Emotion Work and the Ethics of Novice Insider Research

http://jrn.sagepub.com

Journal of Research in Nursing

DOI: 10.1177/1744987107085119 2008; 13; 251 Journal of Research in Nursing

Susanne Darra Emotion work and the ethics of novice insider research

http://jrn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/13/3/251 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Journal of Research in Nursing Additional services and information for

http://jrn.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://jrn.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jrn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/13/3/251 Citations

by daniela pop on October 31, 2008 http://jrn.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jrn.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jrn.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jrn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/13/3/251


251

jrnORIGINAL PAPER

Emotion work and the ethics of novice insider research

Susanne DarraMidwifery LecturerCentre for Midwifery and Gender Studies, School of Health ScienceUniversity of Wales Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea, UK

Abstract This paper relates to research practice and in particular, it explores the practice of insider research in a study carried out as part of a research trainingfellowship.The effects of research on the researcher and the researched are discussedand extracts from transcripts and a research diary are used to illustrate ethical dilem-mas that may arise from such a study.The role of the novice researcher is central to the discussion and the concept of ‘emotion work’ is used to illustrate thehidden consequences of seemingly innocuous insider research.

The paper contributes to the body of knowledge relating to qualitative researchmethods, by combining reflection with emotion work and novice insider research.Despite it being largely about the novice researcher studying within her own profes-sion, it raises important points that may be of interest to more experiencedresearchers working in other domains.

Key words novice researcher, emotion work, insider research, exploitation

IntroductionThis paper explores the use of interviews in relation to novice insider research inhealth-care settings, specifically midwifery. The research topic is not considered ethi-cally challenging, as it was a study of midwives’ views about their career progression.However, the research was carried out by a novice researcher as part of a trainingfellowship; this threw up ethical issues of autonomy and veracity. The papercontributes to the body of knowledge by drawing on ethical principles and rulesalongside the concept of emotion work to explain the suggested effects on the noviceresearcher and the research participants. I carried out semi-structured interviews aspart of my research training, which led to the unexpected effect of feeling that I wasexploiting the participants.This led me to question the effects of research on both theresearcher and the researched. I suggest herein that whilst novice researchers needpractical experience in order to develop their skills, this aspect of research training ismore ethically or emotionally challenging than may be expected. Furthermore, Isuggest that emotion work is required in the interaction between the researcher andthe interviewee.The discussion begins with an overview of the benefits and drawbacksof interviewing and insider research. It goes on to reflect on the ethical aspects ofnovice insider research and draws on the concept of emotion work to analyse myexperiences as a novice researcher.The paper is illustrated with extracts from my study.

Journal of Research in Nursing

© 2008SAGE PUBLICATIONS

Los Angeles, London,New Delhi, Singapore

VOL 13(3) 251–261DOI: 10.1177/

1744987107085119



In-depth interviewingQualitative researchers use in-depth interviews as a key method of data collection.Thepositivist approach to interviewing, (Fowler and Mangione, 1990) is not commonlyused; instead, less structured in-depth interviews are more often employed in order toobtain ‘rich’ data (Denzin, 1989). Interviews are especially useful for examining socialissues and the privacy afforded by a well set-up interview will often encourage theparticipant to ‘open-up’ and talk. Whilst some suggest that opening up in this way ishelpful for some participants, (Karp, 1996) yet others point out potential harm (Rubinand Rubin, 1995). Rubin and Rubin (1995) are particularly conscious of the partici-pants, which is demonstrated in their referring to interviewees as ‘conversationalpartners’ (p 97).Their concerns relate to confidentiality and ‘pressing’ participants, aswell as to issues of consent. My study reflects some of the same concerns aboutautonomous consent, which are explored later.

It is, however, sometimes difficult to draw firm conclusions about effects on partic-ipants, due to the nature of interviews. As Denscombe (2002) points out, interviewdata are not really ‘truth’ or ‘reality’ but a picture of the truth or reality. An interviewis an event-taking place between two people with one attempting to elicit somethingof the other’s perceptions, experiences, beliefs, knowledge or story. This may lead todistressing and painful memories being brought up (Oppenheim, 1992) and ethicalresearchers must therefore consider potential harm such as illuminating previouslyconcealed or partially forgotten memories, and seek to take this into considerationfrom the outset, perhaps engaging the services of a suitable professional (counsellor),to minimise harm (Cribb, 2003). More subtle psychological consequences may alsoneed attention (Polit et al., 2001) and when preparing for my research training, Ithought about this in some depth. For example, when interviewing midwives abouttheir practice, it is brought into sharper focus by the researcher. I wondered whetherthis may lead midwife participants to question and perhaps even inwardly criticisetheir own practice, thereby arguably affecting their confidence in their practice. Ithought however, that a skilful interviewer may be able to minimise this, by reflecting-in-action during the interviews and then by phrasing questions with particular care.The midwife participants should also be used to using reflection to explore feelingsabout their practice; in this way the potential harm could be minimised and then theresult may instead lead to positive changes in practice. However, I was not a skilfulinterviewer and I set out to interview my participants with some anxiety about bring-ing their thoughts about their career progression into sharper focus, thereby perhapsleading them to be more self-critical than necessary. These early thoughts about theeffects that I might have on the researched led me to use a reflective research diaryfrom the outset. As Etherington (2004) suggests, this helped me to focus on my ownresponses to being a researcher as well as to think through the impact that I may haveon the participants. My diary proved useful throughout the study and has had partic-ular significance for me in thinking through the ethical dilemmas and emotion workthat are discussed here.

