When Horizons Do Not Merge

Abstract

Gadamer claims that the horizons of the listener and the narrator merge and create a new understanding of the narrative’s meaning. This study examines encounters between researcher and informant in which these horizons do not merge, encounters—usually ignored in the literature—in which the researcher senses that the informant’s statements raise questions, cause confusion, or are perceived as perhaps unacceptable. It analyzes these moments and their implications regarding the research process and findings. We claim that not all statements are accepted. Researchers sift through questionable data, disregarding it at times. This may cause a “converse error,” leading researchers to ignore information perceived as doubtful that in fact could be valuable and contribute innovative understandings and knowledge.