View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Hidden Boundaries and Shared Meanings: The Roles of Researcher Characteristics and Cultural Norms in Shaping Understandings of Sexuality in the Unstructured Interview Setting

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Hidden Boundaries and Shared Meanings: The Roles of Researcher Characteristics and Cultural Norms in Shaping Understandings of Sexuality in the Unstructured Interview Setting
Language: English
Authors: Thorpe, Rachel, Hawkes, Gail, Dune, Tinashe, Fileborn, Bianca, Pitts, Marian, Minichiello, Victor
Source: International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2018 21(2):205-217.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 13
Publication Date: 2018
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Sexuality, Interviews, Cultural Influences, Females, Adults, Interpersonal Relationship, Researchers, Foreign Countries, Aging (Individuals), Peer Relationship
Geographic Terms: Australia
DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2017.1350016
ISSN: 1364-5579
Abstract: This paper examines the role of the research process in shaping the construction of knowledge about sensitive topics in in-depth interviews particularly with regard to researcher identity and cultural influences or norms. We argue that these influences shape all aspects of the research process and that researchers will benefit from reflecting upon them when planning, undertaking and interpreting qualitative studies. Drawing on an empirical study interviewing Australian women aged 55 years and older about sexuality we address differences and similarities between researchers and participants; cultural constructions of sexuality and ageing, and generational influences. Using examples from our interview data we interrogate the contribution of each of these aspects to the interview dynamic and the co-production of meaning. Our analysis draws attention to the fluidity of insider and outsider status and to the existence of hidden boundaries that impact on how certain topics can be discussed in interviews. The paper argues that knowledge about sensitive topics such as older people's sexuality must be viewed as a situated occurrence shaped by the particularities of the interview and the cultural context. Finally, we discuss the implications of these findings for qualitative inquiries into sensitive topics.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 56
Entry Date: 2018
Accession Number: EJ1189053
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwF9-aRZqvSOtxSBFxAZ7_RuAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDOV5BVVR__GVbq_UFAIBEICBml33MvNjCJSXLOumwvF2spsBG1xAWFxHieoYlmk0SRYwloAJ0206wE_w3Tsoc8dzbwSBSoaJ9-cegThGTwgakOXGm7pj6Znpdw0o00WbytJ7iWuz51Og_IN_rk2zoxQZdvLxE5LyahddomECXGHHRl6IYlnZwtrVD5f6WNumoXNE9PBFnpZoka2khP34GReB6xxTYrUBet57-aI=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0126826175;9eb01mar.18;2019Jan09.08:05;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0126826175-1">Hidden boundaries and shared meanings: the roles of researcher characteristics and cultural norms in shaping understandings of sexuality in the unstructured interview setting. </title> <p>This paper examines the role of the research process in shaping the construction of knowledge about sensitive topics in in-depth interviews particularly with regard to researcher identity and cultural influences or norms. We argue that these influences shape all aspects of the research process and that researchers will benefit from reflecting upon them when planning, undertaking and interpreting qualitative studies. Drawing on an empirical study interviewing Australian women aged 55 years and older about sexuality we address differences and similarities between researchers and participants; cultural constructions of sexuality and ageing, and generational influences. Using examples from our interview data we interrogate the contribution of each of these aspects to the interview dynamic and the co-production of meaning. Our analysis draws attention to the fluidity of insider and outsider status and to the existence of hidden boundaries that impact on how certain topics can be discussed in interviews. The paper argues that knowledge about sensitive topics such as older people's sexuality must be viewed as a situated occurrence shaped by the particularities of the interview and the cultural context. Finally, we discuss the implications of these findings for qualitative inquiries into sensitive topics.</p> <p>Keywords: Sexuality; researcher positionality; older women; subjectivity; social constructivism</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-2">Constructing the research interaction</hd> <p>Research participants are generally assumed to be 'other' to researchers in the sense that they possess certain characteristics that make them the subject of the research (Fawcett & Hearn, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref1">12</reflink>]). In the context of research that takes a feminist approach and seeks to minimise the distance between the researcher and the researched, the 'otherness' of the researcher, in our case the interviewer, also becomes significant to the interview interaction (Fawcett & Hearn, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref2">12</reflink>]; McRobbie, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref3">37</reflink>]; Rowling, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref4">47</reflink>]). This is especially salient when the questions asked in the research process relate to sexual behaviour, however it is relevant to any research in which the research data is constructed in an interaction between researcher and participant (Bourne & Robson, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref5">6</reflink>]; Noy, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref6">42</reflink>]). The multiple social locations of researchers as well as participants contribute to the ways in which the research topic is discussed, and meaning generated (Noy, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref7">42</reflink>]; Tinashe, Mapedzahama, Minichiello, Pitts, & Hawkes, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref8">11</reflink>]). As Hockey and colleagues observed, interviews are social interactions 'in which both interviewee and interviewer participate as social beings, bringing to it their own identities, experiences and stereotypical assumptions about the other' (Hockey, Meah, & Robinson, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref9">27</reflink>], p. 45). In this paper, we are particularly interested in how age was acknowledged in the research context and in how being of a similar age (or not) to research participants contributed differentially to the co-production of participants' sexual narratives, and to broader cultural narratives on ageing sexualities. While research has previously addressed some of the methodological implications of discussing sexual matters between a single interviewer and different-aged interviewees, this issue has not been explored in the context of different-aged interviewees (Robinson, Meah, & Hockey, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref10">46</reflink>]). In this paper we draw upon our recent experience of researching sexual subjectivity and embodiment with Australian women born between 1925 and 1955. This research involved the use of one-on-one interviews conducted by three interviewers of different ages – one in her late twenties, one in her early forties and one in her sixties.</p> <p>Researchers have noted that age difference contributed to the perceived sensitivity of asking older adults about sexuality (Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref11">20</reflink>]; Hockey et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref12">27</reflink>]; Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref13">30</reflink>]). In addition to prevailing social norms about asexual older people, younger researchers may be uncomfortable discussing sex with people closer to the age of their parents or even grandparents (Calasanti & Slevin, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref14">7</reflink>]; Hodson & Skeen, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref15">28</reflink>]). In this context, Robinson and colleagues write that one younger interviewer sought to overcome this by using language that the participants did not find offensive and that was relevant to their generation (Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref16">46</reflink>]). Such issues may also arise when the interviewer is of a similar age to the research participants, where peer-researchers may 'over-identify' with their participants, or where same-aged participants do not openly discuss their experiences (Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref17">46</reflink>]). Having shared experience may generate a sense of comparison between participant and researcher (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref18">4</reflink>]). Further, being identified as an insider by participants may lead them to make assumptions about shared experience and to not disclose some information (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref19">4</reflink>]). Evidence suggests that in addition to age, other interviewer attributes shape the interaction between researcher and participant (Fawcett & Hearn, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref20">12</reflink>]; Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref21">30</reflink>]). In our research with older, mostly heterosexual women, relevant attributes may include gender, class, ethnicity, sexual identity and personal experiences such as relationship status, parenthood and attitudes towards older people (Fawcett & Hearn, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref22">12</reflink>]; Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref23">46</reflink>]). Others have noted that these attributes may influence who volunteers to participate in the research and the way in which the researcher interprets the findings (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref24">4</reflink>]; Noy, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref25">42</reflink>]). While some existing research has reflected upon the role(s) that age and interviewer characteristics may play in shaping the research process, there has been comparatively little reflection on the co-production of knowledge within sexuality and ageing studies.