feminist online interviewing: engaging issues of power, resistance and reflexivity in practice

abstract

This paper is a response to scholars who have called for exploring and interrogating new strategies of data collection and new approaches to more traditional methods, such as interviewing in the context of the internet. Drawing on feminist standpoint theory, ‘reflexive email interviewing’ is proposed as a method for feminist research. The method is illustrated using a recent case study of email interviews with self-identified women who are members of World Pulse, an online community that aims to unite and amplify women’s voices worldwide. Through this case study, issues of power and resistance in the researcher/researched relationship and of participant reflexivity are interrogated. Lastly, criteria for reflexive email interviewing are proposed, including 1) strategies to interrogate and disrupt power hierarchies within the research process, 2) researcher reflexivity as a continuous part of the research process, and 3) continued invitations for participants to directly reflect on and respond to the research process. Reflexive questions are offered for researchers to use during research design and in each phase of their research process to ensure reflexivity is achieved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Following Daniels (2009), the use of ‘self-identified women’ in this paper is an attempt to acknowledge and account for the contestation of ‘woman’ as a category and to move beyond essentialising uses that dictate who counts as ‘women’ and what ‘women’ experience. Our usage here is then also an attempt to include queer and transgender women within our notion of ‘women’. It is with recognition of the complexities and differences among variously positioned self-identified women that the terms ‘women’ or ‘woman’ are used in this paper.

  2. 2.

    See World Pulse, https://www.worldpulse.com [last accessed 12 April 2017].

references

  1. Bhavnani, K. and Talcott, M., 2012. Interconnections and configurations: toward a global feminist ethnography. In S.N. Hesse-Biber, ed. Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 135–153.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Briggs, C.L., 1986. Learning How to Ask: A Sociolinguistic Appraisal of the Role of the Interview in Social Science Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Callaway, H., 1992. Ethnography and experience: gender implications in fieldwork and texts. In J. Okely and H. Callaway, eds. Anthropology and Autobiography. New York: Routledge Chapman Hall, pp. 29–49.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Collins, P.H., 2000. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Daniels, J., 2009. Rethinking cyberfeminism(s): race, gender, and embodiment. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 37(1), pp. 101–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. DeVault, M.L. and Gross, G., 2012. Feminist qualitative interviewing: experience, talk, and knowledge. In S.N. Hesse-Biber ed. Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 206–236.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Finlay, L., 2002. ‘Outing’ the researcher: the provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12(4), pp. 531–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Frost, N. and Elichaoff, F., 2014. Feminist postmodernism, poststructuralism, and critical theory. In S.N. Hesse-Biber, ed. Feminist Research Practice: A Primer. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 42–72.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Haraway, D., 1988. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), pp. 575–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Harding, S., 1991. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge?: Thinking from Women’s Lives. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Harding, S., 2004. The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hartsock, N., 1983. Money, Sex, and Power: Toward a Feminist Historical Materialism. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hesse-Biber, S.N., ed., 2014. Feminist Research Practice: A Primer. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hesse-Biber, S.N. and Piatelli, D., 2012. The feminist practice of holistic reflexivity. In S.N. Hesse-Biber, ed. Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 557–582.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Illingworth, N., 2001. The internet matters: exploring the use of the internet as a research tool. Sociological Research Online, 6(2). Available at: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/6/2/illingworth.html [last accessed 8 August 2015].

  16. James, N. and Busher, H., 2006. Credibility, authenticity and voice: dilemmas in online interviewing. Qualitative Research, 6(3), pp. 403–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. James, N. and Busher, H., 2009. Online Interviewing. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kazmer, M.M. and Xie, B., 2008. Qualitative interviewing in internet studies: playing with the media, playing with the method. Information, Communication and Society, 11(2), pp. 257–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Letherby, G. and Zdrodowski, D., 1995. ‘Dear Researcher’: the use of correspondence as a method within feminist qualitative research. Gender and Society, 9(5), pp. 576–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Linabary, J.R., 2013. Voicing online: catalysts and constraints for women’s empowerment. MA. Chico: Communication Studies, California State University, Chico.

  21. Linabary, J.R. and Hamel, S.A., 2014. Voicing online: conditions and catalysts for the emergence of women’s voices. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Western States Communication Association, 14–18 February. Anaheim.

  22. Mann, C. and Stewart, F., 2000. Internet Communication and Qualitative Research: A Handbook for Researching Online. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd..

    Google Scholar 

  23. McCoyd, J. and Kerson, T.S., 2006. Conducting intensive interviews using email: a serendipitous comparative opportunity. Qualitative Social Work, 5(3), pp. 389–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Meho, L.I., 2006. E-mail interviewing in qualitative research: a methodological discussion. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(10), pp. 1284–1295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mishler, E.G., 1986. Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Naples, N.A. and Gurr, B., 2014. Feminist empiricism and standpoint theory: approaches to understanding the social world. In S.N. Hesse-Biber, ed. Feminist Research Practice: A Primer. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 14–41.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Newsom, V. and Lengel, L.B., 2004. The culture of computing: gender online as contained empowerment. Conference paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association, 27–31 May. New Orleans.

