Immigration and
socially constructed
identities:
Working with autobiographical
narratives and focus group data
Sirkku Varjonen
Cultures in contact 29.11.2010
Overview
Immigrant lives and identities – My PhD
INPRES - Discourse analytic study on the social
construction of Finnishness and Finnish identity
Immigrant lives and identities
My PhD research
Topic: Construction and functions of identity talk in
immigrants life stories
Research questions:
What kind of positions are constructed for immigrants
in Finland in this autobiographical data?
How are these positions constructed?
What are the functions of this identity talk?
(How does the construction of positions differ
between the life stories produced at different points in
time?)
Data
46 autobiographical narratives by 23 immigrants
Study is longitudinal: 2 stories from each immigrant
(average of 6 years in between them)
Mainly written narratives
1st stories: self collected and archive data
Follow-up stories: self collected
Data
All kind of contacts used when collecting my data
Use of archive data
A possibility for oral narration as a secondary option
Loose instructions for participants: ”Please write a
story about your life (in Finland).” 2. ”Please write
about your life after year x.
Written consent
Permission for archiving data
Narrative research
Key assumption: People make sense of the world and
bring structure to it by telling and listening to stories.
Narrativity as a characteristic of the data
Narrative approach as researcher’s perspective.
Defining narrative
A story with a beginning, a middle and an end. (e.g.
Chatman, 1978; Elliott, 2005)
A temporal continuum, at least two elements in time
(e.g.Rimmon-Kenan 1991)
An account of connected events revealed by narration.
(Murphy-Lejeune 2002, 43)
Narratives are temporal, meaningful and social.
(Elliott, 2005)
Analysing narratives
No standard method exists
Analysis can focus on:
Content (what happened and why?)
Structure (form, genre)
Performance (the interactional and institutional
context, producing and consuming of narratives)
(Mishler (1995), ref. Elliott (2005))
Narratives & identity
Our lives are storied and identity is narratively
constructed.
Narrative inquiry in general: a commitment to viewing
self and identity not in essentialist terms, but as
multidimensional and connected to social, historical,
political and cultural contexts
(Brockmeier and Carbaugh 2001; Polkinghorne 1988, ref. Smith & Sparkes
2008)
Narrative approaches & identity:
Narrative constructivism & narrative constructionism
(Sparkes&Smith 2008)
The focus / source of identity:
individual (inner self)
social (relatedness)
View of language:
realist
non-representational / relativist
Narrative constructivism
Realist assumption: ”Narratives have the capacity to
'reflect' the realities of personal experiences”
Focus on what goes on inside an individual's head.
Stories people tell reflect the inner workings of their minds:
identity, emotions, ways of uderstanding past, present and
anticipated future
Emphasis not on narratives as social action, but personal
experience and active processing of self-constructions
Narrative constructionism
Narratives never simply mirror some independent reality or
inner world but help to construct the reality, within
relationships
Narratives as discursive actions or social practices that
people perform and do in relation to others as opposed to
something they have.
Looks at how narratives function within social
relationships.
Stresses narrative as a form of social action and a
relational, sociocultural phenomenon.
Narrative constructionism &
Identity (Smith & Sparkes 2008)
Producing identity takes place socially
situated: We can analyse biographical
accounts e.g. in terms of the cultural
narrative resources which people draw on,
use and resist when constructing identities.
Research questions
•What kind of positions are constructed for
immigrants in Finland in this autobiographical
data?
•How are these positions constructed?
(Around which topics does the identity talk take place?
Which cultural resources do the stories draw on, resist
or take for granted?)
•What are the discursive functions of this identity
talk? (For whom and for what purposes are the stories
narrated?)
Results
Identity positions
constructed for immigrants
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Main themes: context of
identity talk
Belonging: connectedness to Finland
Rights and responsibilities of immigrants and
Finns
Otherness: differences and similarities
Discrimination
Theme 1. Belonging:
Connectedness to Finns and
finnishness
Describing on what basis and to what
extent one is
Finnish
Stating that one is not a Finn
Being a Finn – the extent and basis
I am a different kind of a Finn (...), I can not be quiet
and I’m bad at listening to other people, I speak
several languages and almost without an accent, (...)