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-3">Researching sexuality and ageing</hd> <p>In this paper we include under the term 'sexuality' both social expectations about sexual behaviour and the subjective experience of sexual desire and pleasure among our participants. As Weeks ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref26">56</reflink>]), p. 3 has argued 'sexuality is as much about words, images, ritual and fantasy as it is about the body: the way we think about sex fashions the way we live it'. This definition reminds us that what we come to know as 'sexuality' is shaped as much by how it is possible to talk about this as it is by bodily properties and practices, and draws attention to the potential for the interview interaction, participant experience and generationally-specific cultural norms to contribute to how this meaning is constructed in research. Ageing sexualities have widely been considered a 'taboo' topic in popular culture and in research with older people, reflecting the belief that sex is the domain of youth and not a topic of importance to adults over a certain age (Calasanti & Slevin, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref27">7</reflink>]; Gill, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref28">16</reflink>]; Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref29">20</reflink>]; Plummer, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref30">43</reflink>]; Rutter & Schwartz, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref31">50</reflink>]). This notion of asexual old age still holds normative currency, informing the belief that sex would be a difficult topic to research with older people (Gott, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref32">18</reflink>]). These assumptions underpinning asexual old age have been challenged by social theorists and researchers in recent scholarship (Fileborn, Thorpe, Hawkes, Pitts, & Minichiello [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref33">14</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref34">15</reflink>]; Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref35">21</reflink>]; Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref36">31</reflink>]; Lindau & Gavrilova, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref37">33</reflink>]; Loe, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref38">34</reflink>]; Montemurro & Gillen, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref39">41</reflink>]; Sandberg, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref40">52</reflink>]; Thorpe, Fileborn, Hawkes, Pitts and Minichiello, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref41">54</reflink>]; Vares, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref42">55</reflink>]). The most recent sample included in the British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (NATSAL) comprised adults up to and including the age of 74, while previous samples from 1990 and 2000 only included adults up to the ages of 59 and 44 respectively (Mercer et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref43">38</reflink>]). The United States (US) National Survey of Sexual Health and Behaviour included adults aged 14 to 94 (Herbenick et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref44">26</reflink>]).</p> <p>Demographic and generational changes are arguably driving this recent focus on researching sexuality among older adults. Population ageing within most Western nations has brought the sexual behaviour of older people into focus under the banner of sexual health and policy planning, while the ageing of the baby boomer cohort has shifted expectations about the role and importance of sexuality into old age (Feldman & Poole, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref45">13</reflink>]; Gilleard & Higgs, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref46">17</reflink>]; Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref47">31</reflink>]; Katz & Marshall, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref48">32</reflink>]; Marshall, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref49">35</reflink>]; Marshall & Katz, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref50">36</reflink>]; Shilling, [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref51">53</reflink>]). In Australia the term baby boomer refers to those born between 1946 and 1965 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref52">2</reflink>]). Several theorists have suggested that this cohort's formative experiences of sex and relationships, in addition to their involvement with social movements such as second wave feminism, will shape their expectations of sexuality old age (Calasanti & Slevin, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref53">7</reflink>]; Gott, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref54">19</reflink>]; Plummer, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref55">44</reflink>]; Rowntree & Zufferey, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref56">48</reflink>]). Researchers, including ourselves, consider this generation's subjective experience of sexuality and ageing to be a topic worthy of investigation. We believe that they will be more willing to discuss their sexual experiences compared with previous generations of older adults (Marshall, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref57">35</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-4">How do researchers expect older people to talk about sex?</hd> <p>Despite the increasing number of empirical studies addressing sexuality among older adults this topic remains one that is approached with caution by researchers (Hockey et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref58">27</reflink>]). Gott and Hinchliff noted that they did not clarify whether participants equated sex with penetrative sex 'for fear of intrusion', although this sensitivity reflected their concerns rather than those of the participants (Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref59">20</reflink>], p. 1627). In fact they reported that many older participants 'welcomed the opportunity to talk about sex and discuss issues that they had never talked about before' (Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref60">20</reflink>], p. 1626). While sensitivity towards the language used to discuss sexual matters may be warranted in certain cases, the reluctance of interviewers to ask older participants certain questions may perpetuate the current lack of clarity about their erotic expectations and subjective experience of sex (Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref61">20</reflink>]). Hurd Clarke noted that some of her participants considered intimate cuddling and touching to be sexual behaviour, while others differentiated between sexual intercourse and touching (Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref62">31</reflink>]). This is an important differentiation to make, as touching and cuddling could be believed to be a natural progression as people age, entrenching ideas about the difference between youthful and old sexualities (Calasanti & Slevin, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref63">7</reflink>]). The limited boundaries of normative ageing sexuality are also reflected in the paucity of research interest in masturbation, oral sex and same-sex activity, and especially to what extent these erotic outlets are important in the sexual lives of older women (Calasanti & Slevin, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref64">7</reflink>]; Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref65">31</reflink>]).</p> <p>As these examples illustrate, researchers enter the field with their own perceptions of older people's willingness to discuss issues of a sexual nature, and these are likely to reflect cultural beliefs about the incompatibility between old age and sexuality. Our own research was informed by evidence of generational shifts in sexual experiences and practices. We suggest that these perceptions, in addition to interviewer characteristics, will influence the interview interaction and shape the meanings of sexuality that are generated in face to face interviews and reported in research findings (Calasanti & Slevin, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref66">7</reflink>]). We argue that knowledge about older people's sexuality must be viewed as a situated occurrence shaped by the particularities of the interview and the cultural context.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-5">Methodology</hd> <p>In the project we employed qualitative methodologies in order to generate personal and subjective accounts of embodied sexuality in older age. Our study was informed by feminist and constructivist paradigms, which emphasise the richness of data gathering through empathic interaction and co-construction of knowledge between the researcher and the researched (Denzin & Lincoln, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref67">9</reflink>]; Hockey et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref68">27</reflink>]; McRobbie, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref69">37</reflink>]). Ethics approval was received from the La Trobe University and University of New England Human Research Ethics Committees prior to initiating the fieldwork. All participants provided written consent to participate in the study and for their research data to be included in future publications.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-6">Interview procedure</hd> <p>The interview schedule consisted of open-ended questions about ageing, sexuality and the body directed towards accessing meanings beyond the prevailing assumptions about ageing sexualities. The three interviewers co-wrote the interview schedule. The women were asked questions such as 'How important is sexual satisfaction to you?' We were also careful to bypass the expectation of 'coupledom' when we asked 'How do you feel about sexually satisfying yourself?' Probing questions were used to validate and clarify participants' meanings (Minichiello, Aroni, Timewell, & Alexander, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref70">40</reflink>]). All interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Three experienced researchers undertook the face-to-face interviews. Researchers kept field notes on the interview interaction, including any conversations that took place after the tape recorder was turned off. Twenty-eight interviews were conducted with women living in the state of Victoria by the first author, who was aged 40 at the time, had two small children and was undertaking these interviews as part of her PhD research. The remaining thirty-one interviews were conducted with participants located in regional-rural New South Wales (NSW) and coastal NSW and Queensland, and divided between two female interviewers, one in her 60s and the other in her late 20s. Almost all participants identified as heterosexual (<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref71">56</reflink>) while two identified as bisexual and one as lesbian. The majority were born in Australia and from an Anglo-Australian background, while a small number had emigrated, mostly from the UK or Ireland, as children or young adults. Participants were diverse in terms of measures used to establish socio-economic status including income, level of education and current or previous occupation. Most owned their own homes and self-identified as being middle-class (Australian Bureau of Statistics, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref72">1</reflink>]). The three interviewers identify as heterosexual and middle-class. Two were from an Anglo-Australian background and the third was of Black Shona-Zimbabwean heritage and a dual citizen of Canada and Australia.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-7">Recruitment</hd> <p>The women were recruited through a combination of strategies. Twenty-four responded to advertisements placed in doctor's surgeries, community centres and local papers (in the rural and regional areas). ABC Radio National (an Australian radio program with a nation-wide audience) broadcast a feature on the study, generating a further 33 participants, while two were recruited through snowballing (Hawkes, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref73">25</reflink>]). A total of 59 women aged between 55 and 81 years participated in an interview. In the data presented in this paper the women are referred to using pseudonyms.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-8">Data analysis</hd> <p>Data coding and analysis were conducted independently by the first and fourth authors using a thematic analysis approach (Ryan & Bernard, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref74">51</reflink>]). For this paper we were particularly concerned with identifying key themes relating to the interview process, interviewer characteristics and the ways in which these were raised in relation to ageing and sexual expression. Themes were initially identified from the literature and refined during the data collection and coding processes. This initial coding consisted of open coding of the interview transcripts and field notes by highlighting 'chunks' of text (usually sentences/paragraphs) in which these themes featured, first by hand and then in NVivo 10 (Bazeley, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref75">3</reflink>], p. 143). These thematic codes were refined in discussions between the authors (Bazeley, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref76">3</reflink>]; Miles & Huberman, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref77">39</reflink>]). Six main themes were identified: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref78">1</reflink>) The significance of age difference, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref79">2</reflink>) Locating the researcher as insider and outsider, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref80">3</reflink>) Discussing ageing and sexuality among peers, (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref81">4</reflink>) Testing the boundaries and dealing with discomfort, (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref82">5</reflink>) Disrupting the interview dynamic, (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref83">6</reflink>) Countering or furthering the silence? We examine each of these themes further in the following discussion in which direct quotes are taken from interview transcripts and other excerpts from field notes.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-9">Results and discussion</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0126826175-10">The significance of age difference</hd> <p>We have already discussed the expectation that sexuality will be difficult topic to discuss with older participants. In the following interview extract, the participant recounts an exchange with a friend about the imminent interview encounter with Rachel:</p> <p>I said to a friend on the phone this morning that I can't talk any more I am going to pick up this research person who is going to interview me. She said 'tell me all about it afterwards, that will be fantastic'. And I said 'yes but she sounds so young on the phone'. 'I think I am going to be too embarrassed to discuss stuff' (Kay, 75)</p> <p>Here Kay identifies the relative youth of the interviewer as a potential deterrent to discussing intimate matters. This confirmed our expectations that age difference would influence the research encounter, yet contrasts with researcher assumptions that when asking older people about sex that it is <emph>their</emph> age that might cause this to be potentially uncomfortable. Furthermore, this excerpt reveals how expectations of the research encounter are formed prior to meeting in person, by a voice or a name, in addition to the research topic, potentially influencing what participants are prepared to discuss (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref84">4</reflink>]). In Kay's interview, age difference did not prevent the discussion of sexual experiences, although to what extent the participant self-censored is uncertain. It is also worth noting that as many of our research participants were recruited through radio promotion undertaken by Gail, they may have expected, and wanted, to be interviewed by someone of a similar age to them. While none of our participants directly mentioned this expectation, one woman said 'you're too young for all this' when Rachel did not understand a colloquial term she used to describe older women's breasts. Here the youth of the interviewer was perceived by this participant to preclude her from closely understanding her experiences because she did not share these generationally-specific terms.</p> <p>While some researchers have argued that being younger makes an interviewer an outsider in the interview process, Hurd Clarke discussed feeling both like an outsider due to her youth and an insider as a woman interviewing other women (Cotterill, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref85">8</reflink>]; Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref86">30</reflink>]). Furthermore, she found that all but one of her participants said that they would prefer to speak to a younger woman about ageing and embodiment than to a woman of their own age (Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref87">30</reflink>]). This suggests that the interviewer/interviewee interaction is rarely one characterised only by difference or similarity. Rather, this may be viewed as one between insiders <emph>and</emph> outsiders, and the ways in which the interviewer/interviewee may be 'same' or 'other' is likely to continue to emerge and evolve throughout the interview dialogue, shaped by the multiple social locations of interviewer and interviewee (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref88">4</reflink>]; Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref89">46</reflink>]). An example of this is in the excerpt below, in which the 60-year old participant reflects upon the ageing process and her perception of the passing of time:</p> <p>Connie: <emph>It seems like yesterday that I turned 40. I can remember my fortieth birthday, every single minute of it and then I think that can't have been 20 years ago. It seems like five years ago, maybe four years ago. So yes. How old are you?