Abstract
This article explores a question that was left mostly unanswered in a recent special issue of Qualitative Inquiry surveying the field of postqualitative research: How can conventional and post qualitative research coexist within the qualitative community? The importance of addressing this key question is first highlighted. Then, a possible answer is offered, which is: By promoting a new paradigm dialogue grounded in the principles of agonistic pluralism. Challenging the idea of consensus and harmonious coexistence, agonistic pluralism allows casting researchers with competing paradigmatic positions as adversaries or “friendly enemies,” which exist together in the same space without each sacrificing its beliefs about knowledge production. We invite members of the global qualitative community to explore this possibility.
Highlights
At the QRSE2018 conference, Professor Smith alerted about the McDonaldization of qualitative research, a phenomenon that occurs when research is adapted to have the same characteristics that are found in fast-food chains
I have oscillated between conventional qualitative research (CQR) and postqualitative research (PQR)
Because it allows to generate more questions and direct them to the ongoing development of PQR. It generates vague answers, especially to “how” questions. These include the questions I was concerned with since I attended to the QRSE2018: Can CQR and PQR coexist in our scholarly communities, and if so, how? What are the reasons to support coexistence? And, if we find good reasons to do it, what can we do and how can we do it? While I agree in that such problems cannot be resolved once and for all, I believe that they need more direct, focussed and perhaps pragmatic responses
Summary
At the QRSE2018 conference (see qrsesoc.com), Professor Smith alerted about the McDonaldization of qualitative research, a phenomenon that occurs when research is adapted to have the same characteristics that are found in fast-food chains. Postqualitative inquiry, politics of research, paradigm dialogue, agonistic pluralism I have oscillated between conventional qualitative research (CQR) and PQR.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
