Search results

The purpose of this study is to provide a practical guide and checklist for newcomers to autoethnography.

The approach is grounded in autoethnographic methodology, functioning as a comprehensive teaching resource.

When used as a learning resource, this study will enhance the work of beginning autoethnographers.

As an arts and humanities and social science-based research approach, autoethnography is a vital, creative methodology in advancing social justice in mental health.

This study, written by an experienced teacher, mentor and supervisor of the approach with an international reputation, is original in its provision of a comprehensive teaching resource in article form to assist the development of beginning autoethnographers.

The purpose of this opinion piece is to present a case for the potential of positive autoethnography (PosAE) as a new autoethnographic approach.

This work resulted from on-going discussions between the authors as to the practicalities and benefits of associating the qualitative approach of autoethnography with the field of positive psychology.

PosAE is proposed to encourage writers to actively reflect on the importance for themselves, and their readers, of including positive narrative elements, prospective visions and exploratory trajectories in their work.

This research builds on existing research that has included positive psychology in autoethnography. As positive psychology is grounded in empirical research, the authors are suggesting that PosAE is allied to pragmatic autoethnography.

PosAE offers to facilitate positive thought, affect and strategies that could improve well-being. For example, some people struggling with serious health issues, and those helping them, may find it useful for articulating conditions and envisioning, even experiencing, positive change.

With so many lives impacted by mental health issues globally, and with rapidly changing societies struggling to provide stability and purpose, an autoethnography that provides tools such as PERMA (Positive emotions, Engagement, Positive Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishments/Achievements) to communicate the positive seems timely.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first time the creation of an autoethnographic approach explicitly linked to positive psychology has been proposed.

The purpose of this paper is to review and organise the autoethnography literature: to explore the obstacles of and opportunities for autoethnography in organisation research; to support PhD students and supervisors who have chosen this methodological route to more clearly define their autoethnographic positions and choices; and to propose new research directions for organisational autoethnography.

The authors critically summarise autoethnography as a contemporary approach to organisational ethnography by looking back, looking at the present, and looking to the future. The authors briefly consider the historical and disciplinary development – and vehement critique – of autoethnography, trace its shifting epistemological positions and introduce three emergent “possibilities” of organisation autoethnography.

The authors highlight how autoethnography can tell stories otherwise silenced; exploring the mundane, ignored and distorted in current academic life, past and other work experiences, working with others through collaborative or co‐produced autoethnography in exciting new organisational contexts.

This paper is one of the first attempts to review autoethnography as a contemporary approach to organisation autoethnography.

This paper aims to draw attention to a unique paradox concerning doing an autoethnography as a PhD. On the one hand, a student may feel a pull towards revealing a vulnerable, intimate, autoethnographic self, yet on the other hand she may be pushed away from this because the oral/viva voce examination process may deny the student anonymity. Through the telling of this tale the complexities concerning self‐disclosure and student autoethnography reveal are explored.

The tale is autoethnographic: a fictionalised account based on real events and co‐constructed from substantial field notes, personal diaries, e‐mails, and reports.

This paper contributes to relational ethics concerned with self‐disclosure and the “I” of a reveal, and highlight the possibilities for developing Medford's notion of mindful slippage as a strategy for removing highly personal and possibly harmful elements within student autoethnography.

The paper provides a preliminary theoretical framework that has not been empirically tested and is situated within “introspective” autoethnographic research.

The paper takes an innovative approach to autoethnography, addressing ethical value systems specifically within a PhD context.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the possibilities of autoethnography as a commitment to care and a social justice agenda (Denzin, 2014:p. x).

Autoethnography can be seen as a “methodology that allows us to examine how the private troubles of individuals are connected to public issues and to public responses to these troubles” (Mills, 1959, cited in Denzin, 2014). This resonates strongly with the field of study: political care ethics, as the main focus is on how to promote a caring society. “Care” might be conceived broadly as everything the authors do to maintain and repair the world; i.e., as a social praxis.

Care ethics can benefit from autoethnography, as there is a strong(er) emphasis on “what matters,” what people care for, about and why, rather than on what is “right.” In this paper, the authors will thus explore the promises and pitfalls of autoethnography for a caring society, by connecting insights from theories on political care ethics and qualitative inquiry with the own autoethnographic performance at the International Conference on Qualitative Inquiry in May 2015.

Care ethics can benefit from autoethnography, as there is a strong(er) emphasis on “what matters,” what people care for, about and why, rather than on what is “right.”

The purpose of this paper is to introduce to sociologists the concept of dissociative hypnosis and to demonstrate the potential that this discipline has for obtaining or deriving biographical narratives in ethnographic and autoethnographic studies.

