Critical Reflexivity of the Researcher as an Exploratory Vehicle in Sensitive Research

Abstract

Qualitative research requires in-depth immersion in the topic of concern for the findings to be valid and pertinent. However, in doing so, qualitative researchers may encounter certain challenges that address beyond the methodological concern. There is limited research that explores the impact on researchers who undertake research on sensitive or challenging research and marginalized groups. Considering that the researcher is the central figure who influences the research project across all steps from conceptualization to action, researcher reflexivity can be used as a strategy to look behind the curtain of the research project. Through practicing critical reflexive experiential analysis, I reflect on my journey on conducting research on the topic of sexual violence. I address the silence of researcher vulnerability by documenting and analyzing my emotional journey through each stage of the research project in my reflexive journal and how I resolved each dilemma at both personal and professional levels. The aim of this article is, therefore, to highlight the process of critical reflexivity of my journey as a sexual violence researcher in Indian context.

Introduction

Being exposed to years of positivist-inspired training, conducting “good” research had made me believe that my stance as a researcher should ideally be impersonal, and based on neutral detachment. ¹ Within such a context of distance and impartiality, the subjective experience of the researcher is often reduced to a nuisance that needs to be “controlled” and “maintained” in the face of a threat to objectivity. In spite of this background, once I embarked on designing the research on sexual violence and meaning-making, which I will refer to for the entire article, I found myself wary of adopting the prescribed impartial and objectivist neutrality. Tuning into my own emotional journey and what could be ideally described as “a self-conscious analytical scrutiny of myself as a researcher” ¹ through each phase of the research led to new insights and discoveries into the research in itself. The reflexive “I” as the researcher allowed me to dismiss the observational distance as prescribed, destabilizing the role of the observer as an impersonal machine. ²

I found myself validated in the works of several researchers^3,4 who maintained that the researcher remains the primary “instrument” of data collection and analysis and, therefore, reflexivity is deemed essential. Reflexivity is often “a method of inquiry, a way of finding about yourself and your topic” ⁵ indicating it as a peek into the “backstage of doing research.” ⁶ Since qualitative research has been described as “emotional labor,” ⁷ practicing reflexivity became a continuous process of critical scrutiny and interpretation of my subjective responses. Within the India context, several researchers have addressed the need for reflexivity.^8,9 However, there appears to be a gap in addressing the role and impact of practicing reflexivity when conducting research on sensitive topics. Pio and Singh (2015), in their article on reflexivity, emphasize the necessity of critical reflexivity, particularly in the context of gendered violence. ¹⁰ They argue that such reflexivity can serve as a typology for researcher resilience, which is crucial when designing research aimed at informing policy development. The goal of writing this article is to elucidate the critical role of researcher reflexivity, especially in the context of conducting research on sensitive topics, such as sexual violence. In sharing the detailed account of my own emotional journey and the challenges encountered, I attempt to shed light on the “behind the scenes” of conducting research. This reflective practice ensures the validity and rigor of the research, ¹¹ allowing radical insight into the decision-making steps of research. It also serves as a valuable resource for researchers’ facing similar situations, providing them with a framework to navigate their emotional responses and ethical dilemmas. By documenting and analyzing their experiences, the author contributes to a broader understanding of the emotional labor involved in qualitative research on marginalized and challenging topics, promoting a more empathetic and reflective research community.

However, during this process, I found myself in dilemmas that are unique to the context of undertaking research on sensitive issues and/or marginalized groups. ¹² Therefore, this article also addresses the reflection on the emotional journey of researching sexual violence and the challenges encountered.

Method

On a theoretical level of consideration, reflexivity entails careful scrutiny of the researcher’s own emotional journey that may be impacting the inquiry. ¹³ However, embodying this as a new researcher became a struggle. Understanding the need for reflexivity I chose to document my emotional journey in a research journal, which is the subject of exploration in this study. Throughout the article, I have drawn excerpts from my journal to document the reflection through each stage of the project, the issues and tensions that arose, and how that enhanced my understanding of the complexities of qualitative research. These journal entries remain witness to the meaningful connections that I established to bridge the gap between theory and practice as a novel researcher, documenting my preoccupations and considerations in every step of the research.

