ABSTRACT In this paper, we engage in a dialogue to discuss (a) what (in)tensions are involved in autoethnographic knowledge construction, that is, whether autoethnography is considered legitimate knowledging as opposed to more ‘traditional’ qualitative research methods, (b) why and how autoethnography, as an appealing way of expression, allows researchers from marginalised communities to contribute their voices to the scholarly conversations, and (c) how autoethnography can serve as a ‘part of a corrective movement against colonizing ethnographic practices’ that praise concealing researchers' beliefs/thoughts/emotions while positioning them as the ultimate autonomous, authoritative knowledge generators. Hinting at our own dialogical autoethnographic reflections, our discussion features critical self‐reflexivity which leads us to constantly probe and critique our own curiosity, creativity and criticality.
Yazan et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: