Abstract

Qualitative research in psychology has tended to draw on a relatively narrow range of research methods, and the recent shift towards the analysis of material involving `naturally occurring talk' in some areas of psychology has reinforced this trend. This article discusses the implications of a preference for the analysis of `naturally occurring talk' or `naturalistic records' across the full range of qualitative psychology research. In particular, I focus on how researchers are positioned in debates over the advantages and limitations of analysing `naturally occurring data' and research interviews. Drawing on examples from a current project concerned with the meanings of consumption for young people, I interrogate the assumptions associated with a preference for analysing `naturalistic records' and consider some of the benefits as well as the problems involved in using research practices that involve a degree of direct engagement between the researcher and other participants. This article is therefore discussing the origins as well as the implications of the preference for analysing `naturally occurring data'.