I was primarily alone, yes. No community. My tutors knew nothing about autoeth besides what they read in Denzin & Lincoln. I was the one tutoring them, actually. There was also a lot of resistance, mainly because they did not understand the depths or consequences of this concept. One of the consequences being, like Kip Jones writes, that you cannot talk about reliability, validity etc when you use this method. You cannot actually do that in any qualitative method, but a lot of people, also researchers doing qualitative work, are still very positivistic in their heads, and then their work become some hybrid between qualitative and quantitative work.

(I used Rorty on these matters, who suggests first intersubjectivity, and next solidarity. I also used the concept of transparency – in this situation meaning that what I did and how I did it was transparent in the text, I was very open about it. Also I used reflectiveness, being self-reflective throughout the whole text.)

I managed to find one person who had performed autobiographic work, which is not quite the same, but with some similarities, and had a couple of conversations with that person via mail.

When this is said, I was also encouraged to continue this work by my tutors, because there had not been research like this at my university; actually autoeth studies are rare, if existing at all, in Nordic countries (I live in Norway).

If possible, I would like very much to read your paper when it is finished.