Insider research‘Insider’ research may arguably lead to psychological consequences for the participantsbeing lessened, or at least more easily identified and perhaps avoided, as the researchermay have greater understanding of the perspective of the participants (Reed andProcter, 1995). This, however, results in questions about neutrality. There has beenextensive debate on neutrality in interviewing (Sword, 1999), which centres on

Journal of Research in Nursing 13(3)

252



suggestions about the impartiality of qualitative research interviews. However, it isnow generally accepted that, if the interviewers are to practice ethically, then they mustreveal their identity and something of themselves (e.g. that they are now, or have pre-viously been health care workers), in order to obtain true informed consent and therequired in-depth, qualitative data (Bowling, 2002).

Feminist research on women is also an example of what may be termed ‘insiderresearch’. Oakley (1981) first explored the issue of women interviewing women andlater went on to further explore the barriers between the researcher and theresearched. She quotes some early work by Stacey (1988) in which she notes that‘Stacey found herself wondering whether the appearance of greater respect for andequality with research subjects (in an attempt to deflect the power imbalance) in theethnographic approach masks a deeper, more dangerous form of exploitation’ (Oakley,2000, p 66). My study also threw up questions about such exploitation as I was, afterall, a woman interviewing women.

Power relationships in qualitative research have long been explored (Spradley,1980; Mitchell and Radford, 1996). However, interviewees are not necessarily exploit-ed in the research partnership. Oppenheim (1992) discusses the ‘social desirabilitybias’ as seen in some interviewees’ responses. In insider health-care research, thiscould lead to participants denying or ‘watering down’ aspects of practice, especiallywhen it may reflect badly on themselves or their colleagues. Alternatively they may ‘talk themselves up’ to present an ideal impression of themselves or their practice. Inthis way, one could argue that the researcher is being exploited instead.

Effects of researchThe inclusion of the voice and/or the body of the interviewer within research is alsodiscussed particularly extensively in feminist literature (Oakley, 1981; Shakespeareet al., 1993; Ellingson, 2006). However, other authors also consider the researcher’sgender to be important, especially when exploring sensitive issues (Pollner, 1998;Lamb and Garretson, 2003). The age and race of the interviewer is also sometimesthought to be important (Moorman et al., 1999); and some theories relate in particu-lar to the impact that the researcher may have on the participant. Etherington (2004),for example, refers to how some participants may appear to regret the consent thatthey have given, and they then go on to worry about how they are represented inresearch transcripts, despite promises of anonymity.Twigg (2006) illustrates this verywell in her recollection of playing an interview tape back to an interviewee. Theresearcher was surprised by the response; the participant felt that she had given theresearcher ‘something of herself’ and as Twigg writes, ‘Her life, her memories, her thoughts were now enclosed in that little crystal box, [the tape] to be replayed in goodness knows what circumstancesand before what people’ (p 36).This illustrates how researchers may initially underestimatethe hidden consequences of research on the researched, even though consent may havebeen properly sought and obtained. More serious and significant effects are alsoreferred to within research ethics discourse (BACP, 2002; Fine et al., 2000; Homan,1991) and were most infamously apparent in Stanley Milgram’s (1963) research.Whilst both Twigg and I are unlikely to be guilty of such maleficence, Twigg did notexpect her participant to be so upset following hearing her words being played back,and in my study I did not expect to feel so guilty about using the respondents largelyfor my own ends. In line with Reynolds’ (1972) five categories of discomfort andharm, my participants are likely to have only experienced the ‘temporary discomfort’of level two on Reynolds’ scale.That is, they may have risked economic cost in coming

Darra Emotion work and the ethics of novice insider research

253



to the interview, they may have experienced temporary anxiety or embarrassmentwhen answering questions and they may have thus been temporarily inconvenienced.Whilst I doubt that the midwives in my study felt any particular harm, I carried outthe interviews with feelings that I was exploiting the participants and this led me toquestion the effects of research on both the researched and the researcher.

