Insider Memory Research - Essay Example

?MEMORY RESEARCH VIEWPOINTS An insider researcher is an individual who is connected or involved with the research settings and subjects. Brayboy and Deyhle (2000) explain that insider researchers are directly linked to the research in terms of interests, environment and relationship. On the other hand, an outsider researcher is described as an individual who lacks prior familiarity with the research subjects or setting. In memory research, there are many considerations which must be put in place in order to ensure that the research is successful. Naveh-Benjamin and Kilb (2012) assert that dynamic or constrictive memory processes among researchers and subjects are also likely to determine the accuracy and validity of memory research. This is attributed to the sensitivity which is associated with memory research. It is quite easy for memory research process or the results of the research to be tampered with or influenced by external factors. Therefore, the differences and similarities of insider and outsider research and the associated strengths and weaknesses are significant in conducting memory research. Many researches on memory are directed at determining whether human memory is constructed or dynamic. Naveh-Benjamin and Kilb (2012) argue that the results and accuracy of studies on memory have been influenced significantly by the type of research approach used. Outsider research is commonly used in memory studies. However, insider research has various benefits which have proved effective in attaining accurate results from memory research. The differences between insider and outsider viewpoints would therefore be attributed to the diversity of results in memory research within organizations, families, cultures and groups, as explained by Brayboy and Deyhle (2000). Outsider research viewpoints have been described as more objective as compared to insider viewpoints in research. Bridges (2001) says that researchers who are outsiders to an organization are likely to apply objectivity in research as compared to insider researchers. Objectivity is an important consideration in memory research because it helps the researcher to focus on the objectives of the research and as a result obtain accurate data for analysis. Naveh-Benjamin and Kilb (2012) explain that objectivity in memory research will not influence the setting of research and the thinking processes of the subjects and thus will portray human memory as either dynamic or constructive depending on the findings of the study. Brayboy and Deyhle (2000), demonstrate that objectivity in outsider research is considered as the most significant strength of the outsider viewpoint which justifies its preference in memory research. According to Bridges (2001), insider research has been described as being more subjective rather than objective in the processes of scientific investigation. Martinez (2010) points out that human memory is subjective to a number of factors which would be internal or external to the subjects of a study. For example, the emotion and fears of the subject may alter the memory pathways or processes. External factors such as the researcher and the research setting are also likely to determine the memory pathways of the study subject. It is therefore imperative that insider research is more likely to cause the memory processes of the subject of a research to have subjective responses. The results of an insider research have greater chances of being inaccurate. Lack of objectivity in insider memory research may be caused by the social and psychological influence that the researcher is likely to have on the subjects. Brayboy and Deyhle (2000) emphasize that the analysis of research findings by an insider researcher is less objective than insider research. This reveals that outsider viewpoints of a memory research are advantageous in terms of accuracy as compared to insider researcher viewpoints. Professionals who carry out a memory research in their own organizations or their work settings comprise of an insider research process. Because memory has been described as being constructed by internal and external factors, it can be argued that insider researchers may have a direct influence on the responses of the subjects on the research tools during the memory research processes. In this sense, it is evident that the mind of research subjects and their memory processes would be constructed by the attitudes that the subjects have developed on the insider researcher during their prior interactions. Brayboy and Deyhle (2000) explains that in research, outsider research viewpoint is more appropriate because subjects of the study are more likely to give honest responses and thus lead to accuracy and credibility of the research findings. In this perspective, outsider research viewpoint will portray memory research findings based on a dynamic memory processes. Insider memory research where the researcher is a member or the society or community that is being studied would give viewpoints that have been constructed by the perceptions which were already developed about the community. Bridges (2001) explains that insider research findings may result from the acceptance that the study population or society demonstrate on the researcher and this would lead to research viewpoints that are constructed by the friendly attitude of the subjects. Therefore insider viewpoint of memory research has a weakness of possible presentation of findings which are based on responses which are constructed by prior perceptions of the subjects and the researcher. Outsider viewpoints of memory research would also be similar to insider viewpoints in cases where reporting