-1-
LITERATURE REVIEW SUMMARY
AUTHOR:
TOPIC:
DATE:
Tara Lyons
Feminist methodology
October, 2006
AIM:
To identify the key themes in the literature in 3–5 pages and provide personal
comments/thoughts. All members of the research team will have an opportunity to provide
their comments/thoughts as well.
Feminist research and methods are a response to research that claims to be able to find truth about the
world through objective and neutral means, such as the scientific method which claims that researchers
can and should be unbiased and that it is possible to observe and measure phenomena. These research
methods are based in a philosophy called positivism that claims that only real knowledge is produced
from scientific methods. Often in this type of research women are overlooked and misrepresented.
Feminist scholars contested, and continue to contest, the claims that researchers can be unbiased and
neutral and that the scientific method is the only way to produce knowledge (Gatenby & Humphries
2000). In response, new methods have been proposed that try not to speak on behalf of women without
their input (Fitzgerald 2004).
In this review I outline what feminist research is, highlighting central principles: the relationship
between participants and researchers; reflexivity; privileging women’s experiences and analyses of race,
class and gender.
Research is political (Hunter 2002). Research produces knowledge and like other social institutions (law,
education, etc.) further marginalizes certain people while reinforcing the power of others (Harding &
Norberg 2005). Researchers are people with opinions, assumptions, and value judgments and these
cannot be separated from research methods. Researchers bring previous experiences to the research and
this affects what research topics are chosen, the methods used and how findings are interpreted (Deutsch
2004). Thus, questions of power cannot be separated from research: How is the research being
conducted and disseminated? Who gets to decide how the research is conducted and disseminated? Who
benefits from the research?
What is feminist methodology?
Research methods are the tools used to investigate, examine and analyze the social world (e.g.,
interviews, observations, questionnaires). There is not a clear definition of feminist methodology, in part
because this is contested in the literature.
There is debate over what feminist methodology is, and whether it exists. Chafetz (2004) argues that
there is no such thing as a feminist methodology and that we should use all and any research tools
necessary to further our research on gender/women. In contrast Baber (2004) argues that there is such a
thing as feminist methodology and that some research tools are not useful for feminist research. Baber
CIHR Research Project - Aboriginal Women Drug Users in Conflict with the Law: A Study of the Role of SelfIdentity in the Healing Journey
-2(2004) argues that feminist methodology is distinct in its assumptions and its goal to make women’s
lives better.
There is some consistency in the literature that social change is central to feminist research (Fonow &
Cook (2005) and that feminist research is about improving women’s lives (Harding & Norberg 2005).
Reinharz (1992: 175) argues that “the purpose of feminist research must be to create new relationships,
better laws, and improved institutions”.
Undoubtedly, feminist methods privilege women’s experience. Privileging women’s experiences is a
response to these experiences being silenced and misconstrued (Mulinari & Sandell 1999). Just focusing
on women, however, doesn’t ensure that women being researched will have power in the research
process (Shope 2006: 179). However, specific methods have been developed for carrying out feminist
research.
Principles of Feminist Research
1) Relationship between participants and researchers
The research process is infused with power inequalities. This is most evident in the relationships
between participants and researchers. A principle of feminist research is acknowledging and attempting
to disrupt these power inequalities (Deutsch 2004; Hunter 2002; Shope 2006). The goal is for
participants’ experiences to be central and the interests of the researcher to be less important (Fitzgerald
2004: 236).
One way this is carried out is with research methods that attempt to minimize the gaps in power between
researchers and those they are researching. For example, Gatenby & Humphries (2000) outline a
Participatory Action Research (PAR) feminist project that had the goal to develop the careers of
participants by virtue of their experiences as ‘co-researchers.’ Another way feminists deal with power
imbalances in research is by giving participants roles in the research and/or providing opportunities for
the participants to design the research. Fitzgerald (2004) argues that negotiating the research project
from beginning to end with participants and giving participants ownership over the research and
knowledge is fundamental.
Another method is for researchers and participants to write together and/or by having writing approved
by the participants. Research and writing is taken to the communities researchers are working with to be
‘validated’ and to give participants the opportunity to give feedback on the research and results (Hunter
2002: 128). The work of Fitzgerald (2004) is a good example of this. The women in her study can decide
not to give their approval to publish her writing about them: “While I may have been the author of the
published work, the authority to produce such accounts was vested in the participants who could `always
rescind our approval' (Barbara, Australia)” (Fitzgerald 2004: 237-8). It is important to address power
inequalities between those doing the research and those being researched in order to challenge dominant
power relations and the status quo (Fitzgerald 2004: 238). This is also a way to prevent speaking for
women and their experiences (Shope 2006: 175).
Even with these methods, the researcher holds significant power over how the results are disseminated
and how the research is conducted. Shope (2006) argues that equality between researchers and
CIHR Research Project - Aboriginal Women Drug Users in Conflict with the Law: A Study of the Role of SelfIdentity in the Healing Journey
-3participants is not possible until the broader power inequalities, such as inequalities based on class and
ethnicity, are changed.
