Working at a remove: continuous, collective, and configurative approaches to qualitative secondary analysis

Abstract

In this paper, we define and operationalise three modes of research engagement using qualitative secondary analysis (QSA). We characterise these forms of engagement as continuous, collective and configurative. Continuous QSA involves modes of engagement that centre on asking new questions of existing datasets to (re)apprehend empirical evidence, and develop continuous (or contiguous) samples in ways that principally leverage epistemic distance. Collective QSA characteristically involves generating dialogue between members of different research teams to establish comparisons and linkages across studies, and formulate new analytic directions harnessing relational distance. Configurative QSA refers to how existing data are brought into conversation with broader sources of theory and evidence, typically in ways which exploit greater temporal distance. In relation to each mode of engagement we discuss how processes of both (re)contextualisation and (re)connection offer opportunities for new analytical engagement through different combinations and degrees of proximity to, and distance from, the formative contexts of data production.

Citizens’ experiences of a policy-ridden environment: A methodological contribution to feedback studies based on qualitative secondary analysis

“…For secondary qualitative analysis, it is a challenge for researchers to familiarize themselves with data depending on their distance to the formative contexts of data production (Hughes et al, 2022). In our research, team members have varying degrees of proximity and distance with the collected datasets: one of us was a primary researcher or participated to the fieldwork in three of our main datasets and three team members participated to the fieldwork of the RESTEP project.…”

“…We have performed a collective and configurative secondary analysis. Collective qualitative secondary analysis involves generating a dialogue between team members to establish comparisons and linkages across studies in ways to achieve relational distance; whereas configurative qualitative secondary analysis refers to how existing data are brought into conversation with existing theory and evidence, typically in ways which exploit greater temporal distance (Hughes et al, 2022).…”

Fields, Worlds and Figurations: Using Elias to Revisit Depth Conceptual Imagery and Emancipatory Critique

“…For example, he suggests that while we do not need to know what it feels like to be a particle to study atoms, we do need insights into what it feels like to be human to grasp human figurations 7 . Here again, Elias's case for involvement is synthetic, with a range of epistemic affordances possible from both "remove" and "proximity" to the subject-objects of study (Hughes et al, 2021).…”

“…It entails not just the steps that individual researchers might undertake; but also how sociologists can, over successive generations, build "small islands" of relatively greater certainty. Here, Elias employs the imagery of sociological knowledge processes involving a baton relay race across generations: an ongoing "conversation" of evidence, theory, and subsequent social and institutional developments (Hughes et al, 2021).…”

Qualitative Longitudinal Research: From Monochrome to Technicolour

“…welfare conditionality; street homelessness), while also building the case for the relevance and even the scope to generalise from qualitative research (2019). Linked to this, there is also the possibility in building in more secondary analysis of qualitative longitudinal datasets, which is becoming increasingly possible because of the move towards archiving data for re-use by researchers and other core stakeholders (see Hughes and Tarrant, 2019;Neale, 2019;Davidson et al, 2021). There is a strong ethical case for making more use of existing qualitative data sets; and this is especially true of longitudinal data sets, due to the increased depth of the available data; and the increased demands made on participants to access their accounts and experiences, not just once but potentially several times.…”