Remaining in the Field

The Vulnerability Paradox of Native Member Ethnography

Bibliographic Data

ID2412002
AuthorsP Kosonen (0000-0001-8474-2666), Kristina Leppälä (0000-0002-3159-2307), Mirjami Ikonen (0000-0002-9915-0927)
Year2025
Volume24
Publication date2025-05-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1609-4069 • E-ISSN: 1609-4069
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/16094069251345125
OpenAlexW4410618953
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited28

While traditional ethnography typically involves researchers entering the field and then leaving it, but at-home ethnography and autoethnography challenge this norm as researchers remain in their native environments after the research period has ended. This dual role creates a paradox of vulnerability for both the subjects and the researchers; vulnerability stems from their dual role and the ethical dilemmas of maintaining confidentiality and trust while being part of the organization. This study explores the concept of vulnerability in ethnographic research, with a focus on researchers who remain in the field after the research has ended as full members of the organisations they studied. Our study identifies a significant vulnerability experienced by ethnographic researchers who remain in the field after research closure and emphasizes the unique challenges faced by researchers who must navigate their roles as both insiders and outside observers, leading to a state of limbo and increased vulnerability. We discuss the ethical challenges of conducting research in one's own organization, including the potential for increased sensitivities and the difficulty of separating researcher and professional identities. We reflexively and reflectively analyze our own research diaries to illustrate the complexities of remaining in the field, and we present three vignettes that highlight the emotional and ethical considerations faced as researchers remaining in the field after research closure. This study contributes to the emerging discussion on researcher vulnerabilities with autoethnography and at-home ethnography as methods. It suggests that understanding and addressing these vulnerabilities is crucial for the ethical and effective practice of ethnographic research. The paper calls for further examination of the reciprocal vulnerability experienced by autoethnographic and at-home ethnographic researchers and their subjects, emphasizing the need for more study, guidance, and support for researchers in these roles

Computer security · Ethnography · Field (mathematics · Sociology · Vulnerability (computing · Anthropology · Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture · Computer Science · Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights · Mathematics · Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access