To answer more specifically, the most flexible methodology I have found is called Thematic Analysis. It allowed me flexibility to deal with very different responses from participants from several different cultures in the same inquiry. I have used NVivo, which I would call a tool rather than a method, and it is handy, but a bit expensive. Likewise, TA is an analytic system rather than a method, per se, but it allows one to gather diverse data via interview and make sense of it. Ref: Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytical tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385-405.

I agree with Sarah H about the need to be a "competent member of the culture" involved in your subject matter, or else you can completely missunderstand the meanings agents associate with their practices.. I am also convinced that in addition the researcher needs to have some analytical distance with it in order to produce knowledge that goes beyond common sense.

I agree with the two previous answers. This is a topic that all qualitative researches must wrestle with.

There is a need for both cultural sensitivity as well as the objectivity of a scientist, and the real skill is to balance these two. Erikson spoke of the need for a "disciplined subjectivity."

For those of us clinically trained, it was the need to balance empathy with professional distance. The key in many cases is how to handle the dynamics of transference and countertransference.

From experience, I would say that most qualitative approaches have the potential to be cross-culturally sensitive, but they certainly don't guarantee this. The researcher needs to be knowledgeable and reflective to guard against making unwarranted assumptions. A good balance of understanding of the perspectives and views of the people being discussed and being able to step back and take some analytical distance is valuable.

Using analytic tools from NVivo(see stage 3 of O'Neill's 2013 Toolkit), such as cross case queries, cetainly allow cross cultura sensitivity.

Nice question. I would say it depends on the subject the researcher is studying and also his background on such research methods. Qualitative studies are much more subjectives from a dialetic perspective than a quantitative survey, nevertheless a cross-cultural survey that consider the translation/re-translation of a research instrument faces the very same concern: how to keep and maintain the "real" sense of an attitude or belief in a given context without incurs in false generalizations or wrong assumptions. My view on this is quite simple: keep your eyes on the epistemologic meaning of every research, and remember that science is not neutral, always depends on the socio-historical's narrative of each researcher, research is a craft.

Thank you all for the interesting responses. Thank you Maureen re: Nvivo.

To me, the bottom line is just being sensitive and listening. Qual is definitely better than marching in with a pile of preconceptions and intrusive surveys. Even if you lack competence in the culture, find a friend to guide you. Hopefully, you find a real friend and don't end up like Margaret Mead or Chagnon, with your participants having a blast making up the funniest things they can dream up.

To answer more specifically, the most flexible methodology I have found is called Thematic Analysis. It allowed me flexibility to deal with very different responses from participants from several different cultures in the same inquiry. I have used NVivo, which I would call a tool rather than a method, and it is handy, but a bit expensive. Likewise, TA is an analytic system rather than a method, per se, but it allows one to gather diverse data via interview and make sense of it. Ref: Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytical tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385-405.

Yes, nice question indeed. Cultural affiliations are hard to divorce from any context, including research methodology. However, there is a need to distinguish between scientific research and other kind of research such as on mythology and religion. Scientific methods are based on empiricism and necessarily experience based, if not data based. Replicability is the corner stone and one can wonder if culture can be dominant. But an element is surely expected.

This may be helpful (postcolonial feminist perspective): http://www.oa.uottawa.ca/journals/aporia/articles/2011_01/racine.pdf

There are two texts I will like to bring to your notice. The first is a book titled 'Performing Qualitative Cross-Cultural Research' authored by Pranee Liamputtong. Check it at: http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/sociology/research-methods-sociology-and-criminology/performing-qualitative-cross-cultural-research.

The other is a paper by Steen Mangen in the International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Volume 2, Issue 2, 1999 titled 'Qualitative research methods in cross-national settings' available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/136455799295087#.UdVLJaBwbIU

DOI:10.1080/136455799295087

I hope these two texts help you.

You might find this paper I wrote of interest: http://academia.edu/198068/Walking_a_tightrope_Asian_health_research_in_New_Zealand

"Interest in how knowledge is constructed in multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and multi-faith communities is gaining momentum in countries such as New Zealand as they become more diverse. In turn, this provides an opportunity for new and innovative research approaches that de-centre hegemonic discourses. This paper describes some key issues and challenges that could shape the development of appropriate and effective health research frameworks for improving the health of the diverse population groups in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Drawing on health and education research policy documents, the paper highlights the complex configuration and reworking of ethnicity, nationalism and belonging in New Zealand, in both historical and modern contexts. It suggests that an ethnic research agenda can benefit from the experience of Māori and Pacific people's research in terms of walking a tightrope between addressing needs and avoiding deficiency, and balancing universal and particular research agendas. Processes that can be incorporated into a research study, such as consultation, enhancing self-determination and building capacity, focusing on community benefits, developing cross-cultural skills and incorporating alternative indicators of research quality, can assist in developing findings that are robust and useful to all stakeholders. However, incorporating such strategies into research with ethnic communities requires resourcing, institutional support and strategic leadership. Lastly, this paper contributes to the growing body of research on 'decolonising methodologies' that move beyond cultural deficit models and the building of theoretical frameworks that draw on a range of standpoints, conceptual tools and worldviews."

