Intersubjective Recognition as the Methodological Enactment of Epistemic Privilege: A Critical Basis for Consensus and Intersubjective Confirmation Procedures

There are a number of procedures, well established within qualitative research, that were originally formulated to use intersubjective confirmation as a way to bolster confidence infindings (e.g., consensus, auditing, member checks). These procedures enhanced methodologicalintegrity by demonstrating that people fromdiffering perspectives can examine the dataand reach the same conclusions—indicating that a finding was not entirely idiosyncratic. Inthis article, we propose the concept of epistemic privilege as an alternate foundation for theseprocedures. In this approach, the recognition of differences among the histories, perspectives,knowledge, and investments of research team members creates a context in which forms ofsubjective knowledge (i.e., lived experience, expertise) become resources that heighten ateam’s perspicacity. The enactment of the proposed procedures shifts the meanings andapplication of confirmation processes so they become appropriate for critical, constructivist,and participatory research. They change the theoretical formulation from a democratic processof confirming objective perceptions to a collaborative process of intersubjective recognitionthat values diverse knowledge sources. We focus on the example of researcher consensus,providing a brief history of past rationales and practices for this procedure, and describing ourapproach as strengthening findings as well as improving research teamdynamics. This form ofcollaboration ameliorates prior concerns expressed about consensus, such as intergroup powerdifferentials, and the fear that attuned investigators may weaken their interpretations to obtainconsensus with others.