There is quite a large literature on the concept of "reflexivity" in qualitative research, and I think interviewing yourself could be quite useful for that purpose. In particular, it would help you "unpack" your assumptions, and give you a basis for comparing your beliefs to those of others.

Note, however, that this is very different from using your own views as if they were data from the research participants. Instead, the goal in reflexivity is to understand (as best you can) the influence of your own position as a researcher.

It seems as though you are teetering on the edge of auto-ethnography if you are moving from from a reflexive consideration of your own position in the research to treating yourself as a respondent, and the questions this should raise go beyond the basics of emic and etic. To what extent are you a member of that community, and what tests do you expose that assumption to? What is the "Ethno" - the native other - whose perspective on "what they think they are doing" (Geertz) you are trying to access? The best, most helpful and succinct summary of these issues is by Garance Marechal in her entry on Auto-ethnography in the Sage Handbook of Case Study Research Ed Mills et al. Check her Researchgate or Google Scholar citations pages as it may be there.

Here it is https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281595140_Autoethnography

I would argue that including yourself is possible, but quite tricky. Part of the issue revolves around the nature of the questions you wish to pose. If you have expectations of the outcome or an hypothesis, I think it would be unwise, as the possibility of bias could not easily be overcome.

However, if what you are seeking is genuinely open-ended, it could be beneficial as David Morgan suggested.

Good luck,

Doug

Yes of course: ethno-ethography has been more recently a tendency among indigenous peoples in Amazon

Eglee Zent Did you mean to say that "auto-ethography has been more recently a tendency among indigenous peoples in Amazon"? And if so, is that statement serious or sarcasm?

Thank you, professionals, for your valuable answers and guidances.

Becoming the research phenomenon is risky business - we lost a student at Bangor to HM's Prison Service after he initiated participant observation of guards (he soon became one). But other researchers have pulled it off successfully. See Jules-Rosette, B. (1975). African Apostles. Ithaca: Cornell UP.

Now it has been a trend in social sciences to study one's own community. Since you belong to that particular community, you can include your own views , but you have to be very careful to avoid baisness. One should not loose the objectivity and should not be bais while studying one's own community.

Certainly yes, but it has both pros and cons.

Rather than acting as an outsider,

the researcher as a community member will observe, even interview his own people, and culture, adding inputs to his own knowledge and will try to understand how and why they live as they do.He has to try to put away his preconceived notions about the culture he is studying, no matter if it is his own. This Emic or Insider Approach done by an insider himself may help to unfold many truths as members of a culture are the true source of information of that culture.

But the con is-there is every possibility of biasness, overcoming which will benefit lot.

Here pros outweigh the cons.@Joseph sir

Yes. Nothing prevents the ethnographic researcher to raise some questions and answer those from an “emic” perspective. The important point here is to maintain objectivity. S/he may try to cover up some unpleasant facts relating to her/his community. This is part of the ethnocentric tendency of the researcher. S/he may not report those out of fear of social boycott. If the researcher is bold enough, s/he may face a top situation when her/his research findings (unpleasant ones) are known to the community members. I am one of such victims. So, the researcher must deal the situation carefully. S/he should try to maintain objectivity all through her/his research. All unintended consequences are to be carefully examined by the researcher doing ethnographic research on her/his community.

Thank you for enriching our knowledge on this topic of discussion. Deepak Kumar Behera

Most of the responses are applicable to the questioner’s concern, as well as to ethnographic fieldwork in general - the need to preserve a measure of objectivity; the concern with the possibility of bias and judgemental attitudes, whether positive or negative; the necessity to decide whether or to what extent one wants to ‘criticize’ what one observes and experiences.

Some tidbits from Jorgensen, D.L. (1989) Participant Observation: a methodology for human studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

'The most direct route to truth is for the researcher to experience the phenomenon of interest - to "become the phenomenon" ' (p 28).

'There is a real danger that, as you become immersed in the setting and overwhelmed by what transpires there, you will find it increasingly difficult to stand back and generate a fruitful perspective on what is of interest' (p 33).

'In spite of warnings to the contrary, participant observers in recent years have endeavored to become the phenomenon in order to achieve observational advantage. One of the most striking accounts of successful employment of this strategy is Jules-Rosette's (1975) fieldwork with a native African fundamentalist-Christian group' (p 63).

'Having internalized the insider's beliefs, Jules-Rosette was able to employ it as a resource, along with notes and material gathered in the field, turning a scientific framework back on for purposes of reflective, critical analysis' (p64).

Yes, it is possible when the respondents do not know how to read and write. A participant may be rich in firsthand information or very knowledgeable in the indigenous knowledge or facing some experience with a certain phenomenon even when he/she cannot read or write but and could help the researcher meet his/her research objectives when they are engaged qualitatively or quantitatively. In such cases, I think it is realistic for the researcher to fill the questions him/herself.