Being Where? Navigating the Involvement Paradox in Qualitative Research Accounts

Researcher presence in the field (“being there”) has long been a topic of scholarly discussion in qualitative inquiry. However, the representation of field presence in research accounts merits increased methodological attention as it impacts readers’ understanding of study phenomena and theoretical contributions. We maintain that the current ambiguity around representing field involvement is rooted in our scholarly community’s “involvement paradox.” On one hand, we laud field proximity as a tenet of qualitative inquiry. On the other hand, we insist on professional distance to avoid “contamination” of findings. This leaves authors in a difficult position as they attempt to weave field involvement into written accounts. We draw on existing conceptual articles and illustrative exemplars to introduce four interrelated dimensions of representation: visibility, voice, stance, and reflexivity. These are intended to structure thinking about how authors do, and can, cast field involvement in research accounts as they navigate the involvement paradox. We encourage researcher-authors to think carefully about how they attend to their field presence as they craft research accounts, in order to enhance their legitimacy, trustworthiness, and richness