Re-Conceptualizing Insider/Outsider Positionalities in Migration Research as ‘Liquid Positionalities’: An Analytical Tool for Migration Scholars

Abstract

Dominant theoretical discussions on insider/outsider, co-ethnic/co-national migrant researcher positionalities have focused on the ideas of group identities such as nationality and ethnicity and how they shape and inform insider/outsider researchers’ positionalities. While some migration researchers argue that shared nationality and ethnicity make co-national or co-ethnic researchers insiders, others contend that the insiderness/outsiderness of co-national or co-ethnic researchers tends to be shaped and informed by multiple, fluid and changing situational factors. This paper draws on ‘fluid identity theory’ and secondary literature to argue that in migration research, insider/outsider positionalities tend to be fluid formations that change, shift and become unstable during research encounters with study participants. I develop an analytical concept that I term ‘liquid insider/outsider positionalities’ to contribute to the literature on insider/outsider researcher positionalities in migration research. By way of introducing this analytical concept, I critique presuppositions, conceptualizations and categorizations of migrant/migration researchers as either insiders or outsiders based on predetermined and rigid social identity markers such as ethnicity or nationality. Migration scholars and researchers may employ the concept of ‘liquid insider/outsider positionalities’ as a tool to frame the dynamic, changing and situational character of researcher positionalities in migration research during field research encounters.

1. Introduction

The main purpose of this paper is to analyze and integrate secondary empirical research studies focused on migrant researchers’ insider/outsider positionalities and propose a consolidative analytical concept that migration researchers may use as a tool and an analytical frame to make sense of insider/outsider positionalities of migration researchers in field research.

This paper makes a contribution to methodological debates on insider/outsider researcher positionalities in migration research, using secondary literature as a source of data, and argues that contrary to conceptualizations of co-national1 or co-ethnic2 migrant3 researchers as automatic insiders or ‘in-group’ members, insider or outsider conceptualizations and framings of co-national/co-ethnic researchers are situated, informed, shaped, constructed and created within actual research encounters with study participants.

I reinforce my theoretical position by proposing a methodological and analytical concept that I term ‘liquid insider/outsider positionalities’ to conceptualize the ways in which insider/outsider postionalities tend to be fluid, shifting, unpredictable, situationally contingent and fluctuating formations rather than fixed, stable, predictable or frozen constructions. Researchers of migration can employ the analytical tool of ‘liquid positionalities’ to frame and conceptualize the dynamic and unpredictable aspect of their positionalities as perceived by study participants during research encounters.

In migration research, co-ethnic migrant researchers are perceived, viewed, interpreted and positioned as either trusted insiders or auspicious outsiders by study participants owing to a plethora of factors that manifest during actual research encounters (Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Keikelame 2018; McNess et al. 2015; Mercer 2007; O’Connor 2004; Pechurina 2014; Ryan 2015; Taylor 2011; Witcher 2010). The conceptual frames of insider positionalities4 or outsider positionalities have been used by many scholars and researchers of migration to make sense of the ways in which ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ groupist identificational perspectives or beliefs play out in a research context (e.g., Berger 2015; Bourke 2014; Crean 2018; Clingerman 2007; Dwyer and Buckle 2009; Kusow 2003; Moroşanu 2015; Nowicka and Cieslik 2014; Ryan 2015).

Theoretical and conceptual debates on migrant researchers’ insider/outsider positionalities have, therefore, revolved around how the overall research process is shaped, informed and influenced by researchers’ subjectivities, perceived group identities and characteristics as understood, perceived, classified and categorized by research participants in interviews or focus group encounters5 (Ahmed et al. 2022; Berger 2015; Camenisch 2022; Crean 2018; Cukut-Krilic 2011; Decoo 2022; Hodkinson 2005; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; McNess et al. 2015; Mercer 2007; Nowicka and Cieslik 2014; O’Connor 2004; Palaganas et al. 2017; Pechurina 2014; Ryan 2015; Taylor 2011; Wagle and Cantaffa 2008).

The dominant theoretical and philosophical perspectives and analytical frames surrounding insider/outsider researcher positionalities have been focused on co-ethnic/co-national and non-coethnic/co-national researchers’ perceived group identity affiliations (Mercer 2007; Nowicka and Cieslik 2014; O’Connor 2004). Migration researchers who share nationality or ethnicity with study participants are generally understood as insiders; those who do not share such identity group classifications are perceived6 and positioned as outsiders. However, such conceptualizations have recently been challenged by scholars who define insiderness or outsiderness as fluid, contextual and shifting (e.g., Crean 2018; Cukut-Krilic 2011; Decoo 2022; Hodkinson 2005; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; McNess et al. 2015; Mercer 2007; Nowicka and Cieslik 2014; O’Connor 2004).

