EMPATHY AND MUTUALITY IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: REFLECTIONS FROM THREE DIFFERENT RESEARCH FIELDS

Piotr Kocyba; Magdalena Muszel; Corinna Trogisch

doi:10.23858/ethp.2022.43.3018

Published: 2022-12-30 — Updated on 2023-01-26

Vol. 43 (2022)

EMPATHY AND MUTUALITY IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Piotr Kocyba , Magdalena Muszel , Corinna Trogisch

Ethnologia Polona

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.23858/ethp.2022.43.3018

Abstract

This article discusses the authors’ reflections on empathy in the context of fieldwork on feminist activism in small towns in Poland and Eastern Germany. Our methodological reflection is further enriched by our referencing of challenges faced in researching activists mobilising for protests against COVID-19 measures. While the role and impact of an empathic approach to data collection and interpretation have been controversial since the ‘erklären-verstehen controversy’, empathy can be understood in very different ways, ranging from sympathy or compassion to the ability to put oneself in someone else’s shoes. Against the backdrop of our case studies, we focus on the openness and curiosity we showed toward our interviewees’ emotions and experiences, despite ideological or socio-cultural differences between us. The key themes of our discussion include the relationship between the researcher and the research subjects, the impact of this relationship on the research process, the constantly changing conditions for interpretative social research, and the impact of such changes on the use of empathy.

Keywords:

empathy, feminist research, ethnography, ‘unloved’ groups, activism

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Grzegorz Piotrowski, Magdalena Muszel, WOMEN’S PROTESTS IN SMALL POLISH TOWNS , Ethnologia Polona: Vol. 43 (2022): Ethnographies of Protests

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

Kocyba, P., Muszel, M., & Trogisch, C. (2023). EMPATHY AND MUTUALITY IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: REFLECTIONS FROM THREE DIFFERENT RESEARCH FIELDS. Ethnologia Polona, 43. https://doi.org/10.23858/ethp.2022.43.3018

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

Ahmed, Sara. 2017. Living a feminist life. Durham: Duke University Press.
Google Scholar

Anderson, Kathryn, and Dana C. Jack. 1991. “Learning to Listen: Interview Techniques and Analyses.” The Oral History Reader, edited by Robert Perks and Alistair Thomson, 171-185. Routledge: London.
Google Scholar

Apel, Karl-Otto. 1982. “The Erklären-Verstehen Controversy in the Philosophy of the Natural and Human Sciences.” In Contemporary Philosophy. A New Survey, edited by Guttorm Fløistad, 19-50. Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Google Scholar

Batson, C. Daniel. 2009. “These Things Called Empathy: Eight Related but Distinct Phenomena.” In The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, edited by Jean Decety and William Ickes. Cambridge, London: The MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Bielska-Brodziak, Agnieszka, Marlena Drapalska-Grochowicz, Caterina Peroni, Elisa Rapetti. 2020. “Where feminists dare: the challenge to the heteropatriarchal and neo-conservative backlash in Italy and Poland.” Oñati Socio - Legal Series 10 (1S): 38S-66S.
Google Scholar

Blake, Megan K. 2007. “Formality and friendship: Research ethics review and participatory action research.” ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 6 (3): 411-421.
Google Scholar

Blee, Kathleen M. 1998. “White-Knuckle research: emotional dynamics in fieldwork with racist activists.” Qualitative Sociology 21 (4): 381-399.
Google Scholar

Blee, Kathleen M. 2002. Inside organized racism: Women in the hate movement. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Google Scholar

Blee, Kathleen M. 2018a. “Studying racist activism: methods and lessons.” Understanding racist activism. Theory, Methods, and Research, edited by Kathleen Blee, 1-9. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Blee, Kathleen M. 2018b. “Methods, interpretation, and ethics in the study of white supremacist perpetrators.” In Understanding racist activism. Theory, Methods, and Research, edited by Kathleen Blee, 88-101. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Burns, Maree. 2003. “Interviewing: Embodied communication.” Feminism & Psychology 13 (2), 229-236.
Google Scholar

Cotterill, Pamela. 1992. “Interviewing women: Issues of friendship, vulnerability, and power.” Women's Studies International Forum, 15 (5-6): 593-606.
Google Scholar

Coplan, Amy. 2011. “Understanding Empathy: Its Features and Effects.” In Empathy. Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives, edited by Amy Coplan and Peter Goldie, 3-18. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Davidson, Larry. 2003. Living outside mental illness. New York: New York University Press.
Google Scholar

Depraz, Natalie. 2001. “The Husserlian theory of intersubjectivity as alterology. Emergent theories and wisdom traditions in the light of genetic phenomenology.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 8 (5-6), 169-178.
Google Scholar

