Search results

The purpose of this paper is to nuance the idea of natural access proposed by Mats Alvesson in his description of at-home ethnography, and to offer a performative view of Alvesson’s suggestion that, in at-home ethnography, the ethnographer must work with “the processual nature of the researcher’s self.”

The author offers a reflection on the several years of ethnographic research the author conducted, of which some parts were done in a living community of which the author was part. Being literally at home, as well as being very familiar in the other research settings the author describes, allows for a critical reflection on what “at-homeness” means.

Using Butler’s notion of performativity, the author argues that “the processual nature of the researcher’s self” Alvesson speaks of, can best be understood as multiple selves, of which some emerge during the research process. The author furthermore problematizes Alvesson’s use of the term “natural access,” by arguing that this kind of access is neither easy, nor devoid of power relations.

This paper uses an experience of conducting research in the home, as well as an experience conducting research in a setting where the researcher arguably blent in well, to question what the “at-home” in at-home ethnography means, and how the researcher can deal with it.

This paper aims to provide an overview over the development of historical research into advertising from the early twentieth century. Its main purposes are to interest marketing scholars and business historians in the history of advertising, help scholars that are unfamiliar with the field in choosing an appropriate theoretical and methodological angle, and provide a critique of a range of methods and theoretical approaches being applied in advertising historical research.

The research design of this paper is based on historiographical analysis and method critique. It surveys the advertising historical literature of the three decades between 1980 and 2010, and it compares and contrasts dominant research methodologies and theoretical paradigms that have been used by historians and advertising researchers.

Much advertising historical research is based on a specific set of theoretical paradigms (“Modernization”, “Americanization”, and “Semiotics”), without being aware of the manifest impact they have on the narratives and understandings that historians create. Identifying these paradigms and outlining their impact will help marketing historians and advertising researchers to avoid the pitfalls associated with particular paradigms.

This paper subjects the modern historiography of advertising to a methodological and narratological analysis. It uses this analysis to propose new and somewhat more critical directions in advertising historical research.