The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ym Edition Edited by Norman K. Denzin University of Iinois, Urbana-Champaign Yvonna 8S. Lincoln Texas A&M University @SAGE Sage publications 2orlINTRODUCTION The Discipline and Practice of Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln he global community of qualitative researchers is mid- way between two extremes, searching fora new middle, moving in several diferent directions atthe same time! ‘Mixed methodologies and call for scientifically based research, ‘on the one side, renewed call for social justice inquiry from the titcal social science tradition on the other. In the method: logical struggles of the 1970s and 1980s, the very existence of qualitative research was at issue. Inthe new paradigm wat, “every overtly social justice-orientd approach to research. threatened with de lgitimization by the government-sanctoned, exclusivst assertion of positivism... as the ‘gold standard’ of educational research’ (Wright, 2006, pp. 799-800). The evidence-based research movement, with its fixed standacds and guidelines for conducting and evaluating qualitative inquiry, sought total domination: one shoe fits all (Cannella & Lincoln, Chapter 5 this volume; Lincoln, 2010) The heart ofthe matter turns on issues surrounding the poli tics and ethics of evidence and the value of qualitative work in addressing matters of equity and social justice (Torrance, Chapter 34, this volume). Inthis introductory chapter, we cfin the fed of qualitative research, then navigate, chart, and review the history of qualita tive research in the human disciplines. Ths will allow us to ‘locate this handbook and its contents within their historical moments. (These historical moments are somewhat artificial ‘they are socially constructed, quasthistorical, and overlapping ‘conventions. Nevertheless, they permit a “performance” of developing ideas. They also facilitate an increasing sensitivity to and sophistication about the pitfalls and promises of ethnogea- ‘phy and qualitative research.) A conceptual framework for read- ing the qualitative research act as a multicultural, gendered [process is presented. Qualitative Research We then provide a brief introduction to the chapters, con- cluding with a brief discussion of qualitative research We will also discuss the threats to qualitative human-subject research from the methodological conservatism movement, which was noted in our Preface. As indicted there, we use the metaphor of the bridge to structure wha follows. This volume provides a bridge between historicl moments, politics, the decolonization project, research methods, paradigms, and communities of interpretive scholars. History, Pournics, ano Parapicass To belle understand where we wre wday and wo beter grasp current eritisms, iti useful to return tothe so-aledpara- ign wars of the 1980s, which resulted in the serious crippling of quantitative research in education. Critical pedagogy, critical theorists, and feminist analyses fostered struggles to acquire power and cultural capital forthe poor non-whites, women, and ‘gays (Gage, 1989). Charles Tedlie and Abbas Tashakkors history is helpful here. They expand the time frame ofthe 198s war to embrace atleast three paradigm wars,o period of conflict: the postpos- itivst-construtivist war aginst positivism (1970-1990); the conflict between competing postpostvst, constructivist, and ertcal theory paradigms (1990-2005); andthe current conict between evidence-based methodologsts and the mixed meth- cds, imerpretve and critical theory schools (2005~present) Egon Guba (1990a) The Paradigm Dialog signaled an end to the 1980s wars. Postpostvsts, constructvss and cial theo- rit talked to one another, working through sues connected to ethics, field studies, praxis, eiteri, knowledge accumulation,| | 2m THESAGE HANDBOOK OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ‘ruth, significance, graduate training values, and politics. By the carly 19%, there was an explosion of published work on qualita: tive research; handbooks and new journals appeared. Special interest groups commited to particular paradigms appeared, some with ther own journals? The second paradigm confict occurred within the mixed ‘methods community and involved disputes “between indi- viduals cenvinced of the ‘paradigm purity’ of their own posi tion? (Tediie & Tashakkori,2003b,p. 7). Purists extended and Fepeated the argument that quantitative and qualitative meth- ods and postpositivism and the other “isms” cannot be com- bined because of the differences between their underlying paradigm assumptions. On the methodological front, the incompatisiity thesis was challenged by those who invoked triangulation as a way of combining multiple methods to study the same phenomenon (Tele & Tashakori,2003a,. 