2) Reflexivity
Reflexivity is a central principle of feminist methodology. Reflexivity is a researcher’s examination of
her chosen methods, her role in the research, her relationships with participants, and how her social
positions affect the research process (Burman et al. 2001; Deutsch 2004; Duncan 2002; Fitzgerald 2004).
Reflexivity also includes how researchers include themselves in writing about the research (Fonow &
Cook 2005) and their emotional reactions to the research. It is a process that is ongoing (Shope 2006).
Reflexivity can bring attention to a researcher’s biases and assumptions (Hunter 2002). If researchers do
not examine these social positions (current and past socioeconomic status, gender and racial
categorization, sexuality, etc.), biases and preconceived assumptions will mark their work (Shope 2006).
Reflexivity, however, does not erase bias, assumptions, and power inequalities (Shope 2006). Certain
practices of reflexivity have been criticized for making the research all about the researcher and
drowning out the voices of the participants (Fonow & Cook 2005; Shope 2006).
3) Privileging women’s experiences
There is an ongoing debate in feminist and critical race research as to whether research can and should
be conducted by people who are socially located outside of the group they are researching. Is it
appropriate for men to do research on women; for Caucasian women to research Aboriginal women’s
lives? Is experience in certain groups, such as drug using communities, necessary for one to do research
with people who use drugs?
Standpoint theories place women’s experiences and lives at the centre of research (Fawcett & Hearn
2004; Smith 1999). A standpoint perspective assumes that “experiences produce knowledge and
knowledge divorced from experience is colonizing, appropriating and oppressive.” (Fawcett & Hearn
2004: 209). Two assumptions, according to Walby (2001), underlie the standpoint perspective. One, it is
presumed that those in marginalized positions are better able to see and understand their marginalization
and two, it is assumed that having lived marginalization and oppression produces knowledge that is
more accurate than those who haven’t lived the same experiences. The knowledge of those in privileged
positions will be less objective because they are not placed in positions that force them to question their
places in the world (Pohlhaus 2002).
It becomes complicated, however, when we look beyond single identity categorizations. Women are not
a unified category; they occupy difference social, economic, ethnic and power positions. For instance,
Chafetz (2004) disagrees with the standpoint claim that people in marginal positions have better
knowledge than those outside. She argues that all knowledge is partial and therefore people in
marginalized positions don’t speak from a true perspective, but rather a different perspective.
Standpoint approaches have tended to collapse the differences among women and consequently have
focused on the experiences of privileged women (Pohlhaus 2002). Fawcett & Hearn (2004) argue that to
make connections to different experiences of people in order to prevent one experience overshadowing
all others and can lead to stronger mobilization with allies. Others respond by stating that ‘others’ “are
not affected or not affected enough to be long-term allies” (Fawcett & Hearn 2004: 212).
CIHR Research Project - Aboriginal Women Drug Users in Conflict with the Law: A Study of the Role of SelfIdentity in the Healing Journey
-4Mulinari & Sandell (1999) argue that with the shift to postmodernism (a philosophical shift away from
positivism that contends there is not one objective reality and contests claims of rationality) there has
been a shift to research on individual narratives away from research on women’s broader experiences.
The shift to postmodernism initially offered feminist scholars ways to move away from essentializing
women’s experiences (which resulted in privileging women in positions of power). However,
postmodernism has moved feminist work away from women’s daily lived experiences. Thus they argue
that a concept of experience that accounts for women’s lived experiences and the social structures that
shape these experiences is important and necessary for feminist work.
4) Looking beyond gender
Another aspect of current feminist research is an acknowledgement and examination of multiple,
connected sites of oppression. It is not enough to look at gender, it is also necessary to consider
women’s experiences with regard to race, class, age, sexuality (etc.). Race, class and gender are
currently considered the important categories. This emphasis is a response to white feminist research
that focuses solely on white, middle-class women; research that is then taken to be representative of all
women’s experiences.
Race, class and gender are often analyzed as intersections. The concept of ‘intersection’ and the
categories themselves, however, are rigid (Andersen 2005). Race, gender and class are not neat
categories and Shope (2006) cautions us against trying to force these categories onto women’s lives
without linking them to specific political and historical contexts. Further, race, class and gender do not
occur in isolation from each other, rather they shape one another (Andersen 2005). Racism and sexism
are connected and thus racial identities are gendered (Hunter 2002). In other words, Aboriginal women
face gender discrimination in different ways than non-Aboriginal women.
Oppressions are not equal and don’t have equal effects (Andersen 2005). For example, being a queer
woman is not equal to being a woman living in poverty. Thus, we cannot compare or pile of oppressions
on top of one another (called additive analysis) (Maynard 2001). This ignores how social structures
(government, policies, laws, history) are tied, in complex ways, to race, class and gender. This style of
analysis also overlooks the differences between different groups of women and differences among
Aboriginal women.
