Peer review of paper number 98
1. Please do not change somebody else's review. 2. Please put your name at the end of your review.
Enter plain text and/or HTML tags.
This work highlights some problematic aspects of reflexivity that are often taken for granted as naturally inscribed in qualitative methodology. It remains true to critical practice insofar as he returns every time to look back and reflect upon the process and his position, origins, assumptions and probable outcomes. In doing so he provides a unique insight into the critical research process that is riddled with questions and uncertainties that are not for the faint-hearted. However, he demonstrates a critical ethical stand that is so often evaded by intellectualised attitudes or theorising. In this sense Michael Francis
s account of the research process is particularly successful in its attempt to enlighten because his report contains the traces of the actual critical thinking process with its doubts and self-reflections, and at the same time provides a multi-levelled analysis of his experiences and the experiences of others as he saw them, thus trying to place them in a context that does not pretend to be the account of a neutral observer.
- Agnes Pinteaux
Exit without saving