Show description

We have illustrated how our own research has systematically been inspired by such reflections in two selected research projects of our own. These reflections have a two-sided aim. On the one hand, we, as 42 Mixing Methods in the Search for Mobile Complexity researchers, are forced to make our analysis transparent, and thus we are forced to explicitly explain and justify our choices. On the other hand, with this transparency we produce research of a better quality, hopefully of great benefit to others for application and for inspiration.

Should our results aim at change? This reflexive approach, first and foremost, requires us to be transparent and explicit, Malene Freudendal-Pedersen et al. 27 and this is essential if the research produced should be open for utilisation by others. In addition, the clear visibility and rationale for certain courses of action will have a direct impact on the clarity of the research conclusions. In order to make reflexive choices, we work with a number of preconceptions. We meet our research problem with knowledge attained from our education, our previous research, from diverse literature, our engagement in society, from the news etc.

This method is characterised by empirical work which is inspired by the theoretical, while the empirical simultaneously calls for new theoretical clarifications. Through the abductive process the two elements inform and interact with each other, and it is thus possible to achieve an empirically based Malene Freudendal-Pedersen et al. 31 and theoretically informed analytical production of knowledge (Blaikie, 1993; Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2000). In this research process, there is not a theoretical basis to be tested which determines the production of empirical results (induction), and there is not an empirical basis calling on certain theoretical frameworks for developing the analysis (deduction).