DeVault, Marjorie L., and Glenda Gross. 2006. “Feminist Interviewing. Experience, Talk, and Knowledge.” In Handbook Of Feminist Research. Theory and Praxis, edited by Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber, 173-197. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar

Ferree, Myra Marx. 2000. “Was bringt die Biografieforschung der Bewegungsforschung.” In Politische Biografien und sozialer Wandel, edited by Ingrid Miethe and Silke Roth, 111-127. Gießen: Psychosozial.
Google Scholar

Fielding, Nigel G. 1993. “Mediating the Message: Affinity and Hostility in Research on Sensitive Topics.” In Researching Sensitive Topics, edited by Claire M. Renzetti and Raymond M. Lee, 146-180. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar

Finlay, Linda. 2005. “‘Reflexive embodied empathy’: A phenomenology of participant-researcher intersubjectivity.” The Humanistic Psychologist 33 (4): 271-292.
Google Scholar

Flam, Helena. 2005. “‘Emotions’ Map. A Research Agenda.” In Emotions and Social movements, edited by Helena Flam and Debra King, 19-40. London, New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 2013 [1975]. Truth and method. London: Bloomsbury.
Google Scholar

Gingrich, Andre. 2013. “Methodology.” In The Handbook of Sociocultural Anthropology, edited by James G. Carrier and Deborah B. Gewertz, 107-126. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Grande, Edgar, Swen Hutter, Sophia Hunger, and Eylem Kanol. 2021. Alles Covidioten? Politische Potenziale des Corona-Protests in Deutschland (No. ZZ 2021-601). WZB Discussion Paper. https://bibliothek.wzb.eu/pdf/2021/zz21-601.pdf (Accessed 07.02.2022)
Google Scholar

Hall, Bogumiła. 2019. “Gendering resistance to right-wing populism: Black protest and a new wave of feminist activism in Poland?” American behavioral scientist 63 (10): 1497-1515.
Google Scholar

Hervik, Peter. 2021. “Neo-nationalism and far right studies: Anthropological perspectives.” In Researching The Far Right. Theory, Method and Practice, edited by Ashe Stephen. D., Joel Busher, Graham Macklin and Aaron Winter, 92-107. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Hochschild, Arlie Russell. 2016. Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American right. New York: New Press.
Google Scholar

Hollan, Douglas. 2008. “Being There: On the Imaginative Aspects of Understanding Others and Being Understood.” Ethos 36 (4): 475-489.
Google Scholar

Hollan, Douglas and C. Jason Throop. 2008. “Whatever Happened to Empathy? Introduction.” Ethos 36 (4): 385-401.
Google Scholar

Kocyba, Piotr and Małgorzata Łukianow. 2020. „The Right in the Streets: The Past and Present of the Polish March of Independence.” The Public Eye, 101: 25-28.
Google Scholar

Kocyba, Piotr. 2021. “Die COVID-19-Pandemie als Katalysator der polnischen Impfgegner*innenbewegung.” Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen 2 (34): 311-318.
Google Scholar

Kocyba, Piotr, and Sebastian Sommer. 2022. “On (missing) critical distance and (involuntary) alliances - A warning about the reproduction of far-right ideologies in academic papers.” Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics 8 (1); 208-212.
Google Scholar

Kögler, Hans Herbert and Karsten R. Stueber. 2018. “ Introduction: Empathy, Simulation, and Interpretation in the Philosophy of Social Science.” In Empathy and Agency. The Problem of Understanding in the Human Sciences, edited by Hans Herbert Kögler and Karsten R. Stueber, 1-61. New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Koos, Sebastian. 2021. Die „Querdenker“. Wer nimmt an Corona-Protesten teil und warum? Ergebnisse einer Befragung während der „Corona- Proteste“ am 4.10.2020 in Konstanz. https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/52497 (Accessed 20.12.2021)
Google Scholar

Kubik, Jan. 1984. “Rozumienie i interpretacja czy wyjaśnienie? Z metodologicznych dylematów humanistyki.” In Wybrane zagadnienia metodologiczno-teoretyczne badań socjologicznych, edited by Jacek Wasilewski, 13-24. Kraków: Universytet Jagielloński.
Google Scholar

Luff, Donna. 1999. “Dialogue across the divides: ‘Moments of rapport’ and power in Feminist Research with Anti-Feminist Women.” Sociology 33 (4): 687-703.
Google Scholar

Mandal, Eugenia and Mirosław Kofta. 2009. “Wykluczanie społeczne feministek jako przejaw usprawiedliwiania patriarchalnego systemu społecznego.” In Przekonania w życiu jednostek, grup, społeczności, edited by Aleksandra Cisłak, Kamil Henne and Krystyna Skarżyńska, 153-170. Warszawa: Academica.
Google Scholar