</emph></p> <p>Tinashe: <emph>I'm 28.</emph></p> <p>Connie: <emph>OK, cool. You are old enough to be my child. My children are older than you. So yes, it just goes so fast...It feels like I was only 28 yesterday.</emph></p> <p>In this example, Connie places Tinashe not only by her age, but also by referencing their shared experience of the ageing process. Tinashe is comparatively young. However Connie also recalls being 28 and therefore shares this experience with Tinashe. This interaction highlights the varying ways in which time may be constructed and experienced, and, in this case, that Connie's embodied experience of time enables her to situate herself as temporally and chronologically closer to Tinashe (<emph>I was only 28 yesterday</emph>). While our research focus was on older women's subjective experience of sexuality, the ageing process (of which old age is a part) is common to research participants and interviewers. These kinds of reflections upon sexuality and appearance in the context of the life-long process of ageing tended to be facilitated by the age differences between Rachel and Tinashe and the participants, demonstrating that differences in social characteristics between interviewer and interviewee can prompt participants to reflect upon social processes as well as providing opportunities for building rapport.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-11">Locating the researcher as insider and outsider</hd> <p>While Rachel and Tinashe were identifiably 'other' to the women due to their youth, they also shared experiences with many of the women, such as of parenting and of heterosexual relationships, although these characteristics were not immediately obvious. This reinforces the point made earlier about the evolving status of the interviewer as insider/outsider. As in the above conversation with Tinashe, the participants commonly compared Rachel and Tinashe's ages and other social characteristics to those of their own children and grandchildren. They frequently asked questions of Tinashe (particularly with respect to ethnicity and nationality) and Rachel, about their age, their relationship status and whether they had children in order to 'place' them (Cotterill, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref90">8</reflink>], p. 596):</p> <p>Greta: <emph>So, where are you from?</emph></p> <p>Tinashe: <emph>Originally from Zimbabwe, born there but raised in Canada</emph>.</p> <p>These discussions often took place prior to the interview and such topics were also raised during some, but not all, interviews, either through questioning by participants or volunteered by the researchers. These conversations tended to enhance rapport through exploring differences and highlighting shared experiences of heterosexual relationships or of women raising small children across the generations, a topic of relevance to many participants whom, as well as being mothers, were now involved in looking after grandchildren.</p> <p>Although certain life experiences were shared between participants and the younger interviewers, when asking about the women's experiences of ageing and sexuality Rachel and Tinashe positioned themselves as 'outside' the experience of old age and as wanting to learn from their participants, given that they would one day be older women themselves.</p> <p>Tinashe: <emph>As a young person I think there is much to learn from older people because they've lived through so much and have so much to tell that it would just make it easier if people would actually listen</emph>.</p> <p>Stella: <emph>If they want to. I've got two daughters and I just don't bother giving an opinion anymore or say anything.</emph></p> <p>Here, Tinashe refers to the age difference between herself and Stella and explicitly positions Stella as the expert and herself as a respectful outsider. In citing the example of her daughters, it becomes clear that Stella does not assume that all younger people have respect for their elders. In her research with older women Hurd Clarke discussed her youth as giving her the status of an 'acceptable incompetent', that is someone who did not have expertise on the topic and therefore could be taught by the interviewees (Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref91">30</reflink>], p. 730). Similarly, Tinashe locates herself as one of the young people who want to listen and learn from older people, as opposed to other young people, including Stella's daughters. In this respect, positioning herself as an 'outsider' or 'other' to the participant may have in fact facilitated the interview process. Other participants shared stories of ageism directed towards them by younger people in various aspects of their lives. In contrast, the interview interaction was a setting in which the women could take on the role of expert and be listened to respectfully (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref92">4</reflink>]; Rowling, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref93">47</reflink>]). Berger suggests that being positioned as the expert is empowering for research participants, particularly those from a marginalised group (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref94">4</reflink>]; Berger & Malkinson, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref95">5</reflink>]). This dynamic in turn shaped the focus of the discussions with Rachel and Tinashe upon the women's subjective accounts of their experiences of old age and of the meanings of these to them.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-12">Discussing ageing and sexuality among peers</hd> <p>In contrast to the younger interviewers, Gail was visibly of a similar age to the participants. On the radio program and during the interviews, Gail was often quite open about the fact that she considered herself as much the subject of the research as the participants were:</p> <p>Gail: <emph>I was born in 1945 and I was interested in...how it felt to get older as a woman in Australia...I thought that I knew how it felt for me but I wanted to know whether other women had the same experience and feelings. (Interview with Jessica)</emph></p> <p>In making this statement to the women, Gail was inviting them to share their experiences of ageing with her as a peer, as well as an academic researcher. Other researchers have also successfully taken this approach (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref96">4</reflink>]). Taking this approach provided opportunities for meanings of sexuality in old age to be co-constructed in less formal conversations between interviewer and interviewee, rather than through the more formal traditional interview format:</p> <p>Jeffa: <emph>Our bodies are abhorrent and that's what we've grown up to be. You know we are not supposed to look at them, not supposed to like them, we're not supposed to love them.</emph></p> <p>Gail: <emph>Not supposed to masturbate</emph>.</p> <p>Jeffa: <emph>Oh god no! No, no. And that's one of the issues with me was, growing up as a good Catholic girl. You know you certainly didn't do that.</emph></p> <p>Gail: <emph>I didn't even know how to do that until I was in my twenties. I didn't grow up as Catholic, but I just remember that being a revelation to me.</emph></p> <p>Although she and Jeffa did not know each other, in this exchange Gail takes on the position of insider, as Jeffa uses the term 'we' to refer to older women and to include Gail. By virtue of having grown old in the context of similar cultural values as younger women, Gail and Jeffa were able to access a shared language, which provided an opening to discuss the research topics as shared difficulties. In bringing her own biography into the research interview, Gail's intention was to avoid objectifying the interviewees and to be more conversational in her discussions with them. Yet, like the younger researchers, she too found that she was uncomfortable talking about sex to 'strangers', as this was a topic that she would normally restrict to her close friends. Gail's insider status as a woman of a similar age who had grown up in a similar cultural context to the participants did not automatically confer her with the status of insider when it came to the topics of sexual practice and desire (Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref97">46</reflink>]). For example while Gail's age led to discussions of shared histories, such as of cultural change in the 1960s and 70s, her experiences were clearly different from those of some of the interviewees:</p> <p>Gail: <emph>When we were teenagers you could just about get the pill, so you would be growing up, if you were born in 1947 then in 1967 you would have been 20</emph>?</p> <p>Sally: <emph>Yes</emph>.</p> <p>Gail: <emph>And it wasn't all that easy to get the pill then was it? Do you remember?</emph></p> <p>Sally: <emph>Well I didn't require it because I had a conservative upbringing. There was no need for me to get it.