Yet I believe that my goals are close to those of many
“ordinary Finnish youth’s” goals: I want to behave in a
way that I respect myself, I want (...) a family and a
one family house by a lake (...), I want to create
something by my work, something that will last – an
ordinary one, that is, isn’t it?
(Vladimir)
Being a Finn – the extent and basis
I have made it clear for myself, that I am Finnish
by my roots (although I am from the area of
Carelia), I’m still Finnish.
(Ann)
Not being a Finn
My home is here. I did not become a Finn, but
I’m more interested in the Finnish news than
the Russian ones.
(Olga)
Not being a Finn
I thought trying to be Finn. The way how Finns
behave and how they... that made me very
unhappy. It's better to be just myself. I am
from another culture and then I respect the
rules and everything but I am still myself.
(Maria)
Theme 2. Rights and duties of a
foreigner in Finland
2. Foreigners - Rights and Duties
Do I have the right to present critical thoughts about the
rules, habits, even the laws in Finland? If one
remembers that (…) this country has opened me it’s
doors and offered me the precondition of the human
life – does it not show gross ingratitude of me? After
giving it a thought I have come to a conclusion that
this kind of criticism is even necessary. A fresh
viewpoint may help to notice (...) that something can
be changed and improved…
(Sergei)
2. Foreigners - Rights and Duties
I am working, and I’m not embarrassed to look Finns
straight in the eye, because I’m not eating the Finnish
bread for free.
(Olga)
I live in this country and apparently I have the right to vote
and speak for my opinion.
(Vera)
Cultural resources and functions of
the identity talk
Constructing Finnishness
What is Finnishness made of?
Ethnic origin, feeling, behaving, character,
skills and goals.
Agency: Who has the power to define it?
I have not felt, and I have not made feel that I was part of
the Finnish nation. (Mohammed)
Constructing foreigness
These accounts start from the culturally
shared construction of the marginal position of
an immigrant, but also challenge it.
The right to be critical? Question of
power!
Cultural resources used
The cultural narrative of the problematic immigrant
”incapable of adapting to a modern society” or ”eating
Finnish bread for free”
Cultural narrative of and immigrant who becomes
native as the time passes
43
In their stories the narrators address: me, other
researchers, Finnish audience and politicians
Ideas, advice, criticism & thanks are given
regarding the integration of immigrants in Finland.
Challenges of narrative /
discursive research
The broad theoretical and methodological field of
narrative and discoursive research and identity
studies.
It takes time to get to know the field
no simple methodology manuals to follow
Tips
Try to define what is it that you are interested in
Get to know the field reading through existing
research
Locate your own study within the broad field by
referring to other studies
Be explicit about your chosen approach and analytic
procedures (e.g. how you read the data)
Consider different data collection methods, including
using already existing data
INPRES-project
The project focuses on returning migrants from
Russia to Finland and aims at providing tools for
promoting integration and adaptation throughout the
migration process.
Focus of research here:
Discourse analytic study on the social
construction of Finnishness and Finnish identity in
focus group talk.
(Sirkku Varjonen, Linda Arnold & Inga Jasinskaja-Lahti, 2009)
Data
Focus group interview data of six Ingrian Finnish
potential migrants
Collected during the pre-migration training
programme in the Russian town of Petrosavodsk in
2008.
A semi-structured interview guide was used in the
group discussion, which focused on the themes of
remigration, meaning of Finnishness, adaptation to
Finland, etc.
The interview was conducted in Russian.
Focus Groups
According to the broad definition of Morgan, (1996),
focus groups (FG) are ”a research technique that
collects data through group interaction on a topic
determined by the researcher” (p. 130).
Focus Groups & construction of
identities
From the social constructionist point of view, focus
groups are not primarily seen as a forum of
expression of previously formed attitudes and
opinions, but as a forum for generating public
discourses and performances in which accounts
about the proposed topics are jointly produced
(Smithson, 2000).
Focus group session as construction site for
identities.