Other authors record the effect that research has on the researcher (Homan, 1991;Beale et al., 2004). Davis (1986) refers to the emotional difficulties faced by nurseresearchers during an observational study based in a health care setting.Wilde (1992)reflects on Davis’ work and offers a very interesting exploration of some unexpectedissues that emerged in her research exploring nurses’ descriptions of their experiencesin their work. Wilde’s discussion centres on the relationship between the researcherand the participant. She refers to role conflict and difficulties that arise for nursesresearching in their own field and posits four hypotheses (Wilde 1992, p 239–241);

1. Rather than attempting to maintain a purely research role, the nurse researcher benefits from utilizingother roles acquired throughout her career.These roles may include clinician, counsellor, therapist andteacher.

2. Intervention by the researcher during data collection does not have an undesirable influence on the inform-ant. Rather, it can open up new avenues of enquiry previously unexplored.

3. The research process can be used effectively for the benefit of both researcher and participant and notpurely to collect research data.

4. It is difficult and disadvantageous for the nurse researcher to maintain a detached relationship with theinformant in qualitative research. Self-disclosure by the researcher has an enhancing effect in informa-tion exchange and results in a more honest and meaningful sharing by the informant.

Wilde notes that she did not come to any clear conclusions following postulatingthese hypotheses, but states that they led her to be clear about the questions thatneeded to be asked about such ‘insider’ research. Whilst she does not state what theseare; she quotes ‘I have not succeeded in answering my problem.The answers I found only serve to raise awhole new set of questions. In some way I am as confused as ever, but I believe I am confused at a higher level,and about more important things’ (p 242). I would further suggest that a consideration ofemotion work and ethics form part of such reflections on insider research.

Reed and Procter (1995) explore insider research in some depth and refer to bothpositive and negative aspects of it. They conclude that it is essential to use insiderresearch ethically to achieve the research aims. They do not however explore ethicalprinciples in detail, nor do they focus on the effect that insider research may have onthe researcher. The ethical principle that concerns me following my experience ofinsider research is autonomy, and the ethical rule in question is that of veracity(Beauchamp and Childress, 2001). Aside from these specific ethical concerns, theeffects of insider research have been debated for many years, particularly in relation to participant observation (Spradley, 1980; Bonner and Tolhurst, 2002; Rager, 2005).Arber (2006) discusses this in some depth, through exploring her emotional responseswhen carrying out insider research in a hospice; she discusses ways in which theresearcher may offset such responses by the adoption of ‘marginal positioning’,between being a practitioner and a researcher, which is similar to that described byJunker (1960). Lofland and Lofland (1984) also explored the sources of emotionalstress associated with fieldwork and produced a typology of those sources which wasused by Arber (2006) to examine her own responses to her field work.These includedhow to manage a balance between detachment and involvement by ‘standing back’ indifficult situations whilst carrying out insider research. This appears to be similar to


254



the afore-mentioned marginal positioning. It is clear, therefore, that being a researcherrequires some emotion work, which may for example, be offset by ‘marginal position-ing’ in field work. I propose, however, that emotion work is not only expended in participant-observation field work, but also in qualitative interviewing, when ‘marginalpositioning’, at least in the way that Junker and Arber suggest, is not possible.

Emotion workEmotional stress is thought to require ‘emotional work’ in order to deal with it.Hochschild (1979, 1983 and 2003) is a key thinker in the field of emotion in theworkplace; her germinal work was based on a study of flight attendants in the USA(Hochschild, 1983). Her research drew attention not only to the significance ofemotions within the workplace, but also to the work expended in managing theseemotions.

Emotions are identified as an intrinsic part of social processes, not only becausethey have a function in maintaining the social order, but also because they are adapt-ed according to the social context. Hochschild states that the individual is required to‘induce or suppress feeling in order to sustain the outward countenance that produces the proper state of mindin others’ (Hochschild 1983, p 7). She states that this emotion management is in accor-dance with ‘feeling rules’ i.e. social norms relating to feeling and display. These rulesdetermine not only what emotions should be displayed in a given situation, but alsowhat should be felt. Feeling rules generally go unnoticed until a mismatch occursbetween what is felt and what the individual perceives s/he should feel.

