Reflexive journals in qualitative research

Daniel Turner

Daniel Turner

It is common practice for researcher to keep a journal or diary during the research process, regardless of discipline or methodology. These are sometimes called reflexive diaries, self-reflexive journals, research journals or research diaries. They are all basically the same thing – a written (or verbal) record written by the researcher during the research process, detailing what they did and why.

Lincoln and Guba (1982) wrote a classic paper detailing reflexive journals as part of an auditing process for research projects, but with the very specific aim of improving the reliability of research and removing bias. Smith (1999) also describes research journals as an important part of ‘enhancing ethical and methodologic rigour’, but there much more to them than this, regardless of the rather positivistic terminology.

Qualitative research projects are complex to design, manage and analyse, and can take many years to complete. Keeping a personal record of the process, key decisions and feelings offers the researcher the opportunity to learn from the research process (Thorpe 2010) and better remember how things came to pass. When writing up, this log can become as a vital a source of data as a participant interview.

There are lots of papers and textbooks that give examples of what research journals look like (eg Silverman 2013 has several from former students), however few detail what they should contain, or how to keep them.

Lincoln and Guba (1982), offers one of the few good published guidelines for what should actually be in a reflexive journal. They define it as “analogous to the anthropologists field journals and is the major means for an inquirer to perform a running check on the biases, which he (sic) carried with him into the context”. The paper lists 4 major things to record in the diary:

1. A log of evolving perceptions

2. A log of day-to-day procedures

3. A log of methodological decision points

4. A log of day-to-day personal introspections

But as Janesick (1998) notes, another important role is to “refine the understanding of the responses of participants in the study, much like a physician or health care worker might do”. In other words, to also record the researchers own observations about the participants and their lives, when doing interviews, focus groups or ethnography, that will enrich and give context to other more ‘formal’ methods of data collection. She defines a different set of 4 roles for research journals which are more focused towards typical qualitative projects and philosophies:

1. Refine the understanding of the role of the researcher through reflection and writing, much like an artist might do;

2. Refine the understanding of the responses of participants in the study, much like a physician or health care worker might do;

3. Use a journal as an interactive tool of communication between the researcher and participants in the study, as a type of interdisciplinary triangulation of data;

4. View journal writing as a type of connoisseurship by which individuals become connoisseurs of their own thinking and reflection patterns, and indeed their own understanding of their work as qualitative researchers.

Reflexive diaries can also be used by those performing research that contains ethnographic methods, and diaries or journals are very commonly used in ethnography. See for example Barry and O’Callaghan (2009), using diaries to record the experiences of student therapists in a hospital setting. Reflexive journals can also be used in autoethnography, or other qualitative research that focuses on the researcher as the participant or main focus of the study or context.

But it’s important to not confuse these with diaries or journals which are given to participants as data collection of the lives and experiences of respondents. There is much more written in the literature on this topic, see our own post on participant diaries , and Janesick (1998) has written about distinguishing and triangulating these in her article.

So what does a reflective journal look like? Many people prefer to write a physical diary, in a paper journal or notebook (eg Nadin and Cassell 2006), or you can just use any standard word-processor like Word. There are advantages to having it digitally: it does make it easier to search, and easier to back up (by saving it in multiple places). Vicary, Young and Hicks (2016) recommend writing a research diary directly in qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS), in their case using Nvivo 10, but any qualitative software has the same basic capability.

The latest version of Quirkos (2.3) contains a new feature which can help with a reflexive journal. For the live collaboration in Quirkos cloud, we added a chat feature so that people can communicate, either in real time, or when working sequentially on their project. But we also added this feature to the offline version as well, not just to keep feature parity, but to give a space to write project wide notes. While you can attach memos to sections of text, and use a source property to have notes attached to a section of text, there wasn’t an designated to write generally in the project file.

Banner - Qualitative analysis made simple with Quirkos

Previously we’ve suggested that people created a blank source and write in there, which gives the advantage that you can treat it like any other data source – coding it and including (or excluding) it from search and query results. However, the chat function works as a great journaling system Even though you are just ‘talking’ to yourself, each entry has a date and time stamp, and you can scroll up and down the list and remove specific entries if needs be. It’s also right there, in the same window you are using to analyse, which makes it very easy to keep quick comments as you work.

If you want to see how intuitive and simple Quirkos makes qualitative analysis, you can try either it with Cloud storage or offline storage for free, for Windows, Mac or Linux . You can also get a good idea of what it’s like to work with Quirkos by watching a short tutorial video right here:

Barry, P., O’Callaghan, 2009, Reflexive Journal Writing: A Tool for Music Therapy Student Clinical Practice Development, Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 17(1) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08098130809478196

Janesick, V., 1998, Journal Writing as a Qualitative Research Technique: History, Issues, and Reflections, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED420702.pdf

Lincoln, Y., Guba, E., 1982, ESTABLISHING DEPENDABILITY AND CONFIRMABILITY IN NATURALISTIC INQUIRY THROUGH AN AUDIT, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED216019.pdf

Nadin, S., Cassell, C., 2006, The use of a research diary as a tool for reflexive practice: Some reflections from management research, Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management 3:208-217, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227430125_The_use_of_a_research_diary_as_a_tool_for_reflexive_practice_Some_reflections_from_management_research

Silverman, D., 2013, Doing Qualitative Research, Sage, London

Smith, B., 1999, Ethical and methodologic benefits of using a reflexive journal in hermeneutic-phenomenologic research., Image Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 1999;31(4):359-63.

Thorpe, K. (2010) Reflective learning journals: From concept to practice Reflective Practice; International and multidisciplinary perspectives Vo 5 Issue 3 pp 327-343

Vicary, Young and Hicks, 2016, A reflective journal as learning process and contribution to quality and validity in Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, Qualitative Social Work, 16(4), 550–565. https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/27234596/POST-PEER-REVIEW-NON-PUBLISHERS.PDF

Sign up for more like this.

Logo for Open Educational Resources

Chapter 6. Reflexivity

Introduction.

Related to epistemological issues of how we know anything about the social world, qualitative researchers understand that we the researchers can never be truly neutral or outside the study we are conducting. As observers, we see things that make sense to us and may entirely miss what is either too obvious to note or too different to comprehend. As interviewers, as much as we would like to ask questions neutrally and remain in the background, interviews are a form of conversation, and the persons we interview are responding to us . Therefore, it is important to reflect upon our social positions and the knowledges and expectations we bring to our work and to work through any blind spots that we may have. This chapter discusses the concept of reflexivity and its importance for conducting reliable qualitative research.

Reflexivity: What It Is and Why It Is Important

Remember our discussion in epistemology ? Qualitative researchers tend to question assertions of absolute fact or reality, unmediated through subject positions and subject knowledge. There are limits to what we know because we are part of the social worlds we inhabit. To use the terminology of standpoint theorists, we have a standpoint from which we observe the world just as much as anyone else. In this, we too are the blind men, and the world is our elephant. None of us are omniscient or neutral observers. Because of this epistemological standpoint, qualitative researchers value the ability to reflect upon and think hard about our own effects on our research. We call this reflexivity. Reflexivity “generally involves the self-examination of how research findings were produced, and, particularly, the role of the researcher in their construction” ( Heaton 2004:104 ).

There are many aspects of being reflexive. First, there is the simple fact that we are human beings with the limitations that come with that condition. We have likes and dislikes, biases, blind spots, preferences, and so on. If we do not take these into account, they can prevent us from being the best researcher we can be. Being reflective means, first and foremost, trying as best as possible to bracket out elements of our own character and understanding that get in the way. It is important to note that bias (in this context, at least) is not inherently wrong. It just is. Unavoidable. But by noting it, we can minimize its impact or, in some cases, help explain more clearly what it is we see or why it is that we are asking the questions we are asking. For example, I might want to communicate to my audience that I grew up poor and that I have a lot of sympathy and concern for first-generation college students as a result. This “bias” of mine motivates me to do the work I do, even as I try to ensure that it does not blind me to things I find out in the course of my research. [1]

Null

A second aspect of being reflexive is being aware that you yourself are part of the research when you are conducting qualitative research. This is particularly true when conducting interviews, observing interactions, or participating in activities. You have a body, and it will be “read” by those in the field. You will be perceived as an insider or an outsider, as a friend or foe, as empathetic or hostile. Some of this will be wrong. People will prejudge you based on the color of your skin, your presented gender, the accent of your language. People will classify you based on the clothes you wear, and they will be more open to you if you remind them of a friendly aunt or uncle and more reserved if you remind them of someone they don’t like. This is all natural and inevitable. Your research will suffer if you do not take this into account, if you do not reflect upon how you are being read and how this might be influencing what people tell you or what they are willing to do in front of you. The flip side of this problem is that your particular body and presence will open some doors barred to other researchers. Finding sites and contexts where your presented self is a benefit rather than a burden is an important part of your individual research career. Be honest with yourself about this, and you will be more successful as a qualitative researcher. Learn to leverage yourself in your research.

The third aspect of being reflexive is related to how we communicate our work to others. Being honest with our position, as I am about my own social background and its potential impact on what I study or about how I leveraged my own position to get people to open up to me, helps our audiences evaluate what we have found. Maybe I haven’t entirely eliminated my biases or weaknesses, but by telling my audience who I am and where I potentially stand, they can take account of those biases and weaknesses in their reading of my findings. Letting them know that I wore pink when talking with older men because that made them more likely to be kind to me (a strategy acknowledged by Posselt [ 2016 ]) helps them understand the interview context. In other words, my research becomes more reliable when my own social position and the strategies I used are communicated.

Some people think being reflective is just another form of narcissistic navel-gazing. “The study is not about you!” they might cry. True, to some degree—but that also misses the point. All studies on the social world are inevitably about us as well because we are part of that social world. It is actually more dangerous to pretend that we are neutral observers, outside what we are observing. Pierre Bourdieu makes this point several times, and I think it is worth quoting him here: “The idea of a neutral science is fiction, an interested fiction which enables its authors to present a version of the dominant representation of the social world, naturalized and euphemized into a particularly misrecognizable and symbolically, therefore, particularly effective form, and to call it scientific” (quoted in Lemert 1981:278 ).

Bourdieu ( 1984 ) argues that reflective analysis is “not an epistemological scruple” but rather “an indispensable pre-condition of scientific knowledge of the object” ( 92 ). It would be narcissistic to present findings without reflection, as that would give much more weight to any findings or insights that emerge than is due.

The critics are right about one thing, however. Putting oneself at the center of the research is also inappropriate. [2] The focus should be on what is being researched, and the reflexivity is there to advance the study, not to push it aside. This issue has emerged at times when researchers from dominant social positions reflect upon their social locations vis-à-vis study participants from marginalized locations. A researcher who studies how low-income women of color experience unemployment might need to address her White, upper-class, fully employed social location, but not at the cost of crowding out the stories, lived experiences, and understandings of the women she has interviewed. This can sometimes be a delicate balance, and not everyone will agree that a person has walked it correctly.

Examples of Reflexivity in Practice

Most qualitative researchers include a positionality statement in any “methods section” of their publications. This allows readers to understand the location of the researcher, which is often helpful for gauging reliability . Many journals now require brief positionality statements as well. Here are a few examples of such statements.

The first is from an ethnographic study of elite golfers. Ceron-Anaya ( 2017 ) writes about his class, race, and gender and how these aspects of his identity and social location affected his interactions with research participants:

My own class origins, situated near the intersection between the middle and the lower-middle class, hindered cooperation in some cases. For example, the amiable interaction with one club member changed toward the end of the interview when he realized that I commonly moved about in the city by public transportation (which is a strong class indicator). He was not rude but stopped elaborating on the answers as he had been doing up to that point.…Bodily confidence is a privilege of the privileged. My subordinate position, vis-à-vis golfers, was ameliorated by my possession of cultural capital, objectified in my status of researcher/student in a western university. However, my cultural capital dwindled in its value at the invisible but firm boundary between the upper-middle and the upper class. The few contacts I made with members of the upper class produced no connections with other members of the same group, illustrating how the research process is also inserted in the symbolic and material dynamics that shape the field. ( 288 )

What did you learn from Ceron-Anaya’s reflection? If he hadn’t told you about his background, would this have made a difference in reading about elite golfers? Would the findings be different had Ceron-Anaya driven up to the club in a limousine? Is it helpful to know he came by bus?

The second example is from a study on first-generation college students. Hinz ( 2016 ) discusses both differences and similarities between herself and those she interviewed and how both could have affected the study:

I endeavored to avoid researcher bias by allowing the data to speak for itself, but my own habitus as a White, female, middle-class second-generation college student with a few years of association with Selective State [elite university] may have influenced my interpretation. Being a Selective State student at the time of the interviews provided a familiarity with the environment in which the participants were living, and an ease of communication facilitated by a shared institutional culture. And yet, not being a first-gen myself, it seemed as if I were standing on the periphery of their experience, looking in. ( 289–290 )

Note that Hinz cannot change who she is, nor should she. Being aware (reflective) that she may “stand on the periphery” of the experience of those she interviews has probably helped her listen more closely rather than assume she understands what is really going on. Do you find her more reliable given this?

These statements can be quite long, especially when found in methodological appendixes in books rather than short statements in articles. This last lengthy example comes from my own work. I try to place myself, explaining the motivations for the research I conducted at small liberal arts colleges:

I began this project out of a deep curiosity about how college graduates today were faring in an increasingly debt-ridden and unequal labor market. I was working at a small liberal arts college when I began thinking about this project and was poised to take a job at another one. During my interview for the new job, I was told that I was a good fit, because I had attended Barnard College, so I knew what the point of a liberal arts college was. I did. A small liberal arts college was a magical place. You could study anything you wanted, for no reason at all, simply for the love of it. And people would like you for it. You were surrounded by readers, by people who liked to dress up in costume and recite Shakespeare, by people who would talk deep into the night about the meaning of life or whether “beauty” existed out there, in nature, or was simply a projection of our own circumstances. My own experience at Barnard had been somewhat like that. I studied Ancient Greek and Latin, wrote an undergraduate thesis on the legal standing of Vestal Virgins in Ancient Rome, and took frequent subway rides to the Cloisters, the medieval annex of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, where I sketched the courtyard and stared at unicorn tapestries. But I also worked full-time, as a waitress at a series of hectic and demanding restaurants around the city, as a security guard for the dorm, as a babysitter for some pretty privileged professors who lived in doorman buildings along Riverside Park, and at the library (the best job by far). I also constantly worried I would not be able to finish my degree, as every year I was unsure how I would come up with the money to pay for costs of college above and beyond the tuition (which, happily, was covered by the college given my family’s low income). Indeed, the primary reason I studied the Classics was because all the books were freely available in the library. There are no modern textbooks—you just find a copy of the Iliad. There are a lot of those in a city like New York. Due to my fears, I pushed to graduate one year early, taking a degree in “Ancient Studies” instead of “Classics,” which could have led on to graduate training. From there, I went to law school, which seemed like a safe choice. I do not remember ever having a conversation with anyone about how to find a job or what kinds of job one could do with a degree in Ancient Studies. I had little to no social networks, as I had spent my time studying and working. And I was very lucky, because I graduated with almost zero debt. For years, until that job interview, I hadn’t really thought my Barnard experience had been that great or unusual. But now it was directly helping me get a job, about fifteen years after graduation. And it probably had made me a better person, whatever that means. Had I graduated with debt, however, I am not so sure that it would have been worth it. Was it, on balance, a real opportunity and benefit for poor students like me? Even now? I had a hunch of what I might find if I looked: small liberal arts colleges were unique places of opportunity for low-income first-generation working-class students who somehow managed to find and get in to one of them (no easy task). I thought that, because of their ethos, their smallness, the fact that one could not hide from professors, these colleges would do a fair job equalizing opportunities and experiences for all their students. I wanted to tell this story. But that is not the story that I found, or not entirely. While everyone benefits from the kind of education a small liberal arts college can offer, because students begin and continue so differently burdened and privileged, the advantages of the already-advantaged are amplified, potentially increasing rather than decreasing initial inequalities. That is not really a surprising story, but it is an important one to tell and to remember. Education doesn’t reduce inequality. Going to a good college doesn’t level the playing field for low-income, first-generation, working-class students. But perhaps it can help them write a book about that. ( Hurst 2019:259–261 )

What do you think? Did you learn something about the author that would help you, as a reader, understand the reasons and context for the study? Would you trust the researcher? If you said yes, why?