Theoretical background:
Discursive Social Psychology
Identities as inter-subjectively achieved social and cultural phenomena
Ethnic identities as constructed and negotiated according to the social
circumstances; they depend on contextual claims that are regarded as
acceptable and justified (Verkuyten & de Wolf, 2002).
Research interest: How people make ethnic distinctions and
definitions and how these distinctions and definitions are accounted
for (Ibid.).
Analytical approach:
“Assumptions about perceptual and cognitive processes can be
set aside in favour of examining descriptions and explanations as
such. Hence, identities and attitudes are not treated as internal states
but analysed in terms of discursive actions”
Verkuyten and de Wolf (2002) (p. 373).
Focus of research:
Discursively constructed identities
How Finnishness and (Ingrian) Finnish identity are
discursively constructed and negotiated in this
particular interaction of a focus group interview
Focus on what happens in the textual level of the
data: categorisations used, distinctions made and
attributes attached to different groups.
How various discursive strategies and devices are
used to build the constructions of identities and
ethnicity as factual.
What does it mean to be
(Ingrian) Finnish?
I: Se tarkoittaa uimista Venäjällä vastavirtaan
I: It means swimming upstream in Russia.
(…)
I: Eli sinä (.) et ole sellainen kuin kaikki muut
I: Meaning that you (.) are not like everybody else.
G: Joo, no juuri niin
G: Yes, well, exactly.
(…)
X: No se on todellakin tunne, että sinä et ole sellainen kuin
kaikki muut.
X: Well it really is a feeling that you are not like everybody
else.
Discursive tools used
Metaphor (“swimming upstream in Russia”)
contrast structure: (“you” and “everyone else”.)
empirist accounting (“it really is…”)
consensus & corroborating statements
“Yes, well, exactly”
Character as distinguishing feature
Heti pystyy sanomaan kuka on suomalainen, he ovat
kaikki, koska vaikka onkin vain puoliksi, on silti
suomalainen. Sillä se on tunnistettavissa, jopa ulospäin
sen huomaa, että nuo ovat suomalaisia. Ja luonne se on
jokaisessa (.). No, sellainen omalaatuisuus luonteessa,
omaperäinen luonne
“One can immediately say who is Finnish, they are all,
because even if you are only half, you are still Finnish.
Because it is identifiable, even from the outside you
can notice, that those people are Finnish. And the
character – that is in everyone. (.) Well, that kind of
originality in the character, distinctive character”.
Character as distinguishing
feature
”He ovat tosi kyvykkäitä, he ovat tosi tarkkoja, he
toimivat tosi huolellisesti … He eivät osaa valehdella.
No eivät osaa valehdella, eivät puhua perättömiä,
eivät osaa kieroilla!”
“They are really skillful, they are really precise,
they are very meticulous in what they do … They
don’t know how to lie, or how to talk untruthfully,
or how to act crooked!”
Constructing Finnishness as a
difference
Ethnicity as inherited
Distinctiveness of Finns is built in contrast to
Russians
Honesty as a defining feature
Finns as innocent children, Russians as deceitful
traitors.
Functions of identity
constructions?
Different constructions have different implications and
functions on individual and group levels.
Constructions can include and exclude people as well
as build moral positions for people.
Consider the functions of these constructions of
Finnishness!
Sources
Chase, S. E. (2005). Narrative inquiry: Multiple lenses, approaches, voices. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 651-679). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Riessman, C. K. (2002). Analysis of personal narratives. In J.F. Gubrium and J.A. Holstein, (Eds.),
Handbook of Interview Research (pp. 695-710). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Smith, B., Sparkes, A. C. (2008). Narrative Constructionist Inquiry. In Holstein, J. – Gubrium, J. (Eds.):
Handbook of Constructionist Research (pp. 295-314). New York: The Guilford press.
Varjonen, S., Arnold, L. & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2009). ”There is a difference.” A discourse analytic study
on the social construction of Finnishness and Finnish identity. Teoksessa I. Jasinskaja-Lahti & T. A.
Mähönen (toim.) Identities, Intergroup Relations and Acculturation – The Cornerstones of
Intercultural Encounters (s. 52–66). Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
Verkuyten, M. (2005). The Social Psychology of Ethnic Identity. Hove and New York: Psychology Press.