Tara’s Thoughts
Deutsch (2004) claims that engaging in reflexivity allowed her to rise above her biases. Is it possible to
overcome one’s biases and assumptions? I don’t think so. I’m suspicious of reflexivity being a simple
solution. I think reflecting on my privilege and social locations as a white, PhD student from a middleclass family is essential, not just as a researcher, but as a person walking through this world. Yet, I also
think that power pervades research and that is it very difficult for researchers to move out of dominant
positions as academics, graduate students, and general holders of knowledge. Some researchers are only
willing/able to be reflexive about certain things. For example, Fitzgerald (2004: 238) argues that
researchers feel comfortable positioning themselves in some categories (gender, race), but “we are less
willing to acknowledge and declare our whiteness…”.
When Chafetz (2004) argues that all knowledge is partial and marginalized people don’t speak a true
perspective I need to ask: What are the implications of this? Is it appropriate to deny women of claims to
CIHR Research Project - Aboriginal Women Drug Users in Conflict with the Law: A Study of the Role of SelfIdentity in the Healing Journey
-5their experiences? What is the role of researchers in this? If a woman states her experiences in a way that
contradicts the treatment provider, whose knowledge is given primacy?
Feminist methods give us opportunities and tools to challenge the status quo and dominant ways of
thinking. This project is a great opportunity to contest negative stereotypes of drug users and Aboriginal
women. Feminist methods give us a way to place Aboriginal women who use illicit drugs at the centre
of the project and to allow them to have power and influence in how the research is done and
disseminated.
References Cited:
Andersen, Margaret L. (2005). Thinking About Women: A Quarter Century’s View. Gender & Society,
19(4): 437-455
Baber, Kristine, M. (2004). Building Bridges: Feminist Research, Theory, and Practice: A Response to
Janet Saltzman Chafetz. Journal of Family Issues, 25(7): 978-983
Burman, Michele J., Batchelor, Susan A., & Brown, Jane A. (2001). Researching Girls and Violence:
Facing the Dilemmas of Fieldwork. British Journal of Criminology, 41: 443-459
Chafetz, Janet Saltzman (2004). Bridging Feminist Theory and Research Methodology. Journal of
Family Issues, 25(7): 963-977
Deutsch, Nancy L. (2004). Positionality and the Pen: Reflections on the Process of Becoming a Feminist
Researcher and Writer. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(6): 885-902
Delgado Bernal, Dolores (2002). Critical Race Theory, Latino Critical Theory, and Critical RacedGendered Epistemologies: Recognizing Students of Color as Holders and Creators of Knowledge
Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1): 105-126
Fawcett, Barbara & Jeff Hearn (2004). Researching others: epistemology, experience, standpoints and
participation. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 7(3): 201-218
Fitzgerald, Tanya (2004). Powerful Voices and Powerful Stories: reflections on the challenges and
dynamics of intercultural research. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 25(3): 233-245
Fonow, Mary Margaret & Judith A. Cook (2005). Feminist Methodology: New Applications in the
Academy and Public Policy. Signs, 30(4): 2211-2236
Harding, Sandra & Norberg, Kathryn (2005). New Feminist Approaches to Social Science
Methodologies: An Introduction. Signs, 30(4): 2009-2015
Hunter, Margaret (2002). Rethinking epistemology, methodology, and racism: or, is White sociology
really dead? Race & Society, 5: 119–138
CIHR Research Project - Aboriginal Women Drug Users in Conflict with the Law: A Study of the Role of SelfIdentity in the Healing Journey
-6-
Maynard, Mary (2001). ‘Race’, Gender and the Concept of ‘Difference’ in Feminist Thought. In Kum
Kum Bhawnani (ed.). Feminism and ‘Race’. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Pp. 121-133.
Mulinari, Diana & Sandell, Kirsten (1999). Exploring the Notion of Experience in Feminist Thought.
Acta Sociologica, 42: 287-297
Pohlhaus, Gaile (2002). Knowing communities: an investigation of Harding’s standpoint epistemology.
Social Epistemology, 16(3): 283–293
Reinharz, Shulamit (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
Shope, Janet Hinson (2006). “You Can’t Cross a River Without Getting Wet”: A Feminist Standpoint on
the Dilemmas of Cross-Cultural Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(1): 163-184
Smith, Dorothy E. (1999). Writing the Social: Critique, Theory and Investigations. Toronto: University
of Toronto Press.
Walby, Sylvia (2001). Against epistemological chasms: The science question in feminism revisited.
Signs, 26(2): 485-509
Walker, Alexis J. (2004). Methods, Theory, and the Practice of Feminist Research: A Response to Janet
Chafetz. Journal of Family Issues, 25(7): 990-994
CIHR Research Project - Aboriginal Women Drug Users in Conflict with the Law: A Study of the Role of SelfIdentity in the Healing Journey