See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/359898621

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design: Being Creative with

Resources in Qualitative Research

Chapter · April 2022

DOI: 10.4135/9781529770278.n19

CITATION READS

1 4,435

9 authors, including:

Karin Hannes Lynn Hendricks

KU Leuven Stellenbosch University
193 PUBLICATIONS 16,157 CITATIONS 54 PUBLICATIONS 332 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Miriam Mary Brgles Chloé Dierckx

Catholic University of Croatia KU Leuven
17 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS 7 PUBLICATIONS 19 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Leni Van Goidsenhoven on 12 April 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research
Design
Being Creative with Resources in Qualitative
Research

Author:Amarante Swift
Edited by:Uwe Flick
Book Title: The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Chapter Title: "Being Creative with Resources in Qualitative Research"
Pub. Date: 2022
Access Date: April 12, 2022
Publishing Company: SAGE Publications Ltd
City: 55 City Road
Print ISBN: 9781526484321
Online ISBN: 9781529770278
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781529770278.n19
Print pages: 290-306
© 2022 SAGE Publications Ltd All Rights Reserved.
This PDF has been generated from SAGE Knowledge. Please note that the pagination of the online
version will vary from the pagination of the print book.
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

Being Creative with Resources in Qualitative Research

Being creative with resources in qualitative research
Amarante Swift
Introduction
The value of qualitative research for investigating phenomena in response to complex societal challenges has
widely been acknowledged. Qualitative researchers have developed a range of strategies to push towards
positive change, in a scholarly climate wherein qualitative research projects have long been underfunded.
Access to finances and specialized staff makes our lives as researchers easier when designing our study.
However, the lack of funding or the absence of paid staff members on a project have not been obstacles for
all, as a substantial number of scholars successfully manage to design and conduct state-of-the-art qualitative
research projects. They develop empirically grounded theories, present disruptive ideas for change, establish
relevant conceptual frameworks or create valuable products in which they address the concerns of
professionals, policy makers and citizens.

Qualitative researchers are excellent maze runners and usually are very skilled in finding a way out of
the ever-changing societal labyrinth (see Figure 18.1). Qualitative researchers encounter several complex
pathways that unfold themselves before, during and after designing a study. These pathways may have
several entry points and a variety of exits to consider. In between, there is the choice of pattern we engage
with as individuals or groups of scholars. Some choices lead to the next level, others to a dead end. Our
task as researchers is to collect the clues along the pathways that lead to answers or perhaps a better
understanding of our study phenomenon. By carefully piecing the different clues together, we will be able to
open the gate to new knowledge, and representations like a journal article, a production, a master thesis, or
insights that will materialize themselves into positive change.

Figure 18.1 The maze-running qualitative scholar (artist: Chloé Dierckx)

For young researchers with limited expertise and time available for research, entering the maze may lead
to discomfort, particularly when they have to enter it alone. The key to successfully conducting qualitative
research is to approach the maze as a challenge rather than something that makes you uncomfortable. The
maze provides us with what we need: clues, people and places of interest. The resources we can rely on
while planning for or conducting qualitative research change under changing conditions. It means we have
to be open to use every ‘thing', work with every ‘one’ and be every ‘where’ to respond to the problem or
challenge we are investigating. This requires a researcher to approach a research design as an assemblage
of different resources, including the events or phenomena we study and the people we engage with as
well as the institutions and physical spaces where research takes place. People, things and places are all
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 2 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

valuable resources. It is practically impossible to consider them as separate entities, as they constantly intra-
act (Barad, 2007) with who we are as researchers. It is in the polylogue between different resources in a
research configuration that the design of a research project is negotiated, playfully and/or critically (Coemans
et al., 2020: 5).

This chapter builds on a combined approach of consulting scientific literature and tapping into the creative
minds of scholars, both junior and senior, who participated in a game-changer initiative on being creative with
resources, at the fourth edition of the European Congress of Qualitative Inquiry. The discussion was triggered
by a number of questions: how to gain resources, invent resources on the spot, appropriate resources,
bypass resources, work resource-free, create one's own resources or critique the very idea of resources in
qualitative inquiry. With the permission of the contributing congress delegates, we integrate their ideas into
this chapter and disseminate them freely. We acknowledge that every qualitative research endeavour begins
with an act of solidarity. We share knowledge frames, skills, insights, materials and collaborative spaces as
resources that facilitate progress. It is through the virtual scholarly identity Amarante Swift that we speak as a
collective. Amarante Swift goes by the gender-neutral pronoun ‘they, them and their'. It is the creative capacity
of their joint endeavour that sets the boundaries around the storylines produced. They share inspiring stories
based on the quotes and storylines they collected through playful encounters in academic spaces, such
as conferences, receptions, university buildings or just in the kitchens of our respective institutes. They will
discuss the idea of qualitative research projects AS a resource and illustrate what it means to be resourceful
IN qualitative inquiry. Amarante Swift proposes a list of strategies that qualitative researchers have considered
to design their projects, without necessarily depending on traditional resources like financial funding and paid
staff members.

Using Qualitative Inquiry as a Resource

Projects designed from a qualitative research perspective should contribute to the very foundation of
qualitative inquiry as ‘a democratic intellectual resource for the community’ (Torrance, 2014: 1112). The
most important question to ask in designing a qualitative research project concerns the study's worth, not
in terms of economic value and grant money but in terms of making a positive difference to society. Much
qualitative inquiry in the human and social sciences has a strong foothold in social justice and political
activism. Along these lines, major EU research projects may find in qualitative inquiry a central resource to
facilitate their goals of social improvement, social impact and innovation, community participation, complex
forms of collaboration, and inclusive social policies (von Jacobi et al., 2017; Moulaert and Mehmood, 2020).
Nevertheless, conducting high-quality research in a competitive scholarly environment remains a challenge
even for more experienced researchers. In the design phase of their study, qualitative researchers reflect
on how their qualitative research project can be used as a vehicle for the social, political agenda they wish
to accomplish, often in the absence of financial resources that cover their working costs. This is particularly
challenging in the initial phase of a project, where it is hard to predict which events will happen, which persons
they are going to encounter or what will become the focal point of our observation.

