Intimacy in Autoethnography: A Framework for Autoethnographic Trustworthiness

Carey Andrzejewski; Sean Forbes; Eric Hogan

doi:10.29333/ajqr/17873

Carey Andrzejewski ¹ ^* , Sean Forbes ², Eric Hogan ³

More Detail

AM J QUALITATIVE RES, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp. 306-316

https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/17873

OPEN ACCESS 22 Views 4 Downloads

Download Full Text (PDF)

Abstract

The hallmarks of autoethnographic research are the centering of personal experience to interpret the ways of being of a culture-sharing group and then representing that group in evocative text. This focus on personal experience in situ and representation sets autoethnography apart from other methodological traditions, even while it blends elements of autobiography and ethnography. We assert, given its unique characteristics, that autoethnography is best understood as a project rooted in intimate epistemologies. Intimate epistemologies are those that eliminate all distance between the knower and the known. Epistemologies should guide the strategies (i.e., warrants) researchers use to assert that their research is trustworthy; trustworthiness is an inherently epistemological concept. This article articulates a framework grounded in four intimacy-aligned strategies. The planks of this framework are researcher reflexivity, prolonged engagement, thick description, and collaboration. We explore how each of these four strategies is practical in the context of autoethnography projects and are consistent with intimate epistemologies.