Emotional labour has been explored in relation to nursing (James, 1989, 1992;Smith, 1991, 1992); for example, Bolton’s (2000, 2001) work explores how thechange towards an enterprise culture in the NHS impacted on nurses’ emotion work.She suggests that changes within the NHS have arguably led to increased ‘acting’ withnurses putting on their ‘smiliest happiest face’ (Bolton, 2001, p 93); this resonateswith Hochschild’s findings in her research with flight attendants. In midwifery,research has been carried out in relation to the emotional labour of caring in mid-wifery (Hunter, 2004). Some of the issues that were encountered were similar to thoseidentified by Arber (2006); the midwives were found to be expending emotionallabour in coping with conflicting ideologies in their workplace(s), rather than whatmay have been expected, in the sometimes difficult client-care situations that arise inmidwifery practice.

My study was not as obviously ‘emotion-provoking’ as those described by Smith(1991, 1992), Bolton (2000, 2001) and Hunter (2004); therefore, it perhaps did notrequire as much emotion work. However, some studies have identified other sourcesof emotion work such as in interactions between workers and management, and incollegial interactions (Copp, 1998; Kunda and Van Maanen, 1999; Lively, 2000).Following my study and the consequent reflection on the experience, I suggest thatemotion work is also required in the interaction between researcher and participant.The emotion work I expended during and after the study related to managing mynovice status as an interviewer and to my feelings about using the participants largelyas a means to my end. I interviewed ex-students following informed consent toparticipate in a real study; but its primary purpose was my research training, with theparticipants becoming ‘collaborators’ (Punch, 1986) in my research enterprise. Thestudy was intended to add to the knowledge base about the career progression ofdiploma and graduate midwives. However, the other purpose of the study was actuallymore of a priority; my aim was chiefly to develop my research skills for the future.


255



I shall now reflect on this, drawing briefly on the ethical principle of autonomy andthe rule of veracity (Beauchamp and Childress, 2001), as well as the concept ofemotion work, using examples from my study.

Interviewing past studentsI was awarded a Research Training Fellowship in 2004; the aim of the fellowship wasto develop my research knowledge and practical skills whilst undertaking a small study.The aim of the study was to explore the career pathways of ex-students who had grad-uated and qualified from my employing University in the years 1991–2001. Followinga literature review I realised that the career pathways of midwives qualifying fromdegree and diploma programmes had not been researched in any depth. I conductedfour semi-structured interviews with ex-students from different programmes in orderto collect data and to gain experience in this method of data collection. Participantswere interviewed either in my office or a private room near their place of work. I useda semi-structured format as I wanted to encourage participants to talk freely, but abouttopics that were determined by me earlier (Polit et al., 2001). These included askingthem about whether they thought that their education had prepared them for theirrole and about what their career plans had been and now were.

I carried out the interviews in the mode of ‘observer as participant’ (Burns andGrove, 2001). Each interview lasted 20–30 min and was digitally recorded with fullwritten consent (following the usual reassurances regarding anonymity and confiden-tiality).The exploratory nature of the interviews meant that they should be nondirec-tive (Oppenheim, 1992). I transcribed the interviews very soon after each interview.This helped me to examine not only the midwives’ responses, but also my involve-ment, with an aim to refine the interview process (Rice and Ezzy, 1999), by perhapschanging my approach for subsequent interviews. I listened carefully to the recordingsseveral times and noted in particular how I was phrasing questions and I discoveredthat as Wilde (1992, p 241) suggests, even the briefest comment such as ‘that’s inter-esting’ could reveal my values and areas of interest. After each interview I made a fewnotes to describe how the participant looked and behaved, and also about how I felt atthe time. Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) suggest that such notes may need work-ing up into more detailed thoughts and observations in order to support the researchprocess; as stated earlier, I particularly valued this aspect as part of reflexive research.The following discussion uses extracts from my research diary and data transcripts:

Interview 1 – Research diary extract. . . .

I was mainly struck by the ‘experimental’ approach I had to this interview.This midwife had taken time out of herbusy working and personal life to sit with me and talk to me about her career. I was struck by the possibly unethicalway in which I carried this out. I mean ‘unethical’ because, although she had consented to the interview and althoughshe knew she was my first real interview for the study, I’m sure she had little idea about how inexperienced I was andhow I was ‘testing out’ my interview skills on her. I have to do a lot more thinking about this! In this interview, I wasalso struck by two further things; firstly by my beginning to analyse the data during data collection, even at this very early stage and secondly by the respondent’s approach to me as being ‘like her’ – she keptsaying ‘you know’ in a way that indicated belonging.

In the work of Erving Goffman (1959), when ‘playing a part’ in the world, oneimplicitly requires that the observer takes the impression that is offered seriously. As anovice researcher, I felt that I was not yet completely comfortable with the part I wasplaying as a researcher, but it was clear that the participant seemed to be taking me


256



seriously in this role. I must have, as Goffman suggests, learned ‘enough pieces of expressionto be able to ‘fill in’ and manage, more or less,’ (p 79). This research diary extract indicates thepowerful position that the researcher is in, perhaps reflecting Oakley’s point aboutexploitation in insider ethnographic research (2000). Had I, by appearing to havegreater respect for and equality with the participants when seeking their consent andwhen playing the part of a researcher, been exploiting them in a deeper sense, asOakley discusses?

