“Chameleonization” in the Folds of Culture: A Comparative Analysis of Cross-Cultural Qualitative Fieldwork

Abstract

This paper argues against a prevailing culture-free tendency in cross-cultural qualitative research that has been normalized by conventional qualitative research methodology to propose “ chameleonization,” a culturally sensitive research process. First, I delineate the paradoxes encountered in comparative research of Sino-U.S. university partnerships by comparing five fieldwork elements: research ethics, access to fields, informed consent, informants’ recruitment, and interview environment and process. The comparison reveals that the seemingly “golden” rule of Western-centered qualitative research and procedure were both disturbing and paralyzing in non-Western fields. Subsequently, this work deciphers these paradoxes with Hofstede's cultural dimension theory as a main analytical framework, supplemented by theories from cultural theorists in the two cultures. These paradoxes can be resolved through a chameleonization process through which researchers attune to a postmodern cross-culturalness by navigating the “folds of culture,” as characterized by their cross-cultural qualitative fields. Tentative strategies for applying chameleonization to activate, solidify, and extend a “folding-unfolding-refolding” process are then proposed, followed by a discussion on the approach’s potential limitations.