{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014977973568281937, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.969325153374233, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Ubiquity of Ambiguity in Research Interviewing

This article examines the shifting word meanings in one encounter with a serodiscordant older African-American heterosexual couple who were struggling with the effects of HIV infection and heroin injection. The author raises concerns about the complexities of language, cultural contexts, relationships between research participants, interpretation, and how qualitative interviews may produce ambiguous results. The purpose of the exercise is to trouble the borders between meanings of words and between researcher and researched. The project is a methodological exercise in ‘unpacking’ the tightly packed components of an interview between participants who differed in social locations and experiences. Closely re-examining the interview uncovered rich and varied uses of language, especially referring to the continuum of illness and wellness. The analysis suggests that social work qualitative researchers should attend closely to language and ambiguities, be vigilant to the possibility of misinterpretation, and acknowledge their social positioning in the research relationship.