When I approach a new research study, I do not necessarily hold the social or the medical as a fixed frame
of reference or understanding all other things I encounter during my research, even though I am a scholar
trained in public health, social and behavioural sciences. I take into account my study environment, how
it comes into presence in relation to the questions I ask. Naturally, I stand in relation to the theoretical
frameworks and hypotheses I put forward, the research literature I select, the millions of voices on paper
and tapes I pull my insights from. In designing a study, I reflect on how these frameworks, philosophies,
methods, and study environments influence my interpretations. I allow these interpretations to shift in a
different direction. The pathways I am able to imagine are somehow linked to the academic culture and ethical
principles I was exposed to over the years. Even the machines and software packages I buy or the talents
of the staff members I work with strongly influence how I conceptualize, conduct and present research. My
research endeavour is an endless, ever changing configuration of relationships between people, things and
spaces. They materialize differently as a result of the discursive-material realities they are part of. If I tried to
box these relationships in from the start, I would exclude an entire range of possibilities from emerging on-
the-spot. I would also exclude an important learning possibility for myself. In writing up my design section, I
often choose to identify the elements in my research-assemblage as something to look into while being in the
field, rather than spelling out a stepwise approach of what I am actually going to do. (Karin, senior scholar)
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 3 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

Open-ended, qualitative research projects where the methodology and research design themselves are
part of the innovative experimental research effort are usually disadvantaged in traditional funding streams
(Braben, 2004; Langfeldt, 2006; Luukkonen, 2012; Roumbanis, 2017). More important is qualitative
researchers’ persistence in changing what needs to be changed through research. In a best-case scenario,
traditional resources such as finances, staff and institutional support are available right from the start. If not,
it should not prevent or discourage us to act upon an idea. In the absence of a clear strategy on how to best
design a study to tackle a complex problem, some questions need to be posed. It is in the creative decisions
on the design of such projects that the possibility for new imaginations occurs. It is in these moments that
researchers transcend pre-established definitions of resources: those we need to hold on to, those we may
need to reconsider, and those we can put aside to respond to emerging and critical events.

In 1985, a mud slide destroyed a Colombian village causing hundreds of deaths. In the short story ‘Of clay
we are created', Isabel Allende writes about Omayra Sanchéz, a 13-year-old girl trapped in the mud from her
neck down, whose slow and inevitable death became the focus of national and international media attention
(Allende, 1989/1994). Storms of reporters from across the globe flew to the disaster site to helplessly talk
about the tragedy. Among them was the photographer Rolf Carlé, who, as Isabel Allende tells, could no longer
watch Omayra's death relentlessly, as a mere bystander. He throws his camera aside and gets into the mud
to hug the girl as her heart collapses.

Rolf Carlé is ‘the vulnerable observer par excellence', as the ethnographer Ruth Behar writes (1996: 1). He
embodies the ethical dilemmas of any research in a critical setting done with the heart. He puts his most
important research resource aside. By doing this, he questions the researcher's role and position, the limits
of one's engagement in research, the fragility of the stories they collect or about the participants they engage
with (Gemignani, 2011). Rather than critiquing the distribution of resources, we invite scholars into developing
new conceptualizations about what a resource might be.

The idea that qualitative inquiry is a resource in itself, by which a number of different goals can be achieved,
makes some of the discussions about how to fund it redundant. We are called into a qualitative inquiry
space, from a variety of different positions and perspectives, because we believe that qualitative inquiry
has the ‘power for positive, ethical, communitarian change’ (Denzin et al., 2006: 779). We put ourselves
forward as qualitative scholars with specific characteristics: reflexivity, flexibility, openness, multimodality and
our extensive knowledge of interpretive, critical research paradigms (Lamnek and Krell, 2016). We write
our performative, self-referential, dramatic, scenic, poetic, iconographic, intimate, contemplative, symbolic,
discursive, creative and other qualities into the design of our projects as a resource.

Resources in Qualitative Inquiry

The concept of ‘resource’ has a particular conceptualization in relation to designing research projects. It
usually refers to funds, staff and institutional support available to be able to conduct research in the best
possible circumstances. These types of resources are meant to make things happen (or not) and should
therefore be perceived as a means to an end. Grants are useful to sponsor travel, buy equipment and hire
collaborators: supplies that create a comfortable situation for researchers to implement their projects. When
these supplies are available, researchers often do not have to compromise on their initial ideas about how to
best design a research project (see Cheek, Chapter 21, this Handbook).

For those working in a project-based research environment under severe time pressure and with little means
available, we offer three pathways towards qualitative inquiry:

1. Work with every ‘thing' that is available to achieve your goal.

2. Involve every ‘one' to build a sustainable network of ‘resourceful’ people.
3. Be every ‘where' interesting events related to your topic of research may happen.

In what follows, we share examples about how this could be done.

Work with Every ‘Thing'

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design

Page 4 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

The idea to start from nothing and arrive at something seems to find its echo and extension in the post-
human critique, that everything, and that includes qualitative inquiry, has become subjugated into a system
of property. Research projects are owned by researchers, controlled by their funders, and supported in their
quest for defending intellectual property rights over the sharing of ideas by the lawyers of their academic
institutes. Young scholars find themselves working in a research climate where qualitative inquiry projects are
increasingly subjected to a system of economic and competitive dynamics in society (Braidotti, 2013). This
suggests that we do research when and because money becomes available, rather than doing it because it
is valuable to society. Students may feel the pressure to ‘deliver’ and adopt a fast research culture in their
projects, many of them evaluated with criteria that are inappropriate for assessing the quality and value of
qualitative research. A key to the success of qualitative research is the ability to create the necessary material
conditions for it to happen.

