100 Questions/ 30
How can the credibility of conflicting narratives in oral history be assessed?Translated by Mandana Karimi
2026-05-21
We asked several researchers and activists in the field of oral history to express their views on oral history questions. The names of each participant are listed at the beginning of their answers, and the text of all answers will be published on this portal by the end of the week. The goal of this project is to open new doors to an issue and promote scientific discussions in the field of oral history.
In this project, a question is asked every Saturday, and we ask experts to present their views in the form of a short text (about 100 words) by the end of the week. All answers will be published together so that the audience can compare and analyze the views.
The content is the opinions of the senders and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Oral History website. Although the answers are supposed to be based on about 100 words, in order to be polite and not to leave the discussion incomplete, in some cases, answers longer than that are also accepted.
The experts are asked to submit their answers by Sunday night so that all answers can be published on Tuesday.
From the interweaving of these responses, using AI, we have arrived at theories about oral history that will be published in the near future.
Question 30
How can the credibility of conflicting narratives in oral history be assessed?
Answers to Question 30:
Gholamreza Azari Khakestar
One of the important issues in oral history is the credibility of narratives. How or by what method an oral history researcher can ascertain their accuracy is a matter of reflection. Usually, during oral history interviews, researchers sometimes encounter conflicting narratives, which is a challenge for them. In these cases, if the researcher has a grasp of the subject and a correct and comprehensive understanding of the event, they choose the one that is closest to the truth from among the conflicting narratives. Although conflicting narratives are also considered part of oral history data, verifying and objectifying them through surviving documents and writings can reveal the credibility of oral history narratives. Conflicting narratives are usually abundant in oral history thematic projects. Because each interviewee narrates a small part of the event according to their own perspective and the extent of their presence in an event, and it is possible for the researcher to make a mistake among several conflicting narratives. Therefore, through comprehensive interviews and conversations with people involved in an issue and validation through existing documents and sources, it is possible to identify conflicting narratives.
Hassan Beheshtipour
If we want to give a precise answer to this question, we must pay attention to the reasons for the creation of conflict in oral history narratives. Sometimes the conflict is due to the narrator, that is, in some cases, narrators experience conflict in expressing the narrative due to forgetfulness or because of heroism or self-aggrandizement. To deal with this problem, we must refer to the narratives of others on the same subject or resolve this conflict by citing existing sources and documents.
Sometimes the conflict is due to group and factional differences between different narrators in different times and places, especially when it comes to going back to the past with today's analysis and knowledge. To resolve this conflict, first, priority should be given to the eyewitness and close to the time of the event. Second; those cases that narrate more details and are less biased are more reliable. Third; the current status of the narrator should be considered in terms of attribution to a specific intellectual movement. Sometimes the conflict factor in the text is related to the questioner or editor, who either created the conflict unintentionally due to inattention or ignorance of the details of the story. There is no single method to resolve this conflict. It is possible to use a combination of methods to resolve it, the details of which cannot be described in this brief. I would just like to point out that in all three cases, we must pay attention to the differences in perspective between the narrators, interviewers, and editors.
Mohammad Mehdi Abdollahzade
It is neither necessary nor possible to validate all of a narrator's responses. Rather, one should only validate narrations that conflict with the prevailing narratives or those that common sense would hesitate to accept. In some cases, using one method to confirm or refute a narration is sufficient, and sometimes that narration must be tested using other methods. The most important of these are:
Referring to reliable documents in the field
Using the research findings of others in the field for comparison
Comparison with other narrations in the field
Paying attention to the narrator's personality, verbal organization, social status, purpose, and intention of the statement, in which case there may be no conflict.
Comparison of the narrator's conflicting narration with his other narrations.
Gholamreza Azizi
Depending on the position, number, and credibility of the narrators, the methods for assessing the credibility of conflicting narratives in oral history and how they are treated differ. In general, the factors that should be considered and utilized in assessing the credibility of narrators' narratives (even without conflicting with others' narratives) include: consistency with documents and evidence, comparison with other eyewitness accounts, preference for the narrator's credibility, preference for the credibility of the event, consideration of the beneficiary or beneficiaries versus the victim or victims, the temporal context of the narrative, the spatial context of the narrative (evaluating the possibility of the narrator's presence at the scene of the event), assessing the narrator's relationship with the event and the event from the narrator's perspective, and preference for continuous news over single news.
Abolfat'h Mo'men
In oral history, narrative validation plays a key role and helps to verify and authenticate data. This importance is doubled in conflicting narratives (from different narrators or a single narrator). For validation, both external components (such as editorial plan, topic selection, interviewer skill and training) and internal components (such as the intention, desire and position of the narrator, the client and the interviewer) must be considered. Practical ways of validating conflicting narratives include: choosing a single topic and developing measurable criteria, holding group re-reading sessions for people with common memories, confronting different narratives in terms of time, place and topic, paying attention to the conflict of interests and position of the narrator, confronting the narrative with written documents, the interviewer's scientific mastery of the topic and specific purpose, and conducting re-interviews at intervals to examine the narrator's mental reconstruction.
Seyyed Mohammad Sadegh Feyz
When dealing with conflicting narrations, one must refer to their order of descent and use the elements of time, place, and even the person narrating the subject to understand the cause of the conflict. In such cases, the first step is to extract aspects that are close to each other and commonalities between the narrations; one can interpret the perceptions of the narrations based on a single meaning. Sometimes these conflicts may be apparent; therefore, one must be precise in their meaning. Sometimes this conflict arises from two perspectives that, by bringing them closer together, can lead to a single concept. However, the main point is that since the conflict does not occur in the concept of a sacred matter, it will not be difficult to ignore the details and details in order to achieve a common understanding of the narration, although each conflicting narration also has an independent order and should not be ignored without the necessary evidence.
Hamid Ghazvini
The emergence of conflict in a narrative is natural, because everyone has their own lived world. It should be seen whether the conflict is between one person's narratives or between the individual's narrative and that of other people. Sometimes, depending on the situation and under the influence of family issues, changing beliefs, work, political or legal pressures, and such, the narrative experiences conflicts that must be recognized and evaluated based on them. Sometimes, the conflict is the result of poor memory, which must be taken into account when evaluating the narrative. In some cases, the narrative conflicts with written documents, and in this area, one must have sufficient knowledge and experience to evaluate the sources, because some documents, such as SAVAK documents, also contain errors. In addition, it should be seen whether the narrator was in a position to provide an accurate account of the event. In general, one must first pay attention to the causes of the conflict, and then think of a solution to resolve it.
Shafigheh Niknafs
It is possible to achieve the measurement tool of conflicting narratives by the following methods:
1. Conducting supplementary research and examining newly discovered documents and evidence 2. Collecting multiple narratives with agreeing and disagreeing perspectives on the same event and comparing memories with each other and examining similarities and differences 3. Discovering the missing links in the narrative using information, documents, existing evidence, and other memories and oral histories 5. More precise and meticulous inquiries about the doubtful narrative from the same interviewees and, in a way, repeating the interview and asking about the exact time and place of the event 6. Considering the number of similar and repeated narratives (frequency) and examining the probability of the accuracy of the repeated narratives 7. Analyzing and logically criticizing the narratives based on psychological and historical sociological patterns and drawing conclusions about the doubtful and doubtful narrative.
Abolfazl Hassanabadi
The issue of validating conflicting narratives in oral history can be pursued in two separate contexts. First, during the interview and while providing information, which depends on the interviewer's awareness and intelligence, and the way the interview is conducted. Second, during the compilation of the work, which relies on the method adopted for writing, the taste of the commissioning center, and the availability of the information necessary to evaluate the content of oral history data. Finally, it should be noted that conflict does not necessarily mean incorrectness; different memories can be complementary dimensions of an event. Validating credibility in oral history, especially during compilation, is an interpretive process that the compiler can carry out by using various sources such as documents, photographs, and other oral narratives and in a comparative manner.
AI
Assessing the credibility of conflicting oral history narratives requires a multifaceted comparison and evaluation of data. The researcher must match the narratives with written documents, images, reports, and other historical sources, and consider the time, place, and location of the narrator. It is also important to consider the narrator's motivations, memory, intellectual inclinations, and access to the event. Comparing multiple narratives and examining points of similarity and difference also helps to identify reliable elements. In oral history, the goal is not simply to find "one definitive truth," but to understand how events are perceived and represented by different people. Therefore, critical and methodical analysis of narratives plays a fundamental role in increasing the credibility of the research.
Number of Visits: 16
http://oral-history.ir/?page=post&id=13291