Negotiating the contested terrain of narrative methods in illness contexts

Area of Science:

• Sociology
• Qualitative Research
• Medical Humanities

Background:

• The 1997 publication of Paul Atkinson's "Narrative Turn Or Blind Alley?" sparked a significant transatlantic debate.
• This debate centers on the use of narrative data and narrative analysis within the study of illness.

Purpose of the Study:

• To provide an interpretive account of the ongoing debate surrounding illness narratives.
• To clarify the essentials of the claims and counter-claims regarding narrative data and analysis.
• To assist researchers in refining their approach to narrative research methods in illness contexts.

Main Methods:

• Sequential presentation of claims and counter-claims within the debate.
• Analysis of theoretical perspectives, methodologies, ethics, and politics in academic writings.
• Examination of sociological underpinnings of the arguments.
• Exploration of implications for the author's own research.

Main Results:

• Identified key academics (Paul Atkinson, Arthur Bochner, Arthur Frank, Elliot Mishler) central to the debate.
• Highlighted the multifaceted nature of the debate, involving theoretical, methodological, ethical, and political dimensions.
• Demonstrated the diverse sociological approaches influencing the arguments.

Conclusions:

• The debate on illness narratives is complex, involving fundamental disagreements on research approaches.
• Understanding these differing perspectives is crucial for researchers employing narrative methods.
• This paper offers a framework for researchers to critically engage with narrative research in illness studies.