How to Do It

How does one become a reflective researcher? Practice! Nearly every great qualitative researcher maintains a reflexive journal (there are exceptions that prove the rule), a type of diary where they record their thinking on the research process itself. This might include writing about the research design (chapter 2), plotting out strategies for sample selection (chapter 6), or talking through what one believes can be known (chapter 3). During analysis, this journal is a place to record ideas and insights and pose questions for further reflection or follow-up studies. This journal should be highly personal. It is a place to record fears, concerns, and hopes as well. Why are you studying what you are studying? What is really motivating you? Being clear with yourself and being able to put it down in words are invaluable to the research process.

Today, there are many blogs out there on writing reflective journals, with helpful suggestions and examples. Although you may want to take a look at some of these, the form of your own journal will probably be unique. This is you, the researcher, on the page. Each of us looks different. Use the journal to interrogate your decisions and clarify your intent. If you find something during the study of note, you might want to ask yourself what led you to note that. Why do you think this “thing” is a “thing”? What about your own position, background, or researcher status that makes you take note? And asking yourself this question might lead you to think about what you did not notice. Other questions to ask yourself include the following: How do I know “that thing” I noted? So what? What does it mean? What are the implications? Who cares about this and why? Remember that doing qualitative research well is recursive , meaning that we may begin with a research design, but the steps of doing the research often loop back to the beginning. By keeping a reflective journal, you allow yourself to circle back to the beginning, to make changes to the study to keep it in line with what you are really interested in knowing.

One might also consider designing research that includes multiple investigators, particularly those who may not share your preconceptions about the study. For example, if you are studying conservative students on campus, and you yourself thoroughly identify as liberal, you might want to pair up with a researcher interested in the topic who grew up in a conservative household. If you are studying racial regimes, consider creating a racially diverse team of researchers. Or you might include in your research design a component of participatory research wherein members of the community of interest become coresearchers. Even if you can’t form a research team, you can reach out to others for feedback as you move along. Doing research can be a lonely enterprise, so finding people who will listen to you and nudge you to clarify your thinking where necessary or move you to consider an aspect you have missed is invaluable.

Finally, make it a regular part of your practice to write a paragraph reporting your perspectives, positions, values, and beliefs and how these may have influenced the research. This paragraph may be included in publications upon request.

Internal Validity

Being reflexive can help ensure that our studies are internally valid. All research must be valid to be helpful. We say a study’s findings are externally valid when they are equally true of other times, places, people. Quantitative researchers often spend a lot of time grappling with external validity , as they are often trying to demonstrate that their sample is representative of a larger population. Although we do not do that in qualitative research, we do sometimes make claims that the processes and mechanisms we uncover here, in this particular setting, are likely to be equally active in that setting over there, although there may be (will be!) contextual differences as well. Internal validity is more peculiar to qualitative research. Is your finding an accurate representation of what you are studying? Are you describing the people you are observing or interviewing as they really are? This is internal validity , and you should be able to see how this connects with the requirement of reflexivity. To the extent that you leave unexamined your own biases or preconceptions, you will fail at accurately representing those people and processes you study. Remember that “bias” here is not a moral failing in the way we commonly use bias in the nonresearch world but an inevitable product of our being social beings who inhabit social worlds, with all the various complexities surrounding that. Because of things that have happened to you, certain things (concepts, quotes, activities) might jump out at you as being particularly important. Being reflexive allows you to take a step back and grapple with the larger picture, reflecting on why you might be seeing X (which is present) but also missing Y (which is also present). It also allows you to consider what effect/impact your presence has on what you are observing or being told and to make any adjustments necessary to minimize your impact or, at the very least, to be aware of these effects and talk about them in any descriptions or presentations you make. There are other ways of ensuring internal validity (e.g., member checking , triangulation ), but being reflective is an essential component.

Advanced: Bourdieu on Reflexivity

One researcher who really tackled the issue of reflexivity was Pierre Bourdieu. [3] Known in the US primarily as a theorist, Bourdieu was a very capable and thorough researcher, who employed a variety of methods in his wide-ranging studies. Originally trained as an anthropologist, he became uncomfortable with the unreflective “outsider perspective” he was taught to follow. How was he supposed to observe and write about the various customs and rules of the people he was studying if he did not take into account his own supposedly neutral position in the observations? And even more interestingly, how could he write about customs and rules as if they were lifted from but outside of the understandings and practice of the people following them? When you say “God bless you” to someone who sneezes, are you really following a social custom that requires the prevention of illness through some performative verbal ritual of protection, or are you saying words out of reflex and habit? Bourdieu wondered what it meant that anthropologists were so ready to attribute meaning to actions that, to those performing them, were probably unconsidered. This caused him to ponder those deep epistemological questions about the possibilities of knowledge, particularly what we can know and truly understand about others. Throughout the following decades, as he developed his theories about the social world out of the deep and various studies he engaged in, he thought about the relationship between the researcher and the researched. He came to several conclusions about this relationship.

First, he argued that researchers needed to be reflective about their position vis-à-vis the object of study. The very fact that there is a subject and an object needs to be accounted for. Too often, he argued, the researcher forgets that part of the relationship, bracketing out the researcher entirely, as if what is being observed or studied exists entirely independently of the study. This can lead to false reports, as in the case where a blind man grasps the trunk of the elephant and claims the elephant is cylindrical, not having recognized how his own limitations of sight reduced the elephant to only one of its parts.

As mentioned previously, Bourdieu ( 1984 ) argued that “reflective analysis of the tools of analysis is not an epistemological scruple but an indispensable precondition of scientific knowledge of the object” ( 92 ). It is not that researchers are inherently biased—they are—but rather that the relationship between researcher and researched is an unnatural one that needs to be accounted for in the analysis. True and total objectivity is impossible, as researchers are human subjects themselves, called to research what interests them (or what interests their supervisors) and also inhabiting the social world. The solution to this problem is to be reflective and to account for these aspects in the analysis itself. Here is how Bourdieu explains this charge:

To adopt the viewpoint of REFLEXIVITY is not to renounce objectivity but to question the privilege of the knowing subject, which the antigenetic vision arbitrarily frees, as purely noetic, from the labor of objectification. To adopt this viewpoint is to strive to account for the empirical “subject” in the very terms of the objectivity constructed by the scientific subject (notably by situating it in a determined place in social space-time) and thereby to give oneself awareness and (possible) mastery of the constraints which may be exercised on the scientific subject via all the ties which attach it to the empirical “subject,” to its interests, motives, assumptions, beliefs, its doxa, and which it must break in order to constitute itself . ( 1996:207 ; emphases added)

Reflexivity, for Bourdieu, was a trained state of mind for the researcher, essential for proper knowledge production. Let’s use a story from Hans Christian Andersen to illustrate this point. If you remember this story from your childhood, it goes something like this: Two con artists show up in a town in which its chief monarch spends a lot of money on expensive clothes and splashy displays. They sense an opportunity to make some money out of this situation and pretend they are talented weavers from afar. They tell the vain emperor that they can make the most magnificent clothes anyone has ever seen (or not seen, as the case may be!). Because what they really do is “pretend” to weave and sew and hand the emperor thin air, which they then help him to put on in an elaborate joke. They tell him that only the very stupid and lowborn will be unable to see the magnificent clothes. Embarrassed that he can’t see them either, he pretends he can. Everyone pretends they can see clothes, when really the emperor walks around in his bare nakedness. As he parades through town, people redden and bow their heads, but no one says a thing. That is, until one child looks at the naked emperor and starts to laugh. His laughter breaks the spell, and everyone realizes the “naked truth.”

Now let us add a new thread to this story. The boy did not laugh. Years go by, and the emperor continues to wear his new clothes. At the start of every day, his aides carefully drape the “new clothes” around his naked body. Decades go by, and this is all “normal.” People don’t even see a naked emperor but a fully robed leader of the free world. A researcher, raised in this milieu, visits the palace to observe court habits. She observes the aides draping the emperor. She describes the care they take in doing so. She nowhere reports that the clothes are nonexistent because she herself has been trained to see them . She thus misses a very important fact—that there are no clothes at all! Note that it is not her individual “biases” that are getting in the way but her unreflective acceptance of the reality she inhabits that binds her to report things less accurately than she might.

In his later years, Bourdieu turned his attention to science itself and argued that the promise of modern science required reflectivity among scientists. We need to develop our reflexivity as we develop other muscles, through constant practice. Bourdieu ( 2004 ) urged researchers “to convert reflexivity into a disposition, constitutive of their scientific habitus, a reflexivity reflex , capable of acting not ex poste , on the opus operatum , but a priori , on the modus operandi ” ( 89 ). In other words, we need to build into our research design an appreciation of the relationship between researcher and researched.

To do science properly is to be reflective, to be aware of the social waters in which one swims and to turn one’s researching gaze on oneself and one’s researcher position as well as on the object of the research. Above all, doing science properly requires one to acknowledge science as a social process. We are not omniscient gods, lurking above the humans we observe and talk to. We are human too.

Further Readings

Barry, Christine A., Nicky Britten, Nick Barbar, Colin Bradley, and Fiona Stevenson. 1999. “Using Reflexivity to Optimize Teamwork in Qualitative Research.”  Qualitative Health Research  9(1):26–44. The coauthors explore what it means to be reflexive in a collaborative research project and use their own project investigating doctor-patient communication about prescribing as an example.

Hsiung, Ping-Chun. 2008. “Teaching Reflexivity in Qualitative Interviewing.” Teaching Sociology 36(3):211–226. As the title suggests, this article is about teaching reflexivity to those conducting interviews.

Kenway, Jane, and Julie McLeod. 2004. “Bourdieu’s Reflexive Sociology and ‘Spaces of Points of View’: Whose Reflexivity, Which Perspective?” British Journal of Sociology of Education 25(4):525–544. For a more nuanced understanding of Bourdieu’s meaning of reflexivity and how this contrasts with other understandings of the term in sociology.

Kleinsasser, Audrey M. 2000. “Researchers, Reflexivity, and Good Data: Writing to Unlearn.” Theory into Practice 39(3):155–162. Argues for the necessity of reflexivity for the production of “good data” in qualitative research.

Linabary, Jasmine R., and Stephanie A. Hamel. 2017. “Feminist Online Interviewing: Engaging Issues of Power, Resistance and Reflexivity in Practice.” Feminist Review 115:97–113. Proposes “reflexive email interviewing” as a promising method for feminist research.

Rabbidge, Michael. 2017. “Embracing Reflexivity: The Importance of Not Hiding the Mess.” TESOL Quarterly 51(4):961–971. The title here says it all.

Wacquant, Loïc J. D. 1989. “Towards a Reflexive Sociology: A Workshop with Pierre Bourdieu.” Sociological Theory 7(1):26–63. A careful examination of Bourdieu’s notion of reflexivity by one of his most earnest disciples.

  • Someone might ask me if I have truly been able to “stand” in the shoes of more privileged students and if I might be overlooking similarities among college students because of my “biased” standpoint. These are questions I ask myself all the time. They have even motivated me to conduct my latest research on college students in general so that I might check my observations that working-class college students are uniquely burdened ( Hurst 2019 ). One of the things I did find was that middle-class students, relative to upper-class students, are also relatively disadvantaged and sometimes experience (feel) that disadvantage. ↵
  • Unless, of course, one is engaged in autoethnography! Even in that case, however, the point of the study should probably be about a larger phenomenon or experience that can be understood more deeply through insights that emerge in the study of the particular self, not really a study about that self. ↵
  • I mentioned Pierre Bourdieu earlier in the chapter. For those who want to know more about his work, I’ve included this advanced section. Undergraduates should feel free to skip over. ↵

The practice of being conscious of and reflective upon one’s own social location and presence when conducting research.  Because qualitative research often requires interaction with live humans, failing to take into account how one’s presence and prior expectations and social location affect the data collected and how analyzed may limit the reliability of the findings.  This remains true even when dealing with historical archives and other content.  Who we are matters when asking questions about how people experience the world because we, too, are a part of that world.

The branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge.  For researchers, it is important to recognize and adopt one of the many distinguishing epistemological perspectives as part of our understanding of what questions research can address or fully answer.  See, e.g., constructivism , subjectivism, and  objectivism .

A statement created by the researcher declaring their own social position (often in terms of race, class, gender) and social location (e.g., junior scholar or tenured professor) vis-à-vis the research subjects or focus of study, with the goal of explaining and thereby limiting any potential biases or impacts of such position on data analyses, findings, or other research results.  See also reflexivity .

Reliability is most often explained as consistency and stability in a research instrument, as in a weight scale, deemed reliable if predictable and accurate (e.g., when you put a five-pound bag of rice on the scale on Tuesday, it shows the same weight as when you put the same unopened bag on the scale Wednesday).  Qualitative researchers don’t measure things in the same way, but we still must ensure that our research is reliable, meaning that if others were to conduct the same interview using our interview guide, they would get similar answers.  This is one reason that reflexivity is so important to the reliability of qualitative research – we have to take steps to ensure that our own presence does not “tip the scales” in one direction or another or that, when it does, we can recognize that and make corrections.  Qualitative researchers use a variety of tools to help ensure reliability, from intercoder reliability to triangulation to reflexivity.

In mostly quantitative research, validity refers to “the extent to which an empirical measure adequately reflects the real meaning of the concept under consideration” ( Babbie 1990 ). For qualitative research purposes, practically speaking, a study or finding is valid when we are measuring or addressing what we think we are measuring or addressing.  We want our representations to be accurate, as they really are, and not an artifact of our imaginations or a result of unreflected bias in our thinking.

A method of ensuring trustworthiness where the researcher shares aspects of written analysis (codes, summaries, drafts) with participants before the final write-up of the study to elicit reactions and/or corrections.   Note that the researcher has the final authority on the interpretation of the data collected; this is not a way of substituting the researcher’s analytical responsibilities.  See also peer debriefing . 