Right on Ruth. NZ was the context for my own multi-ethnic qualitative research mentioned above. I looked at Ruth's dissertation the other day, which she just released for access. She is much more disciplined in her approach, but my research question was quite nebulous- "how do arts function for minorities as a mechanism of adaptation in acculturation?" It sounds specific, but I interviewed 30 artists from like 28 different cultures and 23 different arts, if I recall correctly, and I was in for some analytic surprises. The sources were radically different in views and opinions- It took me a year to wrangle the data.

When attempting to explore and understand the meanings individual or groups ascribe to a social or human phenomenon qualitative methodologies tend to be favourable. Ethnographic approaches to data gathering are ideal for drawing cultural context. Sometimes as a researcher you have to consider the sensitive nature of the topic under investigation.

When considering data collection methods these should be appropriate to your targeted population whether its observational, diaries, questionnaires interviews etc. Cultural sensitive adaptations should consider the language, culture, and context so that these are compatible with the cultural patterns and values of the population or group under investigation.

This is an old question. I answer that nowadays we need a broad cooperation among scientist of different areas, to avoid the dangers of a chaotic technology development and a new social disease, the information anxiety, which is pervading the scientific community. Erich Fromm in the first pages of his book “The revolution of hope towards a humanised technology” writes that a spectre wanders about us, but only a few see it clearly. It is not the old ghost of the communism or of the fascism. It is the technological society managed by the computers and oriented towards the maximum material production and the large waste. The feared dangers are the end of individualism and privacy. The solution is a new philosophy centered on the priorities of the life on the death. Its scope is the activation of individual, the restoration of man control on the social system and the technology humanisation. A different and smart approach to the exploitation of computer potentialities, oriented to the full benefit of men, is needed. Teachers and scientific researchers must take part in this project. Modern diseases have to be avoided with an interdisciplinary approach and the humanisation of the technology. Psychologists, doctors together with engineers and scientists must work closely with interest not only in high-value added products, but also in a new philosophy of the social development. In every country this reorganization has to develop according to the traditional customs and moralities yet formally existing. Moreover, men have to avoid great specialization and to reclaim the unity of human and natural sciences; only overcoming the specialization it is possible to obtain an excellent development of scientific research. Mario Savino Politecnico di Bari

Glasser's Grounded Theory methods is a rigorous, systematic, multivariate approach to theory generation in which "all is data and theory emerges. "Individual agendas and external requirements of colleagues and audiences impact emergence", but be corrected. Grounded Theory can help someone who "knows nothing" become an expert....and a sensitive theorist. When researchers collaborate on a Grounded Theory project, the results can be elegant ...beautiful...truthful.

In order to minimize your influence first of all you should reflect on your personal strengths and weaknesses: personal attitudes, skills, knowledge. This 'knowing' will help you to organize the data collection in valid way, for example, should you perform interviews alone or should you ask to do it by other researcher. The same aspect (reflection on your personal attitudes and etc.) is important when you will analyze the qualitative data.

Don't forget the importance of researcher reflexivity. Understanding and grasping your own perspective is an important part of qualitative research. Naturally, your own culture will shape your own constructions and interpretive process and it is helpful to reflexively explore and account for cultural factors as part of this.

The good thing is, you've already made a start by recognising that these culture is likely to influence the analysis process... keep up the good work, and check out resources on reflexivity

The culture is likely to influence. So is the participants relationship to the culture; the degree to which the participant fits into and is accepted by the culture. Is the participant also an observer? Is the participant an average example of the culture? An outlier? An example of a subgroup?

I like Mark Widdowson's comment about reflexivity. You might find this article I wrote useful about reflexivity and positionality: Motherhood, migration and methodology: Giving voice to the “other”. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228462405_Motherhood_migration_and_methodology_Giving_voice_to_the_'other'?ev=prf_pub

http://academia.edu/198059/Motherhood_migration_and_methodology_Giving_voice_to_the_other_

Article Motherhood, migration and methodology: Giving voice to the 'other'

I have always felt that doing good qualitative research requires more skill than doing good quantitative research. I also always advocate multiple or mixed methods combining qual and quant to get a valid and reliable research result. Finally, as a number of people have said. The researchers personality and skills are an important part of the picture. not everyone is well suited to using grounded theory or participatory methods as an example. harry

Here are some references for reflexivity which you may find useful:

Elliott, R., Fischer, C.T., and Rennie, D.L. (1999). Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields. The British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38: 215-229.

Etherington, K. (2004) Becoming a reflexive researcher: using our selves in research. London: Jessica Kingsley.

Fischer, C.F. (2009). Bracketing in qualitative research: conceptual and practical matters. Psychotherapy Research, 19 (4-5): 583-90.

Watt, D. (2007). On becoming a qualitative researcher: the value of reflexivity. The Qualitative Report, 12(1), 82-101. Retrieved on 27th October 2011, from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR12-1/watt.pdf

As a qualitative researcher I address this question in my work with indigenous and migrant young people. Please see my links and if you have any questions please do not hesitate to ask any questions. There are arguments for and against using purely qualitative work and mixed methods work. My work suggests that prior to any research being conducted in a cross-cultural setting one must first seek the approval and guidance of the group whom you are wishing to research and work in a COLLABORATIVE and co-operative, openly transparent manner. Without these first basics the work may not reflect a true encapsulation of the culture you are trying to find insights into. Please see my SAGE case study methodological piece as well as my Opening Pandora's box article (all works listed on my profile). AND please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.