‘Something to think about’Oakley noted that 75% of the interviewees in her 1981 study stated that being inter-viewed, in itself, had had an effect on them. I was reminded of this during a reflectionin my research diary following the interview with Midwife 4. . ..

Interview 4 – Research diary extract. . ..

I can elicit aspects of Rogerian counselling techniques in my approach (Rogers, 1942) []. It was this interview thatleft me wondering whether the respondent would go away with something to think about. Whilst this does not necessarily have to be a bad thing – I was struck by the way in which interviews may have a lasting effect on therespondent.

In this extract I asked the midwife what she thought about practice-based learning:

Interviewer –What about practice based learning, then? You said a couple of times about being well supported – do you think youwere also well educated in practice, do you think you learned a lot from practice placements?

Midwife 4 –I think so, sometimes I felt when I first umm came out on the wards cos the only thing I knew about CTGs [Cardio-tocographic examination of fetal heart rate patterns] and abdominal palpation and things like that waswhat I looked at in myself before I came out on placement. And then it was ages, I mean months and months andmonths into our course we started doing about CTGs and palpations and I don’t know, sometimes I thought, well,wouldn’t it be better if they’d done a basic thing on CTGs and palpations, that sort of thing for us before we’d goneout on placement. Cos I thought, I think my first placement was a community placement and I think she [the stu-dent’s mentor] thought I would just know, that I’d know more than I did – and I didn’t know a thing, really atall, only what I’d read at home in my own textbooks before I went out.

Me –MmmMidwife 4 –But then, are you supposed to learn, is that, is that why you come onto placement, to be taught how to palpate andhow to read CTGs. . .it is, I suppose then, perhaps it would have be nicer to have a basic, like one lecture – ‘this iswhat to expect’

Me –Mmm yeahMidwife 4 –. . .that’s what I I felt.There’s a same in nursing I remember not being told anything about B/Ps or anything likethat, then I suppose, that’s why you go out on placement I suppose?

I allowed the participant to think through her thoughts on practice-based learningand to come to her own conclusions about it. I was surprised, however, about howmuch her conclusion matched my own; had I unwittingly changed her view on whatwas a previously fairly strongly held belief? I realised that it was not likely to harm theparticipant to talk about her education programme and her career plans. Despite this,


257



if I could do this on this occasion, it leads to the question; what if I and otherresearchers are doing similar ‘mind-changing’ in more critical situations? The poten-tial for harm is clear.

During and following my first experience as a researcher, I realised that beingethically minded about research interviews is not only about consent, anonymity,confidentiality and about avoiding harm in asking probing questions. It can be muchmore subtle than this and the potential for such ‘mind-changing’ should be consid-ered particularly in research where the aim of the study may be more ethically criticaland the clear and expressed view of the participant is paramount. It is this, whichforms the nub of the issue for me, reflecting again Oakley’s (2000) views aboutexploitation. As a novice researcher, but an experienced midwife/lecturer, I was ableto achieve the co-operation of very busy professional people for my own ends; andwhilst interviewing them I also became aware of the possibility of affecting them inperhaps a lasting way.

Ethical questions and ‘emotion work’The midwife participants had given time in their very busy work schedules to come to the interviews, which were as much (perhaps more) about my gaining‘research experience’ as they were about gathering data for the study. At the outset Iinformed all participants that it was my first research study, as Barbour (2005) suggests that this disclosure is actually useful and should be capitalised upon in orderto gain co-operation from participants.Although all the midwives who were invited tothe study clearly had an autonomous choice whether to respond or not, I felt that dueto my previous position as a midwife and now as a lecturer, the participants may havefelt that they ‘ought’ to take part. I felt strongly then, and still feel now, that they hadgiven their time and effort in order that they could contribute to the body ofknowledge on the subject and not particularly in order for me to practice my interview skills on them.These feelings have required reflection on the ‘emotion work’involved.

I practised reflection in action (Schon, 1983) during each interview, by thinkingthrough how I was managing to present myself as a credible researcher. I also reflect-ed on action (Johns, 2000) whilst writing up the field notes and research diary aftereach interview. Returning to Wilde’s first hypothesis of ‘insider research’ (1992) I notethat, (also much like Goffman’s theory), I was using aspects of my other roles (as amidwife and a lecturer) in order to manage this strange situation. In relation to Wilde’sfourth hypothesis and similar ideas of ‘marginal positioning’ however, I found that Icould not maintain a detached relationship with the respondents, in which I wastrying to play the part of an interviewer instead of a midwife and lecturer who wasknown to them. I did not set out to be detached, and I do not believe that I was prac-tising ‘marginal positioning’ per se, but I was struck by the way in which this partici-pant seemed to be trying to draw me in by saying ‘you know’ so often, with the clearemphasis on the word you.

