A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Etheses - Queen Margaret ...

nor is it satisfied with the interpretation of the meanings of social actions. Its fundamental
aim is to destroy the illusion of observed reality (Harvey, 1990).
The substantive issue I want to address concerns the reasons why people with impairments
often find it difficult to feel positive about being the people they are. This will involve an
attempt to penetrate both the outward appearances of what is going on and participants‟
surface level responses.
What I was looking for, when initially trying to decide upon a framework for structuring my
research, was a comprehensive methodological approach through which I could deconstruct
the personal tragedy myth and, having subjected it to critical exploration and evaluation,
propose a clarified affirmative model as a new construction „which seeks not to demonstrate
final absolute truth, but to present an approximate reflection of reality which is subject to
continuous change‟ (Harvey, 1990:197).
Before elaborating on why Harvey‟s critical social research methodology suggested itself as
the approach most likely to yield useful knowledge in terms of this issue, I will briefly
outline reasons which led me to reject other approaches to qualitative research.
Why not ethnography?
56
Ethnography involves an extended observation of the group, most often through
participant observation, in which the researcher is immersed in the day-to-day lives
of the people and observes and interviews the group participants. Ethnographers
study the behaviour, the language, and the interaction among members of the
culture-sharing group (Creswell, 2007:68).
I was initially attracted to the idea of carrying out my research as an ethnographic study
because of the potential I saw for gathering thick data on the day-to-day experiences of
disabled people as they occurred. This would have allowed me the opportunity to make clear
my political commitment as a disabled person siding with the disabled people participating
in my research (Becker, 1991). However, there were a number of considerations which led to
my rejection of this approach. These related to issues concerned with identifying a group.
Talking of the disabled community does not describe a collective of people who necessarily
spend a lot of time „hanging out‟ together. While many disabled people do spend a lot of
time together in special schools, day centres, supported employment, and so on, I identify
these in terms of what John Fiske has described as stations rather than as locales: