Pushing the Boundaries of Feminist Research: Reflectivity: The Importance of Qualitative/Quantitative Hybrid Research

Reflectivity- the quality of being reflective is an important part of the feminist literature. Fonow and Cook identify that almost all pieces of feminist research contain some kind of reflective quality in them (2218). Because of this feminist research has been accused of being biased and only reflective of the author’s opinions or experiences. I believe the opposite to be true. All work is in some way reflective of the author even if it is fiction. It is impossible not to let your own opinions drift into your work and by being reflective and telling your audience what your standing is to the issue they can better understand the value in the conclusion you have drawn. This is especially important when one embarks on empirical research. As Presser shows us, something as simple as one's gender can affect your findings and by being able to reflect on her interviews with convicts and ex-convicts she contributed an important finding to the field: that “stories are constructed situationally” (Pressor, 2087).
        

While reading Pressor’s account, I could only find myself agreeing with her belief that stories are constructed situationally and that if someone of a different gender was interviewing the subjects in a different environment and gave different responses to their answers the subjects would tell their story in a different way. This then calls into question empirical research and fields such as women’s studies that rely so heavily on work that is based on empirical research. This is why as feminist researchers we need to also base our findings on quantitative methods. This will help us create convincing arguments that will in turn help our political activism and create social change (Fonow and Cook, 2226).  

  

When doing global research in the developing world it is especially important to use this hybrid model. An example of this is when measuring women’s participation in government we need to look at both the number of women that are in parliament in addition to the quality of their participation and its impact on society (Beetham and Demetriades, 205). If we were to just look at the number of women in parliament (quantity), it would not give us significant information because those women may not be allowed to have their voices heard. On the other hand if we only looked at the quality of their participation, their might be just one women in parliament who makes quality contributions. This quantity/quality model then is used to determine that we are looking at the most accurate picture as possible.   

It is important that we as feminist researchers continue to challenge the traditional methodologies that constrain traditional disciplines. At the same time I believe that we need to expand the definition of feminist research. Feminist research cannot and should not be just defined as research by a woman seeking to end the oppression of women. It should also include men that do research on ending gender binaries in a way that challenges the status quo. When reading the articles that are cited in this post, I was deeply frustrated by their unstated assumptions that feminist research is only done by women (Negotiating Power and Narratives in Research: Implications for Feminist Methodology) or that the only feminism worth studying is to advance the status of women in the world (Feminist Research Methodologies and Development: Overview and Practical Application, and Feminist Methodology: New Applications in the Academy and Public Policy). Feminism needs to open its tent not only to include nontraditional research methods but also to include research that challenges the basic tenets of feminism.       

Work Cited:
Beetham, G, & Demetriades, J. (2007). Feminist research methodologies and development: overview and practical application. Gender and Development, 15(2), 199-216.

Fonow, M, & Cook, J. (2005). Femenist methodology: new applications in the academy and public policy. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(4), 2211-2236.

Presser, L. (2005). Negotiating power and narrative in research: implications for feminist methodology. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(4), 2211-2236.