The emotional labour of gaining and maintaining access to the field

Abstract

The role of emotions in qualitative research receives increasing attention. We argue for an active rather than a reactive approach towards emotions to improve the quality of research; emotions are a vital source of information and researchers use emotions strategically. Analysing the emotion work of researchers in the process of gaining, securing and maintaining access to the Swedish judiciary, we propose that the emotion work involved is a type of emotional labour, required by the researcher in order to successfully collect data. The particular case of researching elites is highlighted. Emotional labour is analysed along three dimensions: 1. Strategic emotion work – building trust outwards and self-confidence inwards; 2. Emotional reflexivity – attentiveness to emotional signals monitoring one’s position and actions in the field; and 3. Emotion work to cope with emotive dissonance – inward-directed emotion work to deal with the potentially alienating effects of strategic emotion work.

Observing judicial work and emotions: using two researchers

“…For these reasons, observational research can require that researchers present multiple suitable demeanours which entail careful emotion work (Bergman Blix and Wettergren, 2014). The extent of this demand may depend in part on how much of an insider the researcher becomes and on sources of emotional support.…”

“…Most of the information is confidential, imposing an additional burden of emotional management on the researchers. Under these circumstances the opportunity to share one's reactions with a colleague who is also directly undertaking the research can provide significant support, which will enhance the researchers' well-being and strengthen the quality of the research (Bergman Blix and Wettergren, 2014;Hubbard et al, 2001;Lofland et al, 2006;Watts, 2008).…”

“I Don’t Want You Sitting Next to Me”

“…a "practical" approach which "itself provides insights into the social organization of the setting" (p. 41). However, access (and securing truly informed consent) is not a one-off event during extended periods of fieldwork (Blix & Wettergren, 2015). It may be that certain elements of the organization are permitted to be observed, while others are not, and this is not necessarily linked to the researcher's perception of the sensitivity of the topic (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007).…”

“…Researchers may choose not to share their own views which contrast to dominant discourse in the setting (Molloy, 2015) Researchers may perform "emotion work" to present a neutral response to comments or activities that they find emotive (Blix & Wettergren, 2015). If this approach is taken, researchers should reflect on their emotional response (Coffey, 2009;Stodulka, 2015) Viewing behavior that may be embarrassing for participants…”

“…Insights from "the waiting field" can be highly valuable (Mannay & Morgan, 2014) Contentious or difficult questions should not be asked until access is more secure; it may never be appropriate to ask some questions that are of interest to the study and researchers may gain understanding of the issue through observation alone (Bondy, 2013). Researchers should pay attention to body language from participants, to ensure that their questions are being positively received Ensuring that consent is truly informed (Blix & Wettergren, 2015) During ethnographic fieldwork, consenting an individual cannot be a one-off event, tied only to a consent form. Researchers should informally check that participants feel comfortable with the researcher being present, and be prepared to leave spaces when it appears appropriate to maintain good relationships, as well as ethically comfortable research.…”