7). This ushered in a new round of arguments and debates over paradigm superiority, A soft, epoitical pragmatic paradigm emerged in the post- 1990 period. Suddenly, quantitative and qualitative methods became compatible and researchers could use both in their empirical inquires (Tedlie & Tashakkori, 2003s, p. 7) Propo- nents made appeals to a “what works pragmatic argument, contending that “no incompatibility between quantitative and ‘qualitative methods exist at either the level of practice or that of epistemelogy.. there are thus no good reasons for educ tional reserchers to fear forging ahead with ‘what works (Howe, 1988, p. 16). OF course, what works is more than an empirical question. I involves the politics of evidence. ‘This isthe space that evidence-based research entered, It became the battleground of the third wag “the current upheaval and argument about ‘scientific research in the scholarly world of education’ (Clark & Scheurch, 2008; Scheurich & Clark, 2006, .401). Enter Teddlie and Tashakkoris third moment: Mixed ‘methods anc evidence-based inguiry meet one another ina soft cente. C. Wight Mills (1959) would say this is a space for abstracted empiricism. Inquiry is cutoff from politics. Biogra- phy and hisory recede into the background, Technological rationality prevails Resistances to Qualitative Studies The academic and disciplinary resistances to qualitative research illustrate the politics embedded in this field of dis- course. The challenges to qualitative research are many. To bet- ter understand these criticisms, itis necessary to “stnguish analytically te politcal (or external) role of [qualitative] meth. dology from the procedural (or internal) one” (Seale, Gobo, Gubrium,&Stverman, 200, p 7). Polts situate methodology within and outside the academy. Procedural issues define how qualitative methodology is used to produce knowledge about the world (Seaeet al, 2004,p.7) Often the political andthe procedural intersect. Polite and hard scientists call qualitative researchers journalist “soft” scientists, Their work is termed unscientine, « exploratory or subjective. Its called citcism and not the or its imterpreted politically, asa disguised version of Mi ism or secular humanism (see Huber, 195; so Denzin, ¢ p. 258-261), ‘These politcal and procedural resistances reflect an une awareness that the interpretive traditions of qualitat research commit one toa critique of the positivist or pc positivist project. But the positivist resistance to qualita research goes beyond the “ever-present desire to maintai «istinction between hard science and soft scholarship” (Ca 1989, p. 99). The experimental (positivist) sciences (phys chemistry, economics, and psychology, for example) ate of seen as the crowning achievements of Western civiliat and in their practices, itis assumed that ‘truth’ can transce spinion and personal bias (Carey, 1989, p. 99; Schwan 1997b, p. 309). Qualitative research is seen as an assault this tradition, whose adherents often retreat into a “value-fi objectvist science” (Carey, 1989, p. 104) model to defend th: Position. The positivist seldom attempt to make explicit, a critique the “moral and political commitments in their ov contingent work” (Carey 1989, p. 104; Lincoln, ynham, & Gut Chapter 6 this volume), Postiviss further allege thatthe so-called new experime tal qualitative researchers write fiction, not science, and ha no way of verifying their tcuth statements. Ethnogreph Poetry and fiction signal the death of empirical science, ar there is little to be gained by attempting to engage in mot criticism, These critics presume a stable, unchanging reali that can be studied withthe empirical methods of objects social science (see Huber, 1995). The province of qualitatn research, accordingly is the world of lived experience, for th is where individual belief and action intersect with cultur Under this model, thee is no preoccupation with discoure and method as material interpretive practices that constitut representation and description. This is the textual, arrativ turn rejected by the positivist. ‘The opposition to postive science by the poststructuralist is seen, then, as anattackon reason and truth. At the same time the positivist science attack on qualitative research isregerde asan attempt to legislate one version of tuth over another The Legacies of Scientific Research Writing about scienitic research, including qualitative research, fom the vantage point ofthe colonize a position tel she chooses to privilege, Linda Tubivai Smith stats that “the term eseare is inextricably linked to European imperialism and colonialism,” she continues, “the word itself is probably one of the dirtiest words inthe indigenous words vocabulary .Chapter 1 {tis implicated inthe worst excesses of colonialsn(p.1), with the ways in which “knowledge about indigenous peoples was collected, classified, and then represented back to the West” {Sinith, 1999, p 1). This dirty word stirs up ange, silence, dis- trust. “It is so powerful that indigenous people even site poetry about research" (Smith, 1999p. 1. tis one of colonia isms most sordid legacies, she says, Frederick Ercksons Chapter 3 of this volume charts many key features of this painful history. He notes with some irony that qualitative research in sociology and anthropology was born out of concern to understand the exotic, often dark skinned “other” OF course, there were colonialists long before there were anthropologists and ethnographers. Nonetheless, there would be no colonial—and naw no neo-colonial—history ‘were it not for this investigative mentality that turned the dark- skinned other into the object ofthe ethnographer’s gaze. From the very beginning, qualitative research was implicated in a racist project." TL Dernvrrioat Issues Qualitative research is a field of inquiry in