Biography

In March 2021, I was faced with the incumbent decision of choosing a topic for my dissertation for my master’s program. My journey of reflexivity began from that point onwards. For my dissertation, I chose to conduct research on sexual violence. Previous studies indicate that social structural factors (such as age, gender, class) influence the course and the content of interviews. ¹⁴ Considering the biography of a researcher impacts the fieldwork, it is essential to reflect on my biography; I am an educated, female, young adult belonging to the Hindu religion (representing about 80% of the total population in India, following the 2011 census) living in Kolkata, a metropolitan city in India. Taking into account that the target population for my research comprised educated young adult women aged 25–35, I posited that my own demographic characteristics would facilitate the elicitation of personal narratives. This is because shared demographics between interviewers and interviewees can facilitate rapport-building and the elicitation of personal narratives.^15,16 I anticipated that these shared attributes would enable the participants to establish a connection with me, thereby fostering rapport and enhancing the depth and authenticity of the data collected.

My reflexivity journey began with me identifying my position in clear notions of power and privilege that can impact my relation to the specific topic of concern ¹⁷ in terms of my educational background and socio-demographic status. However, being an early-career female researcher, my insecurities about preparedness to conduct sensitive research became a standpoint of my vulnerability. My age and gender in this case allowed me to connect more with my participants and aid in rapport building.

In the negotiation of insider-outsider perspectives, I began the research by assuming that I was an insider because of my gender but an outsider in terms of lack of experience with sexual assault. It is important to consider the positionality of the researcher in terms of the research topic. ¹⁸ Given that my participants and I shared the same gender and ethnicity, I assumed an insider role in the context of the gender norms and roles imposed by this specific cultural setting, therefore, providing an emic perspective. While at the beginning of the research, I assumed an outsider positionality for the experiences that were discussed, that is, I positioned myself as an outsider to the group of survivors of sexual assault, therefore, providing an etic perspective. For conducting research on sexual violence, which is a sensitive topic, it was important to consider the implications of my positionality as I would have the active role in the interpretation and presentation of marginalized voices. ¹⁹ There appeared to be a leverage in having the emic perspective when conducting qualitative research as I would be more aware of not only the nuances of being a woman in the Indian context but also be more “in tune” with the experiences that the women would share through the interviews. However, I rationalized that the etic perspective could allow me to retain a level of objectivity and view it from an audience point of view, therefore, allowing more apt representation of the narratives. In fact, previous research validates me as some research indicate that outsider perspectives hold some advantages. ²⁰ Over time, however, with exposure to the spectrum of sexual assault and hearing the narratives, I remain in the gray area where it is difficult to situate myself in either/or. Previous researchers have individuated that there are no clear-cut distinctions between “insider-outsider” perspectives; rather it is a continuum in which the researchers’ positionality lies that is influenced by context. ²¹ My positionality, therefore, appeared to be situated on a spectrum wherein I ranged from the emic-etic perspective depending upon the context wherein after hearing some of the experiences, I found myself reflecting, rather questioning some of the experiences that I have had that I had dismissed as “common.” In doing so, I found myself resonating with the experiences that the participants shared and hence questioning; “am I really an outsider to these experiences or have I just like my participants didn’t question them or struggled to label them?” (Journal entry of primary researcher, April 2021).

Being a novice researcher brings the essentiality to have access to quality academic supervision, ²² therefore, the second author guided and supervised the research study. Ethical approval was sought and granted by Ethics Committee of the University. The participant well-being remained as a priority in line with the ethical code. But well-being, as it turns out is quite multi-faceted when conducting the research in practical terms as documented through each of the phases of the research. One aspect I may have underestimated was the emotional impact on myself as a novice researcher. Previous studies have suggested that researchers often experience distress and emotional stress.^7,18 To mitigate the toll of conducting research on sensitive topics, I was provided with institutional support such as access to counseling sessions, regular check-ins, and self-care resources. However, what I did not anticipate was the long-term psychological impact and the need for ongoing support beyond the duration of the research project.

My Research Project: What, Why, and How?