I was a theatre maker, making theatre from scratch. Together with others I co-created pieces of theatre
with little means, making something out of nothing, being everything: actor, director, producer, prop maker,
set designer…It was a little later that I heard this summarised very well. I was at an event (actually at a
university) where a bunch of performance artists spoke. I think it was their book launch or something. The
book was called ‘13 Experiments in Hope'. One of the writers was also a founding member of the Clandestine
Insurgent Rebel Clown Army. They practiced non-violent civil disobedience and subversion, for example at
big demonstrations around international summits, as a form of activism targeting globalised consumerist
capitalism. So, this writer was being asked about resources for his activism and how he might be funding
himself and the materials he used by one of the academics. He was somewhat surprised though by the
scholar's thought that first you have to have funding before you can do anything else. The writer and activist
said something like: ‘If you need something, make it yourself. If you cannot make it, borrow it. If you cannot
borrow it, steal it. And only if all of these fail, buy it'.

As theatre makers, this is what we did. We made things like props and stage sets (if needed) ourselves,
often out of recycled materials. We borrowed costumes. Maybe we were a little reluctant to steal. But define
stealing! We certainly infringed copyright. Is this a form of stealing in a world where ideas can be personal or
corporate properties? Where a song or a phrase can be owned? I guess then it was easy for me to continue
in this vein as a researcher. I borrowed cameras. I bartered for space to do workshops in. And most of all I
take part in one of the only forms of legalised use of others’ ideas: academic citation. (Mark, fourth-year PhD
student)

Equally important is to adopt the idea that research data are not necessarily a ‘thing'. Data do not necessarily
need to be collected by staff members hired for a project or students, particularly when time for data collection
is limited. Working with existing data embraces the notion of serendipity: data are everywhere! Data are like
hidden treasures for researchers. We come across data when we browse in archives, yearbooks, marketing
material, legal acts, letters, discussions, polemics, reports, minutes of council meetings, strategic plans, etc.
They make us remember and allow for reconstructions of the past and fluid representations of the present.
They generate a foresight perspective. According to Lee (2019: 502), ‘serendipity has an important role
to play in the generation of unobtrusive measures'. We find, capture and retrieve them along the road.
Qualitative inquiry invites and engages us into encounters and events that leave a dazzling impression, spark
our curiosity, intrigue and provoke us. We are consciously involved in a process of solving the complex
puzzle of social, emotional, cultural, socio-political, biomedical, or economic life itself. We build on the past to
understand the present and to invent the future. We use fiction as a method of inquiry, but equally as a space
to reside in or a format to disseminate our thoughts and our images (Anthoni et al., 2021). We are data and
so are the materialities that surround us.

Coming to academia from art school, where taking time to experiment and embracing serendipity is
encouraged, I often feel restrained to include a whole range of data and insights because they cannot be
protocolized. Conversations with friends or colleagues, hearing something on the news, visiting an exhibition,
or just working in a different space as usual, all influence my thinking. However, since these events are not
formalized, I easily disregard them and don't take the time to properly record and analyse them. Though they
undoubtedly influence me and my research, they remain underexploited and hidden. In recent years, I came
to appreciate and acknowledge the potential of the concept of serendipity. I started to record the things that
trigger my thinking, however insignificant they might seem in the beginning. From the seed of a Maple tree

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design

Page 5 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

I once saw swirling through the air to a conversation on my research with a stranger on the train. Allowing
serendipity into the data collection is a way of allowing the messiness of the world to enter the qualitative
inquiry process and open up our understanding of ‘data’ as something which is in and around us and might
drift our way at unexpected times. Perhaps, most researchers are too focused on data collection as a work
package, something that needs to be done as part of a research cycle by qualified staff members hired on the
job. However, it was in my embrace of the idea of serendipity that many discussions about a lack of resources
actually became unnecessary. (Chloé, second-year PhD student)

To recognize the potential of a personal encounter with data, one must be mindful and open. Following the
presumption that ‘data, theories, writing, thinking, research, researchers, participants, past, future, present,
body-mind-material are entangled’ (Koro-Ljungberg et al., 2018: 479; see Koro et al., Chapter 10, this
Handbook), we might free ourselves from the rather stringent framework within which we tend to design
research. ‘Objectivity; obsessive concerns with individuating, sorting, and categorizing or the consensus of
disciplinary communities, IRBs, and so forth – leach our energies and constrain experimentation. Designed
to reproduce the same rather than encourage difference, they trap us in the given, the myth of Science’
(St. Pierre, 2013: 226). If we accept the idea that ‘data are ontological impossibilities in quantum worlds’
(Koro-Ljungberg et al., 2018: 464), for there is no separation between the researcher and the world he
or she studies, we enter a new reality of research that challenges the entire structure of conventional
humanist qualitative inquiry: its methods, its processes, what we might consider data and the epistemological
assumptions that underpin our habits of mind and scholarly behaviour (St. Pierre, 2013). The project-bound
logic of many of our qualitative inquiries requires us to balance planning with uncertainty. When research time
is limited, developing a time and location map could be helpful as guidance. Such a map can be physical
or virtual. It allows us to add details to each stage of the plan post-hoc: notes, photos, interviews, copies of
archives, posters, tickets and other resources we have collected in the field (see Figure 18.2).

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design

Page 6 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

Figure 18.2 Time plan project ‘20:30 Bruxsels Talks: A future fiction radio show script
for change’ (Anthoni et. al., 2021)
Although these plans may help researchers to evaluate whether they are ‘on track', the emergent practice
of qualitative research goes hand in hand with adapting their study designs and data-collection methods
when environmental conditions and circumstances change. In the period 2019–21, the COVID-19 pandemic
strongly affected the way qualitative research was conducted. Social distancing restricted traditional face-
to-face investigations and fieldwork of all kinds. Therefore, many researchers quickly switched to digital
methods. Online and remote strategies offered greater flexibility in time and location of data collection
while simultaneously taking into account health and safety restrictions. The transformation also prompted
institutions to invest in digital security to comply with ethical regulations on confidentiality and logistical needs
such as equipment, computer, camera, microphone, mobile phone, etc. (Lobe et al., 2020). It also raised
questions about respondents in a video call at home or other environments being potentially overheard.

