Week 8 Research Journal

Creswell and Poth, Chapter 4: Narrative Research

Narrative can be the phenomenon being studied or the method used in a study

Definition by Czarniawska (2004): "narrative is understood as a spoken or written text giving an account of an event/action or series of events/actions, chronologically connected." So this means that if I were to use various oral history interviews focusing on one event (like mining disasters, for instance), I could use the narrative method. Now it makes sense why some people assume I'm doing a narrative project when I tell them I'm working with oral histories!

Procedures:

• focusing on studying one or two individuals
• gathering data by collecting their stories
• reporting their individual experiences
• ordering the meaning of those experiences

Narrative research emerged from a LOT of different fields and is considered to still be developing; it is different from narrative inquiry, however.

Defining Features:

• STORIES! (This is majorly important!)
• Experiences/identities/self-perception
• Specific to places or situations
• Gathered via interviews, observations, documents, pictures, and other qualitative data sources
• Can be analyzed by theme, structure, dialogue/performance, visual images (with or without words), values, plot, significance, character mapping, time
• Often shaped into a chronology
• Often contain turning points, tensions, transitions, interruptions, and consequences

Types of Narratives:

• Biographical study: write/record the experiences of another person's life
• Autoethnography: done by the individuals who are the subject of the study
• Life history: an exploration of an individual's entire life
• Oral history: gathering personal reflections of events (causes and effects) on individuals; often paired with social justice framework

Procedures for Conducting Narrative Research:

• Determine if narrative research is a good fit
• Select participants; can collect stories from journals, observations, letters, stories from family members, documents, photographs, additional artifacts
• Consider how to frame the collection and recordings
• Embed information about the context (experiences, culture, historical contexts, etc.) of these stories into data collection, analysis, and writing
•  Reorganize stories into a framework through "restorying," often placing the stories in chronological order
• Embed a collaborative approach; this acknowledges the relationship between the researcher and the participant(s); researcher may gain insight through the stories; focuses on the epiphanies, turning points, and disruptions of the lived experiences
• Present narrative in written form

Challenges in Narrative Research

• Finding the "figure under the carpet"
• Knowing how to discuss the stories of the participants while at the same time reflecting on their own background when restorying
• Issues of power
• Important questions from Pinnegar and Daynes (2007): Who owns the story? Who can tell it? Who can change it? Whose version is convincing? What happens when narratives compete? As a community, what do stories do among us?

Discussion Question #1:  Creswell and Poth state that "Active collaboration with the participant is necessary" in narrative research. Does that create a whole new set of issues when using narrative research with archival materials?

 

Hensley Owens, "Writing My Body, Writing My Health: A Rhetorical Autoethnography"

Rhetorical autoethnography: seeing the work as it happened

This study uses personal artifacts to self-analyze writing about health related issues

She argues that "even private self-sponsored writing is a form of activism" because it can "provide a template for public activism."

This feels very well written, but not overly academic. Obviously it IS academic, but what I'm trying to convey is that the STORY speaks loudest, which makes sense since this type of research relies so heavily on story.

Discussion Question #2: As this is something that I struggle with, how does one know if a piece is too informal to be considered? It seems to me that when I'm writing something as a "story," I tend to get too informal with my writing. 

She really shows how her writings about her health struggles directly impacted her activism; very clear!

Random note: All of this makes me think of how Alice James, the sister of author Henry James, kept a detailed diary of her medical issues (particularly her battle with breast cancer) and mental struggles. Her diary is now considered groundbreaking for giving a representative voice for Victorian women who were often silenced and for providing a profound meditation on life and death.

It's interesting that this piece doesn't use any subheadings like other pieces I've read. It adds to the informal vibe. I know that's a stylistic choice, but it feels very congruous with the rest of the piece.

Micro-activism can pave the way to public activism.

She's not afraid to discuss how her perceptions have changed; very good transparency!

Discussion Question #3: This piece was very personal, and Hensley Owens was able to frame the story on her terms. However, what would this piece have looked like if she had been telling someone else's story? Pinnegar and Daynes (2007) in the Creswell and Poth chapter asked "Who owns the story?" In this piece, it's very clear that she does. But if we are researching participants other than ourselves, what measures can we put in place to make sure their story gets told in a way that is mutually beneficial?