It is imperative to consider reasons of conducting a particular research study ²³ wherein the researchers become aware of their subjective motives in carrying out the research, which ascertains the trustworthiness of the research, playing a crucial role in shaping the research itself. ¹³ My decision to choose sexual violence came from reading an excerpt from a blog where a woman shared her experience. It did not focus on the social, legal aspects of her journey, but rather her emotional one. Her struggles in coming to terms with it and rebuilding her life post-assault had led me to find my purpose in designing the study.

How is it that we as society have so much to say against the perpetrator, the ‘villain’ if you must, the one who gets all the attention, while we picture the woman just as a sufferer. Why do we take away her voice and project our horrors into her narratives? Media, society and us, all we see is an individual who has faced misfortune, to whom the best assured is justice. Why do we take away their voice within the harrowing detail of one particular event without letting them weave their story without the expressive domination of one emotion: suffering (Journal entry of primary researcher, April 2021)

Based on the purpose of the research, as I identified through my writing, I found myself gravitating toward qualitative methodology. By choosing the qualitative approach which promotes reflection on the experiences, participants could help us to understand and explain subjective experiences ²⁴ in their terms. Deciding to conduct research on a sensitive topic led to significant emotional struggles for me. In the initial stages, I found myself grappling with self-doubt, questioning my efficacy and my ability to search for or build connections with participants. These challenges highlighted the complex emotional landscape I navigated throughout the research process. I reflected on the magnitude of work required for this research, recognizing the extensive effort and emotional resilience needed to navigate the complexities involved.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted to ensure that descriptions of the experiences were from the participant’s point of view by unfolding the meaning of the experience and uncovering their lived world embedded within their socio-cultural context. ²⁵

My inclination toward hearing the “story” of women’s experiences of sexual assault, which I conceptualized as dynamic intersectional interaction of multiple factors (such as identity, beliefs, culture) led me to adopt a narrative method for my research. Narrative research is concerned with the stories that we produce to tell ourselves highlighting the “personal truth” offering the means of constructing meaning out of the “chaos of lived experience.” ²⁶ It becomes a fundamental scheme of linking individual actions and events up to a contextualized whole by making it essential to the meaning-making process.

The decision to adopt a narrative method for research on women’s experiences of sexual assault stemmed from a deliberate consideration of various qualitative methodologies and their alignment with the research objectives. ²⁷ While methodologies such as case study, grounded theory, and phenomenology offer distinct advantages, they were not deemed suitable for this study. Case study methodology, typically focusing on singular instances, was perceived as potentially constraining for capturing the multifaceted nature of women’s experiences of sexual assault. Grounded theory, renowned for its ability to generate new theories, often necessitates a larger sample size than feasible for this study, potentially compromising the depth of exploration. Similarly, phenomenology, while adept at elucidating lived experiences, may not fully encapsulate the intricate dynamics and contextual nuances inherent in narratives of sexual assault. Through a comprehensive review of qualitative methodologies, it became apparent that narrative research best aligns with the research aims. Narrative research, concerned with the production of stories to derive personal truths and construct meaning from lived experiences, facilitates the synthesis of individual actions and events into a contextualized whole. Polkinghorne (1988) defines narrative as a fundamental scheme for linking individual actions and events into contextualized and whole making it essential to the meaning-making process. ²⁸ According to Murray (2003), narrative functions tend to provide order where there is disorder, in the sense the narrator attempts to bring organization to something which is disorganized and challenging to everyday routine by supplementing meaning and order. ²⁹ Considering my aim of the study was to understand how women made sense of their experience, narrative approach was deemed essential for capturing the dynamic intersectional interactions of factors such as identity, beliefs, and culture within the narratives of women’s experiences of sexual assault.

Participants and Data Collection

Considering the research design was already in place, my attention was now focused on seeking participants who fit the inclusive criteria determined for each study. Despite my various attempts to reach out to participants across the country, majority of them were chosen because of my easy access to those whose narratives I believed would provide me a good “opportunity to learn” ³⁰ about my topic of interest.

In reflecting on my intention behind the “opportunity to learn,” it refers to the potential for gaining valuable insights or understanding from the narratives of the participants. I selected participants whose experiences, stories, or perspectives were anticipated to be particularly informative, enlightening, or illustrative of the phenomena being studied. The goal was to maximize the educational or informative benefit from the data collected.

