Step 1

Describe yourself in detail

As a human being, you exist at the intersection of all of many personal, societal, and intimate details and characteristics (a concept known as intersectionality). To practice reflexive thinking, you need to first understand who you are.

On a piece of paper (or digital tool like Miro, Microsoft Word, or Google Sheets), describe yourself in as much as detail as possible. Use the list below for help.

‍

Possible Details to Include when Describing Yourself

• Age
• Race
• Gender identity
• Sexual identity or preferences
• Dietary preferences
• Religious preferences
• Socioeconomic status
• Country, state, or place of residence
• Family structure (such as child of divorced parents, newly married, single parent, etc.)
• Education history, schools attended, diplomas, and achievements
• Critical events in your personal history (such as moving to a new country, being in a car accident, learning a foreign language)
• Communities you’re a part of (both social and professional)
• Relevant habits or regular behaviors (such as buying coffee at a fancy coffee shop, traveling in the summer months, playing in trading card game tournaments, etc)

‍

Step 2

Recognize how similar or different your personal details are from your participants

In some situations, your personal details might mirror or mimic what’s true about your participants. In these cases, you’ll need to maintain objectivity to collect as high-quality data as possible.

In other situations, who you are might be very different — or even contradict! — who your participants are. Recognize that you might need more time to build rapport, meet with participants several times or in a neutral location, or even choose to remove yourself from any hostile or dangerous situations.

‍

Step 3

Repeat this exercise regularly

Based on your research questions and informative population, you might need to repeat this exercise with relevant details. If you’re studying a more sensitive topic (such as sexual preferences, religious behaviors, financial habits, etc.), repeat this exercise to mark down what’s relevant about you toward those topics.

You don’t need to mention these details to your participants, but know that you bring your entire self to every research study. Recognizing who you are can help expose areas where you’re biasing for or against different kinds of people.

(Optional) You can run one or several of the linked exercises below with your stakeholders during a research or design workshop. Engage them in conversation and be prepared for uncomfortable dialogue.

Helpful Links to Learn more about Intersectionality & Reflexive Thinking

• “Intersectionality 101” (video)
• “Intersectionality Resource Guide and Toolkit” (pdf)
• “Reflective Exercise” (pdf)
• “Intersectionality” (pdf)
• “Intersectionality worksheet” (pdf)
• “Managing neutrality, rapport, and antiracism in qualitative interviews” (article)
• “Researcher Positionality - A Consideration of Its Influence and Place in Qualitative Research - A New Researcher Guide” (pdf)

Study Phase:

Alignment

• What is your relationship, experience, and comfort with the study topic or research questions?
• Do the research question(s) and intended post-study decisions benefit the participant/population or only the business?
• How engaged and involved are your stakeholders (especially those who need to use or act on the research findings)? Could there be unmet expectations about the research between you and your stakeholders?
• How does conducting this study affect your energy, attention, and time for upcoming or future research studies?

Use this guide to get alignment with your stakeholders.

Guide 4: Conducting Stakeholder Interviews

‍

Study Phase

Recruitment

• Are potential participants being treated, viewed, or spoken about as datapoints or sources of information?
• When grouping/segmenting participants, does every person have a group? Who doesn’t have a group? How would participants feel about the group they’ve been placed into?
• Are the study incentives/compensation proportional to the study’s risks and demands? If not, how will that affect your study results?
• Are you the best person to be studying this topic or will your presence skew or bias the study itself? Who else might be better fit to run the research?
• On what basis or characteristics are you selecting participants? Are you unintentionally biasing your sample? Could you ask your stakeholders for recruiting help?
• Who “wins” and who “loses” with your current recruitment strategy? Whose voice will never be heard or represented?

You can more about recruitment in Collection 2: Recruit.

‍

Study Phase

Study Design

• How would potential participants (or your target population/segment) feel about your research questions and study goals?
• What are your (and your stakeholders) expecting to hear or learn? Are these expectations closing off your mind to unexpected learnings?
• Does your study design allow you to give each participant the respect and attention they deserve? Does your study design respect you and your limited time, attention, and energy? Is your study design sustainable (meaning you could replicate it without damage or loss in quality)?

You can read more about study design in this Handbook (”Designing Better Studies”).

‍

Study Phase

Data Collection — Qualitative Research

• What are your energy levels? Are you hydrated? Did you eat enough?
• How do you know you’re building or have built rapport with the participant? What will you do if a participant is combative or minimally responsive?
• Did you schedule a break between qualitative sessions? How will your energy from one session wax and wane into the next one?
• What are the power dynamics between you and the participant? What factors can be mitigated or lowered? How will these factors affect your study?
• How often are you making eye contact?
• When and why are you choosing to take notes? Could your note-taking behavior influence the quality and quantity of your participant’s responses?
• How often are you writing/taking interpretative notes? How will you check the accuracy of these notes?
• Are you remaining neutral?
• Do you interrupt or cut off your participant?
• What tone of voice are you speaking in? How fast and how often do you speak?
• What are the signs or signals you’ll look for to end a session early and safely?

You can read more about qualitative research in this Handbook (”Qualitative Foundations”).

‍

Study Phase

Analysis — Data Analysis

• How long do you have to analyze your data? If you didn’t have the pressure of time, would you feel comfortable spending as much time as you’ve planned for data analysis? Why or why not?
• How will you choose and define “extreme” or “outlier” datapoints? How would participants feel about their data being labelled as “extreme/outlier” data?
• What data do you choose to skip or ignore? Why?
• Do you have enough time to both analyze and validate your findings?
• How does the intended audience for your research affect what you do or don’t analyze?
• How likely could your study design and findings be replicated by another research?
• How confident or comfortable with your analysis tools/software? Could you unintentionally be biasing or skewing your findings based on your inexperience?
• Did you ask for help with analysis? Were you able to have a second set of eyes review your data and findings?
• What will you do with the data, findings and recommendations that don’t/won’t report?
• How often do you verify, double-check, or reconsider the notes, tentative findings, insights, and recommendations in your analysis journal?

You can read more about data analysis in Collection 5: Analyze.

‍

Study Phase

Reporting

• How would participants feel about your final report? Would they agree or disagree with your findings?
• How accurate are your data visualizations to your raw data? Are your data visualizations adding or distracting from your findings?
• What findings are based on circumstantial or tentative datapoints? Can you avoid reporting these? Can you explain to your stakeholders the implications of actioning on such findings?
• Are you intentionally presenting findings that confirm the actions your team wants to take?
• What findings are you hesitant or avoidant to report back to your stakeholders? Why?
• How will you handle criticism from stakeholders about any unsavory, contradictory, or negative findings?
• If you have an appendix, are you using it as a dumping ground or for a more meaningful purpose?

You can read more about reporting in Collection 6: Report.