2015 has been a busy year, pluralistically speaking. As can be seen, the previous guest blog posts have been written by Natalie Harrison and Astrid Coxon, who both attended the BPS’ Qualitative Methods in Psychology (QMiP) Biennial Conference at Cambridge in September 2015; but more specifically, who attended the symposium on pluralism called ‘Pluralism in Qualitative Research: emerging theory or incompatible differences?’, where two papers considered the philosophical underpinnings and methodological concerns of pluralism, and two other papers presented empirical research which used a pluralistic approach. My paper was one of the latter ones, and highlighted both the epistemological and practical challenges and benefits of applying a pluralistic approach to my current doctoral research into couples’ relational experiences as they transition to second-time parenthood (Rodriguez and Frost, 2015a). This collection of papers was well received, and they also had the opportunity to be delivered to an international audience at the APA’s Society for Qualitative Inquiry (SQIP) Annual Conference at New York in May 2015. The international coverage of pluralism in qualitative research was a fantastic opportunity to both raise awareness and to understand the ways in which pluralism is being used across the pond (for example: Wertz, Charmaz, McMullen, Josselson, Anderson, and McSpadden, 2011). In addition, I also presented another paper at QMiP 2015 titled ‘Pushing at the boundaries of qualitative research: the emergence and development of qualitative mixed methods innovation’, which discussed both qualitative pluralism and qualitative multimethods in the context of a mixed methods paradigm, and showcased each of these with a case study (Rodriguez and Frost, 2015b). In keeping with the international coverage theme, I also delivered this paper at the 11th International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry (ICQI) in Urbana-Champaign, Illinois in May 2015. However, I pushed the boundaries of internationalism and presented it at the ‘A Day in Spanish’ stream, in Spanish! Therefore, pluralism in qualitative research has hit the Spanish speaking world at least once in the last year! Taking advantage of my presence at ICQI 2015, I also presented another paper called ‘Rethinking the adult attachment paradigm: the application of a qualitative pluralistic approach to couple relationships’, which discussed the challenges to attachment theory that a pluralistic approach can bring by drawing on my doctoral research to illustrate this (Rodriguez, Frost, and Oskis, 2015). 2015 was an extremely interesting and illuminating year with regards to pluralism in qualitative research, with many opportunities to showcase my pluralistic research, receiving widespread dissemination and engagement.
This all brings me to some of my current thinking about pluralism: perhaps because I am so immersed in my doctoral research that I feel as though I eat, sleep and breathe it at the moment! If one is engaging in pluralism in qualitative research and is constantly thinking multi-dimensionally, then it stands to reason that even one’s thoughts would not just go along one track on the train of thoughts. For example, if I adopt a social constructionist approach, I might then be thinking “What else might the data tell me if I looked at it sideways, or if I looked at it through a different lens (e.g. through a phenomenological approach)? There is an ongoing sense of constant consideration, continual possibilities and new opportunities. Pluralism in qualitative research encourages taking open and creative means to research, where anything is possible; it encourages the multiplicity of ideas because it advocates for a both/and approach, rather than an either/or approach. For example, I may have already decided on qualitative approaches to my research, but as I continue to attend seminars, workshops, conference presentations etc, and may learn about a different interesting method which stimulates me to consider whether the application of such an approach may facilitate insight into phenomena through another angle. Of course, I am not saying that anything and everything goes – every approach undertaken requires careful thought and consideration, and a solid rationale for its use, regardless of whether one method is taken, or several. However, although exciting and stimulating and ever-evolving, it can also feel as though it is never-ending, and within the parameters of research (be it a PhD, a funded research project, etc) pragmatic choices must be made. The sense of messiness, which provides a valuable contribution by helping to give further insight to the complexity of phenomena – for example, loose ends does not mean frayed ends (Rodriguez and Frost, 2015a) – is an inevitable part of a pluralistic approach. However, whilst there may be a sense of acceptance and comfortability in this, the messiness can also become overwhelming. Whilst addressing constraints surrounding methodolatry, this free rein can feel consuming when one is being pluralistic alone. Working in a team pluralistically may help to overcome such issues with each member of the research team applying one approach and knowing that the different lenses and findings of the others will help to bring the multidimensionality and creativity that pluralism in qualitative research encourages. However, this is not always possible and having to do it alone, in my doctoral research has been an invaluable learning tool, sometimes daunting, but mostly exciting and ever-engaging. Undertaking a pluralistic approach provides an invaluable understanding to couples’ relational experiences as they transition to second-time parenthood and a fundamental contribution to the challenges of the dominant view of attachment theory that this approach facilitates.
Deborah Rodriguez, Middlesex University
d.rodriguez@mdx.ac.uk @Deborah_Rod
References:
Rodriguez, D., & Frost, N. A. (2015a, May & September). A methodological reflection on the application of qualitative pluralistic research to couple relationships. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association’s Society for Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology Second Annual Conference, City University New York, New York, USA and at the 2015 BPS Qualitative Methods in Psychology Section Biennial Conference, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.
Rodriguez, D., & Frost, N. A. (2015b, May & September). Presionando los límites de la investigación cualitativa: El avance de innovación en métodos cualitativos mixtos. (Pushing at the boundaries of qualitative research: The emergence and development of qualitative mixed methods innovations). Paper presented at both A Day in Spanish at the Eleventh International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA and at the 2015 BPS Qualitative Methods in Psychology Section Biennial Conference, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.
Rodriguez, D., Frost, N. A., & Oskis, A. (May 2015). Rethinking the adult attachment paradigm: The application of a qualitative pluralistic approach to couple relationships. Paper presented at the Eleventh International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Wertz, F. J., Charmaz, K., McMullen, L. M., Josselson, R., Anderson, R., and McSpadden, E. (2011). Five ways of doing qualitative analyses: Phenomenological psychology, grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative research, and intuitive inquiry. New York: The Guilford Press.
N-PQR's Blog 