Rapport Building

The entire study in Sohan was carried out over a period of 28 months from December 2012 to February 2015. The actual interviews with the four participants were conducted over a seven-month period between August 2014 and February 2015. The period from December 2012 and July 2014 focused on building rapport with the women in the village as part of the participant observation approach described in 3.7.1. The women and I developed a strong connection with each other over a period of 21 months through multiple visits to the village as part of the fieldwork. I visited different homes in the village with the host family as a daily routine. The villagers were engaged in ‘informal’ friendly discussions about their lifestyle, family life and challenges. Engaging individuals in unstructured

(Fontana & Frey, 1994). The interviews were conducted only after gaining an in-depth understanding of the rural culture and society. I remained mindful of the following elements when building trusting relationships with the women.

3.5.1 Researcher’s Ethnicity or Gender

Galam (2015) and Berger (2015) discovered that being a female researcher offers a greater flexibility in exploring intimate issues with female participants. Few et al. (2003) contended that gender is not enough to negotiate an insider status in the research group as other identities such as social class, ethnicity and nationality of the researcher can pose barriers. For this study gender was an important consideration for successfully negotiating access to the participants. It would have been ethically questionable to have a male researcher ask for access to women in the village. In a gender-segregated society such as that of Sohan village, the gender of the researcher significantly impacts the interview process (Fontana & Frey, 1994).

Secondly, numerous women at the village inquired about my ethnic background. I believe that they were trying to identify me in their own terms and wondered if we could connect culturally. In a qualitative study it is difficult to access participants from a culturally diverse group if the researcher is perceived as a cultural outsider (Casado, Negi, & Hong, 2012). It is suggested that having a similar racial identity between the researcher and the participant is an important component in gaining an insider status in a qualitative study (Few et al., 2003). The participants in the study were Punjabi, while I came from a Pathaan

background. However, the ethnic difference did not pose a challenge to the research since I was perceived as a member of the mainstream Pakistani society.

3.5.2 Appearance and Use of Language

On my first day at the village, the gatekeeper informed me that I was expected to follow a certain pattern of behaviour and conform to the norms of the village. I was expected to dress down to reduce the social difference and follow a specific dress code with my head covered. Wearing pants or short shirts was not acceptable. Figure 3.3 (appendix IIA) shows my picture in appropriate attire while chatting with a community member in Sohan village. Paying attention to personal appearance was important to allow me to integrate into the local community and reduce social differences (Few et al., 2003; Fontana & Frey, 1994). In addition, I used the terms of respect when speaking to the participants. It was not acceptable to call out the names of the older women out of respect. It was required of me to say words like baji (older sister), and aunty when engaging older women in conversation. I would have been perceived as highly disrespectful if I had not used these terms of respect.

In addition, my ability to speak in the participants’ language allowed me to interpret words and expressions that carried certain cultural, social and religious meaning. Pelzang and Hutchinson (2017) suggested that a researcher’s inability to speak the local language could pose a threat to the accuracy of the qualitative research because the true meaning of certain cultural expressions may get lost in translation and can easily be misinterpreted. Language

was also one way by which I negotiated my relationship with the potential participants in the village.

3.5.3 Tackling Hierarchical Position

Evidence from qualitative studies suggests that in an interview situation the researcher is typically in a hierarchical position in relation to the participant (Fontana & Frey, 1994). A researcher’s failure to invest his or her own personal identity in the relationship inhibits the formation of a non-hierarchical relationship (Oakley, 1981). Keeping these ideas in mind, I adopted strategies to reduce my perceived hierarchical position. I was often offered tea and sometimes a meal during my visits with the women in the village. Eating together in a Pakistani culture is considered almost like a ritual that serves to strengthen bonds between those who share food out of the same dish. Sharing a meal with the women helped me form trusting relationships with them (Liamputtong, 2008). I perceived the hospitality as a sign that the women saw me more than a researcher and wanted to connect. The gatekeeper had also advised me earlier that my refusal to accept hospitality from the participants would be considered an insult. It was also important for me to reciprocate and occasionally share food with the women during my visits. I would sometimes take a cake with me, which often became a reason to celebrate because the villagers were too poor to afford a cake. Sitting around together on a floor mat sharing food with each other reduced the perception of inequality and created a non-hierarchical relationship between myself and the women.

3.5.4 Self-Disclosure and Reciprocity

The preliminary conversations with the women in the village focused on ‘shared experiences’ between myself and the potential participants. Sharing common experiences with the women facilitated communication between us. The women expressed a strong desire to learn about personal care products. They enjoyed listening to me talk about shampoos, various hygiene and cosmetic products. The village women used locally made soaps to wash their hair, which made their hair thick and dry. The women, especially younger girls would touch my hair and tell each other how soft it is. They would also touch my hands and ask me to recommend a good skin cream. Even though the women and I were worlds apart, we shared common interests in beauty products and found it intriguing enough to have a discussion about it. This was an excellent conversational icebreaker which helped me establish some common ground with the women.

I felt that investing myself in the research by responding to the women’s questions was instrumental in building a trusting relationship. The use of ‘self-disclosure’ is a key feature in creating a non-hierarchical relationship with the marginalized and secluded groups who may fear being exploited (Few et al., 2003). As (Oakley, 1981, p. 253) points out, there is “no intimacy without reciprocity”. This implies that the researcher should be ready to respond to the participant’s questions and express feelings (Corbin & Morse, 2003). This approach reduces status difference between the researcher and the participants and allows the researcher to gain a deeper insight into the life of the participant (Oakley, 1981). I believe that self-disclosure also became a source of empowerment for the participants as it gave them the power to lead the discussion to explore various issues in the domestic

violence research. Although self-disclosure was offered with caution, withholding information about myself would have compromised reciprocity in relationship building with the women.

The participants asked me whether I was married. I felt that the participants were trying to find common ground between us. My marital status at the time of the fieldwork and being a mother of two young boys helped me gain an insider status in the group. It also allowed the women to open up to me about the sexual aspect of their marriage. In a Pakistani culture it is generally unacceptable to speak to an unmarried woman about sexual matters, hence, my marital status at the time of the fieldwork facilitated the process of rapport building. In addition, sharing some details about my life with the women was also a form of reciprocity.

3.5.5 Cautious Self- Disclosure

I was cognisant of the fact that once the participants’ trust is gained, it can be quite fragile (Fontana & Frey, 1994). Recognition of this reality made me re-consider the information I disclosed to them. I became careful in sharing aspects of my life because I did not want to say anything that could have ‘jeopardised’ the research. However, I shared enough to demonstrate that I valued and respected their questions. I drew on my tacit knowledge of Pakistani rural society to decide which information to reveal as part of ‘self-disclosure. The gatekeeper’s advice and my own understanding of the religious intolerance in Pakistan indicated that challenging their core religious beliefs could have devastating implications for the research. Sharing my religious views could potentially have altered the participants’ perception of me in a negative manner. For example, I could not challenge the women’s

religious beliefs concerning marital relationships. This could have resulted in participants withholding information about their marital lives. Therefore, I made a conscious decision to refrain from participating in religious discussions. However, I carefully listened to their religious narrative to understand how it had shaped their marital experiences.