KIP JONES, an American by birth, has been studying and working in the UK for more than 15 years. Under the umbrella term of 'arts-based research', his main efforts have involved developing tools from the arts and humanities for use by social scientists in research and its impact on a wider public or a Perfomative Social Science.
Jones is Reader in Performative Social Science and Director of the Centre for Qualitative Research at Bournemouth University. Kip has produced films and written many articles for academic journals and authored chapters for books on topics such as masculinity, ageing and rurality, and older LGBT citizens. His ground-breaking use of qualitative methods, including biography and auto-ethnography, and the use of tools from the arts in social science research and dissemination are well-known.
Jones acted as Author and Executive Producer of the award-winning short film, RUFUS STONE, funded by Research Councils UK. The film is now available for free viewing on the Internet and has been viewed by more than 11,000 people in 150 countries over the past year alone.
Areas of expertise • Close relationships, culture and ethnicity • Social psychology, sociology • Ageing, self and identity • Interpersonal processes, personality, individual differences, social networks, prejudice and stereotyping • Sexuality and sexual orientation • Creativity and the use of the arts in Social Science
Media experience His work has been reported widely in the media, including: BBC Radio 4,BBC TV news,Times Higher Education, Sunday New York Times, International Herald-Tribune and The Independent.
Jeffrey is using his blog and autoethnography to navigate his PhD at Lancaster. He often asks me short, concise 'just the facts, ma'm' kinds of questions on the blog or in response to my postings.
I feel like Susan Boyle. She is answering questions such as 'What's your favorite meal? What's your favorite show tune?" in videos on her website. Yoko Ono answers 10-15 questions from 'readers' a week on Twitter. The era of the fast and furious, no-nonsense reply is upon us.
Jeffrey asks (Do you like that use of the newspaper-style breezy present tense?):
Kip, I think you hit on the reason why autoethnography may be so contentious a method! From this vantage, how would you define this (especially for those who find it easy to confuse the two)?
'My personal story is simply one of the raw materials used to produce my product. What I construct stands alone for what it is (a story, a painting, an A/V production), but comes to life when it engages with the response that it instils in the reader/viewer/audience, “… those wonderful people out there in the dark!”' Rough talk and chocolate brownies
In the best autoethnography, I am always a minor character and/or a conduit to a time, place and other people. I become fictional through writing. I am the sorcerer who reminds the audience of themselves.
Reflexive writing is more like a diary; private thoughts that perhaps I share, perhaps I do not. They remind me of myself. I get to be Proust in private.
To do good research, it is myself that often that I need to get out of the way, so writing about my self may help me accomplish this.
A 'personal journey' PhD is often boring and usually takes about twice as much time anyway. If you already know the subject of your research, what is the point of investigating it?