of findings is based on the attitude developed by the research population especially when subjects become unfriendly to outsiders. Outsider viewpoints on memory research have an advantage of not being constructed by the subjects. On the other hand, insider viewpoints may be based on a collaborative research between the researcher and the subject which would cause presentation of distorted findings which have been influenced by the subject. The difference between insider and insider viewpoints of a memory research stems from the lack of researcher subject collaboration in outsider research as was said by Naveh-Benjamin and Kilb (2012). The minds of the researcher and the subject in outsider research are likely to be involved in a dynamic memory process which will present findings without influence or bias. An outsider researcher causes a dynamic thinking process within the subject during the course of the research. This means that the memory process of the subject is devoid of external influence. Bridges (2001) emphasizes that the outsider point of view has a benefit of validity of the research finding. In memory research, validity will therefore be ascertained through the application of outsider research approach. Insider research viewpoints may be constructed by the political, emotional, sexual or religious affiliation of the researcher and thus have a disadvantage of a limited validity of the research findings. According to Verde and Rotello (2007) memory research should be done in an environment which encourages a dynamic thinking process rather that involvement of insider researchers whose viewpoints would be a construct of social and political affiliations or interests. Martinez (2010) explains that in memory research, the relationship of the subject with the researcher would lead to negative behaviors which could cause responses that are constructed on emotions and feelings of the research respondents. Insider and outsider viewpoints reveal a similarity of the possibility of misinterpretation of data or assumptions. Insider knowledge during a memory research would lead to assumptions. Similarly, lack of adequate or prior knowledge of an outsider researcher would also lead to assumptions during the research and the presentation of analyzed findings. Brayboy and Deyhle (2000) explain that the hidden agenda of an insider researcher may lead to misinterpretation of results. Insider research has strengths over outsider research despite its glorification as the most suitable approach of conducting a study. Bridges (2001) illustrates that insider viewpoints are based on wealth of knowledge as opposed to outsider viewpoints which would be limited to the research findings. In this case, memory research would benefit from insider research because the presentation of results is likely to be more in-depth considering the complexities that are associated with the memory processes. Therefore it is arguable that an insider researcher is likely to present findings of a memory research which are based on dynamic thinking processes. This illustrates a benefit of insider viewpoints of presenting rich information on the memory process as determined by genetic, social, health, political and environmental factors. During a memory research process, insider research has strength of establishing a more comfortable research setting. This is caused by the familiarity of the subject to an insider researcher as opposed to outsiders who would cause tension on the subjects. Memory research is affected by emotional factors such as tension which demonstrates that insider research viewpoints are likely to be accurate because they are based on a relaxed research setting. Bridges (2001) adds that the benefit of insider research is the ability of researchers to obtain the rapport of the study subjects. This means that more subjects are likely to be involved in insider research leading to more credible findings. According to Brayboy and Deyhle (2000), outsider research viewpoints have an advantage of presenting viewpoints which are based on ethical research. Therefore, the fidelity of outsider viewpoints in memory research is likely to be superior. This is due to the fact that the viewpoints of an outsider researcher are less likely to be biased. These arguments, thus, present the insider and outsider viewpoints of memory research as sharing some similarities and differing in strengths and weaknesses. The dynamic and constructive memory processes are argued to be determined by memory research approaches and processes. The dilemmas which face memory research such as ethics, bias and reciprocating interviews are, thus, understood in relation to the viewpoints of insider and outsider researchers. Bridges (2001) shows that outsider research viewpoints in brain studies are generally considered more valid, objective and ethical even though insider research viewpoints have their strengths. References Brayboy, B., & Deyhle, D., 2000. Insider-Outsider: Researchers in American Indian Communities. Theory into Practice, 39, 3, p. 163. Bridges, D., 2001. The Ethics of Outsider Research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35, 3, p. 371. Martinez, M. E., 2010. Human Memory the Basics. Phi Delta Kappan, 91, 8, pp. 62-65. Naveh-Benjamin, M., & Kilb, A., 2012. How the Measurement of Memory Processes Can Affect Memory Performance: The Case of Remember/Know Judgments. Journal Of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory and Cognition, 38, 1, pp. 194-203. Verde, M.F. & Rotello, C.M., 2007. Memory strength and the decision process in recognition memory. Memory and Cognition (pre-2011), vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 254-62. Read More