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design

Page 7 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

Whenever a crisis event happens, I start digging for useful resources from research colleagues to ease
the switch from the normal to the exceptional. For example, useful resources for the digital transformation
in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic include the ‘LSE Digital Ethnographic Collective Reading List’ and
Deborah Lupton's (2020a) ‘Doing Fieldwork in a Pandemic'. The authors crowd-sourced the net and invited
the scholarly community to provide input on creative data sampling and collection methods. I found out that
the most obvious solution to replicate face-to-face interviews and focus groups is the use of video-calling
(e.g., Skype/Zoom), live streaming apps (e.g., Periscope, StreamNow) or text-based instant messaging (e.g.,
Signal, WhatsApp) (Lobe, Morgan, Hoffman 2020). These video-calling sessions can be complimented by
other methods, such as online discussion groups on Facebook, Instagram, WordPress to share photos,
afterthoughts, writing a story together and giving comments on it, or keeping online diaries by using a shared
Google.doc. A number of qualifying adjectives have come to be applied creatively to the term ‘ethnography',
including e.g., duo- or collective ethnography, digital ethnography and ethnography 2.0 (Hammersley, 2018),
as well as Story Completion Methods for use in an online environment. Story completion methods introduce
fictional characters who commonly face a dilemma they need to resolve. Participants are asked to complete
the story. The completed narratives are then analysed for what they reveal about understandings, discourses
or imaginaries concerning the topic of the story stems (Lupton, 2020b). I also find it rewarding to make my
own voice central to my inquiry in the absence of others, or to set up a written dialogue with colleagues that
serves as data. (Leni, post-doctoral researcher)

New situations and conditions create other possibilities and most likely an opportunity to learn. We reorient
ourselves when the people we study no longer appear in their natural environment, the workspace or social
institutions (e.g., due to governmental lockdown policies) or when face-to-face contact is discouraged or
practically impossible (e.g., due to geographical distance). We switch to photovoice, videovoice and photo
elicitation to put participants in control of the process. We let them use their own (wearable) cameras or voice-
recording apps to take photos, make videos or voice memos about their everyday practices and interactions
that they can then share with the researchers. Also, the answers participants give in writing (e.g., as diaries)
as an alternative to interviews do not need further transcribing. These answers are usually shorter, yet
still very rich. When analysing data, researchers can make time-saving decisions. Most researchers use
an analytical strategy linked to a particular methodology (e.g., constant comparative analysis promoted in
grounded theory; see Thornberg and Keane, Chapter 27, this Handbook) or a standard approach described in
literature (thematic analysis, narrative analysis, content analysis, network analysis, visual analysis, etc.). Yet,
when time is limited, the usefulness of transcriptions might be the main criterion to decide on what content
to select and how to proceed with its interpretation (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009). Usefulness may be found
in relational rather than material aspects of, for example, an interview: non-verbal communications, humour,
irony, fieldnotes, and transgressive data (St. Pierre, 1997). If we accept that we always actively select what to
transcribe, taking a collaborative stance to data collection using selective transcription seems to be the most
appropriate approach.

Faced with an overwhelming amount of interview data, we as well as other qualitative researchers often
wonder if it is necessary to transcribe or keep transcribing interviews in their entirety. Could we selectively
transcribe only those passages of an interview that are relevant to the research questions and goals? Or is it
really important to transcribe in great detail to ensure validity and reduce the risk of perceiving only those data
that meet the researcher's expectations? We think that in any act of transcribing choices are made – whether
consciously or not – as there is no such a thing as a perfect transcription. Think about a very short sentence:
someone in an interview said ‘Yes'. Was it a tentative or very assured ‘Yes'? Or maybe an ironic one? If you
write that it was ironic, are you ascribing your own meaning? If you do not write anything at all, you also
change a potential meaning. If you are trying to measure the length it took to say the word, the melody of the
sound or tone, you will always only get approximations. The selection for transcription could happen together
with the interviewee to question if the choices still feel true to what they meant. (Marco, senior scholar, and
Mark, fourth-year PhD student)

Involve Every ‘One'

Researchers often enter the lives of ordinary citizens uninvited. They request attention or try to influence
people's behaviour, perceptions, and affects. Several qualitative scholars are engaged in intervention studies,
often to study feasibility and applicability aspects of interventions or to identify under which conditions an
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 8 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

intervention seems meaningful to participants (Hannes, 2019). Such interventions may disempower citizens
or communities rather than build capacity to stimulate self-organization and sustainable initiatives. Therefore,
an important resource for any qualitative researcher is the people with whom they share a common goal and
who can help them realize a shared research ambition. Naturally, this poses challenges to the design of a
study. Rather than trying to protocolize designs and practices from within a project-based logic, working with
people moves us into the position of a facilitator who creates a shared space for thought and action (Dierckx
et al., 2020).

Being an urban researcher and PhD student, I got an opportunity to teach in a master program in urban
planning. Urban development and planning are an unpredictable field, with many stakeholders involved.
The field often moves quicker than the peer-review rounds organized in the context of selection procedures
for research grants. Master students’ fieldwork and action research projects have been an alternative way
to act upon these developments with on-the-spot research activities: by establishing partnerships with city
authorities and organisations, we could jointly conduct small and quick research projects on urban wicked
problems through citizen engagement. All parties benefited: the citizens engaged in an in-depth participatory
process could fine-tune and communicate their concerns and ideas about their neighbourhood with some
support from the students. The students gained valuable real-life and research experience with citizens and
authorities, while setting up their own research project with the support of the city and educators and by
building on other research projects. Authorities on their turn gained fresh insights and a better dialogue
with their citizens and the civic sector through the supervised student work, while the staff could use their
educational work as a source of data through meta-reflection on the process, for example on pedagogic
aspects around participatory methods. As the outcomes of this action research are directly disseminated
among citizens and city authorities, the boundaries between citizens, students, researchers, educators, and
city become blurred, which often complicates the qualitative inquiry process. However, these projects always
initiate new ways of solidarity. This way, resources are clustered into covalent connections (Hanne, first-year
PhD student).