Midwife 1 –[] they’d actually, you know, requested somebody with two years’ experience which I didn’t have and Umm I sort ofwent for it, just really because I wanted to sort of register an interest to show them that, you know, that was where Iwanted to go and ummm. . . . .not really expecting to get it, in fact, I think just a combination of circumstances really,in that there weren’t an awful lot of other people who wanted the job at the time. Umm so, you know, I perhaps gotit sooner than I really expected that I would.


258



I appreciate that it would generally be seen as quite appropriate to ask midwives toparticipate in my study for the Fellowship. However, as Hochschild (2003) notes inher discussion about ‘feeling rules’, there was a pinch between this feeling thatarguably I should feel and how I actually felt. I could not easily reconcile my feeling thatthe participants were not entirely clear about exactly how much of a ‘novice’ I was. I‘managed’ this by using my experiences as a midwife/lecturer and through attemptsto behave as I believed an experienced researcher would. In this way, emotion workwas required not only to reconcile myself with the feelings that I had about my roleas a novice interviewer, but also in relation to the ‘surface acting’ (Hochschild, 2003)that I undertook within the interview situation itself. These two aspects are intimatelyinterlinked in my dilemma, along with the ethical rule of veracity; just how far shouldone go to explain the rationale for one’s research and one’s experience as a researcher,to prospective participants? As previously stated, all the midwives in my study wereaware that it was my first research study, but perhaps due to my successful ‘surface acting’ and my use of experience from other roles, they took part in a study which wasnot exactly what they might have thought it was. Hammersley and Atkinson (1983)discuss how it is difficult to assess the benefits and costs for those actually involved inresearch; they suggest that this clearly involves judgements but conclude that suchjudgements are always open to possible disagreement.When initially setting out on thestudy, I judged that little if no harm was likely to come to the participants and that Iwould obtain autonomous consent in an acceptable way. I judged that the benefits forthe participants were minimal and that any costs to them were likely to be ‘temporary’(Reynolds, 1972). However, reflection during the study and afterwards focused on myconcerns about mis-use of participants’ time and effort as well as about compromisingtheir full autonomous consent through a) capitalising on my novice status (as suggestedby Barbour, 2005), b) successful emotion-work in surface acting and c) uncertaintyabout the extent of veracity required for informed consent.As for me, I believe that thebenefits and costs to me have been inextricably linked; the emotion-work has requiredmuch effort, the feelings of guilt have needed in-depth reflection for reconciliationand I have done all this at the same time as reaping the benefits of building researchexperience.

ConclusionIn conclusion, I believe that I have done considerable emotion work both during andfollowing the training fellowship.This has largely been in relation to surface acting andthen reconciling myself with the ethical issues around autonomy and veracity that Isuggest arise from novice research. The topic I chose was perhaps less ethically chal-lenging than others might have been, but it served to open my mind to the pleasuresand possible pitfalls of research. As Wilde (1992) notes, the research process benefitedme and was clearly not simply about collecting the data. Therefore, one should notdenigrate the ‘good’ that has come from the whole experience. Being able to reflect (Ithink, effectively) and to work through the emotional labour has led me to be able torealise the benefits of the experience. During the interviews, I used emotion work topresent myself as the researcher I thought I should be. The emotion work involved inrelation to ‘feeling rules’ and ‘surface acting’ whilst training in research practice is shownto be considerable, particularly if one is reflexive as a researcher. Reflection can be veryempowering (Johns, 2000) and being reflexive as a new researcher has been invalu-able in being able to work through the emotional labour to aim to be a thoughtful noviceresearcher, whilst not forgetting that I was able to produce some useful data.


259



The purpose of this paper is to encourage debate about the (I believe) questionablenature of novice research and position of the novice researcher, in particular those likeme who are starting out with insider research. It recognises the important contribu-tion of in-depth, insider interviewing to qualitative research, referring to the impor-tance of recognising the person and the role of the researcher in obtaining rich data;but it has also identified some pitfalls of such an approach. My role as a noviceresearcher ‘testing out’ my interviewing skills on participants as collaborators in mytraining presented troublesome ethical dilemmas for me. I utilised a reflexive approachto work through the ‘emotion work’ that I had expended to help me in the work andto think through all the issues that arose, both during and after the study. The discus-sion has moved through a recognition of some negative aspects of the emotion workin research and has, through the use of in-depth reflection demonstrated how thepositive can come out of the negative. To reflect Wilde’s (1992) thoughts, I am stillnot completely clear about the ethics of novice insider research and I wonder aboutthe emotion work that will be required throughout my research career, but perhaps I am now confused at a higher level, which may not be an entirely bad thing.