For example, drawing on multiple empirical observations and migration scholars’ studies, many scholars contend that commonalities or lack of commonalities in nationality/national-origin or ethnicity do not automatically position researchers as insiders or outsiders, but numerous other factors and characteristics position co-national/non-co-national researchers as either insiders or outsiders (Mercer 2007; Nowicka and Cieslik 2014; O’Connor 2004). Some of the factors that shape and inform researcher positionalities include age, gender, social class, power relations and race (Decoo 2022; Hodkinson 2005; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; McNess et al. 2015).

2. Conceptualizing Co-National/Co-Ethnic Researchers

In the context of increasing migrant populations in various host societies, migrant networks, collaborations and interlinkages have increased and expanded on the basis of largely national-origin and ethnic group identifications. Scholars and researchers who belong to these increasingly expanding national-origin and ethnicity-based migrant communities have emerged around the world where the field of migration7 has now seen many ethnic/national-origin scholars studying their own migrant communities (Camenisch 2022; Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Keikelame 2018; Mercer 2007; O’Connor 2004).

Co-national or co-ethnic researchers are generally understood and conceptualized as having a competitive advantage over those other researchers who do not share commonalities in nationality or ethnicity with research participants as co-ethnic/co-national migration researchers are seen as relative insiders and hence can obtain easy access to study participants and rapport (Palaganas et al. 2017; Pechurina 2014).

It should be noted that migration researchers sharing nationality/national-origin or ethnic group identities with research participants may lack commonalities in other group identity dimensions such as clan, religion, tribe, age, gender and other identity characteristics (Beals et al. 2020; Cukut-Krilic 2011; Hodkinson 2005; Ryan 2015).

In other words, while co-national-co-ethnic migrant researchers may be perceived and positioned as insiders in some contexts, in other situational contexts, they might be regarded and viewed as outsiders by the same co-national research participants due to differences in other identificational dimensions (Collet 2008; Kusow 2003; Nowicka and Cieslik 2014; Ryan 2015; Wagle and Cantaffa 2008).

For example, a co-national/co-ethnic researcher might not share group identity8 characteristics with co-national/co-ethnic study participants such as inter alia, political ideologies, religious beliefs, power relations or socio-economic status (Beals et al. 2020; Camenisch 2022; Cukut-Krilic 2011; Decoo 2022; Hodkinson 2005; Keikelame 2018; McNess et al. 2015; Moroşanu 2015; O’Connor 2004).

3. Fluid Identity Theory

I frame and conceptualize social identities such as nationality and ethnicity within conceptions and theorizations that regard such social identity constructions as situational, contextual, constantly changing and reconfigured formations. Perceived insider/outsider positionalities of co-national/co-ethnic migration researchers are often generally mediated through conceptions of shared nationality/national origin and ethnicity, and hence it is important to situate these conceptions within the broader theoretical perspective of group identity perception and formation (Berger 2015; Camenisch 2022; Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Gelir 2021; Halilovich 2022; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; Lokot 2022; Mahmud 2021; McNess et al. 2015; Medzani 2021; Mercer 2007; O’Connor 2004; Palaganas et al. 2017; Pechurina 2014; Ryan 2015; Taylor 2011; Trzeszczyńska 2022; Witcher 2010).

Many social theorists and scholars examining the dimensions and nature of group identities/identifications and perceptions of group identities have argued that group identities such as nationality, ethnicity, tribe, clan, religion, gender, class and other factors tend to be situational constructions rather than constant, fixed, frozen or permanent formations (Abdulrahim 2008; Asante 2012; Awokoya 2012; Brubaker 2002; Rockquemore and Brunsma 2002; Suárez-Orozco 2004; Vandeyar 2012; Vasquez 2007).

Even though social scientists such as anthropologists had previously conceptualized identities as constant and stable, social scientists have recently argued that social identity formations tend to be mediated by a plethora of context-shaped and situationally informed contingent factors (Brubaker 2002; Rockquemore and Brunsma 2002; Suárez-Orozco 2004).

Fluid identity theory suggests that how we are perceived, viewed, classified, categorized, interpreted and positioned by others tend to be shaped and informed by numerous situational and circumstantial factors and contingencies rather than existing as permanent and fixed features of individual or group identifications (Brubaker 2002; Rockquemore and Brunsma 2002). I situate this paper within fluid identity formation theory to make sense of the liquid, situational and unpredictable ways in which migration researchers are perceived and positioned by research participants during actual field experience.