Engaging master students and young researchers in qualitative inquiry is most interesting. They come from
different contexts, families, and places. They bring into play their unique storylines and thoughts from many
lives that otherwise would remain hidden to us, including the lies about the lives they are currently not leading
(Barnes, 2007: 123). These inform researchers about young people's desired futures. Affiliated with a range
of methodological approaches, including feminist new materialism (Davies, 2018; see Hawkey and Ussher,
Chapter 11, this Handbook) and research in a more-than human world (Springgay and Truman, 2018), the
classical dichotomies of object/subject, self/other, and researcher/researched are altered in favour of a more
empathic relationship and a more open process of crafting research questions in the relationship between
different agents (Gemignani, 2011; Manning, 2016). Applied to resources in qualitative inquiry, the idea of
‘multivoicedness’ (Elden, 2013) may perhaps complicate the process of designing research. At the same time,
polyvocality may also help researchers understand the chaotic and constrained social realities we ourselves
are part of (Mazzei and Jackson, 2009). It is therefore a crucial element to consider in the design phase: who
and what do we consult and what role are they allowed to play in our research project?

Because I am interested in the different roles and potentialities of ‘experiential knowledge’ in the context of
mental health care and neurodevelopmental diversity, I work closely together with ‘participants'. I always look
for dialogical ways of doing research – ways that are receptive to possibilities that lead to flourishing of both
researcher and participant and emphasize a relational ontology which holds that people and entities come
into being through relationships. This means, for instance, that I don't conduct interviews, but look for ways
to open in-depth conversations. The conversations mostly lead us also to creations; we often create things
(i.e., drawings, films, blog texts, etc.). During these co-creation processes – which can last for several months
or sometimes years – we become intimately entangled. We also text each other if we encounter something
interesting in the context of our project, we e-mail our thoughts, we share information by using social media
or just sit together in a park. After analysing the conversations and creations (i.e., research material), I go
back to the participant and discuss the analyses with her, which again generates new questions to discuss
in following conversations, which can in turn be analysed (Van Goidsenhoven and De Schauwer, 2020). This
process is repeated until a saturation point is reached – felt by both the researcher and participant. Topics
that emerge during such an iterative process are often also linked to the creative products we make. In my
experience, the conversation does not stop when a project is finished. Although the intensity can change,
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 9 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

stories and experiences keep circulating after the project deadline. Life goes on and the line remains open.
This is the catalyst that generates significant knowledge without it being bounded by a (funded) project. (Leni,
post-doctoral researcher)

Relationality and closeness are key concepts associated with the ‘empirical’ in qualitative research (Koro-
Ljungberg, MacLure, & Ulmer, 2018; St. Pierre et al., 2016). After extended periods of intimate collaborations
and empathic dialogues, some degree of emotional identification with the participants is inevitable
(Gemignani, 2011). The emotional bond between researcher and participant based on intimacy, trust and
hope does not dissolve at the end of the professional commitment. When a research project ends, the
participants may feel a sense of loss that may be hard to manage. For the researcher, the project may lead to
academic recognition and a new line in the CV. For the student, it may lead to a positive score on their thesis
project. For the participants though, the project is their everyday life. Hope often comes from the possibility
of being understood and from challenging invisibility. When a researcher recognizes experiences, events and
phenomena as important, they become more important also to those who lived them. This recognition by
the researcher and the chance of talking or processing experiences and events after the project's deadline
are helpful to develop meanings both for those who lived them and for the community in general, as stories
that are made public may further social awareness and political actions. It is of crucial importance to think
this through in your design and in conversation with your ethics board. The value of such reflection is not
in a possible straight answer but in its power to critically engage researchers and participants (Gemignani,
2017). Eventually, this is a matter of representation and, as such, it includes both an epistemological and an
ethical-political dimension; who owns what and for how long? This should be made explicit when presenting
the design plan. Some ideas might live long beyond the purpose for which they have initially been developed.

We all speak about being inclusive and securing equal opportunities for all. But what does that mean in
scholarly practice, where financial resources are limited and where we have to choose who gets the privilege
to participate in a congress, who will be pitched as the first author on a paper, or whose open-access fee
we will be able to cover? Over time, I came to experience the responsibility of choosing among people as a
burden in building trustworthy relationships. I created Amarante Swift, a virtual scholarly identity adopting the
gender-neutral pronoun ‘they, them and their'. Amarante Swift already appeared at a number of qualitative
research congresses. ‘They’ were initially created to allow nine different staff members from my research
group to engage with the sessions of their choice at a congress that was far too expensive to secure a spot for
all. ‘They’ operated under the same name tag, in a sequential order, depending on their personal preferences.
A flawless plan was designed in advance. Passing the tag felt similar to passing the baton from one runner
to another. Amarante Swift has grown out of ‘their’ status of a budget-saving hands-on solution. ‘They’ are a
collective scholarly voice permanently in-the-making. ‘They’ appear as the author of this chapter, in a different
configuration of people. For me, Amarante Swift is the ultimate resource through which a sustainable form
of collaboration and fast access to new ideas can be secured. Collective authorship provides opportunities
for young scholars and students to engage in important academic debates from the perspective of equal
intelligence, in an atmosphere that is stripped from any form of hierarchical relationship and where everyone's
contribution is awarded with a joint first authorship (Karin, senior scholar).

There is no limit to participation and collaboration as long as the idea of collaboration is a central part of the
research philosophy, design and representation. It can be as simple as opening a discussion line, commenting
on someone else's work or developing a panel for a congress contribution. In later phases, it may evolve into
a joint research proposal, master thesis projects or a writers’ collective. One of the first research and writers’
collectives in history was the Bourbaki group, named after the famous mathematician, Nicolas Bourbaki. It
was founded in 1934, originally to prepare a methods book on mathematical analysis in response to the
effects of the First World War, which caused the death of a generation of French mathematicians. Over time,
the writers’ collective produced a large series of textbooks commonly known as the ‘elements of mathematics’
(Beaulieu, 1999). In the last couple of years, the interest for collaborative research and writing projects has
increased. Notable examples include The Bodies Collective (2021) and the Arts-based Research Global
Consortium (Gerber et al., 2020). Both initiatives originated from the game-changer programme launched
by the European Network for Qualitative Inquiry. Despite logistical challenges (e.g., time-zone differences)
there is the intellectual challenge of merging perspectives and voices from different cultures and language
communities, or the search for the right balance between a non-hierarchical structure and leadership to spark
creativity. It is the breadth and depth of ideas generated in such collectives make the effort worthwhile (The
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 10 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

Bodies Collective, 2021).

