Interactional Challenges and Researcher Reflexivity: Mapping and Analysing Conversational Space

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12111
• Date: 01 June 2018
• Published date: 01 June 2018
• Author: Stefanie C. Reissner

Interactional Challenges and Researcher

Reflexivity: Mapping and Analysing

Conversational Space

STEFANIE C. REISSNER

Newcastle University Business School, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

This paper argues that a combination of visual and textual information can help researchers engage critically

with their interviewing practice, identify interactional challenges and advance their reflexivity. It proposes a

mapping and analysis of conversational space in qualitative interviews based on the length of speech sequences

and the speed by which these move from one party to the other. Such verbal exchanges are represented visually

in a conversational space map (CSM) allowing researchers to identify moments for further textual analysis and

explore their interviewing practice and wider research context. It sensitises researchers to their preferred patterns

of verbal interaction and the effect of these on the continuing interview, enabling them to engage more

meaningfully with research participants. The process proposed here may be particularly valuable for doctoral

training and supervision as well as for research teams.

Keywords: co-constructing interviews; interactional challenge; qualitative interviewing; researcher reflexivity;

researcher development

Introduction

Amid critique of qualitative interviewing (e.g., Potter and

Hepburn, 2012; Silverman, 2013), there has been

significant methodological interest in interactional

challenges (e.g., Roulston, 2011, 2014) and the role of

researcher reflexivity in addressing them (Finlay, 2003;

Roulston et al., 2008). Interactional challenges refer to

those actions by researcher and/or participant that

jeopardise the continuing interview. They typically stem

from a lack of alignment between the parties (Nairn

et al., 2005; Prior, 2014), the researcher’swayof

questioning and listening (Kahn and Carnell, 1957;

Partington, 2001) and/or the participant’s engagement or

lack thereof (Adler and Adler, 2002; Dundon and Ryan,

2010). Reflexivity means that researchers are aware of

their role in the research (Cassell et al., 2009) and the

way in which they influence the conduct and outcomes

of their work (Cunliffe, 2003). It is built through critical

engagement with (Bott, 2010) and amendment of one’s

research practice (Hibbert et al., 2010). As such,

researchers can learn much by critically engaging with

their interviewing practice (Roulston, 2016).

Recent work has focused on practical means through

which researchers ‘do’reflexivity in line with their

philosophical stance (Finlay, 2002) and personal

preference. These include reflective (Mauthner and

Doucet, 2003; Nadin and Cassell, 2006), engagement

(Haynes, 2012; Kalou and Sadler-Smith, 2015), relational

(Cunliffe and Karunanayake, 2003; Hibbert et al., 2014)

and conversation analytic strategies (Mazeland and Ten

Have, 1996;Roulston, 2006; Prior, 2014).However, these

are based on textual or oral materials and therefore ill-

suited for visual learners, who best engage with pictures

and diagrams (e.g., Paschler et al., 2008) and make up

more than half of an adult population (e.g., Barbe and

Milone, 1981). I am such a visual learner and have

struggled with ‘doing’reflexivity using these means:

reflective strategies provided insufficient focus on my

interviewing practice, engagement strategies distracted

my attention from interactional aspects, relational

strategiesrequired input by others which I failed to secure,

and conversatio n analytic strategies were too t echnical for

me. I was thus looking for a different way.

The result is a mapping and analysis of the

conversational space in which researcher and participant

interact verbally as part of a qualitative interview and

Correspondence: Stefanie C. Reissner, Newcastle University Business

School, 5 Barrack Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. E-mail: stefanie.

reissner@newcastle.ac.uk

European Management Review, Vol. 15, 205–219, (2018)

DOI: 10.1111/emre.12111

©2017 European Academy of Management