It's probably because of the time-consuming nature of shadowing. Further, research-on-action is probably something for which you can administer a questionnaire after the fact. This is an easier process: All I need to do is obtain a sample of junior doctors and ask them to reflect on a few of their recent decisions. It even lends itself to quantitative analyses, which are often viewed as more worthy endeavors by journals. If you conduct research on reflection in action, then we need to be present for the decision-making process or train them to write down their thought process as they go. That's both more time-consuming and lends itself to lower sample sizes. It's also qualitative, which doesn't get enough respect in research outlets today.

Basically,

1. It is more time-consuming

2. It typically lends itself to lower sample sizes

3. It's qualitative

Dear William Miller, very well explained. Thank you so much. Just one thing I would disagree that findings based on shadowing do not gain respect. I have seen a rising trend of qualitative research in social science, public health and medicine.You are right, it is time consuming and then access is also an issue.

Muhammad Usman It is great to hear that qualitative research is getting more respect in the fields that you are working in. It is a valuable endeavor that builds our understanding.

Hmmm, I'm wondering whether shadowing really allows you to access the participant's reflection in action? It too may be 'reflection on action' - worse still your reflections on someone else's actions? Even asking them to verbalise their thought processes during action is likely to result in something different from typical reflection in action as professional behaviour has been shown to be largely based on tacit knowledge rather than easily codified knowledge.

Vicki Welch, thank you so much. Yes, you are right, shadowing alone is not sufficient and you have to ask them at every step about the thought process. But many actions would be tacit and they may not elaborate on what they did. However, we do not have a choice other than relying on the information they provide. As far as your concern about reflection in action cannot be captured, I perceive that we focus on some importance decisions. All steps and actions taken by them to reach those decisions should be followed, asked and observed

I agree that it is about time - which is a reflection of prioritisation - what an organisation values to invest time in. While there is little understanding about the value of reflective praxis, an organisation is unlikely to make time for it. And a couple of the key threats to this way of working being valued is a) it makes the invisibilised and unheard present, which can be threaten peoples' standing in many ways and b) it makes decision making distributed which threatens explicit and tacit power systems and cultures in organisations. So until the practice that requires reflection in action is related to an issue that is compelling enough to the organisation to learn about and support this transformative shift in how change is done, it is unlikley to be invested in. Added to this is that to do it well, we have to learn to learn which requires a formalised learning culture to built into an organisation or discipline - so the preproduction investment is also significnat.

Thank you so much Susan for very promising suggestion indeed.

Reflection-in-action is 'thinking on our feet'; for instance, in the case of junior doctors, automatically putting their training into action say, in resuscitating a patient in cardiac arrest.

While reflection-on-action would be a junior doctor considering after-the-fact whether she/he has acted appropriately.

Thus, it seems to me that there may be more research 'mileage' perceived to be had from the latter; hence, the dearth of empirical research on the former.

The focus of research is

the objective of your research and your sample

Not necessarily, it just might be a relatively new area of interest to researchers.

Interest and priorities count a lot

Thank you so much all of you for your interest and response

How do you obtain data on reflection-in-action for reflection-on-action without interference-on-action or affecting the events ?

Hi Patricia

Data for reflection on action is relatively easy; while for reflection-in-action is usually difficult. First thing is access and then observing and asking questions about different decisions that doctors take. But in any case, you are not affecting their ways of working.

Followers of this question might like to read The Critically Reflective Practitioner, Thompson and Thompson (2008), Palgrave MacMillan.

Thank you so much Dr. Paulina. Yes video recording is a good option, but again it has certain limitations, such as it somehow limits capturing role of real setting in decision making and its interaction with cognition and body. Yes, you are right combining it with shadowing and interviews will be helpful.

Very good question. Of course, reflection, or reflexive activity, is a part of a mental process that only the reflective/reflexive person has access to (epistemic privilege). However, I have tried to understand reflexivity, by finding out how young people think about themselves and their surroundings. I have two (sociological/social psychological) papers that shed a bit of light on your question (but, perhaps, cognitive psychological literature does a better job than what I am capable of at understanding "reflection-in-action").

Here's a theoretical paper:

Article The temporal dimension of reflexivity: linking reflexive ori...

And, here's a newly published empirical article that tries to understand how young people reflect on negative representations of youth:

Article Youth voices in post-English riots Tottenham: The role of re...

Seems to me that data on reflection-in-action must come from self-reports; therefore, difficulty of data collection, in terms of somehow validating these self-reports, will be an issue.