Be Every ‘Where'
Physical places are key resources in qualitative inquiry, particularly when conducting fieldwork to examine
cultures, structures, interaction patterns among people or between humans and their living environment.
The theatre, café, town square, libraries, cinemas, a particular neighbourhood, or the bench on the corner
of the street are all places where people can meet. In addition, virtual spaces such as social networks
(e.g., Facebook or Instagram), YouTube channels, personal pages of influencers, official webpages of
organizations, health care or policy institutes, and Second Life environments are all powerful assets in
qualitative research (see the Chapters in Part VII, this Handbook). Such spaces provide access to the
communities we are interested in. Some of these communities are very close to who we are as researchers.
This creates an opportunity to consider their members as key decision makers in our research, rather than a
data resource to pull information from (Musesengwa and Chimbari, 2017).

During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, our participatory research project in a local community was
suspended due to the health vulnerabilities of participants. The research was proudly supported by the
community from its inception, hailing it as a triumph for one of its own (the researcher), successfully moving
forward in their career. Access to community, availability of interview sites, support from local leaders,
attention from the media all promoted and supported the research and increased the feasibility of the
research. Upon the temporary suspension of the project, the researcher supported the community in other
ways through participating in volunteering opportunities and food relief for those most severely hit by the
pandemic. This strengthened the community's trust in the researcher and confidence in the project. Twelve
months into the pandemic community members were still invested in the project. This suggests that they are
more than a data resource; they are the blood vessels passing oxygen to the project through the COVID-19
pandemic. (Lynn, third-year PhD student)

When time is limited and you have a choice about whom to engage with or what sort of project to conduct,
consider to work collaboratively with and through groups of people that share a particular interest or work on
a common cause to address issues affecting well-being. Geographic proximity can be a facilitator here, as
is a genuine interest of the researcher in the group's aspirations. The inclusion and partnerships with local
research and community members start to move the conversation from those people to ‘our’ people – and we
become one another's resource on many different levels. Investing in relationships with participants, scholars
and all the things that are near to you, whether they are physical or part of your virtual networks, intensifies
your capacity to listen, create, experiment and breathe in a local atmosphere that fully nurtures your research
assemblage and creates opportunities for developing a sustainable bond with a community over time. Next
time you come up with an idea, they will be there for you to help design the plan.

As a young researcher, I was often driven by the need to explore new settings and innovative topics remaining
blind for the possibilities to study familiar contexts and communities. One of my professors gave me the
advice to take a familiar topic and study it in a new, unknown context or to select a familiar context to work on
a topic I did not have expertise in yet, without overdoing the unknown factors. It turned out to be an excellent
trigger for my whole group of master students planning their research design. The idea was to be strategic
and build on our existing knowledge, networks, and infrastructures. Interested in the topic of change and
spatial justice, I decided to return to a city in Uganda where I had previously undertaken fieldwork to study
the appropriation and transformation of colonial heritage, a topic I had not studied before. By choosing this
familiar context, I could rely on previously established contacts with individuals, organizations and institutions,
contextual knowledge and insights in place dynamics to design and set up the fieldwork project with limited
time and resources at hand. I also saved time selecting the specific streets I would study, by walking them
in advance; reaching out to community members, government officials or other researchers, or finding a
place to organize a community exhibition as I reconnected with the network I had built up before. While extra
attention is required to reflect on assumptions related to our personal history in the research setting, linking
data collection to other aspects of our life (previous experiences, including volunteering, social network,
community, etc.) and pooling resources really sparked my motivation (Hanne, first-year PhD student)

Time in relation to place also refers to ‘that time of the day’ when things get interesting. When designing a
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 11 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

study, this element of being in the right place at the right moment should be taken into account, particularly
when our time window to collect relevant data is short and we don't have the luxury to use a multiple range of
data-collection techniques in a sequential order. Focal-sampling procedures usually work well in the design
of shorter, project-based qualitative studies. In focal sampling, one observes for a specified period of time
a particular sample unit, such as an individual or a group, and records all instances of relevant behaviour
occurring during that timeframe (Lee, 2019). It requires you to find and liaise with important gatekeepers that
can provide access to the environment or the scene you are interested in. To put it in theatre terms, make sure
you have access to the stage and the backstage. It is in the informal atmosphere that people find it easier to
talk to researchers or make arrangements for a more formal meeting.

There I was, collecting visual data (e.g., details of the stairs and façade of a cultural temple, the atmosphere
at the square where it was located, self-photographs) for the interviews I was planning to do in a theatre
building, hoping that they would spark reactions in participants, in my case the audience of a theatre play. I
knew that the audience I wanted to question would gather on the square before and after the performance.
I observed it the week before. It felt convenient taking pictures, because for outdoor photography I did not
need permission of the ethics board. At least, I could already start my research awaiting their advice on
the submitted proposal. Naturally, I also entered the theatre building as I wanted to engage as an in-situ
researcher, using a combination of unobtrusive methods like participatory observation and interviews with
members of the audience. These were held in the foyer or theatre café. I went to the theatre play myself,
which allowed me to open up a conversation about the play as an icebreaker. It also allowed me to describe
the atmosphere before the performance, during breaks and after the performance, and deeply explore the
audience's movement in the theatre space. From approaching different people, I also learned that it is easier
for an audience to agree on participation in research if their acquaintances or friends also participate. (Myriam
Mary, post-doctoral researcher)

Resources for Designing Qualitative Research

From persuading gatekeepers to engaging in deep and lasting relationships resulting from unexpected
encounters or moving through strange environments, what we want to secure in research is continuous
growth in insight. The stories we shared invite you to give time and attention to troubling periods that
characterize qualitative inquiry and to invent your way out of the maze. Look for the hidden clues around each
corner. Use upcycled material, found objects (see Woodward, Chapter 47, this Handbook) and data streams
that surround you as an alternative to the often expensive material funded through a monetary stream of
support. Engage with poetry, billboards, street-art murals, data repositories, flows of people and things that
can be observed and interpreted to create new theories or spark imaginary power. Spend a short time talking
to archivists and librarians when working with archives or secondary data to get your data faster and save
time in the initial stage of research. Let them prepare the box you need and organize a pickup moment. Use
software tools available where possible. Alternatively, crawl underneath the hedges of the maze to bypass
the technical aspects and find a wall to draw on. Enter the workshops of others as an unexpected or even
uninvited guest to learn, sense and appropriate what has been learned in your own project. Valorize your
insights using creative dissemination formats. Point people to performative pieces that have made it into a
top journal such as The Lancet. A nice example of a high-impact multimodal type of publication is Marisa de
Andrade's (2018) version of ‘measuring humanity’ through hip hop as an evidence base for describing existing
health-related inequalities. Make a case for the inclusion of creative work in your university's repository of
academic output as a way of increasing visibility for the extra miles you walked.

