IB Psychology HLTopic 5 — Research DesignPaper 3 & IACore idea~8 min read
Reflexivity: The Researcher in the Research
In a lab experiment you try to remove the researcher from the picture. In qualitative research you cannot — the researcher chose the questions, sat in the room, and decided what counted as a theme. Reflexivity is the honest response to that: instead of pretending you were invisible, you write down exactly where you were standing.
📚 What you need to know
Reflexivity is a strategy used by qualitative researchers to examine how their own subjectivity shaped the findings.
It exists because in qualitative work the researcher is part of the process, not outside it.
Personal reflexivity: examining your own values, experiences and beliefs, and how they affected the research.
Epistemological reflexivity: examining how your method choices shaped what could be found.
The main tool is a reflexive journal or field diary kept throughout the study.
Reflexivity is reported openly, usually in the discussion section, and increases credibility.
Failing to be reflexive threatens the validity of qualitative findings.
Why you cannot just remove yourself
An experiment can standardise the researcher away. A qualitative study cannot. Somebody decided which questions to ask in the interview, which follow-ups to chase, which quotes to include, and which recurring idea counted as a theme. Every one of those was a judgement, and judgements come from a person with a history.
The reflexive answer is not to pretend otherwise. It is to make those judgements visible, so a reader can weigh them. That is why reflexive research often reads more honestly than research that claims perfect neutrality: it tells you what the researcher brought with them.
The loop is the point. Assumptions shape methods, methods shape findings, and findings should send you back to re-examine the assumptions.
The two types you must name
Type
What the researcher examines
A question they ask themselves
Personal reflexivity
Their own values, experiences and beliefs
Have I lived through something like this, and is it colouring what I hear?
Personal reflexivity
How the topic affects them emotionally
Is this getting personal in a way that intrudes on my professional judgement?
Epistemological reflexivity
How knowledge was produced in this study
Why did I choose this method, and what did it make impossible to see?
Epistemological reflexivity
The assumptions built into the design
What have I taken for granted that could undermine the integrity of this work?
The distinction is easier than it sounds. Personal reflexivity is about you as a person: your background, your beliefs, your emotional reaction to the topic. Epistemological reflexivity is about your choices as a researcher: the method, the questions, the framework, and what those decisions ruled out before you started.
Two questions, two typesWho am I? → personal reflexivity How did I come to know this? → epistemological reflexivity
If you interview people about exam stress while sitting your own exams, that is personal reflexivity territory. If you chose semi-structured interviews and therefore never found out anything the questions did not touch, that is epistemological.
How it is actually done
🧩 Being reflexive in practice
Keep a reflexive journal from the first day. Record what you expected before each interview and what surprised you afterwards.
Write down your position on the topic before you collect any data, so you cannot rewrite it later.
Note why you chose each method and what that choice made invisible.
Review your coding. Ask whether a theme is really in the data or is something you arrived expecting to find.
Report it openly in the discussion, covering strengths and weaknesses honestly.
Pair it with triangulation. A second researcher checking your interpretations catches what reflection alone misses.
Reflexivity is not an apology. Writing “I may have been biased” and stopping there earns nothing. The credit comes from saying how your position could have shaped a specific decision, and what you did about it.
Worked examples
WORKED EXAMPLE
Distinguish the two types
A researcher who was raised bilingual studies the school experiences of bilingual children. In her discussion she writes two paragraphs of reflection. Explain what each type of reflexivity would cover.
Step 1: Personal reflexivity
She examines how her own bilingual childhood shaped what she noticed — she may have been quick to recognise experiences that matched her own and slower to hear ones that did not.
Step 2: Why that matters
It affects which follow-up questions she asked and which quotes felt important, so it shaped the themes themselves.
Step 3: Epistemological reflexivity
She examines her method choices: interviewing children individually rather than observing them in class meant she learned what they could articulate, not what they actually did.
Step 4: State the benefit
Reporting both openly increases the credibility of the study, because readers can judge the findings knowing where they came from.
Personal = her own background; epistemological = her method choicesthe split is person versus process — keep that phrase in mind
WORKED EXAMPLE
Explain one strength of using reflexivity
A qualitative study is criticised for being “just one researcher’s interpretation”. Explain how reflexivity answers that criticism, and one limitation of reflexivity as a solution.
Step 1: State what reflexivity does
It makes the researcher’s influence visible and documented rather than hidden.
Step 2: Explain why that helps
Readers can judge the findings knowing the researcher’s position, which supports credibility and transferability.
Step 3: Give the limitation
Reflexivity relies on the researcher noticing their own bias, and some biases are invisible from the inside. Not all researchers practise it fully.
Step 4: Give the stronger combination
Pair it with researcher triangulation, so a second person checks the coding independently.
Makes influence transparent; limited by self-awareness, so pair with triangulation“explain one strength” still wants a limitation if the question asks for one
💡 Exam tip
Always name both types. A question on reflexivity almost always splits them.
Say the word credibility. Reflexivity is a credibility technique, and the two are marked together.
Tie reflexivity to qualitative research specifically. It is not a general term for being careful.
The reflexive journal is the concrete example examiners look for. Mention it by name.
Pair reflexivity with triangulation when asked how to improve a qualitative study — they cover different weaknesses.
Use it in the IA if your study involves interpretation. A short honest paragraph is worth more than a long defensive one.
⚠ Common mix-up
Thinking reflexivity removes bias. It documents bias so it can be judged. It does not delete it.
Applying it to experiments. Quantitative research controls bias out; reflexivity is a qualitative strategy.
Confusing the two types. Personal is about the person; epistemological is about how knowledge was produced.
Treating it as an admission of failure. Transparency raises credibility, which is the whole point.
Mixing reflexivity with reflection. Reflexivity is systematic, documented and reported, not just thinking things over.
Leaving it to the end. A journal kept during the study is far more useful than a paragraph written afterwards.
Up next: Credibility and Transferability — the two words qualitative research uses where quantitative research would say reliability and generalisability.
Want this explained one-to-one?
Book a free session with an experienced IB Psychology tutor and get your trickiest topics made simple.
