Is Bias And Impartiality In The Eye Of The Beholder? An Exploration on Reflexivity And Its Contribution Towards Credible Qualitative Research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37231/jimk.2025.26.3.981Abstract
Background: Reflexivity is a practice used in qualitative research in order to overcome issues of bias. Bias has been known to arise surreptitiously in the subjective interpretation and analysis of qualitative findings. This paper explores the literature on the practice of reflexivity and finds a gap in the exemplification of the practice of reflexivity itself. The existing literature is still somewhat vague on how and what reflexive notes are and how they can be integrated within the actual research itself. Objective: The aim of this paper is to narrate various notes on reflexivity that have been conducted on a qualitative research. Methods: The qualitative research explores the expectations of industry practitioners on graduate employability skills for a higher education internship programme in Brunei Darussalam. Results: Based on the results of reflexive notes of the study, the findings show several factors that arise that contribute towards impartial interpretation of research findings which include language, proximity and familiarity, shared knowledge and interview structure. An additional factor also shows how bias may contribute towards inequity. Conclusion: Therefore, this result shows the importance of impartial collaboration between both higher education and industry practitioners to overcome the issue of inequity.
References
Alhejaili, A., Wharrad, H., & Windle, R. (2022). Method during Social Distancing : Benefits and Challenges. 1–12.
ApricotFields. (2020). Urban Dictionary. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Brulish
Arnold, R., Mahato, P., Holloway, R., & Teijlingen, E. R. Van. (2023). Writing and publishing a reflective paper : Three case studies. January.
Azahari, L. M., & Ahmad, F. A. (2022). Complementing Quality Education with Sustainable Employment for the Future of Work: An Overview. Journal of UCYP Press, 1(1), 29–34. www.journal.ucyp.edu.my
Barton, G., Khosronejad, M., Ryan, M., Kervin, L., & Myhill, D. (2024). Teaching creative writing in primary schools: a systematic review of the literature through the lens of reflexivity. Australian Educational Researcher, 51(4), 1311–1330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-023-00641-9
Bell. (2022). The Challenges And Benefits Of Insider Research Within A Professional Doctoral Study – An Exploration Of Experience And Review Of Current Literature. EDULEARN22 Proceedings, Pp. 8685-8690., 8685-8690. https://library.iated.org/view/BELL2022CHA
Creswell, J.W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Insider-Outsider Research in Qualitative Inquiry. In Theory Into Practice (Vol. 39, Issue 3). Routledge.
Kinitz, D. J. (2022). The Emotional and Psychological Labor of Insider Qualitative Research Among Systemically Marginalized Groups: Revisiting the Uses of Reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 32(11), 1635–1647. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323221112620
Lees, A. B., Walters, S., & Godbold, R. (2022). Illuminating the Role of Reflexivity Within Qualitative Pilot Studies: Experiences From a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221076933
McGlacken, R. (2023). A review of reflexive practice in qualitative research teams. 1–11.
MTIC. (2019). Digital Economy Master Plan 2025. http://www.mtic.gov.bn/DE2025/documents/Digital Economy Masterplan 2025.pdf
Nunan, D. (2021). Collection: Privacy and research ethics. International Journal of Market Research, 63(3), 271–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853211015445
Olmos-Vega, F. M., Stalmeijer, R. E., Varpio, L., & Kahlke, R. (2022). A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Medical Teacher, 0(0), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287
Pousti, Hamid, Urquhart, & Cathy. (2021). Researching the virtual: a frame- work for reflexivity in qualitative social media research. 31, 356–383.
Ritter, C., Koralesky, K. E., Saraceni, J., Roche, S., Vaarst, M., & Kelton, D. (2023). Invited review: Qualitative research in dairy science—A narrative review. Journal of Dairy Science, 106(9), 5880–5895. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2022-23125
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. In SAGE Publications.
Taquette, S. R., & Borges da Matta Souza, L. M. (2022). Ethical Dilemmas in Qualitative Research: A Critical Literature Review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221078731
Tomlinson, J., & Medlinskiene, K. (2024). Reflexivity in pharmacy practice qualitative research: systematic review of twelve peer-reviewed journals. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 32(Supplement_1), i5–i6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riae013.007
Published
Issue
Section
License
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.
Copyrights for articles published in JIMK journals are retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the journal. The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.
