Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Examining the methodological, ethical and emotional dimensions of researching intimate partner violence among women as a past victim of IPV. Interpretive criticities and rapport building potential of shared pain within anthropological research.

Paper long abstract

As researchers, we are expected to know ourselves and how others might perceive us deeply enough to anticipate how this might influence our fieldwork. However, how do you react when you are interviewing someone and you realize that you could be on either side of that microphone? How does that influence not only data-collection but also its coding, analysis and interpretation?

Reflexivity and positionality are the tenants of anthropological fieldwork. Choosing to research intimate partner violence after experiencing it, therefore warranted a deep moment of self- analysis and methodological reflection.

Throughout my paper, I analyze experiences of shared pain and vulnerability as elements of positionality in the fieldwork. On one side, I argue that shared experiences, although traumatic, can constitute a useful tool to create and strengthen relationships and allow access to deeper knowledge and interpretations. Within research of intimate partner violence specifically, shared experiences of past abuse allow for a safe space where the respondent can break from the image of “ideal victim” (Binik, 2015) without the fear of being judged or experiencing secondary victimization.

On the other side, there are both emotional and methodological counterindications. Emotionally, actively listening to stories of violence and abuse (past or active) can reignite feelings in researchers who have experienced similar forms of abuse, endangering their well-being. Methodologically, there’s a risk of biasing the research by cherry picking respondents interpretations, stories and narratives that resonate with the researcher’s.