Standing Out and Blending In: Contact-Based Research, Ethics, and Positionality

Abstract

This article explores the ethical difficulties that arise because of the interaction between fieldwork practitioners and their sites, in terms of the positionality of the researcher. What are the ethics of blending in or of standing out? This question stems from my experience of 12 months of fieldwork in South Africa in two distinct locales and among two different populations, one in which I could “pass” and another in which I was marked as various degrees of “outsider.” Drawing on this fieldwork, as well as an overview of the literature in political science on positionality, I argue that our discipline—because of the way it shapes interactions and research outcomes—must take positionality seriously in ethical training and practice.

Navigating the shift in Bangladeshi host community’s perceptions towards the Rohingya refugees: a declining sympathy

“…The authors exercised a great deal of reflexivity based on their experience and knowledge in minimising potential biases and maintaining objectivity when speaking to interviewees. While we are aware of researchers’ and respondents’ positionality in terms of how these may impact research ethics and objectivity ( Holmes, 2021 ), we are confident that the views and interpretations offered in this paper are coming from interlocutors who are well placed to shed important lights on the subject matter ( Mathijssen et al, 2023 ). We followed the ethical guidelines of the Association of Social Anthropologists (ASA) in conducting this study, including data collection and data analysis.…”

“…Their views offer a unique opportunity to contrast and complement the views of the host community members. While we are aware of researchers’ and respondents’ positionality in terms of how these may impact research ethics and objectivity ( Holmes, 2021 ), we considered that both the host community members and the Bangladeshi humanitarian professionals were well placed to shed important light on the subject matter. 18 interviews were conducted with the humanitarian professionals (8 males and 10 female).…”

Why national development experts are not included in development policy‐making and practice: The case of Ghana

“…However, we have maintained that this article mainly draws on the perceptions of the NDEs (in Ghana) whose account is largely absent in the existing scholarship. While we are aware of researchers' and respondents' positionality in terms of how these may impact research ethics and objectivity (Holmes, 2021), we consider such views to be coming from interlocutors who are well placed to shed important lights on the subject matter (Mathijssen et al, 2021). The NDEs' testimonies provided insights into understanding the politics of exclusion among development experts in formulating and implementing national development policies.…”

Interpreting the Political, Politicizing Interpretation: Doing Politically Sensible Social Science Research

“…As mentioned already, politically sensible scientifical research has to contain some positioning regarding the researcher’s and their project’s situatedness (see Holmes, 2021; Nicholas & Hollowell, 2007, p. 77). Much has been written in this regard about desirable forms of relationships between researcher and researched, 61 while I would note that this distinction has to be seen as an analytical one.…”