By prioritizing those participants, I believed that their narratives could answer the research questions, offering rich, detailed, or diverse viewpoints that would enhance the overall understanding of the subject matter. This selection process was based on the perceived potential of these narratives to yield meaningful and useful findings for the study.

This restriction in access resulted in the limitation of studies where only educated middle-class working women volunteered and were willing for the interview. This is in line with the criticism raised against qualitative research by noting that qualitative research is quite susceptible to racial and social class biases. ³¹ I found myself concerned and uncertain about the representation of stories in my research.

How do I represent the stories across the country, how do I reach those voices that don’t have access to the major forms of media? How do I reach those voices that are hidden, not quite accessible? If I can’t, then, do my findings reflect the voices of women in an unbiased manner or am I still doing what I had sought to not do - put a filtered lens on the stories of sexual assault? - (Journal Entry of primary researcher, May 2021)

It was realized that there are some blurry areas which are beyond the scope of the present research because of the lack of feasibility to collect data from all strata of the society. While I acknowledged this as a limitation of the study upon sharing the reflections with my supervisor, and proceeded with data collection, there I found myself questioning my position as the interviewer:

To all these women who will trust me and share their story, what can I really offer them? How can I give them the comfort and the space to find their own voice within the stories and still collect enough data for my study? How do I strike that balance between what should be done and what could be done? - (Journal Entry of primary researcher, May 2021)

In contemplating the negotiated position within this interaction, ³² I found myself reflexively examining the power shift between myself and the participant as the topic shift to the topic of conversation in which the interviewee had much greater knowledge than I did. ³³ The narrative paradigm draws on the constructivist paradigm, which conceives social reality as constructed, fluid and multifaceted. I conceptualized “gathering the data” as a co-constructed account within the dynamics of the researcher-researched relationship that can fundamentally shape results. ³⁴ While I had clarified my stance regarding the dynamic with participants, my dilemma concerning the limits of my primary role as a data collector persisted. Discussions with my supervisor provided critical balance and direction, offering a clear guideline to navigate this challenge. Although I adhered to the narrative questions and employed probes to clarify portions of their stories, I remained acutely aware of the ethical responsibility to offer comfort and support to participants. This awareness significantly influenced my approach, ensuring that I listened attentively and responded empathetically without excessively deviating from the research plan.

This method allowed me to maintain methodological rigor while being sensitive to the participants’ needs. The collaborative reflection with my supervisor was instrumental in helping me strike a balance between collecting sufficient data and providing participants with the space to find their own voice within their narratives. By adhering strictly to the narrative questions and following up with appropriate prompts, I was able to gather rich data. Simultaneously, my empathetic responses and commitment to creating a nonjudgmental, safe space enabled participants to share their experiences openly and comfortably. Hutchinson et al. (1994) identified the benefits of qualitative interviews as catharsis, self-acknowledgment, sense of purpose, self-awareness, empowerment, healing, and providing a voice for the disenfranchised. ³⁵ Keeping these tenets in mind, the interview was conducted with sensitivity.

I decided the nature of the interview would be informal and conversational; exploratory, flexible, comprising of open-ended questions. This approach was informed by previous studies, recognizing the challenges participants may face when discussing sensitive information with a stranger. ³⁶ High-risk intrusive questions are particularly difficult in such contexts. Research demonstrated that the practices employed by interviewers significantly influence interview outcomes. ³⁷ Given that the interviews involved personal narratives from the women, we assumed that a more open-ended, conversational approach would create a safer environment for participants to share their experiences openly. Following the suggestion of feminist postmodernists scholars, I also paid higher attention to the feelings of their research participants as well as their own feelings linking emotions and knowledge. ³⁸ By integrating emotions and knowledge, I gained a deeper understanding of how participants’ experiences were shaped by their emotional states. This helped to provide a more nuanced interpretation of the research findings. Additionally, reflecting on my own emotions during the research process allowed me to recognize biases and empathize more deeply with the participants, leading to richer and more insightful conclusions. The interview method was designed to be respectful of the interviewee’s feelings (e.g., ending the interviews on an uplifting note).

