Fuck, fuck, fuck: Reflexivity and fidelity in reporting swearwords in management research

Bryant Ashley Hudson
Additional contact information
Bryant Ashley Hudson: LEM - Lille économie management - UMR 9221 - UA - Université d'Artois - UCL - Université catholique de Lille - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: In this essay, I confront a problem I encountered at a recent academic conference wherein the words and sentiments of research respondents were unfortunately and unnecessarily silenced and edited-perhaps due to presenters' unfortunate and needless regard for the supposed impropriety of the respondents' language. I argue that such silencing and editing is not only unfaithful to our respondents; it is also unfaithful to our project as social scientists. I briefly review some of the literature on qualitative interviewing and the importance of positionality, relationality and reflexivity between the interviewer and the participant. I apply some of these prescriptions to the reporting of data in presentations and manuscripts. I then point out some examples of how rude or swearwords have been appropriately used in management and other journals and end with a plea that we remain true to the language and settings that are so important for our understanding of social and organizational life.

Date: 2019-10
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Published in M@n@gement, 2019, 22 (3), pp.487-495

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02511055

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD (hal@ccsd.cnrs.fr).