Strong Reflexivity and Its Critics
This contribution explores autoethnography as a strongly reflexive approach to qualitative research and its reception in German-speaking sociology and cultural anthropology. Over recent years, our academic communities have developed an increased interest in autoethnography, although many reactions r...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Qualitative inquiry 2016-11, Vol.22 (9), p.753 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | This contribution explores autoethnography as a strongly reflexive approach to qualitative research and its reception in German-speaking sociology and cultural anthropology. Over recent years, our academic communities have developed an increased interest in autoethnography, although many reactions range from critical to hostile: It is accused of solipsism, narcissism, lack of arguments and theory, affective immediacy, non-criticizability, endorsement of neoliberal politics, a threat to disciplinary identity, and a strategic mistake in the fight for appreciation of qualitative research. We discuss each point of criticism and translate our insights into more general considerations on strong reflexivity in German-speaking cultural and social sciences. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1077-8004 1552-7565 |
DOI: | 10.1177/1077800416658067 |