4. Field Research Experiences of Co-National/Co-Ethnic Researchers in Migration Research

In recent times, more co-ethnic/co-national researchers have documented their field research experiences in relation to how they were interpreted, viewed, perceived and positioned by their fellow co-national/co-ethnic research participants. The majority of co-national/co-ethnic researchers conducting scholarly work on their fellow countrymen and women in diaspora noted that their insider positionality was mediated by situational and circumstantial factors as opposed to existing as a priori constant and fixed identity formation (Ahmed et al. 2022; Beals et al. 2020; Berger 2015; Camenisch 2022; Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Gelir 2021; Halilovich 2022; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; Lokot 2022; Mahmud 2021; McNess et al. 2015; Medzani 2021; Mercer 2007; O’Connor 2004; Palaganas et al. 2017; Pechurina 2014; Ryan 2015; Taylor 2011; Trzeszczyńska 2022; Witcher 2010).

For example, Trzeszczyńska (2022), a Ukranian migrant researcher studying the Ukranian diaspora in Canada, noted that her commonality in national origin did not make her an automatic insider; instead, she revealed that she experienced her insider/outsider positionality in the field as changeable, fluid, situational and alterable. Lokot (2022) also notes that in her study of Syrian refugees in Jordan, she experienced insiderness/outsiderness postionality shaped and informed by her race, gender and age and that her researcher positionalities were viewed as dynamic and situational.

Halilovich (2022) suggests that in his study of Bosnian diaspora groups in Australia, Europe and the USA, he noted that despite his shared Bosnian co-national background, other identity dimensions such as ‘…socio-cultural, political, generational, gender and even geographical factors’ prevented and compromised his expected insiderness. (Paragraph 10). Halilovich (2022) further emphasizes that

…[a]s much as insiderness may be taken for granted, when researchers conduct research with fellow co-ethnics and people coming from a similar socio-cultural background—or outsiderness might be anticipated in researching foreign cultures and societies—the experience in the field often challenges any preconceived ideas about when, how and to what extent any researcher is able to claim or sustain a purely insider’s (emic) or outsider’s (etic) perspective.

Drawing on his fieldwork experience of studying research participants who shared familiar or common group identities such as ethnicity, Gelir (2021) relates that other socio-demographic characteristics, such as his gender, prevented him from being completely positioned and interpreted as an automatic insider by his study participants.

Medzani (2021) also explains that despite his co-national positionality as a Zimbabwean academic studying Zimbabwean research participant, a multiplicity of identity factors such as nationality, work experience, gender and age shaped and informed his insiderness/outsiderness in the eyes of his Zimbabwean study participants. Medzani (2021), therefore, conceptualizes his researcher postionalities as unstable, fluid, situational, shifting, unexpected and dynamic identity formations rather than constant, fixed, frozen, easily predictable and stable.

In his study of Bangladeshi co-ethnic/co-national migrants in Tokyo, Japan and Los Angeles, USA, Mahmud (2021, p. 50) notes that despite shared ethnicity, language and culture, he ‘faced considerable challenges to gain access to the field and build rapport with my informants, which contradicted my expectation of an easy entry to the field.’ Mahmud (2021) concludes that co-ethnic migrants are not necessarily automatic insiders, but their insiderness is constantly and situationally negotiated, dynamic, fluid and changing.

Bott (2010), a British migration researcher, notes that despite her shared British national identity with her co-national British migrants in Spain, she was positioned and viewed as a non-insider by her Black research participants due to her White racial identity. Bott (2010) also notes that her age and social class as an academic positioned her as an outsider by her female British migrant research participants in Spain despite their shared British nationality.

A Somali-origin migrant researcher, Kusow (2003), also relates that his presumed and expected insider positionality was compromised and challenged when his gender prevented him from gaining automatic access and rapport with his female Somali research participants due to religio-cultural Somali values. Kusow (2003) argues that contrary to commonly accepted assumptions that co-national/co-ethnic migrant researchers are automatically interpreted, viewed and positioned as insiders, situational and other identity factors mediate, shape and inform how co-national/co-ethnic researchers are understood by research participants.

A Romanian migration scholar, Moroşanu (2015), notes that in her research of Romanian migrants in the UK, she was not automatically regarded and positioned as an insider by her study participants despite her shared Romanian national-origin group identity. Moroşanu (2015) emphasizes that her educational status and gender positioned her as a non-insider by her study participants, and she conceptualized her insider postionality as situationally-shaped and shifting rather than stable and fixed.