The process of strengthening a study by employing multiple methods (most often, used in combining various qualitative methods of data collection and analysis).  This is sometimes referred to as data triangulation or methodological triangulation (in contrast to investigator triangulation or theory triangulation).  Contrast mixed methods .

Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods Copyright © 2023 by Allison Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149

Affiliations.

  • 1 Anesthesiology Department, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.
  • 2 Department of Educational Development and Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
  • 3 Department of Medicine and Center for Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
  • 4 Division of Education and Innovation, Department of Medicine and Scientist, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
  • PMID: 35389310
  • DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287

Qualitative research relies on nuanced judgements that require researcher reflexivity, yet reflexivity is often addressed superficially or overlooked completely during the research process. In this AMEE Guide, we define reflexivity as a set of continuous, collaborative, and multifaceted practices through which researchers self-consciously critique, appraise, and evaluate how their subjectivity and context influence the research processes. We frame reflexivity as a way to embrace and value researchers' subjectivity. We also describe the purposes that reflexivity can have depending on different paradigmatic choices. We then address how researchers can account for the significance of the intertwined personal, interpersonal, methodological, and contextual factors that bring research into being and offer specific strategies for communicating reflexivity in research dissemination. With the growth of qualitative research in health professions education, it is essential that qualitative researchers carefully consider their paradigmatic stance and use reflexive practices to align their decisions at all stages of their research. We hope this Guide will illuminate such a path, demonstrating how reflexivity can be used to develop and communicate rigorous qualitative research.

Keywords: Reflexivity; qualitative methods; qualitative research.

A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis

  • Open access
  • Published: 26 June 2021
  • Volume 56 , pages 1391–1412, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

  • David Byrne   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0587-4677 1  

389k Accesses

452 Citations

117 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Since the publication of their inaugural paper on the topic in 2006, Braun and Clarke’s approach has arguably become one of the most thoroughly delineated methods of conducting thematic analysis (TA). However, confusion persists as to how to implement this specific approach to TA appropriately. The authors themselves have identified that many researchers who purport to adhere to this approach—and who reference their work as such—fail to adhere fully to the principles of ‘reflexive thematic analysis’ (RTA). Over the course of numerous publications, Braun and Clarke have elaborated significantly upon the constitution of RTA and attempted to clarify numerous misconceptions that they have found in the literature. This paper will offer a worked example of Braun and Clarke’s contemporary approach to reflexive thematic analysis with the aim of helping to dispel some of the confusion regarding the position of RTA among the numerous existing typologies of TA. While the data used in the worked example has been garnered from health and wellbeing education research and was examined to ascertain educators’ attitudes regarding such, the example offered of how to implement the RTA would be easily transferable to many other contexts and research topics.

Similar content being viewed by others

reflexive journal in qualitative research example

Different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory in public mental health research: what is their value for guiding public mental health policy and practice?

Malin Eriksson, Mehdi Ghazinour & Anne Hammarström

reflexive journal in qualitative research example

How to use and assess qualitative research methods

Loraine Busetto, Wolfgang Wick & Christoph Gumbinger

How phenomenology can help us learn from the experiences of others

Brian E. Neubauer, Catherine T. Witkop & Lara Varpio

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Although the lineage of thematic analysis (TA) can be traced back as far as the early twentieth century (Joffe 2012 ), it has up until recently been a relatively poorly demarcated and poorly understood method of qualitative analysis. Much of the credit for the recent enlightenment and subsequent increase in interest in TA can arguably be afforded to Braun and Clarke’s ( 2006 ) inaugural publication on the topic of thematic analysis in the field of psychology. These authors have since published several articles and book chapters, as well as their own book, all of which make considerable contributions to further delineating their approach to TA (see, for example, Braun and Clarke 2012 , 2013 , 2014 , 2019 , 2020 ; Braun et al. 2016 ; Terry et al. 2017 ). However, on numerous occasions Braun and Clarke have identified a tendency for scholars to cite their 2006 article, but fail to fully adhere to their contemporary approach to RTA (see Braun and Clarke 2013 , 2019 , 2020 ). Commendably, they have acknowledged that their 2006 paper left several aspect of their approach incompletely defined and open to interpretation. Indeed, the term ‘reflexive thematic analysis’ only recently came about in response to these misconceptions (Braun and Clarke 2019 ). Much of their subsequent body of literature in this area addresses these issues and attempts to correct some of the misconceptions in the wider literature regarding their approach. Braun and Clarke have repeatedly iterated that researchers who chose to adopt their approach should interrogate their relevant publications beyond their 2006 article and adhere to their contemporary approach (Braun and Clarke 2019 , 2020 ). The purpose of this paper is to contribute to dispelling some of the confusion and misconceptions regarding Braun and Clarke’s approach by providing a worked example of their contemporary approach to reflexive thematic analysis. The worked example will be presented in relation to the author’s own research, which examined the attitudes of post-primary educators’ regarding the promotion of student wellbeing. This paper is intended to be a supplementary resource for any prospective proponents of RTA, but may be of particular interest to scholars conducting attitudinal studies in an educational context. While this paper is aimed at all scholars regardless of research experience, it may be most useful to research students and their supervisors. Ultimately, the provided example of how to implement the six-phase analysis is easily transferable to many contexts and research topics.

2 What is reflexive thematic analysis?

Reflexive thematic analysis is an easily accessible and theoretically flexible interpretative approach to qualitative data analysis that facilitates the identification and analysis of patterns or themes in a given data set (Braun and Clarke 2012 ). RTA sits among a number of varied approaches to conducting thematic analysis. Braun and Clarke have noted that very often, researchers who purport to have adopted RTA have failed to fully delineate their implementation of RTA, of have confused RTA with other approaches to thematic analysis. The over-riding tendency in this regard is for scholars to mislabel their analysis as RTA, or to draw from a number of different approaches to TA, some of which may not be compatible with each other (Braun and Clarke 2012 , 2013 , 2019 ; Terry et al. 2017 ). In an attempt to resolve this confusion, Braun and Clarke have demarcated the position of RTA among the other forms of thematic analysis by differentiating between three principal approaches to TA: (1) coding reliability TA; (2) codebook approaches to TA, and; (3) the reflexive approach to TA (Braun et al. 2019 ).

Coding reliability approaches, such as those espoused by Boyatzis ( 1998 ) and Joffe ( 2012 ), accentuate the measurement of accuracy or reliability when coding data, often involving the use of a structured codebook. The researcher would also seek a degree of consensus among multiple coders, which can be measured using Cohen’s Kappa (Braun and Clarke 2013 ). When adopting a coding reliability approach, themes tend to be developed very early in the analytical process. Themes can be hypothesised based on theory prior to data collection, with evidence to support these hypotheses then gathered from the data in the form of codes. Alternatively, themes can be hypothesised following a degree of familiarisation with the data (Terry et al. 2017 ). Themes are typically understood to constitute ‘domain summaries’, or “summaries of what participants said in relation to a particular topic or data collection question” (Braun et al. 2019 , p. 5), and are likely to be discussed as residing within the data in a positivistic sense.

Codebook approaches, such as framework analysis (Smith and Firth 2011 ) or template analysis (King and Brooks 2017 ), can be understood to be something of a mid-point between coding reliability approaches and the reflexive approach. Like coding reliability approaches, codebook approaches adopt the use of a structured codebook and share the conceptualisation of themes as domain summaries. However, codebook approaches are more akin to the reflexive approach in terms of the prioritisation of a qualitative philosophy with regard to coding. Proponents of codebook approaches would typically forgo positivistic conceptions of coding reliability, instead recognising the interpretive nature of data coding (Braun et al. 2019 ).

The reflexive approach to TA highlights the researcher’s active role in knowledge production (Braun and Clarke 2019 ). Codes are understood to represent the researcher’s interpretations of patterns of meaning across the dataset. Reflexive thematic analysis is considered a reflection of the researcher’s interpretive analysis of the data conducted at the intersection of: (1) the dataset; (2) the theoretical assumptions of the analysis, and; (3) the analytical skills/resources of the researcher (Braun and Clarke 2019 ). It is fully appreciated—even expected—that no two researchers will intersect this tripartite of criteria in the same way. As such, there should be no expectation that codes or themes interpreted by one researcher may be reproduced by another (although, this is of course possible). Prospective proponents of RTA are discouraged from attempting to provide accounts of ‘accurate’ or ‘reliable’ coding, or pursuing consensus among multiple coders or using Cohen’s Kappa values. Rather, RTA is about “the researcher’s reflective and thoughtful engagement with their data and their reflexive and thoughtful engagement with the analytic process” (Braun and Clarke 2019 , p. 594). Multiple coders may, however, be beneficial in a reflexive manner (e.g. to sense-check ideas, or to explore multiple assumptions or interpretations of the data). If analysis does involve more than one researcher, the approach should be collaborative and reflexive, aiming to achieve richer interpretations of meaning, rather than attempting to achieve consensus of meaning. Indeed, in this sense it would be beneficial for proponents of RTA to remain cognisant that qualitative analysis as a whole does not contend to provide a single or ‘correct’ answer (Braun and Clarke 2013 ).

The process of coding (and theme development) is flexible and organic, and very often will evolve throughout the analytical process (Braun et al. 2019 ). Progression through the analysis will tend to facilitate further familiarity with the data, which may in turn result in the interpretation of new patterns of meaning. This is converse to the use of codebooks, which can often predefine themes before coding. Through the reflexive approach, themes are not predefined in order to ‘find’ codes. Rather, themes are produced by organising codes around a relative core commonality, or ‘central organising concept’, that the researcher interprets from the data (Braun and Clarke 2019 ).

In their 2006 paper, Braun and Clarke ( 2006 ) originally conceptualised RTA as a paradigmatically flexible analytical method, suitable for use within a wide range of ontological and epistemological considerations. In recent publications, the authors have moved away from this view, instead defining RTA as a purely qualitative approach. This pushes the use RTA into exclusivity under appropriate qualitative paradigms (e.g. constructionism) (Braun and Clarke 2019 , 2020 ). As opposed to other forms of qualitative analysis such as content analysis (Vaismoradi et al. 2013 ), and even other forms of TA such as Boyatzis’ ( 1998 ) approach, RTA eschews any positivistic notions of data interpretation. Braun and Clarke ( 2019 ) encourage the researcher to embrace reflexivity, subjectivity and creativity as assets in knowledge production, where they argue some scholars, such as Boyatzis ( 1998 ), may otherwise construe these assets as threats.

3 A worked example of reflexive thematic analysis

The data used in the following example is taken from the qualitative phase of a mixed methods study I conducted, which examined mental health in an educational context. This study set out to understand the attitudes and opinions of Irish post-primary educators with regard to the promotion of students’ social and emotional wellbeing, with the intention to feed this information back to key governmental and non-governmental stakeholders such as the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment and the Department of Education. The research questions for this study aimed to examine educators’ general attitudes toward the promotion of student wellbeing and towards a set of ‘wellbeing guidelines’ that had recently been introduced in Irish post-primary schools. I also wanted to identify any potential barriers to wellbeing promotion and to solicit educators’ opinions as to what might constitute apposite remedial measures in this regard.

The qualitative phase of this study, from which the data for this example is garnered, involved eleven semi-structured interviews, which lasted approximately 25–30 min each. Participants consisted of core-curriculum teachers, wellbeing curriculum teachers, pastoral care team-members and senior management members. Participants were questioned on their attitudes regarding the promotion of student wellbeing, the wellbeing curriculum, the wellbeing guidelines and their perceptions of their own wellbeing. When conducting these interviews, I loosely adhered to an interview agenda to ensure each of these four key topics were addressed. However, discussions were typically guided by what I interpreted to be meaningful to the interviewee, and would often weave in and out of these different topics.

The research questions for this study were addressed within a paradigmatic framework of interpretivism and constructivism. A key principle I adopted for this study was to reflect educators’ own accounts of their attitudes, opinions and experiences as faithfully as was possible, while also accounting for the reflexive influence of my own interpretations as the researcher. I felt RTA was highly appropriate in the context of the underlying theoretical and paradigmatic assumptions of my study and would allow me to ensure qualitative data was collected and analysed in a manner that respected and expressed the subjectivity of participants’ accounts of their attitudes, while also acknowledging and embracing the reflexive influence of my interpretations as the researcher.

In the next section, I will outline the theoretical assumptions of the RTA conducted in my original study in more detail. It should be noted that outlining these theoretical assumptions is not a task specific to reflexive thematic analysis. Rather, these assumptions should be addressed prior to implementing any form of thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke 2012 , 2019 , 2020 ; Braun et al. 2016 ). The six-phase process for conducting reflexive thematic analysis will then be appropriately detailed and punctuated with examples from my study.

3.1 Addressing underlying theoretical assumptions

Across several publications, Braun and Clarke ( 2012 , 2014 , 2020 ) have identified a number of theoretical assumptions that should be addressed when conducting RTA, or indeed any form of thematic analysis. These assumptions are conceptualised as a series of continua as follows: essentialist versus constructionist epistemologies; experiential versus critical orientation to data; inductive versus deductive analyses, and; semantic versus latent coding of data. The aim is not just for the researcher to identify where their analysis is situated on each of these continua, but why the analysis is situated as it is and why this conceptualisation is appropriate to answering the research question(s).

3.1.1 Essentialist versus constructionist epistemologies

Ontological and epistemological considerations would usually be determined when a study is first being conceptualised. However, these considerations may become salient again when data analysis becomes the research focus, particularly with regard to mixed methods. The purpose of addressing this continuum is to conceptualise theoretically how the researcher understands their data and the way in which the reader should interpret the findings (Braun and Clarke 2013 , 2014 ). By adhering to essentialism, the researcher adopts a unidirectional understanding of the relationship between language and communicated experience, in that it is assumed that language is a simple reflection of our articulated meanings and experiences (Widdicombe and Wooffiitt 1995 ). The meanings and systems inherent in constructing these meanings are largely uninterrogated, with the interpretive potential of TA largely unutilised (Braun et al. 2016 ).

Conversely, researchers of a constructionist persuasion would tend to adopt a bidirectional understanding of the language/experience relationship, viewing language as implicit in the social production and reproduction of both meaning and experience (Burr 1995 ; Schwandt 1998 ). A constructionist epistemology has particular implications with regard to thematic analysis, namely that in addition to the recurrence of perceptibly important information, meaningfulness is highly influential in the development and interpretation of codes and themes. The criteria for a theme to be considered noteworthy via recurrence is simply that the theme should present repeatedly within the data. However, what is common is not necessarily meaningful or important to the analysis. Braun and Clarke ( 2012 , p. 37) offer this example:

…in researching white-collar workers’ experiences of sociality at work, a researcher might interview people about their work environment and start with questions about their typical workday. If most or all reported that they started work at around 9:00 a.m., this would be a pattern in the data, but it would not necessarily be a meaningful or important one.

Furthermore, there may be varying degrees of conviction in respondents’ expression when addressing different issues that may facilitate in identifying the salience of a prospective theme. Therefore, meaningfulness can be conceptualised, firstly on the part of the researcher, with regard to the necessity to identify themes that are relevant to answering the research questions, and secondly on the part of the respondent, as the expression of varying degrees of importance with regard to the issues being addressed. By adopting a constructionist epistemology, the researcher acknowledges the importance of recurrence, but appreciates meaning and meaningfulness as the central criteria in the coding process.

