Ensuring trustworthiness in autoethnographic research in applied linguistics: Criticisms and coping strategies

Abstract

This paper critically examines the concept of trustworthiness in autoethnographic research, a qualitative approach often challenged on various methodological and epistemological grounds. It begins with a personal narrative, illustrating how autoethnography resonates deeply with the author’s academic and professional identity. The paper then engages with four recurring critiques frequently directed at autoethnographic work, namely invisible data, over-subjectivity, misrepresentation of others, and navel-gazing. Each critique is explored in depth, followed by practical and theoretical strategies to mitigate its impact. These include data triangulation, reflexive questioning, collaborative validation, ethical representation, and alignment with established qualitative research criteria. Drawing on constructivist epistemologies, the study argues that when handled rigorously, personal experience can serve as a legitimate and valuable source of knowledge. The paper concludes with implications for both autoethnographers and critics, advocating for more reflexive, transparent, and dialogic practices that elevate the scholarly value of autoethnography while preserving its distinctive voice and transformative potential.