Another migration scholar and researcher, Ryan (2015), relates that in spite of her shared group identity characteristics such as Irish nationality, cultural traditions, language and White racial identity, she was considered an outsider by her co-national Irish study participants in the UK due to other unexpected and unforeseen identity markers and characteristics such as her age and her gender. Ryan (2015), therefore, notes that insider positionalities of co-national/co-ethnic migrant researchers should not be conceptualized as a given insiderness but need to be reconfigured as fluid and changing formation.

In her study of her co-national Muslim Iranian migrants in Norway, Rojan, a Muslim woman of Iranian origin, observed that despite her shared Iranian national-origin group identity, she was positioned, viewed and interpreted as a non-insider by her co-national researcher participants due to other factors and characteristics such as Norwegian language and length of residence in Norway relative to her study participants (Carling et al. 2014). Within the same research work and field experience, another co-researcher, Erdal, a Polish-origin migrant living in Norway, explained that despite her national-origin commonality with her Polish migrant study participants, she was regarded and positioned as a non-insider because of her cultural assimilation into the Norwegian society.

5. ‘Liquid Positionalities’: An Analytical Tool for Migration Research

The concept ‘liquid’ within the analytical term of ‘liquid positionalities’ refers to the flowing, slippery and fluid notions of conducting qualitative research in fieldwork experiences. The Oxford Dictionary defines ‘liquid’ as ‘a substance that flows freely and is not a solid or a gas, for example, water or oil.’ The Merriam-Webster dictionary describes the term ‘liquid’ as ‘flowing freely like water.’

Drawing on secondary empirical and theoretical sources and fluid identity theories, this paper contributes to the scholarly literature on insider/outsider positionalities theoretical and conceptual debates in the field of international migration studies by proposing an analytical concept that I termed ‘liquid positionalities.’ The analytical conceptual lens of ‘liquid positionalities’ emphasizes the fluid, situational, alteredness, dynamic, changing, ephemeral and unpredictableness of co-national/co-ethnic insider/outsider researcher positionalities of migration scholars (Camenisch 2022; Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Gelir 2021; Halilovich 2022; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; Lokot 2022; Mahmud 2021; McNess et al. 2015; Medzani 2021; Mercer 2007; O’Connor 2004; Palaganas et al. 2017; Pechurina 2014; Ryan 2015; Taylor 2011; Trzeszczyńska 2022).

The analytical concept of ‘liquid positionalities’ presupposes that shared nationalities or ethnicity do not automatically make co-ethnic/co-national migration researchers insiders; instead, co-ethnic/co-national migrant researchers’ insider/outsider positionalities should be conceptualized, framed, theorized and constructed as fluid and unforeseen formations (Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Gelir 2021; Halilovich 2022; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; Lokot 2022; Mahmud 2021).

Even though some scholars might argue that group identities such as nationality or ethnicity are powerful identity markers that position co-national/co-ethnic migrant researchers as automatic insiders, numerous empirical field experiences have revealed the situational and fluid nature of co-national insiderness (e.g., Beals et al. 2020; Berger 2015; Camenisch 2022; Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Gelir 2021; Halilovich 2022; Keikelame 2018; Kusow 2003; Lokot 2022; Mahmud 2021; McNess et al. 2015; Medzani 2021; Mercer 2007; O’Connor 2004; Palaganas et al. 2017; Pechurina 2014; Ryan 2015; Taylor 2011; Trzeszczyńska 2022; Witcher 2010).

Other identity markers that explain why the traditional marker/determinant of insider researchers (those sharing ethnicity and nationality) and outsiders (those who do not share ethnicity and nationality) are untenable and indeterminate include class, race, gender, religious beliefs, language, marital status, level of education, political affiliation, inter alia. These and other situational/contextual factors also inform the perceived insider or outsider status of researchers within the field research rather than the traditional ethnic/national status of researchers, which supports the liquid aspects of researchers’ perceived positionalities when researchers and the researched interact.

The concept ‘liquid’ is associated with ideas and actions that refer to change, movement and shapelessness. Academic conceptualizations and understandings of the term ‘liquid’ are also related and overlap with the various dictionary definitions of the term.

For example, the term ‘liquid’ is understood in academic circles in terms of flexibility. I particularly draw on Zygmunt Bauman’s (2000) ideas of the analytical concept of liquidity in relation to social identities and human inter-relationships. In the perspective of Bauman (2000, p. 2), and in relation to the idea of ‘liquidity’,

‘…fluids do not keep to any shape for long and are constantly ready (and prone) to change it…Fluids travel easily. They ‘low’, ‘spill’, ‘run out’, ‘splash’, ‘pour over’, ‘leak’, ‘flood’, ‘spray’, ‘drip’, ‘seep’, ‘ooze’; unlike solids, they are not easily stopped—they pass around some obstacles, dissolve some others and bore or soak their way through others still.