Once a research idea is conceptualized, it would be a loss to not share it with other potential parties of
interest. If the most evident, traditional funding channels don't work out, check for smaller grants available
for innovative, explorative work. Pitching an idea at the policy level could help, particularly when it has a
socio-cultural impact or raises citizens’ awareness. One of the main advantages of qualitative research is that
its methods are usually flexible and easy to adapt for the study of politically sensitive situations or events.
Equally, private funders or philanthropic organizations might be more willing to fund research with open
endings. Therefore, pay attention to those funders even after you have won their trust. Deliver a high-quality
report and disseminate copies of the work, invite funders for seminars, bring out your stories in the press, and
thank sponsors publicly for their support. If you have a longer-term perspective as a qualitative researcher,
start small, gain success, and build your portfolio of resources incrementally as a way of creating a record
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 12 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

of initiatives and valorized papers. Building a reputation for qualitative work facilitates the success rate for
grants (Gray and Cole, 2008). In the absence of resources to conduct large projects, allow yourself to travel
to meet others. Organize a party to generate income to support your research ambition. Consider the option
to crowdfund your study through an established platform. Nothing is more rewarding than citizens funding or
investing time in your project because to them it is worth investing in.

More importantly, link up with several special interest groups and collectives to write, think, create together.
Scholars from different disciplines are happy to serve as each other's critical resource: ‘Transcending
disciplinary silos, cultural divisions, and other man-made societal constructions, is particularly impactful in
crossing social and geo-political boundaries engaging multiple audiences in meaningful, transformative social
discourse’ (Gerber et al., 2020: 9). Above all, check your own pockets. Perhaps you are carrying the decisive
clue with you without realizing. Sometimes the gates you wish to open up are heavily guarded and it might
feel safer to return and choose a safer path. You are most welcome to reproduce what others have proposed
before, or what Amarante Swift proposes in this chapter, as long as it helps you in achieving your goals.

The storylines provided all stress the importance of unexpected encounters with things, places and other
people. Building sustainable partnerships across disciplinary borders are described by many as an important
key to success, as different partners bring different resources to the table. Being resourceful is the ability to
engage the right people and the right things at the right time and in the right place. Every qualitative research
endeavour therefore begins with an act of solidarity: the sharing of ideas, knowledge frames, skills, materials,
spaces and built environments, as resources that facilitate progress in qualitative inquiry.

In pointing out some considerations, potentialities and ethical or methodological questions about the type
of relationship aspired between researchers and participants, the phenomenon under study and the
environment in which things happen, we can rely on the work of Lisa Tillmann-Healy (2003: 734) who coined
the term ‘friendship as method'. Friendship as method's primary procedures ‘are those we use to build and
sustain friendship: conversation, everyday involvement, compassion, giving, and vulnerability'. A project's
design issues emerge organically in the ebb and flow of everyday life: leisurely walks, household projects,
activist campaigns, separations, reconciliations, losses, recoveries. Qualitative inquiry as a resource uses the
concept of collaboration as a political principle through which mutually life-enhancing opportunities for others
can be created, precisely because it is grounded in the interdependency of our existence (Eagleton, 2003).

To be resourceful means to invest in or cultivate relationships in a way that allows you to realize your nature
as a qualitative inquirer, allows others to develop themselves and allows our environment to remain intact.
The establishment of sustainable and ethical responsible relationships with all elements that are part of our
research assemblage certainly influences the rhythm of doing research. Change allows our environment
to remain intact into process rather than product (i.e., what happens in a research encounter cannot be
anticipated prior to that encounter) and is focused on ways to let the ‘researched’ shape what matters. Being
resourceful thus means living the luxury of establishing meaningful relationships with other humans, non-
humans and our academic socio-political-economic-cultural-structural-spatial realities. It sets the boundaries
of what we safely can explore, but also what is destined to be disrupted via qualitative inquiry if we take the
distribution of resources among researchers seriously. In designing a qualitative research project, the central
question should always be: who or what are we designing this study for?

Further Reading
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy as practice: Research directions and
resources. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Konecki, K. T. (2019). Creative thinking in qualitative research and analysis. Qualitative Sociology Review,
15(3), 6–25.
Lee, R. M., & Esterhuizen, L. (2000). Computer software and qualitative analysis: Trends, issues and
resources. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(3), 231–43.
Pelias, R. J. (2019). The creative qualitative researcher. Writing that makes readers want to read. Oxford;
New York: Routledge.
References
Allende, I. (1989/1994). And of clay are we created. In The Stories of Eva Luna. London: Penguin.
Anthoni, E., Balwani, K., Schoffelen, J., & Hannes, K. (2021). 20:30 BRUXSELS TALKS: Fiction as a method,
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 13 of 15
SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