The paper presents brief comparative histories of the development of hypnosis and of performance autoethnography to highlight the degree of consonance between these apparently, disparate modalities, in their struggle for acceptance and respectability. The intensely introspective, emotional and experiential nature of hypnosis and self-hypnosis narratives is then compared with the personal descriptions and applications of the autoethnographic process as depicted in the sociological literature, to illustrate the parallels between the two modalities. The paper concludes with a review of the potential problems and limitations inherent in using hypnosis as a memory recall modality in sociological research studies.

This paper argues that the exploratory and revelatory nature of information accrual during dissociative altered-state hypnosis closely resembles that during performance autoethnography, and that hypnosis could therefore be usefully employed as an additional and novel (ethno-) autobiographical tool in sociological and ethnographic research.

Performative autoethnography has now become a firmly established route to obtaining a valid and intensely personal autobiographical history of individuals or groups of individuals. However this is the first publication to propose hypnosis as an alternative approach to deriving ethnographic and autoethnographic biographical narratives.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the process and challenges of applying an autoethnographic research method to a professional doctoral thesis ethics application. It examines the traditional university ethical approval process and if it is appropriate for this evolving qualitative research method within an organizational context.

A short introduction to the literature on ethics prefaces an autoethnographic account of the author’s experience as doctor of business administration candidate tackling the application process for ethical approval of primary research. The account is a reflection of the review process and critiques with reference to the existing literature.

The majority of the literature relating to ethics has focused on the private, personal and largely evocative accounts of autoethnography. This paper highlights some of the differences and potential for organizational autoethnography and ethical conduct. It highlights the ethical implications of obtaining consent from one’s colleagues, developing and maintaining dependent relationships, risk and reward to one’s own professional reputation and becoming equipped to create both personal and organizational change through a process of reflexivity.

This paper adds to the discussion about ethical conduct when undertaking new forms of organizational ethnographic research. For those interested or involved in the university institutional ethics review committees and for professional doctoral students who are developing an emancipatory insider research approach.

The purpose of this paper is to explore a number of tensions arising in the presentation of autoethnographical research.

The paper provides a reflexive autoethnographical account of undertaking and publically presenting autoethnographical research.

The paper problematises the extent and form of disclosure; the voice and representation of the researcher; the difficulties in dealing with sensitive subjects; conflicts between public and private domains; questions of validity; the extent and form of theorisation of autoethnographical narratives; and emotion and performativity in presenting autoethnographical research.

The paper provides an analysis of the potential of autoethnography, while exploring the presentational and performative context of academia.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the author’s experiences as a school teacher and a lesbian. It considers the culture and discourses of power in the school and the ethical implications of telling the author’s story. Utilizing autoethnography as a method of inquiry, it draws on a critical incident to explore the incompatibility of the author’s private and professional identities, and reflect on the impact of homophobic and heteronormative discursive practices in the workplace, on health, well-being and identity.

This research is grounded in an interpretivist philosophy. It utilizes writing about the self as a method of inquiry.

This research examines the incompatibility of the author’s private and professional identities and offers insight into the steps that those in positions of power will take to protect and perpetuate the heteronormative discourse of rural life.

This research presents the perspective of only one lesbian teacher in a rural context. Consequently, generalizations are inappropriate and recommendations are difficult. Whilst the absence of clear ethical regulation presents an infinite number of possibilities for autoethnographers, the silence that surrounds the prescription of the ethics of autoethnography leaves those of us at the beginnings of our research careers without clear guidance.

This research specifically addresses a dearth of research examining the experiences of the rural lesbian (or gay) teacher in the UK. Headteachers of rural schools must ensure that their schools are inclusive and welcoming environments for teachers, and their equalities policies are living documents that are not simply cast aside in the face of rural parent power. Young people in the countryside deserve access to the full pool of teaching talent and should have access to the diverse role models that their urban and suburban counterparts are beginning to enjoy.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how sharing stories of being a mental health professional and academic, based more broadly on serendipity and searching in life, can serve as means for bridging and developing cross-cultural understandings and collaborative work.

This paper is a relational autoethnography based on face-to-face and written conversational dialogue between five mental health academics from the UK and Norway.

The very practice of writing this paper displays and serves the purpose of bridging people, cultures and understandings, at several levels, in the facilitation of new research and writing projects. Troubling traditional boundaries between “us” and “them, and the “knower” and the “known,” the writing is theoretically underpinned by Friendship as Method, situated in a New Materialist context.

Through its conversational descriptions and explorations the paper shows how doing relational autoethnography can be purposeful in developing cross-cultural understandings and work at both professional and personal levels. It also demonstrates how autoethnography as relational practice can be useful in the sharing of this methodology between people who are more and less familiar with it.