</emph></p> <p>This exchange draws attention to the diversity of women's sexual experiences in the 1960s, and the potential pitfalls of making assumptions about shared experience based upon age. In this case being of a similar age was not a guarantee of shared experience, while the role of class and social background was more significant (Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref98">46</reflink>]). Class position has been recognised as shaping women's sexual identities and practices, such as through the notion of 'respectability' and by influencing the language used to discuss sexual practices (Hockey et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref99">27</reflink>]; Richardson, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref100">45</reflink>]). As with the above example, class or religious background was commonly cited by participants as shaping their exposure to information about sex and their sexual practices as young women. Aside from this context class differences were not observed to feature in the interview interactions. This is because at the time of interview the majority of participants self-identified as middle-class, despite some discussing working-class backgrounds, as did the researchers. Other researchers have identified the potential risks of bringing the researcher into the research, including: imposing the values of the researcher, silencing the voices of the participants, and generating comparisons or competition between the experiences of researcher and participant (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref101">4</reflink>]; Drake, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref102">10</reflink>]). Through reflecting upon this exchange, we can see that as researchers we are equally subject to the prevailing cultural assumptions that the contraceptive pill equalled sexual freedom that all embraced with the same enthusiasm while the women's stories commonly challenged these assumptions. This example reminds us of the importance of being aware of the beliefs and assumptions that we bring with us into the research and how this may influence the interview exchange.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-13">Testing the boundaries and dealing with discomfort</hd> <p>In contrast to Gail's interviews in which intimate topics were often approached through the lens of shared histories, Rachel found that raising these topics more formally could generate uncomfortable moments for both interviewee and interviewer. In the following material, Rachel asks Sandra, a single 66-year-old woman, who had earlier expressed concern that she would not be able to contribute anything useful to the project, about sexual satisfaction:</p> <p>Rachel: <emph>So how important is sexual satisfaction to you?</emph></p> <p>Sandra: <emph>Fairly important, not nearly as important as it used to be. (10 s pause) I don't think it's overwhelmingly important, because if it was I'd have done something about it, apart from self</emph>-<emph>pleasuring. Sometimes I think to myself, if I was male I would simply find a reasonably professional prostitute, and I've never known whether or not other females do that, whether it's available to them [..]I used to think why doesn't this ever get talked about, why is it that it's not advertised?</emph></p> <p>In all interviews, we deliberately included the explicit question relating to sexual satisfaction in order to encourage women to consider sex from the perspective of their own pleasure, and to introduce the issue of self-pleasure subtly into the conversation. In this example, the long pause may reflect the awkwardness of discussing sexual pleasure with a younger interviewer, the unfamiliarity of the term 'sexual satisfaction' or the cultural silence surrounding single older women's sexual pleasure. Sandra voices uncertainty as to whether her individual expression of heterosexual desire, which included considering engaging a sex worker, is 'normal' both in the outside world and within the social interaction of the interview, illustrating how women's sexual behaviour may be constrained by their own uncertainties of what is 'normal' or acceptable' sexual behaviour for a woman of a particular age. In a study on sexual risk-taking participants voiced a fear of being judged on their sexual behaviours by the interviewer (Bourne & Robson, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref103">6</reflink>]). This may have also been the case here, although this the participant did not voice this fear. To us this interaction illustrates the complexity and awkwardness of researching sexuality when the notion of boundaries is implicit however neither interviewer nor participant are certain of where the boundaries lie in terms of 'normal' and 'abnormal' sexuality or 'public' and 'private' sexuality (Cotterill, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref104">8</reflink>]).</p> <p>As for all research into sensitive topics, such interactions can generate 'ethically important moments' and require interviewer sensitivity (Guillemin & Gillam, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref105">22</reflink>], p. 262). Rachel chose not to ask another participant about masturbation, as this woman hinted that she and her husband no longer had sex and Rachel sensed her discomfort in discussing sexual practices. In this situation, Rachel informed her decision on her belief that masturbation would be an uncomfortable topic for older women to discuss, in addition to her concern that to ask this woman about masturbation might be insensitive. While this decision was made out of an ethical sense of concern for her well-being, it nonetheless led to a silence around this aspect of her sexual self, and was an assumption that may not have borne out in reality had the question been asked (Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref106">20</reflink>]; Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref107">46</reflink>]). These examples demonstrate the sometimes unacknowledged yet still powerful boundaries between 'acceptable and unacceptable sex' (Hawkes, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref108">23</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref109">24</reflink>]) regardless of age difference and despite the shared experience of womanhood. Even when sexuality is the topic of concern, it can be difficult for interviewers to discard the notion that it is a private, taboo and potentially embarrassing topic. Furthermore, sexuality's status as a topic of personal significance, perhaps further contributes to the potential awkwardness of entering into conversations about such topics with a stranger (Weeks, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref110">56</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-14">Disrupting the interview dynamic</hd> <p>There is often an assumption in the research literature that the researcher is in control of the research process (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref111">4</reflink>]; Cotterill, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref112">8</reflink>]). However, in our interviews some participants subverted the role of the younger researchers in guiding the interviews:</p> <p>Rachel: <emph>And so are you in a relationship now?</emph></p> <p>Kay: <emph>Do you find these questions hard to ask, your being so much younger than me?</emph></p> <p>Rachel: <emph>No, not really. Not any more, No. I have been talking to a lot of women ...</emph></p> <p>Kay: <emph>You are blushing</emph>.</p> <p>Here, Kay observes that Rachel is finding it uncomfortable to engage older strangers in conversations about their intimate lives. In doing so, Kay makes visible the role of age difference in shaping the interview dynamic and therefore to how the topic of intimate relationships was raised and discussed. The conversational diversion by the interviewee did not inhibit the creation of rapport in this interaction. Rather it indicated the presence of an unspoken consensus about boundaries and sources of discomfort in talking about sexuality. The potential vulnerability of the interviewer is also illuminated. In this example the relationship between age and power is called upon to create an ordered framework into a setting disordered by social embarrassment (Cotterill, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref113">8</reflink>]; McRobbie, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref114">37</reflink>]). Our data support the notion that the balance of power within an interview can shift, particularly when the interviewer is younger, and is an outsider to the world experience of her participants (by virtue of age). This might have a bearing on the kinds of stories that are told, those that are not, and the way in which they are told.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-15">Countering or furthering the silence?