IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcitxx/v17y2014i1p46-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A call for renewal in tourism ethnographic research: the researcher as both the subject and object of knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin D. O'Gorman
  • Andrew C. MacLaren
  • Derek Bryce

Abstract

Our critique of tourism ethnographic research argues that too much existing published work tends to cite preceding studies as methodological precedents without stating how particular approaches were operationalised. Moreover, findings are often presented as individual cases with limited utility in terms of theory-building or wider understanding of contextual phenomena. We argue that closer attention first to current developments within anthropology which seek to overcome researcher naivety and, second, greater philosophical reflexivity would elevate both the rigour with which such work is undertaken and the seriousness with which it is received in the wider academy. We call for a double-reflexivity in ethnographic research in tourism that accepts both the specific situational nature of individual studies and the wider discursive frames within which they are embedded. We call for constant reflection on, and acknowledgement of, this duality in ethnographic research where, after all, the researcher is so intimately embedded in empirical and subjective terms.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin D. O'Gorman & Andrew C. MacLaren & Derek Bryce, 2014. "A call for renewal in tourism ethnographic research: the researcher as both the subject and object of knowledge," Current Issues in Tourism, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 46-59, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:17:y:2014:i:1:p:46-59
    DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2012.718321
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13683500.2012.718321
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13683500.2012.718321?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:17:y:2014:i:1:p:46-59. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.