It is essentially to not only hear the stories that women share but to be actively listening, hearing their emotional undertone while they share their narratives. During the interviews, I could often hear women struggle with their sadness, or their anger. It is often that slight break of the voice, the deep breath, the slight tremble in the voice that could tell me so much more, provide me with context to what they were sharing and connect their past to their present (Journal entry of primary researcher, May 2021)

Considering my desire was reach out to the perspectives of marginalized community ³⁹ of sexual assault survivors, there were various strategies that I adapted using the lens of feminist postmodernist framework in order to mitigate the difficulties that can occur when representing the voice of the marginalized perspectives.

• I attempted to reduce the power hierarchy during the data collection process. Creating nonhierarchical relationships between researchers and participants where both parties invest their personal identities by sharing experiences and information have been suggested by researchers,^11,40 allowing rapport-building and highlighting the voices of the participants to be heard. Being transparent about my values and engaging in reflexive practices remained an aim throughout my research. ⁴¹ Throughout the data collection, reflexive practices included supervisory consultation with my supervisor, journaling and peer debriefing. ⁴⁰ This allowed me with more or less assurance to prevent overriding the participants’ perspectives.

Anonymized transcripts were shared with peers for feedback, leading to revisions. Regular meetings with my supervisor provided crucial guidance on methodology, ethics, and theory. Their feedback was essential in refining my approach and keeping the research on track. Peer debriefing sessions offered constructive criticism on my data collection and analysis, helping identify potential biases.

Several methodological adjustments were made based on feedback viz refining interview prompts to be open-ended and unbiased, enhancing ethical practices, including detailed informed consent and participant confidentiality, improving rapport-building skills during interviews. The data analysis process was revised to include multiple rounds of coding and peer cross-checking for consistency.

Initially, I found myself somewhat resistant to some changes, I eventually recognized their value. Embracing feedback led to professional growth, improved research quality, and increased confidence in the study’s rigor and credibility. Positive reinforcement from my supervisor further motivated me to maintain high standards.

• Specifically, with survivors of sexual assault, it is necessary to maintain trust and attempt to increase participants’ comfort. ⁴¹ I built rapport to further enhance the richness of data. ⁴²

• To give space for the voices of the participants, I adopted asking minimal questions, and only those with the intention to probe deeper, if required.

However, in spite of these strategies, certain concerns surfaced which are quite indicative of the struggle of qualitative inquiry as a novel researcher. On re-reading many of the entries in my journal, I faced certain uncertainties during data collection. One such prominent uncertainty while handling the sheer amount of data was that I was engrossed in wondering what was the appropriate data.

• I feel overwhelmed. There is so much data - how much is important?

• Where do I reach saturation? How do I know when to stop? What if there was more to the story, and I shouldn’t have stopped exploring?

• Looking at quantity is not enough. What about the content, the nature of it? How do I navigate the stories without meandering off in all directions in attempting to get data needed to answer the research questions? (Journal Entry of primary researcher, May 2021).

It is quite common for qualitative researchers to feel overwhelmed with the volume of the data they accumulate as part of their research. ⁴³ My strategy to navigate this difficulty was to ask my participants whether there was anything more that they think would add to the story and needs to be addressed in the interview. Giving up the control in the interview and allowing the participants to own their story and narrative consequently ended up validating what I had intended to do in the first place, hear my participants’ narratives without imposing my personal or academic restrictions.

The uncertainty of not knowing what is saturation is quite a common phenomenon for novel researchers. In fact, Townsend (2013) highlights that the concept of data saturation in qualitative research lacks clear guidelines. ⁴⁴ To navigate my uncertainty, my supervisor referred me toward directing my attention toward the quality instead of quantity. Previous research validates this stance: a refined definition of saturation as the point where the most salient items are obtained, rather than capturing all items. ⁴⁵ Nascimento (2018) further emphasizes the importance of theoretical saturation, which occurs when no new themes or concepts emerge from the data which I found happening at the point of data analysis, thus clearly helping me identify the saturation point. ⁴⁶ Journaling my thoughts during the data collection process helped me to get in touch with the challenges in concrete form that provided me with the clarity which I could draw upon to guide me during the project.