In keeping with the qualitative philosophy of RTA, epistemological consideration regarding the example data were constructionist. As such, meaning and experience was interpreted to be socially produced and reproduced via an interplay of subjective and inter-subjective construction. Footnote 1

3.1.2 Experiential versus critical orientation

An experiential orientation to understanding data typically prioritises the examination of how a given phenomenon may be experienced by the participant. This involves investigating the meaning ascribed to the phenomenon by the respondent, as well as the meaningfulness of the phenomenon to the respondent. However, although these thoughts, feelings and experiences are subjectively and inter-subjectively (re)produced, the researcher would cede to the meaning and meaningfulness ascribed by the participant (Braun and Clarke 2014 ). Adopting an experiential orientation requires an appreciation that the thoughts, feelings and experiences of participants are a reflection of personal states held internally by the participant. Conversely, a critical orientation appreciates and analyses discourse as if it were constitutive, rather than reflective, of respondents’ personal states (Braun and Clarke 2014 ). As such, a critical perspective seeks to interrogate patterns and themes of meaning with a theoretical understanding that language can create, rather than merely reflect, a given social reality (Terry et al. 2017 ). A critical perspective can examine the mechanisms that inform the construction of systems of meaning, and therefore offer interpretations of meaning further to those explicitly communicated by participants. It is then also possible to examine how the wider social context may facilitate or impugn these systems of meaning (Braun and Clarke 2012 ). In short, the researcher uses this continuum to clarify their intention to reflect the experience of a social reality (experiential orientation) or examine the constitution of a social reality (critical orientation).

In the present example, an experiential orientation to data interpretation was adopted in order to emphasise meaning and meaningfulness as ascribed by participants. Adopting this approach meant that this analysis did not seek to make claims about the social construction of the research topic (which would more so necessitate a critical perspective), but rather acknowledged the socially constructed nature of the research topic when examining the subjective ‘personal states’ of participants. An experiential orientation was most appropriate as the aim of the study was to prioritise educators’ own accounts of their attitudes, opinions. More importantly, the research questions aimed to examine educators’ attitudes regarding their experience of promoting student wellbeing—or the ‘meanings made’—and not, for example, the socio-cultural factors that may underlie the development of these attitudes—or the ‘meaning making’.

3.1.3 Inductive versus deductive analysis

A researcher who adopts a deductive or ‘theory-driven’ approach may wish to produce codes relative to a pre-specified conceptual framework or codebook. In this case, the analysis would tend to be ‘analyst-driven’, predicated on the theoretically informed interpretation of the researcher. Conversely, a researcher who adopts an inductive or ‘data-driven’ approach may wish to produce codes that are solely reflective of the content of the data, free from any pre-conceived theory or conceptual framework. In this case, data are not coded to fit a pre-existing coding frame, but instead ‘open-coded’ in order to best represent meaning as communicated by the participants (Braun and Clarke 2013 ). Data analysed and coded deductively can often provide a less rich description of the overall dataset, instead focusing on providing a detailed analysis of a particular aspect of the dataset interpreted through a particular theoretical lens (Braun and Clarke 2020 ). Deductive analysis has typically been associated with positivistic/essentialist approaches (e.g. Boyatzis 1998 ), while inductive analysis tends to be aligned with constructivist approaches (e.g. Frith and Gleeson 2004 ). That being said, inductive/deductive approaches to analysis are by no means exclusively or intrinsically linked to a particular epistemology.

Coding and analysis rarely fall cleanly into one of these approaches and, more often than not, use a combination of both (Braun and Clarke 2013 , 2019 , 2020 ). It is arguably not possible to conduct an exclusively deductive analysis, as an appreciation for the relationship between different items of information in the data set is necessary in order to identify recurring commonalities with regard to a pre-specified theory or conceptual framework. Equally, it is arguably not possible to conduct an exclusively inductive analysis, as the researcher would require some form of criteria to identify whether or not a piece of information may be conducive to addressing the research question(s), and therefore worth coding. When addressing this issue, Braun and Clarke ( 2012 ) clarify that one approach does tend to predominate over the other, and that the predominance of the deductive or inductive approach can indicate an overall orientation towards prioritising either researcher/theory-based meaning or respondent/data-based meaning, respectively.

A predominantly inductive approach was adopted in this example, meaning data was open-coded and respondent/data-based meanings were emphasised. A degree of deductive analysis was, however, employed to ensure that the open-coding contributed to producing themes that were meaningful to the research questions, and to ensure that the respondent/data-based meanings that were emphasised were relevant to the research questions.

3.1.4 Semantic versus latent coding

Semantic codes are identified through the explicit or surface meanings of the data. The researcher does not examine beyond what a respondent has said or written. The production of semantic codes can be described as a descriptive analysis of the data, aimed solely at presenting the content of the data as communicated by the respondent. Latent coding goes beyond the descriptive level of the data and attempts to identify hidden meanings or underlying assumptions, ideas, or ideologies that may shape or inform the descriptive or semantic content of the data. When coding is latent, the analysis becomes much more interpretive, requiring a more creative and active role on the part of the researcher. Indeed, Braun and Clarke ( 2012 , 2013 , 2020 ) have repeatedly presented the argument that codes and themes do not ‘emerge’ from the data or that they may be residing in the data, waiting to be found. Rather, the researcher plays an active role in interpreting codes and themes, and identifying which are relevant to the research question(s). Analyses that use latent coding can often overlap with aspects of thematic discourse analysis in that the language used by the respondent can be used to interpret deeper levels of meaning and meaningfulness (Braun and Clarke 2006 ).

In this example, both semantic and latent coding were utilised. No attempt was made to prioritise semantic coding over latent coding or vice-versa. Rather, semantic codes were produced when meaningful semantic information was interpreted, and latent codes were produced when meaningful latent information was interpreted. As such, any item of information could be double-coded in accordance with the semantic meaning communicated by the respondent, and the latent meaning interpreted by the researcher (Patton 1990 ). This was reflective of the underlying theoretical assumptions of the analysis, as the constructive and interpretive epistemology and ontology were addressed by affording due consideration to both the meaning constructed and communicated by the participant and my interpretation of this meaning as the researcher.

3.2 The six-phase analytical process

Braun and Clarke ( 2012 , 2013 , 2014 , 2020 ) have proposed a six-phase process, which can facilitate the analysis and help the researcher identify and attend to the important aspects of a thematic analysis. In this sense, Braun and Clarke ( 2012 ) have identified the six-phase process as an approach to doing TA, as well as learning how to do TA. While the six phases are organised in a logical sequential order, the researcher should be cognisant that the analysis is not a linear process of moving forward through the phases. Rather, the analysis is recursive and iterative, requiring the researcher to move back and forth through the phases as necessary (Braun and Clarke 2020 ). TA is a time consuming process that evolves as the researcher navigates the different phases. This can lead to new interpretations of the data, which may in turn require further iterations of earlier phases. As such, it is important to appreciate the six-phase process as a set of guidelines, rather than rules, that should be applied in a flexible manner to fit the data and the research question(s) (Braun and Clarke 2013 , 2020 ).

3.2.1 Phase one: familiarisation with the data

The ‘familiarisation’ phase is prevalent in many forms of qualitative analysis. Familiarisation entails the reading and re-reading of the entire dataset in order to become intimately familiar with the data. This is necessary to be able to identify appropriate information that may be relevant to the research question(s). Manual transcription of data can be a very useful activity for the researcher in this regard, and can greatly facilitate a deep immersion into the data. Data should be transcribed orthographically, noting inflections, breaks, pauses, tones, etc. on the part of both the interviewer and the participant (Braun and Clarke 2013 ). Often times, data may not have been gathered or transcribed by the researcher, in which case, it would be beneficial for the researcher to watch/listen to video or audio recordings to achieve a greater contextual understanding of the data. This phase can be quite time consuming and requires a degree of patience. However, it is important to afford equal consideration across the entire depth and breadth of the dataset, and to avoid the temptation of being selective of what to read, or even ‘skipping over’ this phase completely (Braun and Clarke 2006 ).

At this phase, I set about familiarising myself with the data by firstly listening to each interview recording once before transcribing that particular recording. This first playback of each interview recording required ‘active listening’ and, as such, I did not take any notes at this point. I performed this active-listen in order to develop an understanding of the primary areas addressed in each interview prior to transcription. This also provided me an opportunity, unburdened by tasks such as note taking, to recall gestures and mannerisms that may or may not have been documented in interview notes. I manually transcribed each interview immediately after the active-listen playback. When transcription of all interviews was complete, I read each transcripts numerous times. At this point, I took note of casual observations of initial trends in the data and potentially interesting passages in the transcripts. I also documented my thoughts and feelings regarding both the data and the analytical process (in terms of transparency, it would be beneficial to adhere to this practice throughout the entire analysis). Some preliminary notes made during the early iterations of familiarisation with the data can be seen in Box 1. It will be seen later that some of these notes would go on to inform the interpretation of the finalised thematic framework.

figure a

Example of preliminary notes taken during phase one

3.2.2 Phase two: generating initial codes

Codes are the fundamental building blocks of what will later become themes. The process of coding is undertaken to produce succinct, shorthand descriptive or interpretive labels for pieces of information that may be of relevance to the research question(s). It is recommended that the researcher work systematically through the entire dataset, attending to each data item with equal consideration, and identifying aspects of data items that are interesting and may be informative in developing themes. Codes should be brief, but offer sufficient detail to be able to stand alone and inform of the underlying commonality among constituent data items in relation to the subject of the research (Braun and Clarke 2012 ; Braun et al. 2016 ).

A brief excerpt of the preliminary coding process of one participant’s interview transcript is presented in Box 2. The preliminary iteration of coding was conducted using the ‘comments’ function in Microsoft Word (2016). This allowed codes to be noted in the side margin, while also highlighting the area of text assigned to each respective code. This is a relatively straightforward example with no double-codes or overlap in data informing different codes, as new codes begin where previous codes end. The code C5 offers an exemplar of the provision of sufficient detail to explain what I interpreted from the related data item. A poor example of this code would be to say “the wellbeing guidelines are not relatable” or “not relatable for students”. Each of these examples lack context. Understanding codes written in this way would be contingent upon knowledge of the underlying data extract. The code C8 exemplifies this issue. It is unclear if the positivity mentioned relates to the particular participant, their colleagues, or their students. This code was subsequently redefined in later iterations of coding. It can also be seen in this short example that the same code has been produced for both C4 and C9. This code was prevalent throughout the entire dataset and would subsequently be informative in the development of a theme.

figure b

Extract of preliminary coding

Any item of data that might be useful in addressing the research question(s) should be coded. Through repeated iterations of coding and further familiarisation, the researcher can identify which codes are conducive to interpreting themes and which can be discarded. I would recommend that the researcher document their progression through iterations of coding to track the evolution of codes and indeed prospective themes. RTA is a recursive process and it is rare that a researcher would follow a linear path through the six phases (Braun and Clarke 2014 ). It is very common for the researcher to follow a particular train of thought when coding, only to encounter an impasse where several different interpretations of the data come to light. It may be necessary to explore each of these prospective options to identify the most appropriate path to follow. Tracking the evolution of codes will not only aid transparency, but will afford the researcher signposts and waypoints to which they may return should a particular approach to coding prove unfruitful. I tracked the evolution of my coding process in a spreadsheet, with data items documented in the first column and iterations of codes in each successive column. I found it useful to highlight which codes were changed in each successive iteration. Table 1 provides an excerpt of a Microsoft Excel (2016) spreadsheet that was established to track iterations of coding and document the overall analytical process. All codes developed during the first iteration of coding were transferred into this spreadsheet along with a label identifying the respective participant. Subsequent iterations of coding were documented in this spreadsheet. The original transcripts were still regularly consulted to assess existing codes and examine for the interpretation of new codes as further familiarity with the data developed. Column one presents a reference number for the data item that was coded, while column two indicates the participant who provided each data item. Column three presents the data item that was coded. Columns four and five indicate the iteration of the coding process to be the third and fourth iteration, respectively. Codes revised between iterations three and four are highlighted.

With regard to data item one, I initially considered that a narrative might develop exploring a potential discrepancy in levels of training received by wellbeing educators and non-wellbeing educators. In early iterations of coding, I adopted a convention of coding training-related information with reference to the wellbeing or non-wellbeing status of the participant. While this discrepancy in levels of training remained evident throughout the dataset, I eventually deemed it unnecessary to pursue interpretation of the data in this way. This coding convention was abandoned at iteration four in favour of the pre-existing generalised code “insufficient training in wellbeing curriculum”. With data item three, I realised that the code was descriptive at a semantic level, but not very informative. Upon re-evaluating this data item, I found the pre-existing code “lack of clarity in assessing student wellbeing” to be much more appropriate and representative of what the participant seemed to be communicating. Finally, I realised that the code for data item five was too specific to this particular data item. No other data item shared this code, which would preclude this code (and data item) from consideration when construction themes. I decided that this item would be subsumed under the pre-existing code “more training is needed for wellbeing promotion”.

The process of generating codes is non-prescriptive regarding how data is segmented and itemised for coding, and how many codes or what type of codes (semantic or latent) are interpreted from an item of data. The same data item can be coded both semantically and latently if deemed necessary. For example, when discussing how able they felt to attend to their students’ wellbeing needs, one participant stated “…if someone’s struggling a bit with their schoolwork and it’s getting them down a bit, it’s common sense that determines what we say to them or how we approach them. And it might help to talk, but I don’t know that it has a lasting effect” [2B]. Here, I understood that the participant was explicitly sharing the way in which they address their students’ wellbeing concerns, but also that the participant was implying that this commonsense approach might not be sufficient. As such, this data item was coded both semantically as “educators rely on common sense when attending to wellbeing issues”, and latently as “common sense inadequate for wellbeing promotion”. Both codes were revised later in the analysis. However, this example illustrates the way in which any data item can be coded in multiple ways and for multiple meanings. There is also no upper or lower limit regarding how many codes should be interpreted. What is important is that, when the dataset is fully coded and codes are collated, sufficient depth exists to examine the patterns within the data and the diversity of the positions held by participants. It is, however, necessary to ensure that codes pertain to more than one data item (Braun and Clarke 2012 ).

3.2.3 Phase three: generating themes

This phase begins when all relevant data items have been coded. The focus shifts from the interpretation of individual data items within the dataset, to the interpretation of aggregated meaning and meaningfulness across the dataset. The coded data is reviewed and analysed as to how different codes may be combined according to shared meanings so that they may form themes or sub-themes. This will often involve collapsing multiple codes that share a similar underlying concept or feature of the data into one single code. Equally, one particular code may turn out to be representative of an over-arching narrative within the data and be promoted as a sub-theme or even a theme (Braun and Clarke 2012 ). It is important to re-emphasise that themes do not reside in the data waiting to be found. Rather, the researcher must actively construe the relationship among the different codes and examine how this relationship may inform the narrative of a given theme. Construing the importance or salience of a theme is not contingent upon the number of codes or data items that inform a particular theme. What is important is that the pattern of codes and data items communicates something meaningful that helps answer the research question(s) (Braun and Clarke 2013 ).

