Dialogue

Inquiry into complex social realities entails a critical and reflective elaboration of various meanings and interpretations. In action research, the subjective realities of actors in a social system are full of valuable and relevant data for inquiry into the dynamics of that system. Subjective realities of actors in a given social setting are not easy to access, decipher or understand by another researcher, howsoever sensitive and experienced she may be. Articulation of subjectivity is enabled through critical questioning, a process not so easy for an actor to engage in on one’s own. It is in such contexts that dialogue can be a meaningful method of inquiry in action research.

Dialogue has its roots in the Socratic didactics. Human philosophy, ethics and morality were elaborated through a public process of dialogue in the Greek era; Socrates made it a science. In contemporary usage, dialogue is a process of querying, questioning and reflection on the responses to those questions, with enablement and support from a facilitator-researcher. While dialogue implies a conversation between the two, in certain situations a team of researchers may engage a group of actors in a social setting in a dialogue; essentially, the process of inquiry is carried forward in a conversation which is critical, reflective and systematic.

Some of the early theoretical formulations for dialogue in action research came from the work and writings of Paulo Freire; in his Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970), Freire argued for the use of dialogue as a contribution to conscientization, a process of critical awareness of one’s own reality, built on the basis of analysis of subjective experiences. Use of dialogue as a method of inquiry has been most elaborated since then. In this practical way, certain characteristics of this process of dialogue have emerged over time. In a systematic approach, dialogue as a method of action research can serve the purposes of inquiry when conducted as such. Drawing upon the work of Yoland Wadsworth, Rajesh Tandon (2002) describes a number of characteristics of dialogue as a method of inquiry:

In using dialogue as a method of inquiry, researchers have to be prepared in certain particular ways. For a researcher engaged in action research, dialogue can be a powerful method of unpacking and revealing complex and hidden subjectivities. Some of the specific elements of preparation of the researcher (or her team) are derived from the above.

First, the researcher has to build and nurture a relationship of mutual respect and trust with the respondents (the subjects in the dialogue); without trust, it is difficult to facilitate opening up of the innermost dynamics and feelings.

Second, trust building takes time and investment; emotional opening up is a two-way process; dialogue is not psychoanalysis; hence, the researcher should be able to invest emotionally in the larger good of the social system and the actors within it.

Third, the capacity to listen, echo, resonate and empathize is essential in the process of dialogue; without listening, voicing gets interrupted in dialogues. In order to listen, the researcher has to be open to contestations and conflicts in relation to herself, her positions and views and her very act of inquiry.

...