Data Analysis

To make sense of what is learned, it is essential to organize what has been seen, heard and read. ⁴³ Each research study is unique, and the analytical framework adopted for each study depends upon the requirement of the study. ⁴⁷ Since my study dealt explicitly with narratives, analysis proceeded by adopting a number of interpretative perspectives for Narrative Oriented Inquiry. ⁴⁸

During the period of analysis, I took notes on my interpretations, patterns that I observed and connections that I observed across the narratives. Struggles during this period of analysis were centered on finding organization with the spread-out data. I went through the transcripts again and again, identifying themes, patterns, scribbling in the margins and developing my “working transcripts.” ⁴⁸ While most of my hours during the period of analysis was spent mulling over and finding the correct method of analyzing the data, my journal became a place to vent my frustration over the process and the exhaustion that I felt. I came in touch with the practicality of the iterative nature of qualitative inquiry. ⁴⁹

Writing the Narrative

Writing the final article and reporting my findings forced me into a new and more intensive kind of analysis. I reported the results of the analysis with sufficient quotes from the participants’ narratives in order to provide validity to the findings. During this period, the uncertainty and ethical questions related to representation of participants’ voices became the concern during the period. Questions related to the researcher’s rights to interpret and represent data, whose voice is being represented and concerns that in research such representation might reinforce the very system of oppression it sought to address ⁵⁰ remained my dilemma through this phase, as the following excerpt demonstrates,

How am I ever going to work through this powerlessness if I am unable to report in depth? If my intention was to remain at mutual understanding with my participants and have no power hierarchy, then who gives me the authority to appropriate their words (even if textual appropriation) and ultimately choose which quotes to include? How do I reflect the stories in depth within the constraints of scientific reporting standards of journals that require a certain word limit. Does my word limit also extend onto my participants’ stories? Then am I not doing the same things I intended to walk away from? (Journal Entry of primary researcher, July 2021)

Furthermore, a number of entries also indicated that time constraint was also another concern.

“I really need to wrap this up. I can’t afford to give any more time. Who knew time could be a limitation for conducting research?” (Journal Entry of primary researcher, July 2021)

Personal Issues: Vulnerability

Considering qualitative research is often an embodied experience that can affect the research emotionally, ⁵¹ research has documented researcher trauma in response to investigating sexual violence. ⁵² Being immersed in challenging narratives and dealing with issues of social justice can make researchers feel vulnerable. ⁵³ As I found myself dealing with the emotional impact of conducting research on a sensitive topic,^7,54 especially doing that during loss and grief that was omnipresent during the Coronavirus-19 pandemic, I realized the true value of doing research. I went in with a lack of preparedness on both ends of conducting research and dealing with the impact of working with a sensitive topic and I walked out with dilemmas, challenges and experiences that needed to be addressed. With sensitive areas of research such as research on violence against women, the researchers bear witness to painful descriptions and consequences of human atrocity. ⁵⁵ With prolonged engagements with the narratives of sexual assault through data collection, transcription and analysis, the researchers are often immersed into the distressing details of the violence. ⁵⁶ I will describe my experienced vulnerabilities and emotional turmoil in handling sensitive data through each phase of the research.

Conceptualizing the Research

This period covers the time when the project was conceptualized, approval was sought and permission was received for data collection. The primary focus at this point was focusing on my preparedness to undertake the research. While the majority of the conversations with regard to preparation were centered around systematic and methodological preparations; my supervisor (the second author) did bring in questions of emotional preparedness to handle sensitive data that could potentially cause distress. My stance in the initial phase was that of jovial optimism and excitement during this period. My journal entry during this phase

My belief system is mostly guided by the fact that there is under-representation of women and their experiences, especially those that do not follow into a dominant ‘normative’ structure, in the mainstream. This thought is exactly what guided me to take up this research topic. My attention is focused towards understanding the experiences of women which are not highlighted frequently. This is what got me inclined towards the topic, when I realized that I had the opportunity to bring something insightful into the field, bringing forward the voices of marginalized women was my primary goal. The same feminist thought is what drove me towards narrative qualitative research. My belief that reality is idiosyncratic, multifaceted and constructed, made me inclined towards understanding experiences through the lens of those who have experienced them. Here, I believe in the participant as the expert, who chooses what is important to their story in order to let me know. (Journal entry of primary researcher, April 2021)

