Introducing postqualitative inquiry in sport and exercise psychology

ABSTRACT

In recent years, qualitative research has gained popularity and legitimacy in sport and exercise psychology. However, this scientific discipline has not yet paid attention to postqualitative inquiry (PQI), despite the possibilities it offers for producing different knowledge and producing knowledge differently. The present article is the first attempt to rectify this lack of attention by offering a brief and partial sketch of PQI in the context of sport and exercise psychology. To start with, three of the basic propositions that enable PQI are described. These are: adopt a posthumanist view of ontology and the subject; engage with poststructuralism (necessarily) and new materialism (possibly); and think with concepts. Potential reasons for turning to PQI are then highlighted. Following from this, some perils and horizons for PQI are identified and discussed. The article concludes by presenting several reflections and recommendations to facilitate a progressive introduction of PQI in sport and exercise psychology.

KEYWORDS:

• Paradigms
• ontological turn
• poststructuralism
• posthumanism
• new materialism
• theory

Acknowledgements

We are extremely grateful to the two anonymous referees and the associate editor for their supporting and insightful comments on two earlier drafts of this paper. All remaining slippages, shortcomings and sweeping statements are exclusively our own.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 The adjective Deleuzian refers to Gilles Deleuze, a key posthuman thinker and arguably the most important source of inspiration for the postqualitative scholars (Brinkmann, 2017). Alongside with Félix Guattari, Deleuze formulated and developed several philosophical insights of great relevance for PQI.

2 In line with Mayes (2019), our article accounts for the concept of assemblages as it is taken up in much postqualitative inquiry, which sometimes simplifies or departs from the original conceptualisation of Deleuze and Guattari.

3 In this introductory article, the ontological position of Barad and Deleuze seem to be identical. Naturally, they share key points. However, if we read closer, we can observe that, in fact, they are incommensurable. To know more about this issue, please see Hein (2016).