)
  • University of Hertfordshire (GB)
Corresponding author
Wilson, Caitlin
ORCID
Venue
British Paramedic Journal
Publisher
Class Publishing
Published
2022-09-01
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
43-49
ISSN
1478-4726 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.29045/14784726.2022.09.7.2.43
PMC
PMC9662153
OpenAlex
W4293770179
Cited by
132
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 18
FWCI
34.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • British Paramedic Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • University of Hertfordshire Research Archive (University of Hertfordshire) (acceptedVersion)
  • e-space (Manchester Metropolitan University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • amber - ambulance research repository (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Manchester Metropolitan University
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR-INF-0748)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative research in health
Keywords
researcher identity, researcher positionality, reflexivity, paramedic research, insider research, role duality, power relations, prehospital care, research assumptions

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