This phase of research highlighted my struggle with emotional lack of preparedness, where I felt that I was unprepared to anticipate or have a support mechanism to reflect on the challenges that I might encounter in the process of research. While a key element of being prepared for undertaking sensitive research is to be aware that engaging in such research may elicit emotional responses. ⁷ While my supervisor (the second author) made me discuss the potential emotional aspect of encountering disturbing data, the intensity of it completely took me by surprise. Similar reports of researchers feeling ill-equipped to manage the emotional impact of their work with sensitive research ⁵² have been found.

Literature Review: Stepping into the Pool of Sexual Violence Research

However, I soon found my perspective changing from naive passivity to understanding my active interaction between the research process and myself as the researcher. As I enveloped myself within the research history of sexual assault and read various experiences, and identified the spectrum of sexual assault. ⁵⁷ I found myself immersed in turmoil. After reading so much, very soon I was overwhelmed and inspired at the same time. My journal entry during these period documents:

Why is there so little research addressing the voices of victims of sexual violence? (This is in relation to the availability of documentaries, films, stories, letters and other written material for reflection on the scope of how much these ‘voices’ were given freedom of expression). Is the fear of social ostracism that prevents women from talking about sexual violence ⁵⁸ run in academia as well? Is it still the hidden topic of conversation? There is an entire spectrum of sexual violence, where the narratives and voices of those who have experienced them need to be known - the opinions of the insider community, those with lived experience (Journal entry of primary researcher, April 2021)

How was I so unaware of these numerous kinds of abuse? It ranges across a spectrum. Most of them are often extensions of hegemonic gender norms and interactions that lie in an obscure grey area that is borderline between typical and aberrant. The continuum represents the range of behaviours that encompass sexual violence and aggression ranging from everyday sexism to the extreme forms such as rape. (Journal entry of primary researcher, April 2021)

This was handled through supervisory sessions with the second author by learning how to remain open to the different narratives of the participants, be neutral, equidistant to their different selves and be nonjudgmental in orientation.

Data Collection and Analysis

What became the most emotionally challenging portion of the research was the data collection phase. It involved balancing my role as a researcher versus my instinctual response as a human. The interviews, even though each held a unique narrative that could trigger my curiosity, were emotionally draining as I listened to the accounts of struggle, pain and abuse that the participants endured. Witnessing each participant share their stories, and displaying their unfiltered emotions, gave me a responsibility as well as a sense of burden of authentic representation. While I kept hearing gut-clenching narratives of assault, descriptions and often private intimate thoughts that participants had about their incidents, I could often feel my emotions in an influx between shared pain, empathy, anger, horror and agony. Previous research suggests that researchers may encounter various ongoing emotional challenges and range of emotions such as anger, guilt, fear, helplessness and depletion when they have to deal with issues of social justice.^52,58 The following excerpt documents my retrospection after an interview was over.

As I collected the data, the impact happened in-situ as well as outside the interview session. Within the interview, I would often feel myself in a roller-coaster ride with all the women as they would speak about their stories. I would hear in detail, shifting between empathy and neutrality. When any of these women would speak of the perpetrator, I would feel the anger, often times much more than these women displayed in the interview. I felt as if I was one feeling helpless or being treated unfairly. (Journal Entry of primary researcher, May 2021)

What also struck me was the survivors’ willingness to share the intimate details of their life during these interviews.

• One participant shared how she had not disclosed so openly about her experience to anyone.

• Another participant reached out the next day of her interview to let me know that even though she was afraid before the interview, concerned that revisiting her past may affect her, instead she found herself relieved and grateful after sharing everything, mentioning she had a restful night after her interview.