Keywords: Autoethnography, Intimacy, Trustworthiness

References

Adams, T., & Herrmann, A. (2020). Expanding our autoethnographic future. Journal of Autoethnography, 1(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1525/joae.2020.1.1.1
Adams, T., Holman Jones, S., & Ellis, C. (2015). Autoethnography: Understanding qualitative research. Oxford University Press.
Ahmed, S. K. (2024). The pillars of trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 2, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2024.100051
Ambert, A.-M., Adler, P. A., Adler, P., & Detzner, D. F. (1995). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 879–894. https://doi.org/10.2307/353409
Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), 373–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449
Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., & Delamont, S. (2003). Key themes in qualitative research: Continuities and change. AltaMira Press.
Bergman, Å., & Lindgren, M. (2017). Navigating between an emic and an etic approach in ethnographic research: Crucial aspects and strategies when communicating critical results to participants. Ethnography and Education, 13(4), 477–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2017.1387066
Bernauer, J. A. (2023). The six voices of Logue in qualitative inquiry: Prologue, monologue, dialogue, polylogue, metalogue, and epilogue. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 7(4), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/13597
Berry, K. (2013). Spinning autoethnographic reflectivity, cultural critique, and negotiating selves. In S. Holman Jones, T. Adams, & C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of autoethnography (pp. 209–227). Left Coast Press.
Berry, K., & Clair, R. (2011). Reflecting on the call to ethnographic reflexivity: A collage of responses to questions of contestation. Cultural Studies/Critical Methodologies, 11, 199- 209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532708611401339
Bhattacharya, K. (2017). Fundamentals of qualitative research: A practical guide. Routledge.
Bochner, A. P., & Ellis, C. (2016). Evocative autoethnography: Writing stories and telling lives. Routledge.
Boll, T. (2023). Meet “me” in the field(-notes): The selves and self-relations of autoethnography. Qualitative Inquiry, 30(8-9), 674-683. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004231196921
Butz, D., & Besio, K. (2009). Autoethnography. Geography Compass, 3(5), 1660-1674. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2009.00279.x
Chang, H. (2008). Autoethnography as method. Left Coast.
Chang, H., Ngunjiri, F., & Hernandez, K-A.C. (2013). Collaborative autoethnography. Left Coast Press.
Chuang, H. S. (2015). Complete-member ethnography: Epistemological intimacy, complete-membership, and potentials in critical communication research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915611551
Cîrstea, A. M., & Pescinski, J. (2024). ‘Intimacy as method’: Ethnographic reflections on equitable knowledge production in migration research. Migration Studies, 12(3), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnae020
Cook, P. (2014). To be sociological: Autoethnography as an assessment and learning tool. Journal of Sociology, 50(3), 269-282. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783312451780
Cooper, R., & Lilyea, B. (2022). I’m interested in autoethnography, but how do I do it? The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 197-208. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5288
Creswell, J., & Miller, D. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
Creswell, J. & Poth, C. (2024). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.
Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Sage.
Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., Giardina, M., & Cannella, G. S. (2024). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, M. D. Giardina, & G. S. Cannella (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (6^th ed., pp. 1-28). Sage.
Ellis, C. (2007). Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(1), 3-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406294947
Ellis, E., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung 36(4), 273- 290. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23032294
Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (2^nd ed., pp. 733-768). Sage.
Erickson, F. (2024). A history of qualitative inquiry in social and educational research. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, M. D. Giardina, & G. S. Cannella (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (6^th ed., pp. 33-60). Sage.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books.
Giorgio, G. (2013). In his own time: An autoethnographic memorial. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(2), 119-126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800412462994
Grass, K. (2024). The three logics of qualitative research: Epistemology, ontology, and methodology in political science. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 8(1), 42-56. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/14083
Hogan, E. (2022a). An autoethnographic reflection of my academic privileges while working with high school interns. The Qualitative Report, 27(4), 937-944. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.4807
Hogan, E. (2022b). Changing my language and understanding: An autoethnography of dumb- upness. National Youth Advocacy and Resilience Journal 5(2), 50-67. https://doi.org/10.20429/nyarj.2022.050203
Johnson, M. (1999). Observations on positivism and pseudoscience in qualitative nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 30(1), 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365- 2648.1999.01050.x
Keleş, U. (2020). Writing a “good” autoethnography in educational research: A modest proposal. The Qualitative Report, 27(9), 2026-2046. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5662
Le Roux, C. S. (2017). Exploring rigour in autoethnographic research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(2), 195-207.https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1140965
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A., & Guba, E. G. (2018). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5^th ed., pp. 108-150). Sage.
McKim, C. (2023). Meaningful member-checking: A structured approach to member-checking. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 7(2), 41-52. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/12973
Miyahara, M., & Fukao, A. (2022). Exploring the use of collaborative autoethnography as a tool for facilitating the development of researcher reflexivity. System, 105, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102751
Pugh, A. J., & Mosseri, S. (2023). Trust-building vs.“just trust me”: Reflexivity and resonance in ethnography. Frontiers in Sociology, 8, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1069305
Raab, D. (2013). Transpersonal approaches to autoethnographic research and writing. The Qualitative Report, 18(42), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2013.1516
Ross, K., Li, P., & Call-Cummings, M. (2023). Solidarity as methodological praxis. Qualitative Research, 23(5), 1181-1202. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221098919
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201
Smith, C. (2005). Epistemological intimacy: A move to autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 4(2), 68-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690500400206
Stahl, N. & King, J. (2020). Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Developmental Education, 44(1), 26-28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45381095
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837-851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
Tracy, S. J. (2019). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2^nd ed.). Wiley Global Research.
Van Maanen, J. (2011). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography (2^nd ed.). The University of Chicago Press.
Whittemore, R., Chase, S., & Mandle, C.L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11(4), 522-537. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973201129119299
Zacharias, N., & Shleykina, G. (2021). Collaborative autoethnography as a pathway for teacher
learning. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 5(2), 10-21. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/11030

Citation

Andrzejewski, C., Forbes, S., & Hogan, E. (2026). Intimacy in Autoethnography: A Framework for Autoethnographic Trustworthiness. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 10(1), 306-316. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/17873

Andrzejewski, C., Forbes, S., and Hogan, E. (2026). Intimacy in Autoethnography: A Framework for Autoethnographic Trustworthiness. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 10(1), pp. 306-316. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/17873

Andrzejewski C, Forbes S, Hogan E. Intimacy in Autoethnography: A Framework for Autoethnographic Trustworthiness. AM J QUALITATIVE RES. 2026;10(1), 306-316. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/17873

Andrzejewski, Carey, Sean Forbes, and Eric Hogan. "Intimacy in Autoethnography: A Framework for Autoethnographic Trustworthiness". American Journal of Qualitative Research 2026 10 no. 1 (2026): 306-316. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/17873

Andrzejewski, Carey et al. "Intimacy in Autoethnography: A Framework for Autoethnographic Trustworthiness". American Journal of Qualitative Research, vol. 10, no. 1, 2026, pp. 306-316. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/17873

Andrzejewski C, Forbes S, Hogan E. Intimacy in Autoethnography: A Framework for Autoethnographic Trustworthiness. AM J QUALITATIVE RES. 2026;10(1):306-16. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/17873