Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The escalation of Russian aggression against Ukraine—an attack launched throughout almost all of its territory in February 2022—has triggered numerous initiatives aiming at documentation of war experiences through methods of interviewing. The war and refugee crisis in Central and Eastern Europe brings us closer to similar situations in different regions of the world, which also have been documented and researched. Our special section explores various methodologies of emergency response projects and traces how different positionalities are combined and contested during the unfolding conflict. While we focus on the Ukrainian case, our aim is to engage in dialogue with various geographies of the post-communist world, where researchers are (or were) exposed to straightforward challenges in terms of safety and security. We invited scholars who studied their own societies or communities they are related to; therefore, the duality between “insider” and “outsider” as well as the very concept of “field” as something external is challenged in their writing. Assembled articles make visible tensions inherent in the projects that document the present moment: between different roles researchers have, different ethical justifications and academic standards, different audiences and social groups scholars engage with. Following the question that Ghislaine Boulanger posed, “How do we fit our understanding of the individual survivor into the larger picture of a catastrophe without losing sight of individual struggle?”, authors show various possibilities of analytical work with collected materials and ways to conceptualize the experiences of both the interviewers and the interviewees who live through violent conflicts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Otrishchenko et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: