Bracketing

Bracketing is a beguilingly simple term grounded in a profoundly complex concept. At its core, bracketing is a scientific process where a researcher suspends or holds in abeyance his or her presuppositions, biases, assumptions, theories, or previous experiences to see and describe the essence of a specific phenomenon. This process allows a focused researcher to observe the unfiltered phenomenon as it is at its essence, without the influence of our natural attitude—individual and societal constructions, presumptions, and assumptions.

Bracketing is conceptually located within the science and philosophy of phenomenology, developed by Edmund Husserl, the founder of the phenomenological movement, at the turn of the 20th century. Initially a mathematician, Husserl set out to develop a scientific theory of philosophy where logical and reasoned inquiry could reveal the inherent essence of things. Similar to a mathematical equation, bracketing suspends specific elements by placing them outside the brackets, thus allowing focus on the phenomenon within the parentheses. For Husserl, bracketing or epoche was a process of phenomenological reduction that could philosophically lead to the ideal description and understanding of the universal essences of the investigated phenomenon. Over the years, Husserl continued to develop the concept of bracketing from a purely philosophical ideal to a more descriptive practical conceptualization, where researchers may not discover universal truths of a phenomenon, but could gain local truths or understandings. Although bracketing remained fundamental to Husserl's phenomenology writing, he never provided a clear, concise definition or standard application of the concept.

Over the proceeding century, as bracketing continued to grow within the various schools of phenomenological movement (descriptive, Heideggarian, Utrecht, and existential), each reconceptualized the nature and/or elements of phenomenological reduction. As the various movements within phenomenology emerged, vied with each other, and developed their own theoretical tenets, the concept of bracketing became increasingly disconnected from its traditionally philosophical roots. Although the qualitative application of bracketing in research expanded, the concept behind the term eroded and its meanings and applications fractured, with the result that bracketing became multifaceted. Unfortunately, bracketing can also be seen as a formless technique or black-box term in studies, with a general unspoken assumption that there exists a shared understanding to the term. Despite lack of uniformity and often varied application, bracketing is composed of specific standard elements. Whereas researchers from different philosophical, epistemological, or theoretical traditions may employ bracketing based on their own standpoint and divergent meanings, the elemental components of bracketing are consistent. Bracketing remains an efficacious scientific process across various qualitative approaches based on a researcher's ability to effectively define and apply its elements.

Returning to the core definition, bracketing is a rigorous process that suspends internal and external suppositions, thereby allowing the focusing in on a specific phenomenon to understand or see it as it is. The four core elements of the process are as follows:

• the actual brackets that the researcher places around the phenomenon;
• the nature of the internal and external suppositions, experiences, theories, or assumptions being held in abeyance or suspended by the researcher;
• the temporal structure in which the bracketing is applied; and
• the reintegration of data generated from the bracketing process.

The methodological concept of bracketing requires researchers to explicitly operationalize and define these four elements. The first element centers on the construction of the actual parenthesis, specifically, on how solid or porous the actual brackets are. For example, does the researcher conceptualize the brackets as able to hold or suspend all or part of internal (e.g., assumptions, beliefs, theories) and external (e.g., context, culture, time) suppositions that may impact, affect, or distort the phenomenon in its natural state? Some researchers may define these brackets as holding most internal and external elements, whereas others may simply want the brackets to hold only their own experiences and opinions.

...