Practising reflexivity: Ethico-epistemological and political practice?

In recent times, the term reflexivity has gained prominence in bioethics. For scholars engaged in both qualitative and quantitative research methods, particularly amid the prevailing climate of the empirical turn and reflexive turn, the concept of reflexivity opens up diverse epistemological and methodological possibilities. Given the varied moral paradigms and normative assumptions that shape applied ethics scholars’ understanding of moral knowledge, it becomes imperative to explore what practising reflexivity entails and how it impacts the discourse within the domain of applied ethics, especially in so-called empirical bioethics. In this paper, I aim to examine the current conversations surrounding reflexivity in bioethics scholarship, offering a critical analysis of the dominant interpretations of this concept. Acknowledging the limitations of thin reflexivity, which risks reinforcing the status quo through its depoliticized approach and lack of critical engagement with systemic issues in the politics of knowledge, my argument is that reflexivity should be understood as an ethical, epistemological and political practice that demystifies the process of knowing. Practising thick reflexivity not only requires acknowledging that the pursuit of knowledge is neither value-neutral nor value-free, but also involves seeking knowledge that explicitly accounts for inherent value commitments. This approach enables a deeper understanding of the complexities of social, moral and political realities. I conclude that embracing reflexivity necessitates a recognition of the politics of knowing, specifically, the non-innocence inherent in our processes of knowledge production, construction and representation of moral and social realities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Methodological Innovations
Published
2025-02-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991251316584
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Practising reflexivity: Ethico-epistemological and political practice?

Supriya Subramani
1 citations
Methodological Innovations
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
4.20
article

Practising reflexivity: Ethico-epistemological and political practice?

Supriya Subramani
article en
1 citations

Abstract

In recent times, the term reflexivity has gained prominence in bioethics. For scholars engaged in both qualitative and quantitative research methods, particularly amid the prevailing climate of the empirical turn and reflexive turn, the concept of reflexivity opens up diverse epistemological and methodological possibilities. Given the varied moral paradigms and normative assumptions that shape applied ethics scholars’ understanding of moral knowledge, it becomes imperative to explore what practising reflexivity entails and how it impacts the discourse within the domain of applied ethics, especially in so-called empirical bioethics. In this paper, I aim to examine the current conversations surrounding reflexivity in bioethics scholarship, offering a critical analysis of the dominant interpretations of this concept. Acknowledging the limitations of thin reflexivity, which risks reinforcing the status quo through its depoliticized approach and lack of critical engagement with systemic issues in the politics of knowledge, my argument is that reflexivity should be understood as an ethical, epistemological and political practice that demystifies the process of knowing. Practising thick reflexivity not only requires acknowledging that the pursuit of knowledge is neither value-neutral nor value-free, but also involves seeking knowledge that explicitly accounts for inherent value commitments. This approach enables a deeper understanding of the complexities of social, moral and political realities. I conclude that embracing reflexivity necessitates a recognition of the politics of knowing, specifically, the non-innocence inherent in our processes of knowledge production, construction and representation of moral and social realities.

Methodological InnovationsVol. 18(1)
The University of Sydney (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.