Mauer, Marcus, Carsten Reinemann and Simon Kruschinski. 2021. Eine empirische Studie zur Qualität der journalistischen Berichterstattung über die Corona-Pandemie. https://rudolf-augstein-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Studie-einseitig-unkritisch-regierungsnah-reinemann-rudolf-augstein-stiftung.pdf (Accessed 20.12.2021)
Google Scholar

Milman, Noa and Folashade Ajayi, Donatella della Porta, Nicole Doerr, Piotr Kocyba, Anna Lavizzari, Herbert Reiter, Piotr Płucienniczak, Moritz Sommer, Elias Steinhilper und Sabrina Zajak. 2021. Black Lives Matter in Europe Transnational Diffusion, Local Translation and Resonance of Anti-Racist Protest in Germany, Italy, Denmark and Poland. DRN #06: Berlin. https://www.dezim-institut.de/fileadmin/Publikationen/Research_Notes/DeZIM_Research_Notes_06_RZ_210702_web-1.pdf (Accessed 04.12.2021)
Google Scholar

Mondon, Aurelien, and Aaron Winter. 2021. “From demonization to normalization: Reflecting on far right research”. In Researching The Far Right. Theory, Method and Practice, edited by Ashe Stephen. D., Joel Busher, Graham Macklin and Aaron Winter. 370-382. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Muszel, Magdalena, and Grzegorz Piotrowski. 2018. “Rozbujać małe miasteczka: aktywistki Czarnych Protestów w Polsce.” Praktyka Teoretyczna, 30(4): 101-128.
Google Scholar

Muszel, Magdalena, and Grzegorz Piotrowski. 2020. “‘Czarne protesty’ jako wydarzenie transformacyjne praktyk obywatelskich działaczek z małych miast” Civitas. Studia z filozofii polityki 27: 131-162.
Google Scholar

Nachtwey, Oliver, Robert Schäfer and Nadine Frei. 17.12.2020. Politische Soziologie Der Corona-proteste. Grundauswertung. SocArXiv. doi:10.31235/osf.io/zyp3f. (Accessed 20.12.2021)
Google Scholar

Oakley, Ann. 1981. “Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms?” In Doing Feminist Research, edited by Roberts Helen, 30-61. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Oakley, Ann. 2016. “Interviewing Women Again: Power, Time and the Gift.” Sociology 50 (1): 195-213.
Google Scholar

Ostrander, Susan A. 1984. Women of the upper Class. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Google Scholar

Pasieka, Agnieszka. 2019. “Anthropology of the far right. What if we like the ‘unlikeable’ others?” Anthropology Today 35 (1): 3-6.
Google Scholar

Rucht, Dieter. 2016. “Conclusions. Social Movement Studies in Europe. Achievements, Gaps and Challenges.” In Social Movement Studies in Europe. The State of the Art, edited by Olivier Fillieule and Guya Accornero, 456-487. Oxford, New York: Berghahn Books.
Google Scholar

Rucht, Dieter. 2019. “Politically Engaged Scholarship in Social Movement Studies.” In Marxist Historical Cultures and Social Movements during the Cold War. Case Studies from Germany, Italy and Other Western European States, edited by Stefan Berger and Christoph Cornelissen, 141-162. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar

Sanders-McDonagh, Erin. 2014. “Conducting ‘Dirty Research’ with extreme groups: understanding academia as a dirty work site.” Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 9 (3): 241-253.
Google Scholar

Smyth, Lisa, and Claire Mitchell. 2008. “Researching conservative groups: rapport and understanding across moral and political boundaries.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 11 (5): 441-452.
Google Scholar

Taylor, Jodie. 2011. “The intimate insider: negotiating the ethics of friendship when doing insider research.” Qualitative Research 11 (1): 3-22.
Google Scholar

Toombs, Austin., Shad D. Gross, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2017. “From empathy to care: a feminist care ethics perspective on long-term researcher-participant relations.” Interacting with Computers 29 (1): 45-57.
Google Scholar

Ulbricht, Justus H. 2017. “Die haben alle verstanden, dass die Zeiten des Abduckens und Abtauchens und ‘Wir wollen das alles friedlich haben’ längst vorbei sind.” In Pegida als Spiegel und Projektionsfläche. Wechselwirkungen und Abgrenzungen zwischen Pegida, Politik, Medien, Zivilgesellschaft und Sozialwissenschaften, edited by Tino Heim,197-210. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Google Scholar

Waldhaus, Christoph. 2021. “Von Covidioten, Corona Leugnern und anderen rechten Verschwörungstheoretikern. Eine Analyse medialer Frames.” Synergies Pays germanophones (14): 45-167.
Google Scholar

Walsh, Russell. 2004. “The methodological implications of Gadamer’s distinction between statements and speculative language.” The Humanistic Psychologist 32 (2): 105-119.
Google Scholar