</hd> <p>Despite the moments of tension, embarrassment and discomfort discussed thus far, none of our participants refused to answer any questions around the topic of sexual pleasure and experience. They commonly noted that they did not discuss these issues with their peers as they were perceived as private or uncomfortable topics. As with other interview studies of sexuality, participants often commented on how much they had enjoyed speaking about these topics in the safety of the interview environment (Bourne & Robson, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref115">6</reflink>]; Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref116">20</reflink>]). In this sense, the interview context may have in fact facilitated an opening up of the boundaries and unspoken rules surrounding the open discussion of sex. Some indicated that they were motivated to participate in the research to counter negative assumptions about older women's sexuality. As Alina, 68, said 'I don't like people having preconceived ideas based on, not reality, about older women...and sexuality'. This theme of challenging the silence around older women's sexuality was further complicated by the role that generation plays upon the sexual experiences that are discussed in contemporary society and those that remain silent (Plummer, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref117">43</reflink>]). As this participant noted, reflecting upon the responses to the radio program, the sexual experiences of pre-sexual liberation women can be more difficult to tell:</p> <p> <emph>I was...so disappointed by the input of my generation, they so skirted around the reality of what we experienced sexually</emph> (Marjorie, 81)</p> <p>While we have discussed the role of participant and interviewer in the research process, we believe that it is also important to consider the part played by generational norms. For example, recent interest in sexuality and ageing is driven by generational change, as exemplified by the media focus on ageing baby boomers (Gott, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref118">19</reflink>]). As researchers, we need to take into account how these cultural stereotypes about sexuality and generational change may shape our own expectations of research participants and potentially silence the experiences of previous generations. Supporting this idea, we found it difficult to recruit women born in the 1920s and 30s. We also need to be mindful of how generational influences, such as the construction of sexuality as something that takes place within a marriage, can shape how it is possible for participants to talk and think about sexuality (Gott & Hinchliff, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref119">20</reflink>]; Plummer, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref120">43</reflink>]).</p> <p>Engaging in the interview process reminds us that people participate in research for a reason (Plummer, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref121">43</reflink>]). For Marjorie and some others participation was an opportunity to counter negative cultural, and generational, stereotypes about older women's sexual desires and practices, while a smaller number of participants, such as Sandra (as discussed earlier), expressed uncertainty about whether they did have anything to contribute. Others hinted that they had more to tell. One participant commented that the interview was not as in-depth as she had been expecting, while another noted that Rachel had asked very general questions about sexual experience. Several others waited until the formal interview was complete to disclose experiences of bondage and discipline (B&D), sexual dissatisfaction, and difficulties engaging in penetrative sex. These women possibly did not want these stories recorded or may have felt they were too personal or difficult to discuss in the interview setting. Given that we did not ask about topics such as B&D, perhaps they did not feel as though these examples were relevant to the research questions. The relative formality of a face-to-face interview may discourage participants from going 'off topic', despite the researchers seeking to take an informal approach to interviewing. These women's post-interview revelations suggest that some sexual experiences are more difficult to tell than others. This may be particularly so if they are topics that are not generally told by or associated with, older women, or are generally taboo topics such as B&D (Holland & Ramazanoglu, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref122">29</reflink>]). Additionally, we wonder how many other women either did not volunteer to participate or did not raise specific examples of sexual practice because they considered them to be uninteresting to the research (Plummer, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref123">43</reflink>]). Despite seeking not to impose our preconceptions on the experience of sexuality and ageing, we suggest that we inadvertently reinforced boundaries between what can be spoken and what cannot. Researching sexual behaviour beyond the popularly reinforced expectations, especially in an in-depth interview situation, reveals the presence of what is often hidden in assumptions about widening sexual liberation in the twenty-first century. That there remain boundaries is indicated by the presence of ambivalence, hesitancy and self-consciousness evident in both interviewer and interviewee.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-16">Conclusions</hd> <p>Given the diverse ages of the three interviewers involved in data collection, in this paper we wanted to explore the role that interviewer age played in the interview dynamic and in shaping the co-production of meanings about sexuality. As we have discussed, while interviewer age was significant to the interview process, particularly in the approach taken to establishing rapport with interviewees, and of raising the topic of sexual practice, being of a similar age to the participants did not always facilitate greater openness in discussions about sexual pleasure with participants. Nor did age difference always allow for more open discussions. As we have demonstrated, age differences and similarities, as well as other characteristics, namely gender, sexual identity, ethnicity and shared experience all figured in the interactions and contributed to the interview dynamic and to the collection of data (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref124">4</reflink>]; Cotterill, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref125">8</reflink>]; Hurd Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref126">30</reflink>]; Robinson et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref127">46</reflink>]). In this paper we have also demonstrated that interviewers and participants were informed by beliefs about what was expected of them in the research encounter including which kinds of sexual experiences could be discussed and which could not. While interviewer characteristics were integral to this process, so were culturally accepted, gendered and age-related, meanings of sexuality and generational influences. We argue that our data reflect the commonly held belief that sex is simultaneously a private topic, and a topic of significance, and that certain kinds of sexual acts, such as masturbation, hold a lower status than others (Rubin, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref128">49</reflink>]; Weeks, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref129">56</reflink>]). We further argue that the topic of single older women's sexuality has few pre-existing scripts or roles, requiring both participants and researchers to negotiate shared and acceptable grounds on which to interact. In the social interaction that comprises the qualitative interview process the tacit existence of 'go' and no-go' categories, or 'hidden boundaries' became evident. Our interview data illustrate the dynamic involved in working through these uncertainties in order to establish a framework within which subjective experiences can be communicated and knowledge constructed. As our examples suggest, the characteristics of those who volunteered to participate, and the experiences that they shared, tended to reflect those for which some normalising framework existed. Thus, while our approach to interviewing did enable for in-depth discussion of sexuality, our findings may not reflect the diversity of older women's sexual experiences and desires. While we have examined these issues in the context of ageing and sexuality, they are relevant more broadly to qualitative inquiries into sensitive topics.</p> <p>We therefore conclude that there is no single right way to match interviewer and interviewee on social characteristics to achieve rapport and gather data on socially sensitive topics effectively. Rather these findings highlight the interactive nature of semi-structured interviews in which cultural and generational norms as well as interviewer and interviewee identities play a role.</p> <p>We suggest that these findings reinforce the benefits for researchers of reflecting upon the potential impact of their social characteristics at each stage of the research process. For example, researchers may consider the ways in which differences (as well as similarities) between themselves and participants could benefit the data collection process, such as by prompting participants to reflect upon the topic of interest from an 'outsider' perspective, generating broader discussion around the topic (Berger, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref130">4</reflink>]). We recommend that researchers be mindful of the potential for cultural norms around the topic of interest to re-inforce these meanings and thereby limit the potential for these to be challenged in the research process. Some strategies to overcome this may include aiming to recruit a diverse range of participants, and raising the topic of cultural norms directly in the interview encounter.</p> <p>Qualitative social research, and especially that which engages with sensitive or complex personal areas, is challenging. We suggest that as researchers we should welcome the opportunity such 'messiness' offers to extend our understanding and thus our articulation of the sometimes-contradictory social dynamics that impact on participants and ourselves during the process of undertaking such inquiry.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-17">Notes on contributors</hd> <p> <bold> <emph>Rachel Thorpe</emph> </bold>, PhD, is a research fellow at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. Her research interests include the experience of sexuality and the body in later life.