Place anonymization as rural erasure? A methodological inquiry for rural qualitative scholars

Abstract

Through the lens of critical rural scholarship, this methodological paper offers reflections on the theoretical similarities between the qualitative research practice of place anonymization and the neoliberal project of place erasure. Using empirical data from a year-long ethnographic study of a remote rural community in Northern Wisconsin, I raise methodological tensions related to the choices we make as qualitative researchers related to masking or obscuring the names of rural places. Applying a critical geographic framework, I offer critiques of place anonymization as a protective measure for rural participants and decontextualization as a goal for broader theoretical application of the research findings. I then reflect on place masking as a form of methodological erasure that echoes the neoliberal erasure of rural places. In conclusion, I offer implications and suggestions for rural qualitative scholars concerned with spatial inequalities and place erasure.

Keywords:

• Critical geography
• Methodology
• Anonymization
• Rural education

Acknowledgments

The empirical study upon which this methodological paper is based was conducted at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Disclosure statement

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

Notes

1 This is a pseudonym for the town.

2 See Seelig (2017) for the full study.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jennifer L. Seelig

Dr. Jennifer Seelig is a K-12 research scientist with NORC at the University of Chicago. She applies critical theory and qualitative methods to study the political economy of rural America, including the rural teacher pipeline, the role of schools in community development, and civic capacity in rural communities.