Research questions:
How do white Muslims perceive their identities to be recognised in different
interactional contexts by relevant others (white non-Muslims and non-white Muslims)? And how do they manage their various identity performance strategies as a result?
Having established some of the complex and contradictory social representations that exist within the British context about white British Muslims, the second study built on the first by focusing on the identity negotiation practices of self-identifying white British Muslim in relation to the way in which they perceive themselves and their
identities to be positioned by relevant others. These relevant others were both other British Muslims, and other white British people who were not Muslim. The study drew on interview transcripts that were thematically analysed to answer the research
questions. In analysing the data, perceived identity recognition emerged as playing an important factor in the identity negotiation and performance strategies of white British Muslims. This study makes up Chapter Five of the thesis and was published as an empirical paper in Political Psychology in 2019.
3.5.1 Rationale for interviews
Interviews are a useful medium through which to explore personal reflections of experiences. Described by Kvale (1996), they are “a conversation, whose purpose is to gather descriptions of the interviewee with respect to interpretation of the meaning of the described phenomena” (p. 174). Whilst structurally varying in flexibility (structured, semi-structured and unstructured) interviews are a popular methodological tool in social science research as they enable in depth data gathering.
A semi-structured interview approach was adopted for the current study, allowing for a thorough exploration of white British Muslim experiences of identity negotiation and performance. This was chosen for its semi-explorative design, providing space for participants to share their experiences almost uninterrupted, but ensuring it was still guided by a topic guide that allowed the research questions to be answered (Berg, 2007). Such in-depth data would have been difficult to gather through other means (e.g. questionnaire or focus group) as the research questions required a reflexive element which gave space and time for thinking through perceived
positionings and an interpretation of experiences. Furthermore, it also allowed for greater understanding between the interviewer and the interviewee, where questions
could be rephrased or simplified, and responses could be expanded on and clarified (Alshenqeeti, 2014; Dörnyei, 2007).
Hammersley and Gomm (2008) critique interviews as a methodological tool in that participants will often only share as much as they are willing to, and their responses can be influenced by not only the framing of questions but also their expectations or assumptions of the ‘expected’ answers. Nevertheless, much research has demonstrated the positive results of building a rapport and trust with participants in relation to responses given (Nandi & Platt, 2017).
3.5.2 Participants
Twenty-six self-identifying white Muslims participated in the study (11 females, 15 males). Their ages ranged from 24 to 78 (M=45). All but one participant had converted to Islam. Those who had converted had done so at various stages in their lives (e.g., as teenagers, at university, later in life) and had been Muslim for between four to forty-six years at the time of the interview. The one non-convert participant was born and
brought up Muslim, her parents having converted to Islam prior to her birth in the late 1980s. All participants were born and grew up in the UK and were living in Britain at the time of the interview. To protect their anonymity, all participants were given
pseudonyms. Where they had English names, they were given English pseudonyms and where they had Arabic/Islamic names equivalent pseudonyms were provided (see Appendix 2 for details of each participant).
3.5.3 Procedure
Participants were recruited via a call-out on social media (e.g. Twitter) as well as through snowballing. The interviews were conducted across England (Colchester, Dover, Gloucester, Leeds, London, Luton, Manchester, Milton Keynes,
participant’s choice to ensure they felt as comfortable as possible, although they were informed that a meeting room was available at the Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, LSE. Most interviews were conducted in participants’ homes. However, some took place in a local café or in the LSE meeting room.
Participants were required to read through and sign a consent form before the start of the interview (see Appendix 3) and were given the opportunity to ask any questions they had about the interview process and the research. As noted above in the section on reflexivity in this chapter (section 3.2), during the interviews, I was
conscious of how participants positioned me in relation to my religious and ethnic identities and their visibility. Furthermore, I was aware of how my position as a researcher would also influence the dynamics of the interview setting. In an attempt to address this, participants were given the opportunity to freely ask questions about myself, my own identity and my relationship to the research topic, and I was open and honest with my answers. Most interviewees were more forthcoming knowing that the research was looking at their experiences as white British Muslims and not on the reasons why they converted, a topic that many believed to be all too often the main focus of interest.
The interviews were semi-structured and began with asking participants to say a bit about themselves, their backgrounds and the prominence of Islam in their lives. This allowed the interviewee to be eased into the interview and to collect some contextual detail about the participants that could add to understanding their identity experiences e.g. for converts - when they converted. The interview topic guide (see Appendix 4) explored themes of self-identification (e.g. In terms of identity, what is important to how you see yourself?), their practice and visibility of identity (e.g. How/Do you display your Muslim identity through visual means? Is this something that is important to you? Why/why not?) and perceived identification by others (e.g. How do you think
other people see you?). Interviews lasted between 70-180 minutes (M=118 minutes) and were audio-recorded. At the end of the interview, participants were again reminded of the purpose of the research and had another opportunity to ask any questions they may have had.
3.5.4 Analysis
All interviews were transcribed verbatim, by myself, for analysis (see Appendix 5 for sample transcript). A thematic analysis was conducted in accordance to the steps
outlines by Braun and Clarke (2006). This analytical method was selected as it provides a systematic framework that enables researchers to organise and identify patterns of meaning in the data which aids in answering the research questions while highlighting similarities and differences across the data set (Braun & Clarke, 2019). Thus, it allows for an exploratory approach to answering the research question, providing theoretical flexibility as it is not tied to any specific theoretical or epistemological perspectives. In the case of this study and its research questions, patterns of experiences of white British Muslims in relation to their multiple identities were identified along with the ways in which performative strategies were drawn upon. As noted above (Section 3.5.3), participants were asked to talk about their backgrounds. This information was collected in order to add possible context to the data collected but was not the focus of the
analysis.
To begin the analysis, all the transcripts were read through in order to become more familiar with the data. Next, the first ten transcripts were read closely and coded before a codebook was generated by collapsing the codes into patterns of shared meaning, creating basic themes. Importantly, Braun and Clarke (2006) note that it becomes important to acknowledge the active role of the researcher in identifying and sorting out the patterns, commonalities and inconsistencies across the interview
transcripts. Themes are by no means simply residing in the data but are consciously selected and emphasised by the researcher because they “capture something important about the data in relation to the research question, and represents some level of
patterned response or meaning within the data set” (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 10). Thus, in being reflexive of the analytical approach taken in this study, and to add strength and validity to the analysis, four interviews were double-coded by an independent
researcher. These codes were discussed, and only minor adjustments were needed to be made to the codebook. For example, the code “Challenging incompatibility” was added to make a distinction between participants talking about challenging the notion of being British and Muslim as being incompatible (often assumed by other white people), and the code “Redefining British Islam” where participants stressed the importance of an Islam that reflects their lives in Britain (aimed more at other Muslims). This coding framework was then applied to the remaining interviews. However, the coding framework was not treated as fixed, and modifications were made as the remaining interviews were coded, refining the themes before developing the final organising themes. Upon completion of the coding thirty-five codes were then sorted into eight themes and two overarching global themes (see Appendix 6 for thematic map and Appendix 7 for codebook and examples of quotes).