</p> <p> <bold> <emph>Gail Hawkes</emph> </bold>, PhD, is Adjunct Associate Professor at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.</p> <p> <bold> <emph>Tinashe Dune</emph> </bold>, PhD, is a lecturer in Interprofessional Health Sciences at the University of Western Sydney. Author C's research and publications focus on sexuality, marginalisation and health inequalities.</p> <p> <bold> <emph>Bianca Fileborn</emph> </bold>, PhD, is a Research Officer at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. Her research is concerned with exploring assemblages of identity, place, culture and experiences of violence and safety, and with critical gender and sexualities scholarship.</p> <p> <bold> <emph>Marian Pitts</emph> </bold>, PhD, is Emeritus Professor and ex-director at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.</p> <p> <bold> <emph>Victor Minichiello</emph> </bold>, PhD, a sociologist and public health researcher, is Emeritus Professor at the University of New England and Adjunct Professor at Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. He has published widely on the topic of sexuality in later life and healthy ageing.</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-18">Funding</hd> <p>This work was supported by Australian Research Council [grant number DP110101199].</p> <hd id="AN0126826175-19">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <ref id="AN0126826175-20"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref72" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Present address: School of Social Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref52" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0126826175-21"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2000). Australian Social Trends 2000. (4102.0). Canberra: ABS.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2003). Baby Boomers and the 2001 Census. Canberra: ABS.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref75" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bazeley, P. (2013). Qualitative data analysis. Practical strategies. London: Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref18" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don't: Researcher's position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15, 219–234. doi:10.1177/1468794112468475</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref82" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Berger, R., & Malkinson, R. (2000). "Therapeutizing" research: The positive impact of family‐focused research on participants. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 70, 307–314.10.1080/00377310009517594</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref5" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bourne, A. H., & Robson, M. A. (2015). Participants' reflections on being interviewed about risk and sexual behaviour: Implications for collection of qualitative data on sensitive topics. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18, 105–116. doi:10.1080/13645579.2013.860747</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref14" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Calasanti, T., & Slevin, K. (2001). Sex, sexuality and old age. In T. Calasanti, & K. Slevin (Eds.), Gender, social inequalities and aging (pp. 73–92). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref85" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Cotterill, P. (1992). Interviewing women. Women's Studies International Forum, 15, 593–606. doi:10.1016/0277-5395(92)90061-Y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref67" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 1–25). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Drake, P. (2010). Grasping at methodological understanding: A cautionary tale from insider research. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 33, 85–99.10.1080/17437271003597592</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dune, T., Mapedzahama, V., Minichiello, V., Pitts, M., & Hawkes, G. (2015). African migrant women's understanding and construction of sexuality in Australia. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 2, 38–50.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fawcett, B., & Hearn, J. (2004). Researching others: Epistemology, experience, standpoints and participation. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 7, 201–218.10.1080/13645570210163989</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Feldman, S., & Poole, M. (1999). Positioning older women. In M. Poole, & S. Feldman (Eds.), A certain age : Women growing older (pp. 3–16). St. Leonards: Allen and Unwin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fileborn, B., Thorpe, R., Hawkes, G., Pitts, M., & Minichiello, V. (2015a). Sex, desire and pleasure: Considering the experiences of older Australian women. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 30, 117–130. doi:10.1080/14681994.2014.936722</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fileborn, B., Thorpe, R., Hawkes, G., Pitts, M., & Minichiello, V. (2015b). Sex and the (older) single girl: Experiences of sex and dating in later life. Journal of Aging Studies, 33, 67–75. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2015.02.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gill, R. (2007). Postfeminist media culture. Elements of a sensibility. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 10, 147–166.10.1177/1367549407075898</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gilleard, C., & Higgs, P. (2000). Cultures of ageing. London: Prentice Hall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gott, C. M. (1998). Researching the sexual behaviour of older people: A methodological challenge. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 1, 325–331. doi:10.1080/13645579.1998.10846884</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gott, M. (2005). Sexuality, sexual health and ageing. Maidenhead: Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gott, M., & Hinchliff, S. (2003a). How important is sex in later life? The views of older people. Social Science & Medicine, 56, 1617–1628. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00180-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gott, M., & Hinchliff, S. (2003b). Sex and ageing: A gendered issue. In S. Arber, K. Davidson, & J. Ginn (Eds.), Gender and ageing. Changing roles and relationships (pp. 63–78). Maidenhead: Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and 'ethically important moments' in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 261–280. doi:10.1177/1077800403262360</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hawkes, G. (1996). A sociology of sex and sexuality. Buckingham: Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hawkes, G. (2004). Sex and pleasure in western culture. Malden, MA: Polity Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hawkes, G. (2012). In N. Hughes (Ed.), ABC life matters.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Herbenick, D., Reece, M., Schick, V., Sanders, S. A., Dodge, B., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2010). Sexual behavior in the United States: Results from a national probability sample of men and women ages 14–94. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 255–265. doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02012.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hockey, J., Meah, A., & Robinson, V. (2007). Mundane heterosexualities. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230596948</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hodson, D. S., & Skeen, P. (1994). Sexuality and aging: The hammerlock of myths. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 13, 219–235. doi:10.1177/073346489401300301</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Holland, J., & Ramazanoglu, C. (1994). Coming to conclusions: Power and interpretation in researching young women's sexuality. In M. Maynard, & J. Purvis (Eds.), Researching women's lives from a feminist pespective (pp. 125–148). London: Taylor and Francis.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hurd Clarke, L. (2003). Overcoming ambivalence: The challenges of exploring socially charged issues. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 718–735. doi:10.1177/1049732303251229</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hurd Clarke, L. (2006). Older women and sexuality: Experiences in marital relationships across the life course. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement, 25, 129–140.10.1353/cja.2006.0034</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Katz, S., & Marshall, B. (2003). New sex for old: Lifestyle, consumerism, and the ethics of aging well. Journal of Aging Studies, 17, 3–16.10.1016/S0890-4065(02)00086-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lindau, S. T., & Gavrilova, N. (2010). Sex, health, and years of sexually active life gained due to good health: Evidence from two US population based cross sectional surveys of ageing. British Medical Journal, 340(9), 1–11. doi:10.1136/bmj.c810</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Loe, M. (2004). Sex and the senior woman: Pleasure and danger in the viagra era. Sexualities, 7, 303–326.10.1177/1363460704044803</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marshall, B. L. (2011). The graying of "sexual health": A critical research agenda. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie, 48, 390–413.