Debates in Qualitative Secondary Analysis: Critical Reflections

This paper is a companion piece to Irwin and Winterton (2011). The current paper takes as a focus some issues relating to the possibility for, and effective conduct of, qualitative secondary data analysis.i We consider some challenges for the re-use of qualitative research data, relating to distance from the production of primary data, and related knowledge of the proximate contexts of data production. With others we argue that distance and partial knowledge of proximate contexts may constrain secondary analysis but that its success is contingent on its objectives. So long as data analysis is fit for purpose then secondary analysis is no poor relation to primary analysis. We discuss some examples of secondary analysis in practice. We further discuss debates regarding research contexts, with reference to practical resources, and to evolving historical contexts of research. We argue there is much to be gained from more critical reflection on a set of „middle range‟ issues regarding how contextual saliences are conceptualised, or assumed, within methodologies and extant data sets. In developing our ideas about secondary analysis we argue for more critical reflection on how effective knowledge claims are built. It is this agenda which we develop in the companion working paper, with specific reference to building effective secondary analysis across Timescapes data sets.