Acknowledgement

I would like to offer my gratitude to Professor Billie Hunter for her support and wordsof wisdom during the writing of this paper.


260

References

Arber, A. (2006) Reflexivity: a challenge for the researcheras practitioner? Journal of Research in Nursing 11(2): 147–157.

BACP (2002) Ethical framework for good practice in counselling andpsychotherapy. Rugby: British Association for Counsellingand Psychotherapy.

Barbour, R. (2005) Reinstating the researcher. In Hallowell,N., Lawton, J., Gregory, S. (eds) Reflections on research. The realities of doing research in the social sciences. Maidenhead: OpenUniversity Press.

Beale, B., Cole, R., Hillege, S., McMaster, R., Nagy, S. (2004)Impact of in-depth interviews on the interviewer: Rollercoaster ride. Nursing & Health Sciences 6: 141.

Beauchamp, T.L., Childress, J.F. (2001) Principles of BiomedicalEthics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bolton, S.C. (2000) Who cares? Offering emotion work asa ‘gift’ in the nursing labour process. Journal of AdvancedNursing 32: 3, 580–586.

Bolton, S.C. (2001) Changing faces: nurses as emotionaljugglers. Sociology of Health and Illness 23: 1, 85–100.

Bonner, A., Tolhurst, G. (2002) Insider-outsider perspec-tives of participant observation. Nurse Researcher 9: 4, 7–19.

Bowling, A. (2002) Research Methods in Health. Maidenhead:Open University Press.

Burns, N., Grove, S.K. (2001) The Practice of Nursing Research.Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co.

Copp, M. (1998) When emotion work is doomed to fail:ideological and structural constraints of emotion man-agement. Symbolic Interaction 21: 3, 299–328.

Cribb, A. (2003) Approaching qualitative research. InEckstein, S. (ed.) Manual for Research Ethics Committees.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davis, M.Z. (1986) Observation in natural settings. InChenitz,W.C., Swansoon, J.M. (eds) From Practice to Grounded

Theory. Qualitative Research in Nursing. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley.

Denscombe, M. (2002) Ground Rules for Good Research.Buckinghamshire: Open University Press.

Denzin, N. (1989) Interpretive Biography. Newbury Park: Sage.Ellingson, L.L. (2006) Embodied knowledge: writing

researchers’ bodies into qualitative health research.Qualitative Health Research 16: 2, 298–310.

Etherington, K. (2004) Becoming a Reflexive Researcher:using Ourselves in Research. London: Jessica KingsleyPublishers.

Fine, M.,Weis, L.,Weseen, S.,Wong, L. (2000) ‘For whom?Qualitative research representations and social responsi-bilities.’ In Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) Handbook ofQualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fowler, F.J., Mangione, T.W. (1990) Standardized SurveyInterviewing: Minimizing Interviewer-Related Error. London: SagePublications.

Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.Pelican Books: Harmondsworth.

Hammersley, M., Atkinson, P. (1995) Ethnography: Principles inPractice. London: Routledge.

Hochschild, A.R. (1979) Emotion work, feeling rules andsocial structure. American Journal of Sociology 85: 3, 551–575.

Hochschild, A.R. (1983) The Managed Heart.Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.

Hochschild,A.R. (1998) The sociology of emotion as a wayof seeing. In Bendelow, G., Williams, S.J. (eds) Emotions inSocial Life. London: Routledge.

Hochschild, A.R. (2003) The Managed Heart.Commercialization of Human Feeling (2nd ed.).Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.



Susanne Darra (BSc (Econ) (Hons, MA, PGCE) I have been a midwifery lecturer forseven years, with a keen interest in education and in midwifery in general. I previous-ly practised for 17 years as a midwife in various settings. I am currently due to com-mence PhD studies in relation to investigating how childbirth is described by users ofmaternity services and midwives, thereby gaining insights into perceptions of ‘normalbirth’. I plan to examine literature aimed at midwives and their clients about normalbirth and to interview women and the midwives involved in their births.The data willbe analysed through narrative and/or rhetorical analysis to obtain views about normalbirth in hospital in the twenty-first century.

This paper arose out of the work done for my Health Professions Wales ResearchTraining Fellowship, which I completed last year.E-mail: [email protected]


261

Homan, R. (1991) The Ethics of Social Research. Essex: LongmanGroup.

