DOI link for Interlude
Critical security studies have different epistemological and ontological points of departure and aspirations moving forward. Instead, the principles of rigour, transparency, and reflexivity can function as driving forces behind methodologically sound research projects in critical security studies. This chapter argues that critical security studies researchers must be honest to themselves and to their audiences about their thoroughness and carefulness in designing their research. As a field of inquiry, critical security studies is prone to external criticisms focusing on lack of standards for validity, or reproducibility by methodically conservative and dogmatic approaches. By focusing on discussions of rigour, critical security studies can offset or challenge criticisms around validity of methods. Critical security studies present an opening to include diverse voices, perspectives, and experiences to be heard on reflecting on what counts as security.