Themes should be distinctive and may even be contradictory to other themes, but should tie together to produce a coherent and lucid picture of the dataset. The researcher must be able and willing to let go of codes or prospective themes that may not fit within the overall analysis. It may be beneficial to construct a miscellaneous theme (or category) to contain all the codes that do not appear to fit in among any prospective themes. This miscellaneous theme may end up becoming a theme in its own right, or may simple be removed from the analysis during a later phase (Braun and Clarke 2012 ). Much the same as with codes, there is no correct amount of themes. However, with too many themes the analysis may become unwieldy and incoherent, whereas too few themes can result in the analysis failing to explore fully the depth and breadth of the data. At the end of this stage, the researcher should be able to produce a thematic map (e.g. a mind map or affinity map) or table that collates codes and data items relative to their respective themes (Braun and Clarke 2012 , 2020 ).

At this point in the analysis, I assembled codes into initial candidate themes. A thematic map of the initial candidate themes can be seen in Fig.  1 . The theme “best practice in wellbeing promotion” was clearly definable, with constituent coded data presenting two concurrent narratives. These narratives were constructed as two separate sub-themes, which emphasised the involvement of the entire school staff and the active pursuit of practical measures in promoting student wellbeing, respectively. The theme “recognising student wellbeing” was similarly clear. Again, I interpreted a dichotomy of narratives. However, in this case, the two narratives seemed to be even more synergetic. The two sub-themes for “best practice…” highlighted two independently informative factors in best practice. Here, the sub-themes are much more closely related, with one sub-theme identifying factors that may inhibit the development of student wellbeing, while the second sub-theme discusses factors that may improve student wellbeing. At this early stage in the analysis, I was considering that this sub-theme structure might also be used to delineate the theme “recognising educator wellbeing”. Finally, the theme “factors influencing wellbeing promotion” collated coded data items that addressed inhibitive factors with regard to wellbeing promotion. These factors were conceptualised as four separate sub-themes reflecting a lack of training, a lack of time, a lack of appropriate value for wellbeing promotion, and a lack of knowledge of supporting wellbeing-related documents. While it was useful to bring all of this information together under one theme, even at this early stage it was evident that this particular theme was very dense and unwieldy, and would likely require further revision.

figure 1

Initial thematic map indicating four candidate themes

3.2.4 Phase four: reviewing potential themes

This phase requires the researcher to conduct a recursive review of the candidate themes in relation to the coded data items and the entire dataset (Braun and Clarke 2012 , 2020 ). At this phase, it is not uncommon to find that some candidate themes may not function well as meaningful interpretations of the data, or may not provide information that addresses the research question(s). It may also come to light that some of the constituent codes and/or data items that inform these themes may be incongruent and require revision. Braun and Clarke ( 2012 , p. 65) proposed a series of key questions that the researcher should address when reviewing potential themes. They are:

Is this a theme (it could be just a code)?

If it is a theme, what is the quality of this theme (does it tell me something useful about the data set and my research question)?

What are the boundaries of this theme (what does it include and exclude)?

Are there enough (meaningful) data to support this theme (is the theme thin or thick)?

Are the data too diverse and wide ranging (does the theme lack coherence)?

The analysis conducted at this phase involves two levels of review. Level one is a review of the relationships among the data items and codes that inform each theme and sub-theme. If the items/codes form a coherent pattern, it can be assumed that the candidate theme/sub-theme makes a logical argument and may contribute to the overall narrative of the data. At level two, the candidate themes are reviewed in relation to the data set. Themes are assessed as to how well they provide the most apt interpretation of the data in relation to the research question(s). Braun and Clarke have proposed that, when addressing these key questions, it may be useful to observe Patton’s ( 1990 ) ‘dual criteria for judging categories’ (i.e. internal homogeneity and external heterogeneity). The aim of Patton’s dual criteria would be to observe internal homogeneity within themes at the level one review, while observing external heterogeneity among themes at the level two review. Essentially, these two levels of review function to demonstrate that items and codes are appropriate to inform a theme, and that a theme is appropriate to inform the interpretation of the dataset (Braun and Clarke 2006 ). The outcome of this dual-level review is often that some sub-themes or themes may need to be restructured by adding or removing codes, or indeed adding or removing themes/sub-themes. The finalised thematic framework that resulted from the review of the candidate themes can be seen in Fig.  2 .

figure 2

Finalised thematic map demonstrating five themes

During the level one review, inspection of the prospective sub-theme “sources of negative affect” in relation to the theme “recognising educator wellbeing” resulted in a new interpretation of the constituent coded data items. Participants communicated numerous pre-existing work-related factors that they felt had a negative impact upon their wellbeing. However, it was also evident that participants felt the introduction of the new wellbeing curriculum and the newly mandated task of formally attending to student wellbeing had compounded these pre-existing issues. While pre-existing issues and wellbeing-related issues were both informative of educators’ negative affect, the new interpretation of this data informed the realisation of two concurrent narratives, with wellbeing-related issues being a compounding factor in relation to pre-existing issues. This resulted in the “sources of negative affect” sub-theme being split into two new sub-themes; “work-related negative affect” and “the influence of wellbeing promotion”. The “actions to improve educator wellbeing” sub-theme was folded into these sub-themes, with remedial measures for each issue being discussed in respective sub-themes.

During the level two review, my concerns regarding the theme “factors inhibiting wellbeing promotion” were addressed. With regard to Braun and Clarke’s key questions, it was quite difficult to identify the boundaries of this theme. It was also particularly dense (or too thick) and somewhat incoherent. At this point, I concluded that this theme did not constitute an appropriate representation of the data. Earlier phases of the analysis were reiterated and new interpretations of the data were developed. This candidate theme was subsequently broken down into three separate themes. While the sub-themes of this candidate theme were, to a degree, informative in the development of the new themes, the way in which the constituent data was understood was fundamentally reconceptualised. The new theme, entitled “the influence of time”, moves past merely describing time constraints as an inhibitive factor in wellbeing promotion. A more thorough account of the bi-directional nature of time constraints was realised, which acknowledged that previously existing time constraints affected wellbeing promotion, while wellbeing promotion compounded previously existing time constraints. This added an analysis of the way in which the introduction of wellbeing promotion also produced time constraints in relation to core curricular activities.

The candidate sub-themes “lack of training” and “knowledge of necessary documents” were re-evaluated and considered to be topical rather than thematic aspects of the data. Upon further inspection, I felt that the constituent coded data items of these two sub-themes were informative of a single narrative of participants attending to their students’ wellbeing in an atheoretical manner. As such, these two candidate sub-themes were folded into each other to produce the theme “incompletely theorised agreements”. Finally, the level two review led me to the conclusion that the full potential of the data that informed the candidate sub-theme “lack of value of wellbeing promotion” was not realised. I found that a much richer understanding of this data was possible, which was obscured by the initial, relatively simplistic, descriptive account offered. An important distinction was made, in that participants held differing perceptions of the value attributed to wellbeing promotion by educators and by students. Further, I realised that educators’ perceptions of wellbeing promotion were not necessarily negative and should not be exclusively presented as an inhibitive factor in wellbeing promotion. A new theme, named “the axiology of wellbeing” and informed by the sub-themes “students’ valuation of wellbeing promotion” and “educators’ valuation of wellbeing promotion”, was developed to delineate this multifaceted understanding of participants’ accounts of the value of wellbeing promotion.

It is quite typical at this phase that codes, as well as themes, may be revised or removed to facilitate the most meaningful interpretation of the data. As such, it may be necessary to reiterate some of the activities undertaken during phases two and three of the analysis. It may be necessary to recode some data items, collapse some codes into one, remove some codes, or promote some codes as sub-themes or themes. For example, when re-examining the data items that informed the narrative of the value ascribed to wellbeing promotion, I observed that participants offered very different perceptions of the value ascribed by educators and by students. To pursue this line of analysis, numerous codes were reconceptualised to reflect the two different perspectives. Codes such as “positivity regarding the wellbeing curriculum” were split into the more specified codes “student positivity regarding the wellbeing curriculum” and “educator positivity regarding the wellbeing curriculum”. Amending codes in this way ultimately contributed to the reinterpretation of the data and the development of the finalised thematic map.

As with all other phases, it is very important to track and document all of these changes. With regard to some of the more significant changes (removing a theme, for example), I would recommend making notes on why it might be necessary to take this action. The aim of this phase is to produce a revised thematic map or table that captures the most important elements of the data in relation to the research question(s).

3.2.5 Phase five: defining and naming theme

At this phase, the researcher is tasked with presenting a detailed analysis of the thematic framework. Each individual theme and sub-theme is to be expressed in relation to both the dataset and the research question(s). As per Patton’s ( 1990 ) dual criteria, each theme should provide a coherent and internally consistent account of the data that cannot be told by the other themes. However, all themes should come together to create a lucid narrative that is consistent with the content of the dataset and informative in relation to the research question(s). The names of the themes are also subject to a final revision (if necessary) at this point.

Defining themes requires a deep analysis of the underlying data items. There will likely be many data items underlying each theme. It is at this point that the researcher is required to identify which data items to use as extracts when writing up the results of the analysis. The chosen extracts should provide a vivid and compelling account of the arguments being made by a respective theme. Multiple extracts should be used from the entire pool of data items that inform a theme in order to convey the diversity of expressions of meaning across these data items, and to demonstrate the cohesion of the theme’s constituent data items. Furthermore, each of the reported data extracts should be subject to a deep analysis, going beyond merely reporting what a participant may have said. Each extract should be interpreted in relation to its constitutive theme, as well as the broader context of the research question(s), creating an analytic narrative that informs the reader what is interesting about this extract and why (Braun and Clarke 2012 ).

Data extracts can be presented either illustratively, providing a surface-level description of what participants said, or analytically, interrogating what has been interpreted to be important about what participants said and contextualising this interpretation in relation to the available literature. If the researcher were aiming to produce a more illustrative write-up of the analysis, relating the results to the available literature would tend to be held until the ‘discussion’ section of the report. If the researcher were aiming to produce an analytical write-up, extracts would tend to be contextualised in relation to the literature as and when they are reported in the ‘results’ section (Braun and Clarke 2013 ; Terry et al. 2017 ). While an illustrative write-up of RTA results is completely acceptable, the researcher should remain cognisant that the narrative of the write-up should communicate the complexities of the data, while remaining “embedded in the scholarly field” (Braun and Clarke 2012 , p. 69). RTA is an interpretive approach to analysis and, as such, the overall report should go beyond describing the data, providing theoretically informed arguments as to how the data addresses the research question(s). To this end, a relatively straightforward test can reveal a researcher’s potential proclivity towards one particular reporting convention: If an extract can be removed and the write-up still makes sense, the reporting style is illustrative; if an extract is removed and the write-up no longer makes sense, the reporting style is analytical (Terry et al. 2017 ).

The example in Box 3 contains a brief excerpt from the sub-theme “the whole-school approach”, which demonstrates the way in which a data extract may be reported in an illustrative manner. Here, the narrative discussed the necessity of having an ‘appropriate educator’ deliver the different aspects of the wellbeing curriculum. One participant provided a particularly useful real-world example of the potential negative implications of having ‘the wrong person’ for this job in relation to physical education (one of the aspects of the wellbeing curriculum). This data extract very much informed the narrative and illustrated participants’ arguments regarding the importance of choosing an appropriate educator for the job.

figure c

Example of data extract reported illustratively

In Box 4, an example is offered of how a data extract may be reported in an analytical manner. This excerpt is also taken from the sub-theme “the whole-school approach”, and also informs the ‘appropriate educator for the job’ narrative. Here, however, sufficient evidence has already been established to illustrate the perspectives of the participants. The report turns to a deeper analysis of what has been said and how it has been said. Specifically, the way in which participants seemed to construe an ‘appropriate educator’ was examined and related to existing literature. The analytical interpretation of this data extract (and others) proposes interesting implications regarding the way in which participants constructed their schema of an ‘appropriate educator’.

figure d

Example of data extract reported analytically

The names of themes are also subject to a final review (if necessary) at this point. Naming themes may seem trivial and might subsequently receive less attention than it actually requires. However, naming themes is a very important task. Theme names are the first indication to the reader of what has been captured from the data. Names should be concise, informative, and memorable. The overriding tendency may be to create names that are descriptors of the theme. Braun and Clarke ( 2013 , 2014 , 2020 ) encourage creativity and advocate the use of catchy names that may more immediately capture the attention of the reader, while also communicating an important aspect of the theme. To this end, they suggest that it may be useful to examine data items for a short extract that could be used to punctuate the theme name.

3.2.6 Phase six: producing the report

The separation between phases five and six can often be blurry. Further, this ‘final’ phase would rarely only occur at the end of the analysis. As opposed to practices typical of quantitative research that would see the researcher conduct and then write up the analysis, the write-up of qualitative research is very much interwoven into the entire process of the analysis (Braun and Clarke 2012 ). Again, as with previous phases, this will likely require a recursive approach to report writing. As codes and themes change and evolve over the course of the analysis, so too can the write-up. Changes should be well documented by this phase and reflected in informal notes and memos, as well as a research journal that should be kept over the entire course of the research. Phase six then, can be seen as the completion and final inspection of the report that the researcher would most likely have begun writing before even undertaking their thematic analysis (e.g. a journal article or thesis/dissertation).

A useful task to address at this point would be to establish the order in which themes are reported. Themes should connect in a logical and meaningful manner, building a cogent narrative of the data. Where relevant, themes should build upon previously reported themes, while remaining internally consistent and capable of communicating their own individual narrative if isolated from other themes (Braun and Clarke 2012 ). I reported the theme “best practice in wellbeing promotion” first, as I felt it established the positivity that seemed to underlie the accounts provided by all of my participants. This theme was also strongly influence by semantic codes, with participants being very capable of describing what they felt would constitute ‘best practice’. I saw this as an easily digestible first theme to ease the reader into the wider analysis. It made sense to report “the axiology of wellbeing promotion” next. This theme introduced the reality that, despite an underlying degree of positivity, participants did indeed have numerous concerns regarding wellbeing promotion, and that participants’ attitudes were generally positive with a significant ‘but’. This theme provided good sign-posting for the next two themes that would be reported, which were “the influence of time” and “incompletely theorised agreements”, respectively. I reported “the influence of time” first, as this theme established how time constraints could negatively affect educator training, contributing to a context in which educators were inadvertently pushed towards adopting incompletely theorised agreements when promoting student wellbeing. The last theme to be reported was “recognising educator wellbeing”. As the purpose of the analysis was to ascertain the attitudes of educators regarding wellbeing promotion, it felt appropriate to offer the closing commentary of the analysis to educators’ accounts of their own wellbeing. This became particularly pertinent when the sub-themes were revised to reflect the influence of pre-existing work-related issues and the subsequent influence of wellbeing promotion.