its own right. It stosscuts disciplines, fields, and subject matter® A complex, inesconnected family of terms, concepts, and assumptions surrounds the teem. These include the traditions associated with foundationaism, positivism, postfoundationalism, post- positivism, posstructuralism, postmodernism, post-humanism, and the many qualitative research perspectives and methods connected to cultural and interpretive studies (the chapters in Patt II ofthis volume take up these paradigms). There are separate and detailed literatures on the many methods and approaches that fll under the category of qualitative research, such as case study, plitis and ethics, participatory inquiry, interviewing, participant observation, visual methods, and interpretive analysis. Tn North America, qualitative research operates in a complex historical field that crosscuts at least eight historical moments. These moments overlap and simultaneously operate in the pres- tent? We define them as the traditional (1900-1950), the mod= ernistor golden age (1950-1970), blurred genres (1970-1986), the crisis of representation (1986-1990), the postmodern, a period of experimental and new ethnographies (1990-1995), postexperimentl inguiry (1995-2000), the methodologically contested present (2000-2010), andthe future (2010-), whichis nov. The future, the eighth moment, confronts the method= ‘ological backlash associated with the evidence-based social movenseut. Its eoncerned with moral discourse, with the devel ‘opment of sacred textualtes. The eighth moment asks thatthe social sciences and the humanities became sites for critical conversations about democracy, race, gender, class, nation- states, globalization, freedom, and community.® Introduction: Disciplinng the Practice of Qualitative Research we 3 ‘The postmodern and postexperimental moments were defined in part by a concern for literary and rhetorical tropes and the narrative turn, a concern for storytelling, for composing ethnographies in new ways (Ells, 2009; and in this volume, Hamera, Chapter 18; Tedlock, Chapter 19; Spry, Chapter 30; Ellingson, Chapter 36; St.Pierre, Chapter 37; and Pelias, Chapter 40), Successive waves of epistemological theorizing move across these eight moments. The traditional period is associated with the positivist, foundational paradigm. The modernist or golden age and blurred genres moments are connected tothe appeat- ance of postpostvist arguments. At the same time,a variety of new interpretive, qualitative perspectives were taken up, includ ing hermeneutics, strucuralism, semiotics, phenomenology, cultural studies, and feminism.’ In the blurted genre phase, the humanities became central resources for critical, interpretive theory and the qualitative research project broadly concived. The researcher became a bricoleur (as discussed late) learning how to borrow from many different disciplines. The blutred genres phase produced the next stage, the criss of representation. tere researchers struggled with how to locate themselves and ther subjects in eflexvetexts.A kind of meth- codological diespora took place, a two-way exodus, Humanists migrated tothe social sciences, searching for new social theory and new ways to study popular culture and its local ethno graphic contexts. Socal scientists turned to the humanities, hoping to learn how to do complex structural and posttruc- taal eadings of social texts. From the humanities, socal scien tists also learned how to produce texts that refused tobe readin simplistic linear, incontrovertible terms. The line between a text anda context blurred. Inthe postmodern experimental momient, researchers continued to move avay from foundational and quasifoundational criteria (in this volume, sce Altheide & Johnson, Chapter 35; St.Pierre, Chapter 37). Alternative evalua tive criteria were sought, ones that might prove evocative, moral, critical, and ooted in local understandings. Any definition of qualitative research must work within this complex historical field. Qualitative research means different things in each ofthese moments. Nonetheles, an initial, generic definition can be ofered. Qualitative research isa stuated activ ity that locates the observer in the world. Qualitative research consist of ast of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible. These practices transform the world. They turn the world into a series of representations including feldnotes, interviews, conversations, photographs, recordings, and memos to the self. at this level, qualitative research involves anintrpre- tive, natutalistic approach othe world. This means that qualita- tive researchers study things in their natural settings, attempt. ing to make sense of or interpret phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to ther." Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of o variety of empirical materials—case study, personal4m THE SAGE HANDBOOK OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH experience, introspection, life story, interview, artifacts, and cutural texts and productions, along with observational, his torical, interactional, and visual texts—that describe routine and problematic moments and meanings in individuals’ lives Accordingly, qualitative researchers deploy a wide-range of interconnected interpretive practices, hoping always to get a better understanding ofthe subject matter at hand. tis under. Stood, however that each practice makes the world visible ina different way. Hence, thereisfequentya commitment to using ‘ore than one interpretive practice in any study, BL THe Quatitarive [RESEARCHER-AS-BRICOLEUR AND Quit MaKe Multiple gendered images may be brought to the qualitative researcher: scientist, naturals, fieldworker, journals, sociel ‘tite artist, performer, azz musician, filmmaker, quilt maker, essayist. The many methodological practices of qualitative "esearch may be viewed as soft science, journalism, ethaogra Phy. ricolage, quilt making or montage. The researcher in turn, imay be seen asa bricler, as a maker of quilts, o in filmmak, ‘ing, person who assembles images into montages (on mon. tage, ee Cook, 1981, pp. 171-177; Monaco, 1981, pp. 322-328, and discussion below; on quilting, see hooks, 1980, pp. 115-122: Wolet, 1995, pp. 31-33) Douglas Harper (1987, pp 9,74~75,92); Michel de Certeau (1984, p. xv): Cary Nelson, Paula A. Treichler, and Lawrence Grossberg (1992.2); Claude Lévi-Strauss (1962/1966, p17) Deenaand Michael Weinstein (1991, 161);and jo L.Kincheloe {2001) clarity the meaning of bricolage and bricoleur" A bico. leur makes do by “edapting the brcoes ofthe worl. Brcolage is‘the poetic making do” (de Certeau, 1984, p. xv), with “such bricoles—the odds and ends, the bits leftover” (Harper, 1987, .74)-The bricoleurisa"Jackof ll trades a kindof professional dlovityourselfer]” (Lévi-Strauss, 1962196, p17) In Harpers (1987) works the brcoleur defines herself and extends herselt. (P-75) Indeed er ite story her biography,“may be thought of as brcclage” (Harper, 1987,p. 92), Thete are many kinds of bricoleurs—interpretve, narra tive, theoreticah political, The interpretive bricoleur produces 8 bricolge: that is, a pieced-together set of representations that are fitted to the specifics of a complex situation, “The Solutor.(bricolage) which is the result of the bricoleur’s ‘methods an emergent} construction” (Weinstein & Weinstein, 1991, 161), which changes and takes new forms as different tools, methods, and techniques of representation and inter Bretation are added to the puzzle. Nelson et al. (1992) describe the methodology of cultural studies “sa briclage. ls choice of practice, that sis pragmatic, strategic, and self fefleive (p. 2). This understanding can be applied, with ‘qualifications, to qualitative esearch, The qualitative researchr-as-bricleur ora maker of quilts ‘ses the aesthetic and material tools of his or her crf deploy. ing whatever strategies, methods, or empirical materials are at hhand (Becker, 1998, p.2). fnew tools or techniques have to be invented or pieced together, hen the researcher wil do this, The choice of which imerpetvearactices to employ snot necessan iy set in edvance, Te “chcice of research practices depends upon the questions that ar sked, and the questions depend on {heir context” (Nelson el, 1992, p.2), what is available Inthe context, and what the researcher can doin that setting, These interpretive practices involve aesthetic issues, an aes- thetics of representation that goes beyond the pragmatic or the Practical Here the concept of montage is useful (see Cook, 1981, P. 323; Monaco, 1981, pp. 171-172). Montage is a method of cclting cinematic images. In the history of cinematography, ‘montage is associated with the work of Serge Eisenstein, expe- cially hs fle, The Bateship Potemkin (1925). In montage, a Picture is made by superimposing several differen images on (one another. In a sense, montage is like pentimenta, where Something painted out of a picture (an image the painter “repented” or denied) now becomes visible again, creating Something new. What is new is what had been obscured by # Previous image. Montage and pentimento, ike jaz, which is improvisation, {eate the sense that images, sounds, and understandings are blending together, overlapping, and forming a composite,» ‘new creation. The images seem to shape and define one another; an emotional gestalt effect is produced, Often, these images are combined in a switly run sequence. When done, this produces a dizly revolving collection of several images around a central or focused picture or sequence; such effets signify the passage of time. Perhaps the most famous instance of montage is given inthe Odessa Steps sequence in The Battleship Potemkin, Inthe cli max ofthe film the citizen of Odess are bing massacred by {sarist troops onthe stone stepsleading down tthe city’s har bo isestin cus toa young mother as she pushes her baby’s Cariage across the landing in fret ofthe firing troops. Citizens rush past her, joing the carriage, which she is afi to push down to the next Bight of stars. The troops ate above her fring & the citizens. She i trapped betven the trops and the steps She screams. line of rifles pointing tothe sky erupts in smoke The mother’ head sways back. The wheels ofthe carriage tecter on the edge of the steps. The mother's hand clutches the silver buckle of her belt. Below her, people are being beaten by so. diets Blood drips over the mother’s white gloves. The baby’s hhand reaches out of the carriage. The mother sways back and forth. The troops advance. The mothe falls back against the Carriage. A woman watches in horror asthe rear wheels of the