Developing Sensory Awareness in Qualitative Interviewing

Abstract

Within the social sciences there has been an increased interest in the senses. Much of this work has focused on ethnographic methods and has concentrated on research about the senses. In this article we focus on interviews and examine the value of expanded interviewing strategies that use the senses as access points. We argue that a sensory awareness can enrich interviews by offering a portal to otherwise unexplored illness or health care experiences which are either too difficult to articulate or too intangible to describe. Sensory awareness incorporates not only attentiveness to the research environment but also the utilization of sensory questions or prompts to gain insight into the research experience. We draw from a variety of empirical studies, and offer methodological guidance to the researcher while exploring ethical and challenging aspects of incorporating sensory awareness into the research interview.

Photographing physical activity: using visual methods to ‘grasp at’ the sensual experiences of the ageing body

“…Yet calls for innovative ways to evoke '…underrepresented, unproblematized realms of everyday, embodied sensory experience' (Paterson, 2009: 772) have yielded remarkably little methodological guidance on how to study multisensual worlds of participants (Harris & Guillemin, 2012). In their reflections on researching sensory experience, Mason & Davies (2009: 595) caution against the assumption that to do sensory research it is '…necessary to literally see, hear, touch, or smell the phenomenon studied.…”

Upper elementary teacher' self-efficacy and spelling instruction : a qualitative study

“…In qualitative research, trustworthiness or credibility corresponds to the concept of validity (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2006), and design validity is described by using a broad range of terms and perspectives (Creswell, 2007). As cited in Creswell (2007), Polkinghorne believed that validation of a concept is achieved when it is well grounded and well supported (Harris & Guillemin, 2012). Angen (2000) argued that validation is a judgment of the trustworthiness or goodness of a piece of research.…”

“…According to Onwuegbuzie et al (2008), bias occurs when a researcher has presumptions or personal prejudices that he or she is unable to bracket (Harris & Guillemin, 2012). Thus, bias can occur at any phase of the research process, including data collection, analysis, and interpretation (Harris & Guillemin, 2012). Lincoln and Guba (1985) commented that the role of a peer reviewer is to keep the researcher honest by posing difficult questions concerning the methods, procedures, and interpretations of the research study.…”

“…According to Onwuegbuzie et al (2008), bias occurs when a researcher has presumptions or personal prejudices that he or she is unable to bracket (Harris & Guillemin, 2012). Thus, bias can occur at any phase of the research process, including data collection, analysis, and interpretation (Harris & Guillemin, 2012).…”

“…Lincoln and Guba (1985) asserted that member checking is the "most critical technique for establishing credibility" (p. 314). To eliminate any possibilities of misinterpretation or misrepresentation, I asked participants to reflect on and judge the accuracy of the preliminary analysis of descriptions and themes gained throughout the study (Harris & Guillemin, 2012). …”