Reflexivity is fundamental to qualitative health research, yet notoriously difficult to unpack. Drawing on Wilfred Bion’s work on the development of the capacity to think and to learn, I show how the capacity to think is an impermanent and fallible capacity, with the potential to materialize or evaporate at any number of different points. I use this conceptualization together with examples from published interview data to illustrate the difficulties for researchers attempting to sustain a reflexive approach, and to direct attention toward the possibilities for recovering and supporting the capacity to think. I counter some of the criticisms suggesting that reflexivity can be self-indulgent, and suggest instead that self-indulgence constitutes a failure of reflexivity. In the concluding discussions I acknowledge tensions accompanying the use of psychoanalytic theories for research purposes, and point to emerging psychosocial approaches as one way of negotiating these.
AlexandrovH. (2009). Experiencing knowledge: The vicissitudes of a research journey. In ClarkeS.HoggettP. (Eds.), Researching beneath the surface: Psycho-social research methods in practice (pp. 29-49). London: Karnac.
2.
ArcherM. (2003). Structure, agency & the internal conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
ArcherM. (2007). Making our way through the world: Human reflexivity & social mobility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BentonT.CraibI. (2001). Philosophy of social science. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
5.
BilligM. (1999). Freudian repression: Conversation creating the unconscious. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
BionW. (1961). Experiences in groups. London: Routledge.
7.
BionW. (1962). Learning from experience. London: Karnac.
8.
BishopE.ShepherdM. (2011). Ethical reflections: Examining reflexivity through the narrative paradigm. Qualitative Health Research, 21, 1283-1294. doi:10.1177/1049732311405800
9.
BondJ.BondS. (1986). Sociology and health care. Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone.
10.
BrownL. (2011). Intersubjective processes and the unconscious: An integration of Freudian, Kleinian and Bionian perspectives. East Sussex, UK: Routledge.
11.
BrymanA. (2008). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12.
CanhamH. (2006). What makes children want to learn? In YouellB. (Ed.), The learning relationship (pp. 7-19). London: Karnac.
13.
CharmazK. (1999). Stories of suffering: Subjective tales and research narratives. Qualitative Health Research, 9, 362-382. doi:10.1177/104973239900900306
14.
CharmazK. (2011). Grounded theory methods in social justice research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 359-380). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
ClarkeS.HoggettP. (2009). Researching beneath the surface: Psycho-social research methods in practice. London: Karnac.
16.
ClemensJ. (2007). Love as ontology: Psychoanalysis against philosophy. In KerslakeC.BrassierR. (Eds.), Origins & ends of the mind: Philosophical essays on psychoanalysis (pp. 185-201). Belgium: Leuven University Press.
17.
DeerC. (2008). Reflexivity. In GrenfellM. (Ed.), Pierre Bourdieu: Key concepts (pp. 199-212). Durham, UK: Acumen.
18.
EnoshG.BuchbinderE. (2005). The interactive construction of narrative styles in sensitive interviews: The case of domestic violence. Qualitative Inquiry, 11(4), 588-617. doi:10.1177/1077800405275054
19.
FinlayL. (2002). Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Research, 2(2), 209-230. doi:10.1177/146879410200200205
20.
FinlayL. (2005). “Reflexive embodied empathy”: A phenomenology of participant-researcher subjectivity. Humanistic Psychologist, 33(4), 271-292. doi:10.1207/s15473333thp3304_4
21.
GiddensA. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
22.
GrayB. (2008). Putting emotion and reflexivity to work in researching migration. Sociology, 42(5), 935-952, doi:10.1177/0038038508094571
23.
HollowayI.BileyF. (2011). Being a qualitative researcher. Qualitative Health Research, 21, 968-975. doi:10.1177/1049732310395607
24.
HollwayW. (2008). The importance of relational thinking in the practice of psycho-social research: Ontology, epistemology, methodology and ethics. In ClarkeS.HahnH.HoggettP. (Eds.), Object relations and social relations: The implications of the relational turn in psychoanalysis (pp. 137-162). London: Karnac.
25.
HollwayW.JeffersonT. (2000). Doing qualitative research differently. London: Sage.
26.
HolmesJ. (1993). John Bowlby and attachment theory. London: Routledge.
27.
HolmesM. (2010). The emotionalization of reflexivity. Sociology, 44(1), 139-154. doi:10.1177/0038038509351616
28.
JankowskiP.ClarkW.IveyD. (2000). Fusing horizons: Exploring qualitative research and psychotherapeutic applications of social constructionism. Contemporary Family Therapy, 22(2), 241-250.
29.
JervisS. (2009). The use of self as a research tool. In ClarkeS.HoggettP. (Eds.), Researching beneath the surface: Psycho-social research methods in practice (pp. 145-166). London: Karnac.
30.
KarakayaliN. (2004). Reading Bourdieu with Adorno: The limits of critical theory and reflexivity. Sociology, 38(2), 351-368. doi:10.1177/0038038504040869
31.
KellyS. (2010). Qualitative interviewing techniques & styles. In BourgeaultI.DingwallR.de VriesR. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative methods in health research (pp. 307-326). London: Sage.
32.
LaytonL. (2008). Relational thinking: From culture to couch and couch to culture. In ClarkeS.HahnH.HoggettP. (Eds.), Object relations and social relations: The implications of the relational turn in psychoanalysis (pp. 1-24). London: Karnac.
33.
MatonK. (2008). Habitus. In GrenfellM. (Ed.), Pierre Bourdieu: Key concepts (pp. 49-65). Durham, UK: Acumen.
34.
MorseJ. (2010). How different is qualitative health research from qualitative research? Do we have a subdiscipline?Qualitative Health Research, 20, 1459-1468. doi:10.1177/1049732310379116
35.
OrbachS. (2008). Democratizing psychoanalysis. In ClarkeS.HahnH.HoggettP. (Eds.), Object relations and social relations: The implications of the relational turn in psychoanalysis (pp. 25-44). London: Karnac.
36.
PotvinL.BissettS.WalzL. (2010). Participatory action research: Theoretical perspectives on the challenges of researching action. In BourgeaultI.DingwallR.de VriesR. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative methods in health research (pp. 433-453). London: Sage.
37.
ReidS. (1997). Psychoanalytic infant observation. In ReidS. (Ed.), Developments in infant observation: The Tavistock model (pp. 1-12). London: Routledge.
38.
RiachK. (2009). Exploring participant-centred reflexivity in the research interview. Sociology, 43(2), 356-370. doi:10.1177/0038038508101170
39.
Salzberger-WittenbergI.WilliamsG.OsborneE. (1983). The emotional experience of teaching & learning. London: Karnac.
40.
SegalH. (1979). Klein. London: Karnac Books.
41.
UnderwoodM.SatterthwaiteL.BartlettH. (2010). Reflexivity & minimization of the impact of age-cohort differences between researcher & research participants. Qualitative Health Research, 20, 1585-1595. doi:10.1177/1049732310371102
42.
WaddellM. (2002). Inside lives: Psychoanalysis & the growth of the personality. London: Karnac.
43.
WengrafT. (2001). Qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage.
44.
WinnicottD. (1989). The beginnings of a formulation of an appreciation and criticism of Klein’s envy statement. In WinnicottC.ShepherdR.DavisM. (Eds.), Psychoanalytic explorations (pp. 447-456). London: Karnac.
45.
WoodbyL.WilliamsB.WittichA.BurgioK. (2011). Expanding the notion of researcher distress: The cumulative effects of coding. Qualitative Health Research, 21, 830-838. doi:10.1177/1049732311402095