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marshall, B. L., & Katz, S. (2012). The embodied life course: Post-ageism or the renaturalization of gender. Societies, 2, 222–234.10.3390/soc2040222</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McRobbie, A. (1982). The politics of feminist research: Between talk, text and action. Feminist Review, 12, 46–57.10.1057/fr.1982.29</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mercer, C. H., Tanton, C., Prah, P., Erens, B., Sonnenberg, P., Clifton, S., ... Johnson, A. M. (2013). Changes in sexual attitudes and lifestyles in Britain through the life course and over time: Findings from the National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal). The Lancet, 382, 1781–1794. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62035-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., Timewell, E., & Alexander, L. (1990). In-depth interviewing (2nd ed.). Frenchs Forest: Addison Wesley Longman Australia Pty Ltd.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Montemurro, B., & Gillen, M. M. (2013). Wrinkles and sagging flesh: Exploring transformations in women's sexual body image. Journal of Women and Aging, 25, 3–23.10.1080/08952841.2012.720179</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noy, C. (2003). You must go trek there: The persuasive genre of narration among Israeli backpackers. Narrative Inquiry, 12, 261–290.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Plummer, K. (1995). Telling sexual stories. Power, change and social worlds. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203425268</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Plummer, K. (2010). Generational sexualities, subterranean traditions, and the hauntings of the sexual world: Some preliminary remarks. Symbolic Interaction, 33, 163–190.10.1525/si.2010.33.2.163</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richardson, D. (1996). Heterosexuality and social theory. In D. Richarson (Ed.), Theorising heterosexuality: Telling it straight (pp. 1–20). Buckingham: Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Robinson, V., Meah, A., & Hockey, J. (2007). Representing 'sex' in the research process. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 10, 181–194. doi:10.1080/13645570701541977</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowling, L. (1999). Being in, being out, being with: Affect and the role of the qualitative researcher in loss and grief research. Mortality, 4, 167–181. doi:10.1080/713685968</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowntree, M. R., & Zufferey, C. (2015). Need or right: Sexual expression and intimacy in aged care. Journal of Aging Studies, 35, 20–25.10.1016/j.jaging.2015.07.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubin, G. (1984). Thinking sex: Notes for a radical theory of the politics of sexuality. In C. Vance (Ed.), Pleasure and danger: exploring female sexuality (pp. 267–319). Boston: Routledge & K. Paul.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rutter, V., & Schwartz, P. (2011). The gender of sexuality. Exploring sexual possibilities. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryan, G. W. & Bernard, H. R. (2000). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 769–802). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sandberg, L. (2013). Affirmative old age—the ageing body and feminist theories on difference. International Journal of Ageing and Later Life, 8, 11–40.10.3384/ijal.1652-8670</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shilling, C. (2012). The body and social theory. London: Sage Publications Ltd.10.4135/9781473914810</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thorpe, R., Fileborn, B., Hawkes, G., Pitts, M., & Minichiello, V. (2015). Old and desirable: Older women's accounts of ageing bodies in intimate relationships. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 30, 156–166. doi:10.1080/14681994.2014.959307</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vares, T. (2009). Reading the 'sexy oldie': Gender, age(ing) and embodiment. Sexualities, 12, 503–524.10.1177/1363460709105716</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weeks, J. (1985). Sexuality and its discontents. Meanings, myths and modern sexualities. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul plc.10.4324/9780203407462</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Rachel Thorpe; Gail Hawkes; Tinashe Dune; Bianca Fileborn; Marian Pitts and Victor Minichiello</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref128"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1189053
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Hidden Boundaries and Shared Meanings: The Roles of Researcher Characteristics and Cultural Norms in Shaping Understandings of Sexuality in the Unstructured Interview Setting
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Thorpe%2C+Rachel%22">Thorpe, Rachel</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hawkes%2C+Gail%22">Hawkes, Gail</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dune%2C+Tinashe%22">Dune, Tinashe</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fileborn%2C+Bianca%22">Fileborn, Bianca</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pitts%2C+Marian%22">Pitts, Marian</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Minichiello%2C+Victor%22">Minichiello, Victor</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22International+Journal+of+Social+Research+Methodology%22"><i>International Journal of Social Research Methodology</i></searchLink>. 2018 21(2):205-217.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 13
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sexuality%22">Sexuality</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interviews%22">Interviews</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Influences%22">Cultural Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Females%22">Females</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adults%22">Adults</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Relationship%22">Interpersonal Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Researchers%22">Researchers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Aging+%28Individuals%29%22">Aging (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Relationship%22">Peer Relationship</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/13645579.2017.1350016
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1364-5579
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This paper examines the role of the research process in shaping the construction of knowledge about sensitive topics in in-depth interviews particularly with regard to researcher identity and cultural influences or norms. We argue that these influences shape all aspects of the research process and that researchers will benefit from reflecting upon them when planning, undertaking and interpreting qualitative studies. Drawing on an empirical study interviewing Australian women aged 55 years and older about sexuality we address differences and similarities between researchers and participants; cultural constructions of sexuality and ageing, and generational influences. Using examples from our interview data we interrogate the contribution of each of these aspects to the interview dynamic and the co-production of meaning. Our analysis draws attention to the fluidity of insider and outsider status and to the existence of hidden boundaries that impact on how certain topics can be discussed in interviews. The paper argues that knowledge about sensitive topics such as older people's sexuality must be viewed as a situated occurrence shaped by the particularities of the interview and the cultural context. Finally, we discuss the implications of these findings for qualitative inquiries into sensitive topics.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 56
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1189053
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1189053
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/13645579.2017.1350016
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 13
        StartPage: 205
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Sexuality
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interviews
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cultural Influences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Females
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adults
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Researchers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Aging (Individuals)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Peer Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Australia
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Hidden Boundaries and Shared Meanings: The Roles of Researcher Characteristics and Cultural Norms in Shaping Understandings of Sexuality in the Unstructured Interview Setting
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Thorpe, Rachel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hawkes, Gail
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dune, Tinashe
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fileborn, Bianca
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pitts, Marian
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Minichiello, Victor
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2018
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1364-5579
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 21
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: International Journal of Social Research Methodology
              Type: main
ResultId 1