Using subjectivity as a key to culture, linking introspection and cultural analysis is a triggering as well as a risky endeavor. Important criteria could be: being explicit of the methods for your reflective work, sticking to an iterative procedure (reanalysing the same pieces again and again), making explicit your theoretical sensitivity.

Robert Kull spent a year alone in the Patagonian wilderness and he was the subject of study on his own PhD. This is the article he published in Canadian Geographic:

http://www.bobkull.org/Canadian_Geographic_Article.pdf

Harshvardhan, Charles & Jose,

Thank you for your contributions. Great resources, advice and Jose, I have Robert Kull's book on my shelf. As a career outdoor educator and wilderness guide / academic, I was excited to see his work. Not sure how he got ethics approval or fully justified his methodologies--but he obviously had a supportive committee!

nevin

Autoethnography is great if it does not turn into navel gazing. Keep in mind that your voice is one voice among many and keep the same critical distance as you would with any other participant's data. Only include material that really moves the discussion forward theoretically/methodologically as you do not want your text to turn into what can only be referred to as confessional anthropology!

Thanks to the other contributors for excellent resources! Must read Kull.

All of the above answers are quite excellent. Also remember that one very important part of any autoethnographic research is that it serves as a larger cultural critique that interrogates taken-for-granted canonical narratives and discourses (hence avoiding the navel-gazing aspect). As Allen-Collinson (2013) put it, “At the heart of autoethnography, for me, is that ever shifting focus between levels: from the macro, wide sociological angle on socio-cultural framework, to the micro, zoom focus on the embedded self” (p. 296). That's from the Handbook of Autoethnography. It's a fantastic resource.

Andree and Andrew,

Thank you both for your contributions. The methodology is so very intriguing to me and I'm hoping it is an academic inclination and not my hidden desire to simply answer some personal questions about my career/life. 

Context: I run adventure-based field schools in the Andes for undergrads and 20+ years ago completed the same trip at about the same age as my students. Nearly 7 months of journal 'data' sits on my shelf and may provide another layer of insight into my research of my student's experience (I am studying experiences of 'place' as they relate to 'self'). 

If that stimulates thinking on analytical approaches, I'd love to hear about them.

Thanks, nevin

Hi Nevin,

I am working on an autoethnographic paper and I find these two books are useful:

Heewon Chang, Autoethnography as Method

Tony Adams, Stacy Jones, and Carolyn Ellis, Autoethnography - Understanding Qualitative Research

I find that Ellis, Adams, & Bochner's article "Autoethnography: An Overview" (link to the article: http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1589/3095 ) does a good job summarizing the history of autoethnography and discussing the "potentials, issues, and criticisms" of the method. Last but not least, the Journal of Research Practice had a special issue on "Autoethnography as Research Practice." Here is the link (special thanks to Nelli Piattoeva, a Lecturer at the University of Tampere School of Education, Finland, for sending me the link): 

http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/issue/view/13

Hope it helps.

Nevin

Creo que las sugerencias de los colegas son muy interesantes,yo solo te añadiria que haciendo investigacion autoetnografica ,habria que tener en cuenta lo que se llama testigo , es decir otra persona que pueda servir de comparacion,para que el autoejemplo no se convierta en un caso tautologico y las conclusiones no puedan analizarse como si fuese una biografia o un relato exclusivamente personal. 

Un testigo, es interesante y entiendo la practica de comparicion por validad. muchos gracias Jose. Voy a pensar en este

Hi Nevin,

You may also look at these articles: 

It seems to me that as in any research de first moment aim to clarifie the position of the researcher imply as self. A monography concerning the autobiography of the researcher is the first steps. In a second time the indicators leadings to conclusions have to be explicitly define. In the end the material collected in the auto ethnography has to be analyzed with explicits categories. Moreover as in other types of researches the first steps is description of the material, the second steps consists in classification of the material and the last step to the analysis of the material leading to a theory.

See 'Urban Ethnography' in Urbanities 3 (2): 80-110 Available at: www.anthrojournal-urbanities.com; Anthropology in the City: Methodology and Theory (Routledge)

Thank you all for your insights and contributions. I have opted to use my original journals phenomenologically in analysis as a comparison to data from my study participants. I have however, drafted an outline for a full autoethnography based on my experiences, learning and education related to adventure as a vehicle to growth and development. An N of 1 exploration--if nothing else I will gain insights into my self and deepen my inquiries with others. shine on.