Search results

Cross-language qualitative research has gained momentum worldwide; yet, there is still a lack of consensus to guide researchers in ensuring the trustworthiness of the research. Several methodological dilemmas related to language differences between researchers and participants should be carefully addressed. Therefore, this study aims to (1) review qualitative literature addressing cross-language, (2) produce a list of methodological criteria and recommendations from the reviewed literature and (3) evaluate systematically published cross-language qualitative researches using the list.

This study employed a summative content analysis of 35 published curriculum and pedagogy researches from 2000–2018 that viewed language differences as methodological issue. A list of 20 criteria or recommendations was constructed and used to evaluate the selected researches.

The findings revealed that majority of the researches lacked understanding of language differences between researchers and participants causing multiple inconsistencies in reporting methodological issues. Failure to address these methodological issues could risk the trustworthiness of the data and the overall rigor of the research.

This study highlights the importance to minimize methodological issues related to language differences. It is hoped that the list of criteria or recommendations proposed by this study could support other cross-language qualitative researchers in overcoming these methodological dilemmas.

This paper demonstrates complexity surrounding cross-language research involving an interpreter and illustrates how the author attempted to ensure methodological rigor through modifying and applying Squires' criteria to the design and conduct of her education research.

This research employed Squires' recommendations for cross-language research as methodological guidelines for designing and conducting cross-language research. The research involved focus group discussions with teachers working in an ethnic minority boarding school in Laos and an interpreter who helped translating/transcribing interviews in Lao to English and data analysis.

From applying Squires' criteria, this paper introduces a reflexive set of recommendations for researchers conducting a wide range of qualitative cross-language research.

Most meta-criteria for cross-language research are developed to evaluate the quality of cross-language research. However, the soundness of a set of meta-criteria as one tool to evaluate all cross-language research might be questionable due to qualitative studies' diverse epistemological grounds. This paper argues that meta-criteria can serve as a critical and reflexive guide for cross-language researchers when used from the research design and on. The paper also suggests a new set of recommendations which may facilitate more reflexive approaches to cross-language research.

Tourism and hospitality research is frequently cross language in nature; yet, English is the most used language to disseminate research findings. The use of thematic analysis is increasing; yet, critical discussions of the implications of the timing of translation when applying this method are rare. The purpose of this study is to present a model for bilingual researchers undertaking qualitative studies in their mother language who are reliant on their own language skills to translate and overcome language differences, and who are using thematic analysis.

Thematic analysis is a six-phase iterative analysis process during which the main themes are identified and a network of related themes is constructed to facilitate the interpretation of the material. The model is illustrated through reference to a research project carried out by the first author on the role and manifestation of intangible cultural heritage in tourism in protected areas in Iran.

The model introduces translation as an internal procedure within thematic analysis, situating it between the second and third phases when the codes are being consolidated into basic themes. Translation is viewed as a part of the iterative process of thematic analysis.

This model is the first to provide bilingual cross-language researchers with a practical and epistemologically, methodologically and ethically sound rationale for the timing of translation when using thematic analysis. While it was developed on a tourism case study, the authors believe it is applicable to research in other disciplines where cross-language qualitative analysis is used.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on reflective practice as a qualitative methodology, and reflection-in-action as a modus operandi to engage with the artistry of cross-language qualitative research.

The author draws on the doctoral research, a cross-language multiple case study aimed at investigating the author’s evolving understanding, as a reflective practitioner, of drama-based pedagogy for teaching Italian as a second language.

A reflective analysis of the author’s tacit decision making during drama improvisation unveiled a clash between covert beliefs and overt attitudes in the author’s practice. In this paper, the author examine this process and highlight the value of translingual writing (writing in two languages) as a method of enquiry that allowed me to become aware of this clash.

A limitation of this research is that the nature of this clash of beliefs is confined to the idiosyncrasy of one practitioner. However, the methodological implications are relevant to cross-language qualitative researchers fluent in two (or more) languages. Frequently, translingual researchers focus all writing efforts in one language only, because of the absence of methodological guidelines bridging cross-language research, reflective practice and translingual studies.

Strategies to investigate awareness of tacit beliefs in educational practice may help other second language/drama reflective practitioners to better understand their knowing in-action.

This paper represents a first step in disseminating knowledge about translingual writing as method, and is of value to all those translingual researchers who are interested in reflective methodologies.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the challenges of translating qualitative data from Arabic to English within the field of gender and management studies.

This paper presents a real experience of translating qualitative data from Arabic to English within the management area in Saudi Arabia. Data were collected from interviewing female managers working in the Saudi public sector.

Translating qualitative data from Arabic to English is not a straightforward process. During the translation of this cross-cultural qualitative research, three challenges were faced: the embeddedness of the language meaning in the culture, positionality and its influence on data production and language differences. The study found that, in absence of a standard way for translating cross-linguistic qualitative research, a combination of methods is found to be useful to increase the validity and reliability of the study findings. Researchers who conduct qualitative insider research and who translate their own data are in a better position to do cross-language data analysis.