An issue proponents of RTA may realise when writing up their analysis is the potential for incongruence between traditional conventions for report writing and the appropriate style for reporting RTA—particularly when adopting an analytical approach to reporting on data. The document structure for academic journal articles and Masters or PhD theses typically subscribe to the convention of reporting results of analyses in a ‘results’ section and then synthesising and contextualising the results of analyses in a ‘discussion’ section. Conversely, Braun and Clarke recommend synthesising and contextualising data as and when they are reported in the ‘results’ section (Braun and Clarke 2013 ; Terry et al. 2017 ). This is a significant departure from the traditional reporting convention, which researchers—particularly post-graduate students—may find difficult to reconcile. While Braun and Clarke do not explicitly address this potential issue, it is implicitly evident that they would advocate that researchers prioritise the appropriate reporting style for RTA and not cede to the traditional reporting convention.

4 Conclusion

Although Braun and Clarke are widely published on the topic of reflexive thematic analysis, confusion persists in the wider literature regarding the appropriate implementation of this approach. The aim of this paper has been to contribute to dispelling some of this confusion by provide a worked example of Braun and Clarke’s contemporary approach to reflexive thematic analysis. To this end, this paper provided instruction in how to address the theoretical underpinnings of RTA by operationalising the theoretical assumptions of the example data in relation to the study from which the data was taken. Clear instruction was also provided in how to conduct a reflexive thematic analysis. This was achieved by providing a detailed step-by-step guide to Braun and Clarke’s six-phase process, and by providing numerous examples of the implementation of each phase based on my own research. Braun and Clarke have made (and continue to make) an extremely valuable contribution to the discourse regarding qualitative analysis. I strongly recommended that any prospective proponents of RTA who may read this paper thoroughly examine Braun and Clarke’s full body of literature in this area, and aim to achieve an understanding of RTA’s nuanced position among the numerous different approaches to thematic analysis.

While the reconceptualisation of RTA as falling within the remit of a purely qualitative paradigm precipitates that the research fall on the constructionist end of this continuum, it is nevertheless good practice to explicate this theoretical position.

Boyatzis, R.E.: Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)

Google Scholar  

Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3 (2), 77–101 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Article   Google Scholar  

Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Thematic analysis. In: Cooper, H., Camic, P.M., Long, D.L., Panter, A.T., Rindskopf, D., Sher, K.J. (eds.) APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, Research Designs, vol. 2, pp. 57–71. American Psychological Association, Washington (2012)

Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2013)

Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Thematic analysis. In: Teo, T. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology, pp. 1947–1952. Springer, New York (2014)

Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual. Res. Sport Exerc. Health 11 (4), 589–597 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

Braun, V., Clarke, V.: One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qual. Res. Psychol. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Weate, P.: Using Thematic Analysis in sport and exercise research. In: Smith, B., Sparkes, A.C. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise, pp. 191–205. Routledge, London (2016)

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Terry, G., Hayfield, N.: Thematic analysis. In: Liamputtong, P. (ed.) Handbook of Research Methods in Health and Social Sciences, pp. 843–860. Springer, Singapore (2018)

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., Terry, G.: Answers to frequently asked questions about thematic analysis (2019). Retrieved from https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/psych/about/our-research/documents/Answers%20to%20frequently%20asked%20questions%20about%20thematic%20analysis%20April%202019.pdf

Burr, V.: An Introduction to Social Constructionism. Routledge, London, UK (1995)

Book   Google Scholar  

Clarke, V., Braun, V.: Thematic Analysis. In: Lyons, E., Coyle, A. (eds.) Analysing Qualitative Data in Psychology, 2nd edn., pp. 84–103. Sage Publications, London (2016)

Frith, H., Gleeson, K.: Clothing and embodiment: men managing body image and appearance. Psychol. Men Mascul. 5 (1), 40–48 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.5.1.40

Joffe, H.: Thematic analysis. In: Harper, D., Thompson, A.R. (eds.) Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health and Psychotherapy: A Guide for Students and Practitioners, pp. 209–223. Wiley, Chichester (2012)

King, N., Brooks, J.M.: Template analysis for business and management students. Sage Publications, London, UK (2017)

Patton, M.Q.: Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1990)

Schwandt, T.A.: Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues, pp. 221–259. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)

Smith, J., Firth, J.: Qualitative data analysis: The framework approach. Nurse Res. 18 (2), 52–62 (2011). https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2011.01.18.2.52.c8284

Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Thematic analysis. In: Willig, C., Rogers, W.S. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology, pp. 17–37. Sage Publications, London (2017)

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., Bondas, T.: Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs. Health Sci. 15 (3), 398–405 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048

Widdicombe, S., Wooffitt, R.: The Language of Youth Subcultures: Social Identity in Action. Harvester, Hemel Hempstead (1995)

Download references

Open Access funding provided by the IReL Consortium. This study was funded by Technological University Dublin Research Scholarship.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Technological University Dublin – Blanchardstown Campus, Dublin, Ireland

David Byrne

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Byrne .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The author declares that he/she has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Byrne, D. A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Quant 56 , 1391–1412 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y

Download citation

Accepted : 06 June 2021

Published : 26 June 2021

Issue Date : June 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Thematic analysis
  • Qualitative
  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • v.9(6); 2022 Nov

Maintaining reflexivity in qualitative nursing research

Monica peddle.

1 School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne Australia

Reflexivity is central to the construction of knowledge in qualitative research. This purpose of this paper was to outline one approach when using reflexivity as a strategy to ensure quality of the research process.

In this exploratory research, reflexivity was established and maintained by using repeated questionnaires, completed online. Using the approach presented by Bradbury‐Jones (2007) and Peshkin's I’s, the aim of the research was to identify the researcher's values, beliefs, perspectives and perceptions prevalent in the research.

Qualitative data were collected in online reflexive questionnaires, completed monthly by the researcher from January 2017 to December 2018. Data analysis used interpretive and reflective reading and inductive processes.

Seventeen questionnaires were analysed. Data indicated use of questionnaires enabled and detailed development of specific strategies to ensure trustworthiness. Importantly, reflexivity, supported by questionnaires, brought about transformation through self‐awareness and enlightenment.

1. INTRODUCTION

Reflexivity is the process of reflecting critically on oneself as a researcher (Bradbury‐Jones,  2007 ) and is central to the construction of knowledge in qualitative research (Narayanasamy,  2015 ). It requires the process of knowledge construction to be the subject of investigation (Flick,  2013 ). Reflexivity assists researchers to consider their “continuing engagement with participants and revelations of the self as the researcher enters the various stages of the research process” (Narayanasamy,  2015 , p. 238). It acknowledges the partnership between the participants and researcher (Narayanasamy,  2015 ), the impact that the participants and the researcher have on each other (Darawsheh,  2014 ) and the need to understand what the effects were and how they impacted on the data (Patton,  2015 ). During reflexivity, the research process and end product are examined relative to the researchers’ praxis, role and social position (Flick,  2013 ).

Reflexivity is also a process that can be transformative for the researcher, developing personal self‐awareness and enlightenment (Narayanasamy,  2015 ). This process can be challenging, as the researcher has to act ethically and employ skilful and illuminative insight through a process of “critical self‐reflection on one's biases, theoretical predispositions, preferences” (Engward & Davis,  2015 ). However, despite the importance of reflexivity, it is suggested that reflexive accounts in nursing research are “under‐addressed” (Narayanasamy,  2015 ).

Reflexivity can be viewed as a criterion, a tool or a strategy of rigour in qualitative studies (Darawsheh,  2014 ). When viewed as a criterion, reflexivity is a marker of quality and is used to increase the confidence, congruence and credibility of findings (Darawsheh,  2014 ). When viewed as a tool reflexivity promotes quality of qualitative research, impacting on the judgement of the significance of the findings (Patton,  2015 ). When viewed as a strategy, reflexivity enables the researcher to ensure credibility of data, dependability of the study and conformability of findings (Darawsheh,  2014 ). This paper will outline one approach when using reflexivity as a strategy to ensure quality of the research process.

In this paper, I will use the first person to outline the personal self‐reflective process used to examine my perceptions, that are the origins of my own voice and perspectives (Patton,  2015 ). This paper will outline the strategies I used to create “a continual internal dialogue and critical self‐evaluation of [my] positionality, and active acknowledgement and explicit recognition that this position may affect the research process and outcome” (Berger,  2015 , p. 220). Examining my own thoughts, actions and assumptions allowed me to bring these to a conscious level and develop an awareness of how these may influence the research process (Darawsheh,  2014 ). Furthermore, reflexivity supported credibility by making the decisions made and the research process transparent (Darawsheh,  2014 ; Patton,  2015 ).

1.1. Background

1.2. research project summary.

The purpose of the research project in which this reflexivity was situated was to explore the influence of virtual patients on the development of non‐technical skills in first‐ and third‐year nursing students. Non‐technical skills are defined as the cognitive, social and interpersonal skills that contribute to safe and efficient task performance (Flin et al.,  2013 ). Research now recognizes that non‐technical skills such as communication, teamwork and leadership are critically important in safe patient care in the clinical setting (Flin et al.,  2013 ). However, literature identifies there is a deficit in undergraduate health professional education curricula of explicit teaching and learning activities and resources enabling development of NTS critical for maintaining patient safety in clinical practice (DeTata,  2015 ).

The Virtual Simulated Patient Resource (VSPR) ( www.vspr.net.au is a free interprofessional web‐based resource that provides undergraduate health professionals the opportunity to engage in simulation based, interactive learning activities to develop and apply foundational knowledge and skill of non‐technical skills. Knowledge and skill are developed in online modules and applied to realistic virtual patient scenarios using a simulation based and “play your own adventure game” approach. The resource is student centred where the learner controls and manages their learning experience from the “driver's seat” to meet their individual needs. Integration of the resource is based on constructivist theory supported by Kolb's Experiential Learning Model (1984). The author has led the design, development, implementation and research of the Virtual Simulated Patient Resource.

Using a case study methodology, the influence of virtual patients on the development of non‐technical skills in first‐ and third‐year nursing student was explored. A purposive convenience sample was used with first‐ ( n  = 45) and third‐year ( n  = 31) nursing students across two education facilities in Victoria, Australia. Ten focus groups and one individual interview were conducted with first‐year students and 6 focus groups and one individual interview, with third‐year students. Data analysis used framework analysis.

1.3. Methods

A descriptive exploratory approach was employed in this research. Qualitative data that promoted self‐reflection were collected using repeated questionnaires, completed online using Qualtrics. The research question posed was as follows: what are the nature of my values, beliefs perceptions and perspectives prevalent in the research?

1.4. Data collection

Online reflective questionnaires enabled an examination of the internal dialogue and a critical self‐evaluation of my skills, commitment and framing in and towards the research enabling me to be self‐aware. This approach to reflexivity allowed application of skills and attributes to support further exploration of the phenomenon under investigation whilst controlling subjectivity, so as not to impart my views or perceptions on the participants’ data (Darawsheh,  2014 ).

I utilized three avenues to capture my consciousness and self‐commentary when immersed in the research – participants, audience and researcher (Patton,  2015 ). According to Patton ( 2015 ), reflexivity intersects with perspective of those studied, considering how do they know what they know, what has influenced their world view and how do I perceive them? Additionally, outlining the perspectives of the researcher, who is an instrument in qualitative inquiry, to identify what prior knowledge, values and beliefs they bring to the research, and current thoughts and perceptions on the research process and findings is important. Finally, the perspectives of those who will critique and use the findings assists in examining what is clear or unclear or what remains unanswered. The repeated questionnaires enabled me to scrutinize the participants, the audience and myself as the researcher to support a deliberate and planned internal examination of my position relative to the research and the values that I brought to the research. Additionally, it enabled me to consider how these perspectives may have shaped the data. This reflexivity allowed me to capture my self‐commentary during the research and articulate how I was making sense of the data.

The qualitative reflective questionnaire comprised six questions as outlined in Table  1 . The time taken to complete the questionnaire was relative to what was occurring in the research at that time. At times, responses were short and sharp with clearly defined statements whilst at others, responses were more reflective and thoughtful taking more time. I completed these online questionnaires monthly.

Reflexive questionnaire

1.5. Data analysis

The aim of the analysis of the reflective qualitative questionnaire entries was to identify the nature of my values, beliefs, perceptions and perspectives prevalent in the research. This approach uses Peshkin's I’s (Bradbury‐Jones,  2007 ). Peshkin's I’s refers to the work undertaken by Peshkin ( 1988 ), who by recording his thoughts and feelings and then systematically analysing the entries, was able to identify the subjective I’s that may have influenced his research. The outcomes of the research suggested that being aware of your subjectivities in research can improve outcomes.

Analysis of reflective questionnaire responses used interpretive and reflexive reading (Bradbury‐Jones,  2007 ). The first step involved a “process of reading the data for meaning and representation” followed by an inductive process, where I recognized themes that represented the different kinds of values, beliefs, perceptions and perspectives prevalent in the research (Bradbury‐Jones,  2007 ). The nature of these I’s identifies my position in the research and the influence of my internal perspectives on the data.

1.6. Ethics

Ethical approval for the qualitative research in which this reflexivity was situated to ensure trustworthiness was obtained (Ethics approval ID number: CF12/3958 – 20,120,018,910).

1.7. Findings

Questionnaire data were captured from January 2017 to December 2018 during a period of intense data collection, analysis, synthesis and reporting. Reflective questionnaire data were downloaded from Qualtrics in February 2019. A total of 17 responses were recorded. Presented below are the nature of the values, beliefs, perspectives and perceptions identified in the analysis, supported by excerpts from the questionnaire (Table  2 ).

Values, Beliefs, Perspectives and Perceptions present in the research

1.8. Values– Unsettled and Challenged

The worth of being unsettled evidenced by feelings of turbulence, confusion, discomfort, clarity and productivity highlights the value of these feelings to prompt resolution and synthesis of data. It was curious to note how feedback and criticism impacted with being unsettled and aligned with moments of clarity or ambiguity of the research progress.

When emotions were framed in a more negative stance, thoughts about the data were perplexing, unsure and disrupted. Criticism of process or outcome caused feelings of doubt and a lack of direction in how to advance the research.

Questionnaire entry 3/5/2017: “Feeling a little perplexed since meeting yesterday. Thought I was on top of everything and then again derailed by a very confusing meeting.”

However, when emotions were framed positively including invigoration and empowerment thoughts about the data were clear but questioning.

Questionnaire entry 20/2/2017 : “Starting to feel invigorated about potential insights into the learning experience of student and VSPR.” Questionnaire entry 29/5/2017 : “Really enjoying this component of my PhD research. It feels more like real research than the other two stages I have completed.” Questionnaire entry 9/6/2017 : “Feeling empowered and on track .”

Additionally, constructive feedback, strengthened confidence and synthesis of ideas supporting progress.

Questionnaire entry 6/7/2017: “Have felt some real support recently with really helpful feedback and suggestions on how to manage and reduce the data to make it more meaningful. Have actually learnt a lot.”

I experienced a level of challenge not previously encountered when engaging with and in and making sense of the data. However, data revealed the usefulness of that challenge to delve in, work with and wrestle with the data to discover patterns and themes. Curiously reflexive questionnaire data highlight how this challenging experience evolved from one of discomfort to having fun.

Questionnaire entry 6/7/2017 : “I love the data. The complexity that it has revealed regarding the VSPR interactions is exciting and I am really looking forward to delving into the ‘how’ data.” Questionnaire entry 1/8/2017 : “The data is rich and interesting . Love working with it and trying to understand what it is telling me.” Questionnaire entry 22/8/2019 : “Love the qualitative data. It is rich and descriptive and the wrestle with the themes etc. is fun!”

