Reflexivity and humility evoke a transformable methodology in a post disaster context

Abstract

Objective The process of reflexivity is used to critically examine the experience of conducting qualitative research with functionally diverse older adults in a post disaster context. Methods The design of the study began with an interpretative phenomenological framework, using in-depth interviews. Fifteen individuals with functional and access needs living in Puerto Rico were interviewed regarding their experiences after Hurricane María of 2017. Findings In the field, it was necessary to expand the initial design, and adjust to participants’ preferences and needs, as well as situational characteristics, without compromising ethical standards of practice. The methodology transformed because of the need for flexibility requiring humility from the researchers. A more relational form of inquiry was warranted, which acknowledged the intersubjectivity of human experience. This entailed adapting to community involvement, building rapport with community leaders functioning as gatekeepers, and integrating family or friends in interviews. Discussion The reflexive approach allowed for a better understanding of the researcher’s positionalities and how they influence the ability or inability to develop trust (e.g. insider/ outsider status, Puerto Rican/ US, with functional and access needs/ without functional and access needs). Conclusions Given the shift toward relational inquiry and due to the challenges faced while carrying out the study, we suggest that post-disaster qualitative research would benefit from further including principles of indigenous decolonizing methodologies, which can be incorporated into studies using interpretative phenomenological analysis.

Community Members as Fieldwork Guides in Disaster Settings: Ethics of Care Through a Relational Methodology of Empathy and Trust

“…Rodgers (2004) asserts the importance of close and informal participatory approaches with vulnerable populations in enabling a humanized research that can inform reflective policy-making. In research with disaster contexts that pose methodological and ethical challenges due to situational variables, Guzzardo et al (2021) suggest the adoption of relational and reflexive methods that acknowledge the intersubjectivity of human experiences. Qualitative research is often embodied, and the researcher–participant relationship may be empowering for both the participant and the researcher (Mishra, 2021; Priya, 2010).…”

“…The researcher’s field interactions not only shaped the analysis but also redefined the methods and process of research. As demonstrated by Guzzardo et al (2021), the field presents with situational variables and participant characteristics that may necessitate a reformulation of methodology. The researcher’s experience was the same; it was evident from the very first few interviews that setting out with a semi-structured interview schedule, however, flexible and tentative it may have been, disrupted the free flowing narrative of the participants.…”

“…This approach was then reworked for the later interviews based on Mueller’s (2019) method of episodic narrative interviewing. Several researchers report flexibility in research procedures, fluidity, openness, and adaptation to what the field offers up as key take-aways from their fieldwork (e.g., Billo & Hiemstra, 2013; Guzzardo et al, 2021; Mishra, 2021). Disaster researchers, particularly, must embrace pliability and accommodate contextual imperatives.…”

“…Several guidelines have been put forward for researchers to navigate the challenges in the disaster field: adopting flexibility in the research procedures and methodology (Guzzardo et al, 2021), forging research collaborations with governmental and non-governmental relief agencies (Benight & McFarlane, 2007), connecting with local players for access and ground information (Johnson & Vindrola-Padros, 2017), understanding the target community prior to embarking on fieldwork (Mukherji et al, 2014), and strategizing for self-care in the field (Indah, 2018). The extensive literature on methodological considerations for research on sensitive topics and various vulnerable populations also offers guidelines applicable to disaster contexts.…”

Developing an open science ‘mindset’

“…However, there is increasing recognition that open science practices should equally apply to qualitative research. In fact, some of the fundamental principles of qualitative research lend themselves directly to open science (Humphreys, Lewis, Sender, & Won, 2021 ), such as the principle of reflexivity, that is, researchers acknowledging their fundamental role in the research and data generation process (Guzzardo et al, 2021 ). This highlights need for maximum transparency when it comes to making such acknowledgements, and the need to provide sufficient supporting evidence.…”