Hunter, B. (2004) Conflicting ideologies as a source ofemotion work in midwifery. Midwifery 20: 3, 261–272.

James, N. (1989) Emotional labour: skill and work in thesocial regulation of feelings Sociological Review 37: 15–42.

James, N. (1992) Care � organisation � physicallabour � emotional labour. Sociology of Health and Illness 14:4, 489–509.

Johns, C. (2000) Becoming a reflective practitioner. BlackwellPublishing: Oxford.

Junker, B.H. (1960) Field work: An Introduction to Social Sciences.London: University of Chicago Press.

Karp (1996) Speaking of sadness: Depression, Disconnection and theMeanings of Illness. Oxford University Press: New York.

Kunda, G.,Van Maanen, J. (1999) Changing scripts at work:Managers and professionals. In Steinberg, R.J., Figart,D.M. (eds) Emotional Labour in the Service Economy. The annalsof the American Academy of Political and Social Science.

Lamb, M.E., Garretson, M.E. (2003) The effects of inter-viewer gender and child gender on the informativenessof alleged child sexual abuse victims in forensic inter-views. Law and Human Behaviour 27: 2, 157–171.

Lively, K.J. (2000) Reciprocal emotion management.Working together to maintain stratification in private lawfirms. Work and Occupations 27: 1, 32–63.

Lofland, J., Lofland, L.H. (1984) Analysing Social Settings.A guideto Qualitative Observation and Analysis Belmont, CA: WadsworthPublishing Company.

Milgram, S. (1963) Behavioural study of obedience. Journalof Abnormal Psychology 67: 4, 371–378.

Mitchell, T.L., Radford, J.L. (1996) Rethinking researchrelationships in qualitative research. Canadian Journal ofCommunity Mental Health 15: 1, 49–60.

Moorman, P.G., Newman, B., Millikan, R.C., Tse, C.K.,Sandler, D.P. (1999) Participation rates in a case-controlstudy: the impact of age, race, and race of interviewer.Annals of Epidemiology 9: 3, 188–195.

Oakley, A. (1981) Interviewing women: A contradiction interms. In Roberts, H. (ed.) Doing Feminist Research. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Oakley, A. (2000) Experiments in Knowing: Gender and Method in theSocial Sciences. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Oppenheim, A.N. (1992) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing andAttitude Measurement. London: Continuum.

Polit, D.F., Beck, C.T., Hungler, B.P. (2001) Essentials of NursingResearch: Methods Appraisal and Utilization. Philadelphia:Lippincott.

Pollner, M. (1998) The effects of interviewer gender inmental health interviews. Journal of Nervous and MentalDisorders. 186: 6, 369–373.

Punch, M. (1986) Politics and Ethics of Fieldwork. Beverley Hills,CA: Sage.

Rager, K.B. (2005) Compassion stress and the qualitativeresearcher. Qualitative Health Research 15: 3, 423–430.

Reed, J., Procter, S. (1995) (eds) Practitioner Research in HealthCare:The Inside Story. London: Chapman & Hall.

Reynolds, P.D. (1972) On the protection of human subjectsand social science. International Social Science Journal 24: 4,693–719.

Rice, P.L., Ezzy, D. (1999) Qualitative Research Methods: A HealthFocus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rogers, C.R. (1942) Counseling and Psychotherapy: Newer Conceptsin Practice. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Rubin, H.J., Rubin, I.S. (1995) Qualitative Interviewing:The Art ofHearing Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professions Think inAction. London: Basic Books.

Shakespeare, P., Atkinson, D., French, S. (1993) Reflecting onResearch Practice. Issues in Health and Social Welfare.Buckinhamshire: Open University Press.

Smith, P. (1991) The nursing process: raising the profile ofemotional care in nurse training. Journal of Advanced Nursing16: 74–81.

Smith, P. (1992) The Emotional Labour of Nursing. London:Macmillan.

Spradley, J.P. (1980) Participant Observation. NY: Holt, Rinehart& Winston.

Stacey, J. (1988) Can there be a feminist ethnography?Women’s Studies International Forum 11(1): 21–27.

Sword, W. (1999) Pearls, pith and provocation. Accountingfor presence of self: Reflections on doing qualitativeresearch. Qualitative Health Research 9: 270–278.

Twigg, J. (2005) Stealing voices. . ..or don’t play back thetape. In Hallowell N, Lawton J Gregory S. Reflections onResearch. The Realities of doing Research in the Social Sciences.Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Wilde, V. (1992) Controversial hypotheses on the relation-ship between researcher and informant in qualitativeresearch. Journal of Advanced Nursing 17: 2, 234–242.



Emotion Work and the Ethics of Novice Insider Research

Documents

Transcript of Emotion Work and the Ethics of Novice Insider Research