Validating and Justifying the Voices

Negotiating the multiple aspects affecting one’s shifting positionality is thus an ongoing process of negotiation researchers have to contend with. This intricate appreciation of the subjectivities surrounding the researcher and the researched must be comprehensively grasped as these understandings undergird the interpretation of data and representation of knowledge (Conti and O’Neil, 2007). After all, the research process is an intersubjectively produced account, a representation of participants’ voices alongside the researcher’s (Baxter and Eyles, 1997). With regard to data interpretation and validation, I found that harnessing my inner voice arising from my various identities was especially useful. My heightened sensitivity due to socialisation in a similar cultural background was essential in teasing out,

93 and following up, participants’ expressions. In other words, the research process is not merely an account in which researcher’s and participants’ voices are heard alongside one another, it is a process which entails the researcher’s voice coaxing the real voice(s)14 of the participants.

The importance of face value15 is known to be relatively significant for most Chinese people. In some of the interviews, respondents were exuberant in detailing their achievements and statuses which were sometimes over-exaggerated. Rosy pictures of their lifestyles were also frequently painted initially. Instead of appearing doubtful towards what they said, I tried to tread such situations delicately, sometimes even appearing to believe everything that they said. However, at the back of my mind, I was consciously aware of the need to triangulate in my questioning in order to validate their accounts. By asking further probing questions in a politically correct and less direct manner, I was thus able to obtain more accurate and representative data from them. When the interviewees realised that I would not look down on them for their less glorious achievements and still accorded them respect for who they were and for what they did, they were then less likely to play up their façade and became more forthcoming with genuine details.

Not only is the researcher’s voice potent during the circuitous course of fieldwork and analysis, the researcher’s voice is equally, if not more, significant in representing the interpretations. The aim of my study is to cast further light on the lesser-researched Chinese in Britain in parallel to Black people, Pakistani and Bangladeshi minority groups which have generated relatively greater attention (Dale et. al. 2001; Dale, 2002; Salway, 2008). It was found that there are relatively fewer studies on the Chinese in the UK because it was generally more difficult to penetrate a community which usually kept to themselves and that

14 _{Real voices refer to genuine and unmodified responses provided by interviewees.} 15 _{Face value refers to the notion of one’s reputation.}

94 was perceived as “quiet, law-abiding and hardly noticed” (Au, 2004: 50). From the policy sociology angle, generating a greater amount of studies on ethnic minorities is favoured by the authorities (Burawoy et al, 2004) and academic circles so as to open the door for more dialogues and understandings of one another in an increasingly globalised world.

However, what if the Chinese community prefers to keep to themselves and they do not wish to be highlighted? How should we rationalise the desire for keeping a low profile with Becker’s (1967) call to give a voice to the ‘voiceless’? Especially for increasingly multi- racial Britain, developing a good grasp on the various minority groups, and how they impact the social fabric, is gaining importance. Furthermore, the knowledge is essential for Britain as she manoeuvres immigration, local planning, economic and nationalism policies. The research will also pave the way for future comparisons between different ethnic groups. However, one can argue that more expansive understandings also make it possible for the state administrators to exert control over the group(s) (Foucault, 1989). Political legitimacy and legality are after all politically derived definitions. Therefore, academic researchers must also be wary of contributing knowledge that would perpetuate the power stronghold of dominating groups. As argued by Marx (Elster, 1986), the utopian but often difficult to achieve outcome would be a type of knowledge that would raise participants’ consciousness and ultimately lead to the process of social change from alienation.

On one hand, insider researchers have the privilege to access domains closed to others and can identify insights into cultural constructions. Their position, on the other hand, can present another layer of internal struggle, often on the part of the researcher, between representing the knowledge and upholding a commitment and loyalty to the community (Hörschelmann and Stenning, 2008). At the same time, insider researchers “find themselves in a position of

95 responsibility and strength to change the disciplines and their social worlds by speaking out in words that in the past were either unspoken or unheard” (Kobayashi, 1994: 73-74). Given the additional suspicions surrounding the objectivity of qualitative research in general, researchers have to be conscientiously reflexive throughout the entire research process – from project inception to findings dissemination – in order to achieve robust research outcomes. Indeed, as time in the field lengthened, the weight of being a responsible community researcher bore down on my shoulders. The writing-up process is similarly carried out under similar conditions of feeling the brunt. Constantly, I felt the need to be very considered and deliberate in writing up my thesis – being objective in presenting knowledge and at the same time not compromising my loyalty to my community.

3.10 Conclusion

An insider / community researcher has several advantages but it is not without its disadvantages. Although I am effectively bilingual in English and Mandarin, my Cantonese is only conversational. The process of thinking, writing and noting language nuances in the English language whilst carrying out the interviews in Mandarin and Cantonese would be extremely taxing if not for the deployment of a tape recorder to prevent anything being ‘lost in translation’. However, transcribing and subsequently translating were an altogether different ordeal, although inevitably necessary. More importantly, the difficulty of being a community researcher is with reporting the findings responsibly and at the same time, being conscious of not compromising my loyalty to my community. During the course of my research, I have come across sensitive information with regard to illegitimate affairs. Whilst ethical safeguards serve to protect the interests of research participants, discussing sensitive information can present a rich source of materials. Acknowledging these in academic

96 discourse may not necessarily disadvantage the community, although it is recognised that there is a power imbalance between legitimate and illegitimate structures.

97 CHAPTER FOUR