In the above conceptualization of the sociological term ‘liquidity,’ Bauman imagines the concept in terms of ideas associated with being incomplete, undefined, undetermined, uncertain, flowing and flexible. The core sociological/conceptual idea behind the notion of liquidity is imageries of flow and shapeless continuous movement (Bauman 2000, pp. 2–3). I draw on Bauman’s sociological metaphor of ‘liquidity’ to make sense of the undetermined, uncertain and constantly moving and changing character and behavior of insider/outsider research positionalities in migration research (Crean 2018; Decoo 2022; Gelir 2021; Halilovich 2022).

The conceptualization of researcher insider/outsider positionalities as ‘liquid and in associations with notions of shapelessness and unpredictability emphasizes the problematization and reconfigurations of traditional ideas of insider positionalities as stable and constant researcher group identities as perceived by research participants (Bourke 2014; Collet 2008; Kusow 2003; Nowicka and Cieslik 2014; Ryan 2015). Migration researchers examining and reflecting upon the notion of insider/outsider researcher positionalities may employ the metaphor of ‘liquid positionalities’ to make sense of and frame their methodological analysis in qualitative research fields.

Seeing through fluid identity theories that conceptualize and frame social/group identities as constantly changing and fluid (Awokoya 2012; Brubaker 2002; Rockquemore and Brunsma 2002; Suárez-Orozco 2004; Vandeyar 2012), ideas of insider/outsider researcher positionalities as flexible and liquid suggest the malleability and situationality of researcher identities such as nationality and ethnicity. Researchers’ identities are therefore viewed as undetermined, constantly fluctuating and unpredictably shifting contextual formations rather than existing as a priori rigid and frozen categories or classifications (Abdulrahim 2008; Asante 2012; Awokoya 2012; Brubaker 2002; Rockquemore and Brunsma 2002; Suárez-Orozco 2004; Vandeyar 2012; Vasquez 2007).

One might ask, ‘How is the concept of liquid positionalities useful for researchers, and what are the implications of the concept for research production in the field?’. Migrant and migration researchers may use the concept of liquid insider/outsider postionalities when they find that their perceived insider/outsider positionalities are dynamic and fluidly change from one positionality to another depending on numerous contextual factors within the field research. In addition to that, migrant or migration researchers may also use the analytical framework of liquid positionality before they enter the field research in order to make sense of the dynamic and fluid ways perceive researcher positionalities change in their encounters with research participants. Granted, many migrant and migration researchers and scholars have used various concepts that capture the dynamic, situational, changing, contextual and inconsistent nature of migrant and migration researchers’ positionalities. By developing the analytical framing of ‘liquid positionality,’ this paper aims to add nuance and richness to the myriad tapestry of analytical concepts proposed by many researchers of migration studies. Particularly, the term ‘liquid’ points to the shapeless, formless, rapidly shifting and unpredictable dynamics of insider/outsider positionalities within the domain of migration research.

6. Conclusions

The main purpose of this paper was to explore the ways in which traditional conceptions and categorizations of insider/outsider research positionalities that are based on shared ethnicity or nationality can be critically engaged and to propose a novel analytical concept that best captures and describes perceived insider/outsider positionalities of researchers within field research encounters. There is a tendency among some academics to think that shared ethnic or national identities between migrant/migration researchers and research participants result in researchers being ‘insiders;’ hence, automatic access to the field research and rapport is possible. Moreover, those researchers who do not share ethnic or national identities with research participants are understood and perceived as ‘outsiders’ by their research participants, which would make access and rapport difficult. This paper critiques this rigid conceptualization of perceived insider/outsider positionalities in migration research.

This paper rejected the understandings, theorizations and framings of insider/outsider research positionalities as mutually exclusive parallel dichotomies and formations. Instead, this paper conceptualizes them as situationally and contextually informed, framed, constituted and shaped flowing and fluid constructions. More specifically, I focused on the ways in which the insiderness/outsiderness of co-national/co-ethnic migrant researchers can be understood as constantly shifting and changing positions and identities. Through the perspective of ‘fluid identity theory,’ I framed insider/outsider positionalities of co-ethnic/co-national researchers as unpredictable and flexible rather than fixed and stable. I also developed the metaphor of ‘liquid positionalities’ as a methodological and analytical concept to help migration researchers make sense of and consider their insiderness in field research as they interact with study participants during either interview or focus group research contexts. Future researchers may explore how the citizenship status of migrants shapes and informs how they are perceived, viewed, shaped and informed by study participants who are not migrants themselves.