1.9. Beliefs – The champion

The Champion highlights my belief that quality non‐technical skills in clinical practice support safe patient care. It emphasizes my confidence that introducing these fundamental concepts early and explicitly in curricula will enable development of these skills in novice practitioners and support preparation for practice. It clearly states upfront my position relative to the importance of the skills and declared my beliefs that the VSPR would be an effective resource to develop these skills.

Questionnaire entry 11/1/2017: “ I believe that NTS are important and should be developed early on in undergraduate education. This enables students to be aware of these skills in practice and gives them opportunities to critique practice, reflect on skills demonstrated and integrate and develop their own skills, as a result. I believe that virtual learning offers an alternative to face to face and can be as effective in most areas. I have a small area of doubt if this is true for NTS as there are emotions and feelings also involved with these which can be hard to replicate in online learning. I believe that VSPR is an innovative resource to develop student awareness of practice and what to expect. It presents practice as not perfect and real.”

The Champion enabled me to declare my position relative to non‐technical skills and VSPR and to be aware of how this position would resonate with the data as I progressed with the research. Being conscious of my position prompted me to pause and consider the data to ensure the data were always “front and centre.” I was mindful to confirm findings were consistent with, and grounded in, the data and to be watchful of the potential of my stance to influence interpretations of the data.

Questionnaire entry 9/6/2017: “ Insight by some participants is fantastic. However, is that because I am hearing what I want to hear? Need to be careful here of subjectivity. Always ensure the data is front and centre.” Questionnaire entry 10/7/2017 : “I know that some of it will change when I discuss but feeling confident that the overarching themes are congruent and make sense of what the data indicates.”

1.10. Perspectives – Structured and Impatient

The Structured perspective emphasizes the desire I have for organization and clarity. Whilst I appreciate and value abstract thought and aspire to be visionary, introspective and immerse myself into the art of qualitative synthesis, in the beginning the ability to participate in this in‐depth thinking appeared beyond me. The reflexive questionnaire data document the struggle experienced during the research to think deeply about the data and what it means.

Questionnaire entry 20/2/2017 : “Limited progress this week ‐ thinking interrupted and no depth to activities completed.” Questionnaire entry 22/6/2017: “Hmm ‐ perplexed with thought in trying to decipher the themes in the data.”

However, as I progressed further into the research, I identified factors that supported and promoted deep thinking whilst supporting a structured perspective. Quarantining time and space both physically and mentally encouraged active participation in and contemplation of deep thought.

Questionnaire entry 22/2/2107 : “Hmm perplexed with thought in trying to decipher the themes in the data. Loving the challenge.” Questionnaire entry 5/11/2017 : “Ok taking its time as this part requires real thinking, rereading and more thinking.”

The Impatient perspective characterizes the inner need to achieve and “get the job done.” It wanted to “kick goals.” At times, this perspective encouraged moving rapidly from one part of the data to the next with emergent findings being considered definitive. At other times, this perspective was a barrier to further reflection and contemplation of all opportunities. Whilst the Impatient and Structured perspectives may be considered complementary, they presented a risk to deep thinking with the opportunity to affect the credibility of the research. Deliberate attention was needed to take my time to revisit and reflect, promoting more thoughtful and innovative insights and to remember this is an iterative process.

Questionnaire entry 19/5/2017 : “I am trying to work hard to progress the outputs. Feeling really pleased.” Questionnaire entry 14/2/2018 : “Need to kick some goals today for the how paper and get a draft happening.” Questionnaire entry 3/5/2017 : “Remember to take my time and that it will be an iterative process.”

1.11. Perceptions – Insight

Data in the reflexive questionnaire reveal the growth of insight and awareness of the data, and the development of my analytical skills and self‐confidence. The reflexive questionnaire data emphasizes the significance of being able to examine one's performance and identify areas for improvement to ensure deep and detailed data are obtained that focuses on answering the research questions. The excerpts below reflect the growth and development of insight through the research, from identifying anxieties with the quality of data, to when I gained clarification into and an understanding of the research process.

Questionnaire entry 20/2/2017: “Perplexing that I did not do a good job moderating the focus group. Data is limited in its depth. The questions in the interview guide will need to be reviewed as it appears to investigate more along the lines of what is the impact rather than how student learn. Research data could be deeper if moderation techniques developed.” Questionnaire entry 3/5/2017 : “The data analysis process is now clear to me and that the framework analysis approach will be used as part of the case study to see how the VSPR scenarios address prior theory established from the literature.” Questionnaire entry 9/6/2017: “Understanding what I am doing and why. Have some clarity to the research process.”

A “light bulb” moment was the realization and comprehension of the applicability and fit of the research procedures being completed with the chosen research methodology. Through the insight developed, I was able to draw together separate components of the research into one unified case study creating a holistic piece of work answering the research questions and adding new knowledge.

Questionnaire entry 6/3/2017 : “The use of the case study approach really resonates and makes sense. It ties in the rest of my research and will hopefully present my findings and the thesis as a holistic piece of work.” Questionnaire entry 6/3/2017 : “I think that the approach of case study with VSPR as the case really fits with the thesis. The data will enable thick and rich description of the learning involved with VSPR and present it so that themes from the review can be utilised across the research. The data sources should help provide triangulation as required in case study research.”

Further to insight into skills and knowledge of research was the development of insight into myself evidence by self‐assurance and self‐possession, enabling me to uphold a position of clarity in challenging discussions. This reflexive questionnaire data highlight the development of awareness of and into the research and viewing myself as being capable and a growing sense of pride in being true to the data.

Questionnaire entry 6/3/2017 : “This component is really taking shape and actually feel a little proud I could pull it together.” Questionnaire entry 19/5/2017 : “I am more confident in what I am doing and the rationales for why. Have been able to hold my own over the last few weeks and feeling like I am finally coming to grips with this research thingy.”

2. DISCUSSION

The findings of this study suggest that the use of a deliberate and planned strategy through a repeated reflective questionnaire can promote reflexivity. Data indicate that this structured approach enables bringing to the surface thoughts, actions and assumptions of the researcher which reveals how the self‐commentary and internal examination of the researcher develops and its potential to influence the research. Additionally, data suggest that a repeated questionnaire can detail the specific strategies implemented that ensure trustworthiness of the research. These findings align with the position presented by Johnson et al., ( 2020 ) that highlights for reflexivity to be critical to the trustworthiness of a study; it should be an active and ongoing application throughout the study. Furthermore, the use of a thoughtful, deliberate and planned application is supported as an approach to best achieve trustworthiness (Johnson et al.,  2020 ). Importantly, reflexivity, that is supported by a deliberate and planned approach, can support researcher transformation through self‐awareness and enlightenment (Narayanasamy,  2015 ).

This structured and deliberate approach recorded the thoughts, decisions, emotions and actions that produced themes and categories during the research. By using a questionnaire to promote reflexivity, assumptions about the research topic, the research and the participants were able to be questioned (Luttrell,  2019 ). This approach enabled decisions made to be openly examined (Sydor,  2019 ). It afforded the ability to distinguish factors that implicitly and explicitly influenced the research which is important in reflexivity (Engward & Davis,  2015 ). Similarly, the organization and construction of the data were able to be interrogated with interpretations of data collected examined (Engward & Davis,  2015 ).

Interestingly, inherent in these findings is the importance of quarantining and observing time for the researcher to go back, reread and reflect on data to ensure findings are grounded in the data obtained. Developing and implementing a deliberately structured and methodical approach to reflexivity require the regular quarantining of time and space, both physically and mentally, for focussed reflection (Bradbury‐Jones,  2007 ). This strategy ensured that the data aligned with and were coherent with themes and categories identified (Nowell et al.,  2017 ).

It is suggested that being systematic and orderly is not conducive to creative qualitative research and reflexivity (Bradbury‐Jones,  2007 ). Additionally, the concept of developing deep understanding and internalization of reflexivity appears at odds with a structured and systematic approach (Dodgson,  2019 ). However, the finding of this research indicates that deliberate repetition and practice can develop familiarity and readiness for deep thought, ensuring adequate deliberation of data and consideration of all options. This finding is supported by Dodgson ( 2019 ) who identifies it is the researcher responsibility to succinctly and clearly address issue of reflexivity in qualitative research. This approach supports conviction and strength of findings in qualitative research (Bradbury‐Jones,  2007 ).

Notably, a reflective questionnaire using the avenues of participants, audience and researcher can capture researcher emotions and thoughts on the different stakeholders during various stages of the research. Whilst it is important to track events and record actions, it is likewise important to identify the roles and personas a researcher assumes in research as part of reflexivity (Sydor,  2019 ). This approach can enable periods of negativity characterized by perplexing, unsure and disrupted thinking, to be recognized and addressed, transforming the research (McCabe & O'Connor,  2014 ). During times when negativity prevails, it is important that researchers discover new ways of actively engaged in and interpreting the data “through the practice of awareness” and actively undertake complex data analysis and synthesis (McCabe & O'Connor,  2014 ).

Finally, the insight, understanding and awareness developed through focussed reflection and deliberation enabled by a systematic and repeated reflective questionnaire permits the acknowledgement of the holistic nature of the research method, data and findings. Congruence between the research aims, methods and design affords an assessment of the strength of the research (Noyes et al.,  2018 ). To produce trustworthy findings, the development of a critical consciousness in the researcher influences the strength of the research, the researcher role, along with the capability and aptitude to undertake the research (Luttrell,  2019 ). This approach to maintaining reflexivity in qualitative research can be exciting and transformative.

2.1. Strengths and limitations

The research reported in the paper provides an important contribution to establishing trustworthiness in qualitative research by offering an innovative approach to promoting reflexivity. A strength in the research reported in this paper is the attention to methodical rigour when using established data collection approaches and questionnaires, over a sustained period of time. Questionnaires are a recognized method to gain data on attitudes, values beliefs and experiences (Johnson & Christensen,  2019 ). Additionally, the data in the questionnaire represent authentic responses gathered during a time of significant data collection, analysis and synthesis.

However, caution is warranted in generalizing these findings to wider populations as like other studies using qualitative data, the findings are particular to this research. The use of a structured and deliberate approach to reflexivity is time consuming and required commitment to see the approach to conclusion. Whilst the questionnaire was developed based on literature, it did not undergo any external review or testing. Finally, it is acknowledged that the research reported in this paper represents the researcher's perspectives.

3. CONCLUSION

Using the repeated questionnaire as a deliberate and planned strategy to support reflexivity enabled examination of values, beliefs, perceptions and perspectives in the research and how they may have influenced the research. The data obtained in the questionnaire enabled strategies to be developed to ensure credibility of data, dependability of the study and confirmability of findings (Darawsheh,  2014 ). This deliberate systematic approach enabled bringing to the surface thoughts, actions and assumptions to reveal how the researcher's self‐commentary and internal examination develops and its potential to influence the research. This transparent approach to reflexivity supports transparency in the research process and promoted investigation into the construction of knowledge during the research process. The identification of effective strategies in qualitative nursing research that ensures quality research process are maintained, producing trustworthy outcomes, will assist audiences in judging the trustworthiness of research outcomes.

3.1. Impact

What problem did the study address?

Reflexivity in qualitative research is an important strategy to ensure trustworthiness of the research. However, reflexive accounts are underreported in nursing research.

What were the main findings?

The use of a questionnaire enabled and detailed the specific strategies implemented to ensure trustworthiness of the research.

Where and on whom will the research have impact?

The processes and findings reported in this paper provide useful strategies to support nurse researchers engage with reflexivity in qualitative nursing research.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No conflict of interest has been declared by the author.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Peddle, M. (2022). Maintaining reflexivity in qualitative nursing research . Nursing Open , 9 , 2908–2914. 10.1002/nop2.999 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

No funding was received to support this research. MP conceived of, designed, implemented and drafted the work presented in this manuscript. The data sets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available

  • Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research . Qualitative Research , 15 ( 2 ), 219–234. 10.1177/1468794112468475 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Bradbury‐Jones, C. (2007). Enhancing rigour in qualitative health research: Exploring subjectivity through Peshkin's I's . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 59 ( 3 ), 290–298. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04306.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Darawsheh, W. (2014). Reflexivity in research: Promoting rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research . International Journal of Therapy & Rehabilitation , 21 ( 12 ), 560–568. 10.12968/ijtr.2014.21.12.560 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • DeTata, C. (2015). Teaching and assessing non‐technical skills . The Clinical Teacher , 12 ( 3 ), 219. 10.1111/tct.12352 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Dodgson, J. E. (2019). Reflexivity in qualitative research . Journal of Human Lactation , 35 ( 2 ), 220–222. 10.1177/0890334419830990 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Engward, H. , & Davis, G. (2015). Being reflexive in qualitative grounded theory: Discussion and application of a model of reflexivity . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 71 ( 7 ), 1530–1538. 10.1111/jan.12653 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Flick, U. (2013). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis . SAGE Publications, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/latrobe/detail.action?docID=1707694 [ Google Scholar ]
  • Flin, R. , O'Connor, P. , & Crichton, M. (2013). Safety at the Sharp End: A Guide to Non‐Technical Skills . Ashgate Publishing Ltd. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Johnson, B. , & Christensen, L. (2019). Educational Research: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 7th ed., SAGE Thousand Oaks. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Johnson, J. L. , Adkins, D. , & Chauvin, S. (2020). A review of the quality indicators of rigor in qualitative research . American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education , 84 ( 1 ). 10.5688/ajpe7120 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Luttrell, W. (2019). Reflexive Qualitative Research. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education . [ Google Scholar ]
  • McCabe, A. , & O'Connor, U. (2014). Student‐centred learning: The role and responsibility of the lecturer . Teaching in Higher Education , 19 ( 4 ), 350–359. 10.1080/13562517.2013.860111 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Narayanasamy, A. (2015). Reflexive account of unintended outcomes from spiritual care qualitative research . Journal of Research in Nursing , 20 ( 3 ), 234–248. 10.1177/1744987115578185 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nowell, L. S. , Norris, J. M. , White, D. E. , & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria . International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 16 ( 1 ), 1609406917733847. 10.1177/1609406917733847 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Noyes, J. , Booth, A. , Flemming, K. , Garside, R. , Harden, A. , Lewin, S. , Pantoja, T. , Hannes, K. , Cargo, M. , & Thomas, J. (2018). Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series—paper 3: Methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings . Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , 97 , 49–58. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.020 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice , Fourth ed. SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—one's own . Educational Researcher , 17 ( 7 ), 17–21. 10.3102/0013189X017007017 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sydor, A. (2019). An interpretative phenomenological analysis of young men’s experiences of addressing their sexual health and the importance of researcher reflexivity . Journal of Research in Nursing , 24 ( 1–2 ), 36–46. 10.1177/1744987118818865 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Examining the world through qualitative inquiry

reflexive journal in qualitative research example

Reflective journals in qualitative inquiry

This week’s guest blogger is Kyu Ha Choi, who is a Ph.D. candidate in the Sport Management and Policy program in the Department of Kinesiology at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA. His research focuses on sport event management with emphasis on the development of sport along with qualitative research methods.

