Gestión y simplificación administrativa

The initial 19 interviews were conducted during the first field immersion. A follow-up interview with each interviewee was conducted during immersion two, at which point I

107 was able to ask additional questions, arising from the fieldwork observations, or to gain further clarification on comments from the initial interview. For example, having noted that music was played during the training sessions, I asked the swimmers if this influenced them in anyway, and whether they sang along to the music – out loud or in their heads.

The final step in the interviewing process occurred during immersion three. After some initial data analysis was undertaken between immersions and potential themes having begun to be generated, I was able to return to the participants to seek their thoughts and to ask further questions, this time in groups. This process aligns with what Tracy (2010, p.

844) refers to as “member reflections” that “allow for sharing and dialoguing with participants about the study’s findings, and providing opportunities for questions, critique, feedback, affirmation and even collaboration”. This is not, it should be emphasized, a form of ‘member checking’ or ‘validation’, seeking to ensure that the researcher ‘got it right’ but rather to provide an opportunity to “yield new data which throws fresh light on the investigation and which provides a spur for deeper and richer analyses” (Bloor, 2001, p.

235). As a result, this process of member reflection provided an opportunity for further

“collaboration and reflexive elaboration” on the research findings (Tracy, 2010, p. 844, emphasis in orignal). I engaged with this by conducting three group discussions with the swimmers in which I presented to them some of the ideas and concepts initially generated from the data, as well as asking further questions to help clarify some possible contradictions between their interview data and my observations. To continue with the example noted above relating to sound, I sought further information on the role sound played within the training environment, asking the groups of swimmers about the role of the music played during sessions, self-talk, or their use of an audible pacing device that they refer to as ‘a beeper’. As with the initial interviews, these group interviews were semi-structured, took place at the swimmers’ training venue, were reflected upon afterwards and subsequently transcribed personally, adding a further dimension to the data collection and analysis process.

As a way of closing this section on the methods of data collection employed, I feel it is important to highlight some of the unforeseen challenges and demands that arose during the interview process.

108 3.8.5 Challenges and Demands

As mentioned in section 3.8.3.2, one of the key elements to an interview is being an active listener, which involves not only listening/hearing but also seeing the other person so that you can ‘tune-in’ to their body language and gestures. This also meant being aware of the non-verbal messages that I was projecting as an interviewer, that may inadvertently have created barriers of disclosure. Therefore, it was important that I married the open nature of the interview with an open-mindedness, a relaxed stance (unfolded arms, warm eye-contact), and timely, encouraging gestures (nodding, smiling, laughing). Because of this, I tried to prepare myself, both mentally and emotionally, as much as possible before each interview as an interactional occasion.

Nonetheless, one can never guarantee what might arise in an interview due to the unpredictability of social situations. For example, during the interview with Jean where she openly disclosed some very personal stories regarding some sensitive issues, I was unprepared for this and it took me somewhat off guard, resulting in me expressing shock and surprise. At the close of this interview I thanked Jean for her openness, and she was quick to say, “don’t worry it was fine, we like you and we enjoy having you around”

(fieldnote, 2^nd November 2017) showing the level of comfort and rapport that had been established, and also alleviating my concerns regarding my responses to her answers.

A further concern related to the participants being able to eloquently orate their own embodied and sensory experiences. They often struggled to find the right words to describe what they had experienced and from time to time even used the phrase “but you know what that’s like” alluding to the fact that I myself had been a competitive swimmer so must have some understanding of what they are trying to describe. In such situations, I firstly asked the swimmers to imagine that I was complete swimming neophyte, and to describe their experiences as clearly as they could by using metaphors or examples from other areas of their lives to compare and contrast these experiences with. Further to this I then asked the swimmers to describe a different experience, or a different element of an experience.

For example, with some of the swimmers I asked them to talk me through the various elements of their race as a way of getting them to break an experience into smaller more manageable chunks. Additionally and following Ravn’s (2016b) advice, noted earlier in

109 section 3.8.3.1, I drew upon examples from my observations that I had experienced alongside the swimmers, and asked them to talk about those. In this situation I could help by recalling specific moments such as asking them to describe the feelings experienced prior to, during, or after a specific type of training session.

The previous sections have highlighted the ‘before and during’ the field activities related to this project. To complete the picture of fieldwork that I have portrayed, there is one final element that needs addressing: leaving the field.