Daily data collection involving interviews, hearing and exposing narratives, maintaining and controlling my emotions, documenting my feelings after the interview and drawing boundaries became a source of emotional anxiety at this point of time. ⁵⁹ I found myself often exhausted and drained after such interviews. In fact, I re-experienced similar feelings of guilt, helplessness and fear in the process of transcribing data, which validates what researchers have identified as a higher risk of secondary distress in the process of transcribing disturbing or sensitive data. ¹⁰

Letting Go

Even after the data collection ended, the experience was etched in my memory and consciousness. On a personal level, I felt deeply disheartened and extra-cautious in all my interactions. A sense of hopelessness and turmoil pervaded my life after data collection was over. My experience during this phase is similar to the symptoms of secondary traumatic stress. ⁵²

On the level of my role as a researcher, I started wondering whether I should continue to engage with them. As someone entering the lives of the participants, being privy to their inner experiences and thoughts, I felt responsible. Thoughts and dilemmas like “Can I do something for them? How do I just leave them” (Journal entry of primary researcher, July 2021) were abundant in my journal during that phase. While a research project usually ends with thanking the participants for their insight and time and sending them a summary of the key findings, I found myself struggling in the dilemma of breaking contact, without making a difference in the lives of the survivors. I found myself helpless in my inability to help the survivors that I interacted with.

I would often times also battle with the need to extend support when any of these women engaged in negative self-talk. Quite a few times, I had to bite down on my lip to refrain from speaking and extending comfort to them. I remembered and kept telling myself, these are adult women who are entitled to their feelings of their journey and I can only bear witness to it, carrying their voice forward. (Journal Entry of primary researcher, May 2021).

Since the role of a researcher is to hear the experiences of distress without providing any active assistance or support that might help the survivor to cope with their experience of sexual violence, ⁶⁰ it can become more traumatizing. ⁵²

For myself, to manage the trauma, self-help resources like mindfulness practice, relaxation techniques, and journaling became constant sources of support. Reaching out to peers and my supervisor provided an emotional safe space, and compartmentalization within my own ability also proved helpful. The answer, I think, would lie in researcher resilience, something that is even validated by previous research. ⁶¹

Researcher well-being in the context of sexual violence research consists more preparation to deal with sexual violence research. Preparation can be in terms of having adequate coping techniques, such as academic supervision to deal with the emotional nature of the research, ²² having regular peer-debriefing sessions, ⁵¹ self-reflection and allowance to develop a safe space for researchers to work through their emotions and engaging in self-care activities, ⁵² which could aid in managing the emotional impact of conducting research on sexual violence.

Expanding on my experience of conducting research on sexual violence, it has been truly transformative, impacting me both personally and professionally. Delving into such a sensitive topic triggered deep introspection and emotional exploration, fostering significant personal growth and a heightened awareness of the social issues surrounding sexual violence. This journey has not only sharpened my research skills and methodologies but has also enhanced my capacity to navigate future endeavors with greater empathy and resilience. Moreover, it has underscored the importance of implementing safety measures and upholding ethical standards in such research, reinforcing my commitment to participant well-being and ethical practice. Integrating these experiences into my everyday life involves ongoing reflection and learning, shaping my perspectives and actions beyond the research context, and fostering resilience in both my personal and professional spheres.

As I continue working on the topic of sexual violence, I still find some of the initial challenges of powerlessness and helplessness creeping up. I have come to the realization that we do not conduct fieldwork only in the world of the researched, but in the “betweenness” ¹ that is shaped by the researcher’s biography which works through the data and our interpretations of the experience. ⁶⁰

Conclusion

Research is never complete without including an understanding of the active role that the researcher played throughout the research process. Therefore, after conducting my research on the marginalized group of sexual assault survivors, I believe that we need to integrate ourselves into the research process, in spite of how anxiety-provoking and vulnerability-inducing process it might be. Reflexivity can be used as an important tool for demonstrating the researcher’s awareness of the “problems of doing research.” ⁶² Reflexive practices and active measures like openness, self-disclosure, and accommodation can help equalize power balance between scholar and subject in research settings. ⁶³ However, considering “researcher reflexivity is necessarily limited” ⁶⁴ as the researcher can ideally never fully address their own subjectivity or its impact on their own research practices, it places the absolute notion of reflexivity under considerable scrutiny. ⁶⁵ For me, as a novel qualitative researcher, reflexivity as the process became a means to challenge the more traditionally held belief of research as a realist tale written by a detached observer, ⁶⁶ allowing me to document my own journey, embedded within the context as a sexual violence researcher.