fiction as a format, fiction as a space for participation. Art/Research International: A Transdisciplinary Journal,
6(1), 56–83. https://doi.org/10.18432/ari29553
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and
meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Barnes, J. (2007). Flaubertova papiga. Zagreb: Celeber.
Beaulieu, L. (1999). Bourbaki's art of memory. Osiris, 14, 219–51.
Behar, R. (1996). The vulnerable observer: Anthropology that breaks your heart. Boston: Beacon Press.
The Bodies Collective (2021). Bodyography as activism in qualitative inquiry: The Bodies Collective at
ECQI19. International Review of Qualitative Research, 14(1), 104–21.
Braben, D. W. (2004). Pioneering research: A risk worth taking. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge UK: Polity.
Coemans, S., Vrebos, H., & Hannes, K. (2020). Emplacement. In P. Atkinson, S. Delamont, A. Cernat, J.
W. Sakshaug, & R. A. Williams (eds), SAGE Research Methods Foundations. https://www.doi.org/10.4135/
9781526421036939916
Davies, B. (2018). Ethics and the new materialism: A brief genealogy of the ‘post’ philosophies in the social
sciences. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 39(1), 113–27.
de Andrade, M. (2018). Measuring humanity: Hip-hop as evidence for health inequalities. Lancet, 391(10128),
1340–1.
Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., & Giardina, M. D. (2006). Disciplining qualitative research. International Journal
of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(6), 769–82.
Dierckx, C., Hendricks, L. (joint first authors), Coemans, S., & Hannes, K. (2020). The third sphere:
Reconceptualising allyship in community based participatory research praxis. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 18(4), 473–97.
Eagleton, T. (2003). After theory. New York: Basic Books.
Elden, S. (2013). Inviting the messy: Drawing methods and ‘children's voices'. Childhood, 20(1), 66–81.
Gemignani, M. (2011). Between researcher and researched: An introduction to countertransference in
qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(8), 701–8.
Gemignani, M. (2017). Toward a critical reflexivity in qualitative inquiry: Relational and post-humanist
reflections on realism, researcher's centrality, and representationalism in reflexivity. Qualitative Psychology,
4(2), 185–98.
Gerber, N., Biffi, E., Biondo, J., Gemignani, M., Hannes, K., & Siegesmund, R. (2020). Arts-based research
in the social and health sciences: Pushing for change with an interdisciplinary global arts-based research
initiative. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 21(2), Art. 30.
Gray, R., & Cole, A. L. (2008). Money worries: Tackling the challenges of funding arts-related research. In J.
G. Knowles & A. L. Cole (eds), Handbook of the arts in qualitative research (pp. 503–9). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Hammersley, M. (2018). What is ethnography? Can it survive? Should it? Ethnography and Education, 13(1),
1–17.
Hannes, K. (2019). Qualitative evidence synthesis. In P. Atkinson, S. Delamont, A. Cernat, J. W. Sakshaug,
& R. A. Williams (eds), SAGE Research Methods Foundations. London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/
9781526421036838863
Koro-Ljungberg, M., MacLure, M., & Ulmer, J. (2018). d…a…t…a, data++, data, and some problematics. In
N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (eds), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (
5
th edn.) (pp. 462–484). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd
edn). London: Sage.
Lamnek, S., & Krell, C. (2016). Qualitative Sozialforschung (
6
th ed). Weinheim: Beltz PVU.
Langfeldt, L. (2006). The policy challenges of peer review: Managing bias, conflict of interests and
interdisciplinary assessments. Research Evaluation, 15(1), 31–41.
Lee, R. M. (2019). Unobtrusive methods. In P. Liamputtong (ed.), Handbook of research methods in health
social sciences (pp. 491–507). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Lobe, B., Morgan D., & Hoffman, K. A. (2020). Qualitative data collection in an era of social distancing.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Published first online, 7 July 2020. doi:10.1177/
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design
Page 14 of 15
 SAGE SAGE Reference
© Uwe Flick, 2022

1609406920937875.
Lupton, D. (2020a). Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd-sourced document). Downloaded from:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1clGjGABB2h2qbduTgfqribHmog9B6P0NvMgVuiHZCl8/edit
Lupton, D. (2020b). The story completion method and more-than-human theory: Finding and using health
information. Sage Research Methods Cases. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://methods.sagepub.com/case/
story-completion-method-more-than-human-theory-health-information
Luukkonen, T. (2012). Conservatism and risk-taking in peer review: Emerging ERC practices. Research
Evaluation, 21(1), 48–60.
Manning, E. (2016). The minor gesture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Mazzei, L. A., & Jackson, A. Y. (2009). Introduction: The limit of voice. In A. Y. Jackson & L. A. Mazzei
(eds), Voice in qualitative inquiry: Challenging conventional, interpretive, and critical conceptions in qualitative
research (pp. 1–13). London: Routledge.
Moulaert, F., & Mehmood, A. (2020). Towards a social innovation (SI) based epistemology in local
development analysis: Lessons from twenty years of EU research. European Planning Studies, 28(3),
434–53.
Musesengwa, R., & Chimbari, M. J. (2017). Experiences of community members and researchers on
community engagement in an Ecohealth project in South Africa and Zimbabwe. BMC Medical Ethics, 18: Art.
76.
Roumbanis, L. (2017). Academic judgments under uncertainty: A study of collective anchoring effects in
Swedish Research Council panel groups. Social Studies of Science, 47(1), 95–116.
Springgay, S., & Truman, S. (2018). On the need for methods beyond proceduralism: Speculative middles,
(in)tensions, and response-ability in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(3), 204–14.
St. Pierre, E. A. (1997). Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. International Journal
of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(2), 175–89.
St. Pierre, E. A. (2013). The appearance of data. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 13(4), 223–7.
St. Pierre, E. A., Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (2016). New empiricisms and new materialisms: Conditions
for new inquiry. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 16(2), 99–110.
Tillmann-Healy, L. M. (2003). Friendship as method. Qualitative Inquiry, 9(5), 729–49.
Torrance, H. (2014). Qualitative research in the United Kingdom: Short-term problems, long-term issues.
Qualitative Inquiry, 20(9), 1110–18.
Van Goidsenhoven, L., & De Schauwer, E. (2020). Listening beyond words: Swinging together. Scandinavian
Journal of Disability Research, 22(1), 330–9.
von Jacobi, N., Edmiston, D., & Ziegler, R. (2017). Tackling marginalisation through social innovation?
Examining the EU Social Innovation Policy Agenda from a capabilities perspective. Journal of Human
Development and Capabilities, 18(2), 148–62.

• qualitative research
• research design

http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781529770278.n19

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design

Page 15 of 15

View publication stats