The purpose of this paper is to offer a more integrative and inclusive conceptualisation of reflexivity as a way of identifying, understanding and managing some of the risks associated with reflexivity's potentially solipsistic “inward turn”.
The paper draws on the authors' experience of empirical qualitative research with working carers. This experience is grounded within the traditions of interpretative phenomenology and critical epistemology.
Two reflexive risks: an unintended focus on researcher rather than participant; and process at the expense of substance are discussed and the first of these, reflexive narcissism, is associated with the recognition of biographical similarity between researcher and participant, and the second, a kind of reflexive “process‐ism”, with certain research designs involving meta‐reflection with participants on the research experience. The paper advocates the use of multiple reflexivities and an intrinsic sensibility to reflexive possibility throughout the duration of a research programme.
The paper offers an alternative model of reflexivity and some practical guidelines, which may be of value to researchers working across a range of different qualitative methodologies.
The paper makes some preliminary observations about the phenomenon of the working carer, which may be of value to organisational practitioners.
The approach to reflexivity outlined in this paper helps to clarify some of the issues and difficulties associated with the reflexive thesis, and in particular, will help less experienced qualitative researchers to avoid some common pitfalls of reflexive practice.
