Inside the research assemblage A micropolitical odyssey from aggregation to methodological line of flight Pam Alldred, Brunel University, London Nick J Fox, University of Sheffield

Introduction DeleuzoGuattarian ontology. The event assemblage. The research-assemblage. The micropolitics of social research. Reverse engineering methods and designs. Forward engineering methods and designs. Coda: Royal and minor sciences.

DeleuzoGuattarian ontology Focuses on assemblages of relations. Relations within assemblages affect and are affected by each other. These flows of affect produce capacities in bodies, collectivities and things. Micropolitics: affects may territorialise or de-territorialise; aggregate or dis-aggregate* relations. * (cf. ‘molar’ and ‘molecular’ affects)

The event assemblage ‘E’ An event (e.g. a school trip; a kiss) is an assemblage of natural and cultural relations. These are drawn into assemblage by affects A,B, C. etc. These affects are what produce the event The objective of so inquiry is to identify and explore the affect economy (Clough, 2004) of the event-assemblage.

The Research-Assemblage ‘R’ Comprises relations, including research tools, researchers, theories, previous research, audience etc. Linked by affects X,Y, Z etc. These affects produce the capacities of the research method or design to engage with events. They also influence the micropolitical interactions between researched, researcher, data, audience etc.

Micropolitics of social research During research, the Event-assemblage E and the Research-Assemblage R hybridise to form a composite assemblage R/E. If the ABC are too powerful, they may reduce the research-assemblage to uncritical description or journalism. If the XYZ affects are too powerful, they may overwhelm the event affects, creating the event in the research’s image. The challenge is to negotiate a path between these extremes.

Reverse engineering social inquiry The affect economies of research-assemblages are relatively simple and can easily be reverse engineered to explore their affect economies and micropolitics. Assemblage micropolitics: the intended and unintended products in terms of power and control e.g. researcher over researched. A research design can be seen as a series of research machines (sampling, collection, analysis) that are plugged together. Each machine has its own micropolitics. 13-15 y o

Example 1: sampling machine Affect: includes or excludes specific events, according to sampling method. Affect economy: systematically includes some in the sample and excludes others. Micropolitics: empowers a researcher to achieve the impossible (to assess an entire population), according to specific, though arbitrary sampling rules.

Example 2: interview design Constituent machines a) set a research question; b) select a sample; c) use in-depth interviews; d) analyse responses and e) report these data with illustrative examples. Micropolitics: researcher controls sample, questions asked, how data is analysed, what theory is used, which data are reported, and what account is presented of the research. Respondents do have control over their accounts during the interviews.

Aggregation in research machines Analysis of methods, techniques and designs reveals that almost all are aggregative. This has the micropolitical effect of producing regularity, similarity and continuity in research accounts of events, often excluding anomalies or diversity. Some designs (e.g. RCT, survey) are more aggregating than others (e.g. ethnography, case study). It is possible to identify all aggregations and recognise the effects they have on the data.

Forward engineering social inquiry We can design in affect economies and consequent micropolitics to research methods and designs, to achieve specific micropolitical outcomes. We can either reduce aggregating affects, or we can account for them and recognise the effects they have on research outputs. This rehabilitates a range of research methods, and provides support for mixing methods/designs.

Coda: Royal and minor sciences Deleuze and Guattari (1988: 372) distinguish ‘Royal’ and ‘minor’ sciences: Royal science has a ‘reproducing’ micropolitics that treats its objects as stable and reproducible if contexts are controlled. Minor science is ‘following’, seeking out singularities and variability, flows and singular events. Should we use understanding of the micropolitics of the research-assemblage to foster minor (social) sciences?

Further reading Fox, N.J. and Alldred, P. (2014) New materialist social inquiry: designs, methods and the research-assemblage. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2014.921458 Fox, N.J. and Alldred, P. (2015) Inside the research-assemblage: new materialism and the micropolitics of social inquiry. Sociological Research Online, 20 (2) 6. DOI: 10.5153/sro.3578 http://www.socresonline.org.uk/20/2/6.html