Remaining in the Field: The Vulnerability Paradox of Native Member Ethnography

While traditional ethnography typically involves researchers entering the field and then leaving it, but at-home ethnography and autoethnography challenge this norm as researchers remain in their native environments after the research period has ended. This dual role creates a paradox of vulnerability for both the subjects and the researchers; vulnerability stems from their dual role and the ethical dilemmas of maintaining confidentiality and trust while being part of the organization. This study explores the concept of vulnerability in ethnographic research, with a focus on researchers who remain in the field after the research has ended as full members of the organisations they studied. Our study identifies a significant vulnerability experienced by ethnographic researchers who remain in the field after research closure and emphasizes the unique challenges faced by researchers who must navigate their roles as both insiders and outside observers, leading to a state of limbo and increased vulnerability. We discuss the ethical challenges of conducting research in one’s own organization, including the potential for increased sensitivities and the difficulty of separating researcher and professional identities. We reflexively and reflectively analyze our own research diaries to illustrate the complexities of remaining in the field, and we present three vignettes that highlight the emotional and ethical considerations faced as researchers remaining in the field after research closure. This study contributes to the emerging discussion on researcher vulnerabilities with autoethnography and at-home ethnography as methods. It suggests that understanding and addressing these vulnerabilities is crucial for the ethical and effective practice of ethnographic research. The paper calls for further examination of the reciprocal vulnerability experienced by autoethnographic and at-home ethnographic researchers and their subjects, emphasizing the need for more study, guidance, and support for researchers in these roles.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Qualitative Methods
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251345125
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Remaining in the Field: The Vulnerability Paradox of Native Member Ethnography

Päivi Kosonen, Mirjami Ikonen, Kristina Leppälä
2 citations
International Journal of Qualitative Methods
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
8.40
article

Remaining in the Field: The Vulnerability Paradox of Native Member Ethnography

Päivi Kosonen, Mirjami Ikonen, Kristina Leppälä
article en
2 citations

Abstract

While traditional ethnography typically involves researchers entering the field and then leaving it, but at-home ethnography and autoethnography challenge this norm as researchers remain in their native environments after the research period has ended. This dual role creates a paradox of vulnerability for both the subjects and the researchers; vulnerability stems from their dual role and the ethical dilemmas of maintaining confidentiality and trust while being part of the organization. This study explores the concept of vulnerability in ethnographic research, with a focus on researchers who remain in the field after the research has ended as full members of the organisations they studied. Our study identifies a significant vulnerability experienced by ethnographic researchers who remain in the field after research closure and emphasizes the unique challenges faced by researchers who must navigate their roles as both insiders and outside observers, leading to a state of limbo and increased vulnerability. We discuss the ethical challenges of conducting research in one’s own organization, including the potential for increased sensitivities and the difficulty of separating researcher and professional identities. We reflexively and reflectively analyze our own research diaries to illustrate the complexities of remaining in the field, and we present three vignettes that highlight the emotional and ethical considerations faced as researchers remaining in the field after research closure. This study contributes to the emerging discussion on researcher vulnerabilities with autoethnography and at-home ethnography as methods. It suggests that understanding and addressing these vulnerabilities is crucial for the ethical and effective practice of ethnographic research. The paper calls for further examination of the reciprocal vulnerability experienced by autoethnographic and at-home ethnographic researchers and their subjects, emphasizing the need for more study, guidance, and support for researchers in these roles.

International Journal of Qualitative MethodsVol. 24
University of Eastern Finland (FI), Finland University (FI)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
8.40
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.