  28. O’Brien Hallstein, L., 2000. Where standpoint stands now: an introduction and commentary. Women’s Studies in Communication, 23(1), pp. 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Pennebaker, J.W., Colder, M. and Sharp, L.K., 1990. Accelerating the coping process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(3), pp. 528–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Reay, R., 1996. Insider perspectives or stealing the words out of women’s mouths: interpretation in the research process. Feminist Review, 53, pp. 57–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Reinharz, S., 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Smith, D.E., 1987. Women’s perspective as a radical critique of sociology. In S. Harding, ed. Feminism and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 84–96.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Stanley, L. and Wise, S., 1993. Breaking Out Again: Feminist Ontology and Epistemology. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  34. van Doorn, N., 2011. Digital spaces, material traces: how matter comes to matter in online performances of gender, sexuality and embodiment. Media, Culture & Society, 33(4), pp. 531–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. White, M.I., 2003. Taking note of teen culture in Japan: dear diary, dear fieldworker. In T. Bestor, P. Steinhoff and V. Bestor, eds. Doing Fieldwork in Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, pp. 21–35.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wood, J.T., 1992. Gender and moral voice: moving from women’s nature to standpoint epistemology. Women’s Studies in Communication, 15(1), pp. 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie A. Hamel.

appendix a

appendix a

Interview Guide

Question Set #1: Voice

For this question set, I would like you to think about one of the first times you felt that you had a voice online.

  1. 1.

    Please tell me the story of this early experience. What were you doing? How did this experience make you feel?

  2. 2.

    What early experiences online helped you to ‘find’ your voice? In other words, what paved the way for this experience?

Follow-ups to Set #1

  • It seems like your experience with [specific details] was particularly impactful for you. What specific experiences with [name of website] or other websites would you say have been the most influential in shaping or developing your distinctive voice online? How so? For example, was there a specific writing that you did that you feel was particularly influential or response you got?

  • What drives you to continue expressing your voice online?

  • What (if any) other aspects have been influential in the development of your voice? (if needed for further prompting)

Question Set #2: Being Heard

For this question set, I would like you to think about a time when you felt you had been ‘ heard’ online.

  1. 1.

    Please describe this experience of being heard. What happened? How did this experience make you feel?

  2. 2.

    What specifically gave you the feeling that you had been heard?

Example follow-ups to Set #2

  • What do you think is necessary in order for you to feel heard online? For instance, is it enough just to put something you wrote out there or what do you need in order to feel heard?

  • How important is being heard to you? In other words, what does it mean to be heard?

Question Set #3: Empowerment

For this question set, I would like you to think about a time you felt empowered while (i.e. before, during, and/or after) creating content online.

  1. 1.

    First, what does empowerment mean to you?

  2. 2.

    Please tell me about this time that you felt empowered online. What were you doing? How did this experience make you feel?

Example follow-ups to Set #3

  • Are there any other ways you feel these experiences have had lasting impacts on your life, outlook or actions? How so?

  • Also, has creating content online ever inspired you to take action on behalf of yourself or others?

Question Set #4: Challenges

For this question set, I would like you to think about a time you experienced challenges or barriers to expressing your voice online.

  1. 1.

    Tell me about those challenges. What did that experience entail? How did it make you feel?

  2. 2.

    If you have overcome these challenges, how did you do so?

  3. 3.

    If these challenges are ongoing, how do you deal with them? What do you need to be able to overcome these challenges?

Example follow-ups to Set #4

  • Aside from these experiences, have you ever felt disempowered or discouraged by your experiences online in any way? If so, please share about these experiences.

  • Are there any other risks you feel you face in using your voice online?

Question Set #5: Reflection

I’ve provided all of your interview responses together at the bottom of this email. For this final question set, I invite you to read back through your interview responses and reflect on this experience.

  1. 1.

    What have you learned about yourself and your experiences online through this process?

  2. 2.

    What sticks out to you as most important about your experiences online based on your responses? Another way to think about this might be, what are maybe one or two things you think people should learn or reflect on from your experiences?

  3. 3.

    After reflecting on your experiences, what do feel that you need, if anything, to be able to fully express your voice online?

  4. 4.

    Is there anything else you would like to add?

Example follow-ups to Set #5

  • Do you have any questions for me now that the interview is complete?

  • Would you be interested in participating in a review of the findings?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Linabary, J.R., Hamel, S.A. feminist online interviewing: engaging issues of power, resistance and reflexivity in practice. Fem Rev 115, 97–113 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41305-017-0041-3

Download citation

keywords

  • feminist methodology
  • online interviewing
  • qualitative methods
  • power
  • reflexivity