Screencast on reflective journals in qualitative research

I initially had three questions that pertain to the concept of reflective journals in relation to qualitative research. Those three questions were: (1) what is the reflective journal in qualitative research? (2) why do we implement reflective journals in our research? and (3) what are the outcomes of employing reflective journals in research? In response to these questions, the objectives of this essay are to understand the concept of reflective journals within qualitative research and to understand why reflective journals are implemented in qualitative research. This essay has been written for any researcher, but especially novice researchers who are not very familiar with or have a limited knowledge of reflective journals in qualitative research and how they might incorporate them in their research. This essay will help researchers learn about the possible outcomes of employing reflective journals and outline some challenging issues of using reflective journals in research.

The reflective journal in qualitative research is a written record by the researchers themselves and is written throughout the research process. A reflective journal includes the details of what the researchers did, thought, and felt while analyzing the data. Then, the rationale behind those thoughts and percepts are recorded. According to Russell and Kelly (2002), keeping self-reflective journals during the analysis process is a strategy that facilitates reflexivity by using the researchers’ journals to examine “personal assumptions and goals” and to clarify “individual belief systems and subjectivities” (p. 2). By doing so, keeping reflective journals consciously acknowledges the values and experiences of the researchers rather than attempting to control their values through methods. In other words, the reflective practice encourages researchers to talk about the presuppositions, experiences, and actions and rationales behind them during the research process. In this regard, reflective journals are increasingly becoming visible within qualitative research.

As for the attributes of reflective writing, the fact that the reflective journal is written in the first-person point of view makes the writing fundamentally subjective. Through writing in the first-person point of view, the centrality of the researcher is acknowledged. Also, self-awareness and an internal dialogue that help in analyzing important issues in the research are supported. In this regard, Jasper (2005) noted that “the purpose of reflective writing is learning which will precipitate some form of action or change in behaviour… is to facilitate the researcher’s discovery and provide a verifiable audit-trail of the research process.” (p. 250) Reflective writing also develops critical thinking by enhancing higher-level conceptual skills. This development is supported because writing down ideas urges the author or researcher to develop and rationalize, which motivate the author to acquire new knowledge that is associated with the research. Finally, reflective writing, along with critical thinking, enables researchers to broaden their perspectives and discover new thoughts and research practices.

Reflective journals as data mainly fall into two categories. First, the products of reflective writing can be used as primary data. Autobiographies, journals, and logs are examples of the case in which reflective writing is employed as the primary data. Reflective writing as the primary data source is well-established in qualitative research, especially in the field of nursing and education. This essay focuses on reflective journals as the secondary data category, including field notes with reflection-on-action that includes insights and references to other data sources. Smith (1999) highlighted in his study that written reflections on one’s own feelings create an audit trail of one’s reasoning, thus contributing to the trustworthiness of the findings by supporting the researcher’s subjectivity.

One of the main reasons why the qualitative researcher maintains a reflective journal is to achieve a rigorous research process. Issues of rigor in qualitative research refer to the trustworthiness of the study (Guba & Lincoln, 1985), and some attributes of rigor include credibility, dependability, and transferability. According to Jasper (2005), reflective journal writing allows researchers to own centrality of their research process, which contributes to the legitimacy of the knowledge claims. Also, reflective journal writing provides an audit trail which clearly indicates the procedural steps that enhance the transparency of process. Moreover, a reflective journal is particularly useful when things did not happen as planned and as one’s thinking changes.

The primary purpose of using reflective journals is to enable researchers to explicitly map their role as researchers. By allowing the subjectivity of the researchers, reflective journals record one’s experiences, thoughts, opinions, and feelings and make them an acknowledged part within the data analysis and interpretation processes. By doing so, researchers can make a vague and unorganized research process more visible not only for themselves but also for their readers. Also, use of reflective journals affects the research process by changing the research design or approach if necessary. Last, but not least, as previously mentioned, use of reflective journals provides an audit trail of the research design, which enhances the transparency of the research process.

Despite the positive potential outcomes from using reflective journals, several challenging issues are associated with reflective journal writing. One potential issue is on ethical grounds in which confidentiality is hard to account for when reflective writing is practiced poorly. Another noticeable issue is hindsight bias. The practice of reflective journal writing may cause hindsight bias which happens when researchers know the outcome of their research in advance and consequently judge that outcome as more likely if they had not known that outcome knowledge (Rehm & Gadenne, 2013). As a result, researchers must overcome several issues in order to conduct a rigorous and reliable reflective journal writing that contributes positively to the research process.

Use of the reflective journal may seem a bit bothersome and time-consuming to some researchers. However, this practice certainly helps qualitative researchers to have a central role in a research process and enhances the transparency of the research process. I am certain that reflective journals are worthy of the required time, and we should make reflective journaling a priority in any type of research.

Glaze, J. E. (2002). Stages in coming to terms with reflection: student advanced nurse practitioners’ perceptions of their reflective journeys.  Journal of Advanced Nursing ,  37 (3), 265-272.

Greenwood, J. (1998). The role of reflection in single and double loop learning.  Journal of Advanced Nursing ,  27 (5), 1048-1053.

Hannigan, B. (2001). A discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of ‘reflection’ in nursing practice and education.  Journal of Clinical Nursing ,  10 (2), 278-283.

Jasper, M. A. (2005). Using reflective writing within research.  Journal of Research in Nursing ,  10 (3), 247-260.

Jones, P. R. (1995). Hindsight bias in reflective practice: an empirical investigation.  Journal of Advanced Nursing ,  21 (4), 783-788.

Koch, T. (1996). Implementation of a hermeneutic inquiry in nursing: philosophy, rigour and representation.  Journal of Advanced Nursing ,  24 (1), 174-184.

Ortlipp, M. (2008). Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process.  The Qualitative Report ,  13 (4), 695-705.

Rehm, J. T., & Gadenne, V. (2013).  Intuitive predictions and professional forecasts: Cognitive processes and social consequences  (Vol. 20). Elsevier.

Russell, G. M., & Kelly, N. H. (2002, September). Research as interacting dialogic processes: Implications for reflexivity. In  Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research  (Vol. 3, No. 3).

Smith, B. A. (1999). Ethical and methodologic benefits of using a reflexive journal in hermeneutic‐phenomenologic research.  Image: The Journal of Nursing Scholarship ,  31 (4), 359-363.

Share this:

' src=

Published by qualpage

Kathy Roulston is a professor in the Qualitative Research program in the Department of Lifelong Education, Administration and Policy at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA. She teaches qualitative research methods, and has written on qualitative interviewing. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9429-2694 Kathryn J. Roulston on ResearchGate My books include: Interviewing: A guide to theory and practice, see: https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/interviewing/book272521 Interactional studies of qualitative interviews. See: https://benjamins.com/catalog/z.220 View all posts by qualpage

Leave a comment Cancel reply

' src=

  • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
  • Subscribe Subscribed
  • Copy shortlink
  • Report this content
  • View post in Reader
  • Manage subscriptions
  • Collapse this bar

Queen's University Belfast Logo

  • Help & FAQ

Excerpts from a reflective diary as a novice qualitative researcher

  • Briege King (Creator)
  • School of Nursing and Midwifery

Description

Access dataset.

File : application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document, 17.2 KB

Type : Text

File : application/pdf, 324 KB

Student theses

To what extent does situated cognition learning theory explain the learning experience of registered nurses and midwives enrolled on a skill-based blended learning programme: a qualitative exploration.

Supervisor: Gormley, K. (Supervisor) & O'Halloran, P. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctoral Thesis › Doctorate in Nursing Practice

Datasets associated with a mixed method systematic review guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute

King, B. (Creator), Queen's University Belfast, Jul 2021

DOI : 10.17034/f3835ec4-7893-468e-a930-3ac2e93a8653

Excerpts from focus group discussing learning theory

King, B. (Creator), Queen's University Belfast, Jul 2022

DOI : 10.17034/2f0ea784-58f6-4d59-88cf-ef32b41c81e4

Participant interview schedule based on the components of Situated Cognition Learning Theory

DOI : 10.17034/d6be02fe-272e-4720-8258-2f20f9bef82d

  • DataSetCite

IMAGES

  1. (PDF) Reflexivity: Situating the researcher in qualitative research

    reflexive journal in qualitative research example

  2. (PDF) Using reflective journals to assess the research process

    reflexive journal in qualitative research example

  3. (PDF) The usefulness of reflexive photography for qualitative research

    reflexive journal in qualitative research example

  4. Reflective Essay On Qualitative Research

    reflexive journal in qualitative research example

  5. (PDF) Reflexivity in qualitative research

    reflexive journal in qualitative research example

  6. Developing Reflexivity in Research

    reflexive journal in qualitative research example

VIDEO

  1. Research Methods: Writing a Literature Review

  2. Lec3/Relations/Properties of Relations/Reflexive Relations

  3. Definition of reflexive pronoun

  4. Reflective and Reflexive

  5. Financial Statement

  6. Writing Up Qualitative Research Findings

COMMENTS

  1. Full article: A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research

    Qualitative research relies on nuanced judgements that require researcher reflexivity, yet reflexivity is often addressed superficially or overlooked completely during the research process. In this AMEE Guide, we define reflexivity as a set of continuous, collaborative, and multifaceted practices through which researchers self-consciously ...

  2. Reflexive journals in qualitative research

    Daniel Turner Apr 2, 2020 • 5 min read It is common practice for researcher to keep a journal or diary during the research process, regardless of discipline or methodology. These are sometimes called reflexive diaries, self-reflexive journals, research journals or research diaries.

  3. Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research Process

    Ortlipp, M. (2008). Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research Process. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 695-705. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1579 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Qualitative Report at NSUWorks.

  4. Chapter 6. Reflexivity

    [1] [Untitled image] by Osarugue Igbinoba on Unsplash A second aspect of being reflexive is being aware that you yourself are part of the research when you are conducting qualitative research. This is particularly true when conducting interviews, observing interactions, or participating in activities.

  5. The Importance of Reflexivity in Qualitative Research

    How to Keep a Reflexive Journal in Qualitative Research. It is generally good practice to keep a reflexive journal when practicing qualitative research in order to keep a log of your thoughts, reflections, and decision-making as you make meaning from data. ... For example, if you conduct research supported by an institution, you may be more ...

  6. Reflexivity in Qualitative Research

    Berger R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don't: Researcher's position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15 (2), 219-234. Crossref ISI Google Scholar Buetow S. (2019). Apophenia, unconscious bias and reflexivity in nursing qualitative research. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 89, 8-13. Crossref PubMed

  7. Practising reflexivity: Ethics, methodology and theory construction

    While the need for reflexivity in qualitative studies has long been acknowledged, in the recent years there has been an increasing focus on the question of how to practise reflexivity ( Finlay and Gough, 2008 Ives and Dunn, 2010 ).

  8. Reflectivity in Research Practice: An Overview of Different

    Abstract The article grounds on the assumption that researchers, in order to be not mere technicians but competent practitioners of research, should be able to reflect in a deep way. That means they should reflect not only on the practical acts of research but also on the mental experience which constructs the meaning about practice.

  9. (PDF) A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE

    A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149 Authors: Francisco M. Olmos-Vega Renee E Stalmeijer Maastricht University Lara Varpio The Children's Hospital of...

  10. A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE ...

    Qualitative research relies on nuanced judgements that require researcher reflexivity, yet reflexivity is often addressed superficially or overlooked completely during the research process. In this AMEE Guide, we define reflexivity as a set of continuous, collaborative, and multifaceted practices th …

  11. Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research

    Throughout the study process, the researcher kept a reflexivity journal as a way to keep track of the thought process involved in each step of the study. The method of keeping a reflexivity ...

  12. Reflexivity in Qualitative Research: A Journey of Learning

    Reflexivity in Qualitative Research: A Journey of Learning February 2017 DOI: 10.46743/2160-3715/2017.2552 Authors: Erlinda Palaganas University of the Philippines Baguio Marian C. Sanchez M.V.P....

  13. How to … be reflexive when conducting qualitative research

    Reflexivity can be a complex concept to grasp when entering the world of qualitative research. In this article, we aim to encourage new qualitative researchers to become reflexive as they develop their critical research skills, differentiating between the familiar concept of reflection and reflective practice and that of reflexivity.

  14. A worked example of Braun and Clarke's approach to reflexive thematic

    3 A worked example of reflexive thematic analysis. The data used in the following example is taken from the qualitative phase of a mixed methods study I conducted, which examined mental health in an educational context. ... as well as a research journal that should be kept over the entire course of the research. Phase six then, can be seen as ...

  15. Using Reflexive Interviewing to Foster Deep Understanding of Research

    Example of reflexive interview sessions to deep explore developmental contexts. ... Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4, 324-327. Crossref. PubMed. Google Scholar. Lordello S. R., Silva I. M. (2017). Resolução nº 510/2016 do Conselho Nacional de Saúde: um ...

  16. Maintaining reflexivity in qualitative nursing research

    1. INTRODUCTION. Reflexivity is the process of reflecting critically on oneself as a researcher (Bradbury‐Jones, 2007) and is central to the construction of knowledge in qualitative research (Narayanasamy, 2015).It requires the process of knowledge construction to be the subject of investigation (Flick, 2013).Reflexivity assists researchers to consider their "continuing engagement with ...

  17. Reflexivity in Qualitative Research: Why You'll Never Be An Objective

    As Francisco M. Olmos-Vega et. al. say in their article on reflexivity in qualitative research : "Embrace your subjectivity; abandon objectivity as a foundational goal and embrace the power of your subjectivity through meaningful reflexivity practices. Reflexivity is not a limitation; it is an asset in your research.".

  18. International Journal of Qualitative Methods Reflectivity in Research

    Reflec-tion aims at understanding the forms of intelligibility by which the world is made meaningful; in the heuristic context of the research work, reflecting means to elucidate the epistemic acts developed in the midst of inquiry process. When the mind thinks on itself, the subject engaged in the reflective practice plays at the same time the ...

  19. Reflective journals in qualitative inquiry

    Autobiographies, journals, and logs are examples of the case in which reflective writing is employed as the primary data. Reflective writing as the primary data source is well-established in qualitative research, especially in the field of nursing and education.

  20. Excerpts from a reflective diary as a novice qualitative researcher

    Reflexivity is the process of examining oneself as a researcher and the research relationship. It involves self-reflection of personal assumptions and preconceptions, and how these will potentially affect research decisions, at all stages in the research process and is of particular importance for a novice researcher (Peddle, 2021).

  21. (PDF) Reflexivity in qualitative research

    examples of reflexive research practice. ... of the ways of doing and writing reflexive qualitative research. 8 . ... (2003), "Reflexivity in Management Research", Journal of . Management Studies ...

  22. Challenging perspectives: Reflexivity as a critical approach to

    This article aims to demonstrate being reflexive and doing reflexivity through reflection where, within the research, for example, the first author addressed the 'difference' between meanings of research participants' perceptions of their experiences and her own interpretations of the meanings.

  23. Academic English Now on Instagram: "47% of PhD students and researchers

    1 likes, 0 comments - academicenglishnow on February 12, 2024: "47% of PhD students and researchers feel constant stress Many feel overwhelmed The sh..."