Search

Within the framework of the current drive to transform psychology in South Africa, this paper highlights "other" axes of identity that are arguably largely overlooked within the field. The conversation exposes the discipline of psychology – specifically within the South African context – and its many unexamined assumptions concerning "expected" identities of psychologists – specifically, those along heterosexual and able-bodied lines. By engaging in an autoethnographic conversation, the two authors, both "other", practising psychologists – one queer, one disabled – share and reflect on some of their experiences of feeling othered in their chosen profession. Drawing on parts of queer theory, critical disability literature, as well as the theoretical framework of biopolitical power, we start to make sense of our experiences of difference, deviance, and defiance. How the field of psychology marginalises "other" psychologists, and the impacts on those who bear the oppressions, is exposed; and a conversation is begun in which the discipline's assumptions around compulsory forms of identity – straight, not disabled, among others – are disrupted in productive ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mixed methods are becoming increasingly popular in social science research. There has recently been a groundswell of literature suggesting that mixed methods should be viewed as a unique form of social enquiry with its own set of philosophical, methodological and practice guidelines, as opposed to the simple combination of quantitative and qualitative methods in one study. In response to three critiques of South African psychological research, this paper argues that regardless of whether we agree that mixed methods is a unique form of social enquiry, the current literature offers useful insights into conceptualising both mixed and mono methods research. It is hoped that this article will stimulate further interest in mixed methods research in South African psychological research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]