This paper contributes to the literature by showing that translating Arabic texts regarding gender, management and leadership is embedded within historical, cultural, political and institutional contexts, requiring a deep understanding of both language and culture to produce a depth of knowledge. Also, the novelty of this study is that it highlights the importance of being an insider qualitative researcher and translating the research data, as researcher offers significant opportunities for close attention to certain points in the text; and this could add value to the analysis as a way to establish validity of interpretations.

The purpose of this paper is to break the silence surrounding the politics of translation that influence cross-language/cultural accounting research. It gives due consideration to the ways in which translation gaps are produced and re-produced in qualitative interdisciplinary accounting research (IAR).

First, the authors discuss backstage insights and the authors’ own life experiences vis-à-vis translating cross-cultural/language research. The authors provide a critical self-reflection on the process as non-Western female researchers publishing in English-language accounting journals. Second, the authors carry out a content analysis to examine reported translation practices in three long-established interdisciplinary accounting journals from 2015 to 2017. The conclusion integrates these analyses to discuss the reproduction process of the translation gap in accounting research and its outcomes.

The study identifies inherent contradictions in IAR and its emancipatory agenda, where translation gaps are structural outcomes of overlaps between the politics of translation and the politics of publishing IAR. The study highlights the IAR community’s lack of awareness regarding political and methodological sensitivities in dealing with particularities in cultural contexts. The authors argue that this reflects the institutional norms for publishing in IAR, which contributes to neutralising cultural diversity and complex translation processes in the name of objectivity. This could ultimately lead to further marginalisation of non-Western cultural knowledge and values, while producing academic “elites” within the IAR community, meanwhile missing opportunities for innovation.

By opening the “black box” pertaining to translation gaps in the context of cross-language/cultural accounting research, the study calls for IAR scholars to help raise awareness of their role and identity as “cultural brokers”.

The use of organizational ethnography has grown significantly during the past decades. While language is an important component of ethnographic research, the challenges associated with language barriers are rarely discussed in the literature. The purpose of this paper is to open up a discussion on language barriers in organizational ethnography.

The author draws on her experience as a PhD student doing an organizational ethnography of an emergency department in a country where she initially did not speak the local language.

The paper examines the author's research process, from access negotiation to presentation of findings, illustrating the language barriers encountered doing an ethnography in parallel to learning the local language in Sweden.

This paper calls for awareness of the influence of the ethnographer's language skills and shows the importance of discussing this in relation to how we teach and learn ethnography, research practice and diversity in academia.

The paper makes three contributions to organizational ethnography. First, it contributes to the insider/outsider debate by nuancing the ethnographer's experience. Second, it answers calls for transparency by presenting a personal ethnographic account. Third, it contributes to developing the methodology by offering tips to deal with language barriers in doing ethnography abroad.

One of the main strengths of qualitative research is to focus on ideas, concepts and meanings involving individuals and groups of people in their own discourse. Instead of testing a narrow hypothesis or making a generalisation about a population on certain issues under investigation, qualitative research attempts to present different insights which can only be unearthed by direct and personal engagement with research participants (Brannen, 1992). This engagement should take place in a natural social context where real life takes place. However, conducting qualitative research in China can pose a huge challenge for both Chinese and international researchers. This paper examines some problems (ethics, linguistics, etc) of using qualitative research methods and tools such as interviews, participant observation, and Critical Discourse Analysis in China.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a unique approach to accessing, interpreting, and presenting issues concerning the lives of social science research participants. It particularly focuses on accessing those considered to be economically, socially, or politically marginalized and where there is reliance upon intersubjective accounts in two languages.

The conceptual and empirical material referred to in this paper is drawn from the author’s doctoral research of a Fair Trade case study in Malawi. The approach presented is influenced by concepts derived from postcolonial theory, grounded theory, and intersubjectivity.

For the community empowerment research focus it was important to provide space to capture voices of all participants, accounting for the hierarchical socio-political context in which people were embedded. This required the use of interpreters, introducing challenges related to intersubjectivity such as recognizing and accounting for positionalities and impressions of multiple parties collaborating in the process of collecting and interpreting qualitative research material.

Investing in trained and engaged interpreters, using pilot interviews, including participants’ data in the field research design process, and capturing marginalized voices helps a researcher to mitigate challenges related to bias and power relations.

Recognizing inherent shortcomings related to interpreter-facilitated research and power relations, the framework presented provides a reflective and practical methodological approach for qualitative researchers.

This chapter explores theory and local context of socially constructed pandemic fears during COVID-19; how material and non-material fear objects are construed, interpreted and understood by communities, and how fears disrupt social norms and influence pandemic behavioural responses. We aimed to understand the lived experiences of pandemic-induced fears in socioculturally diverse communities in eastern Indonesia in the context of onto-epistemological disjunctures between biomedically derived public health interventions, local world views and causal-remedial explanations for the crisis. Ethnographic research conducted among several communities in East Nusa Tenggara province in Indonesia provided the data and analyses presented in this chapter, delineating the extent to which fear played a decisive role in both internal, felt experience and social relations. Results illustrate how fear emotions are constructed and acted upon during times of crisis, arising from misinformation, rumour, socioreligious influence, long-standing tradition and community understandings of modernity, power and biomedicine. The chapter outlines several sociological theories on fear and emotion and interrogates a post-pandemic future.