Reactivity in qualitative data collection occurs when research participants are influenced by the researcher during data collection, as exemplified by the research participants diverging from their routines in the presence of the researcher or by their telling the researcher what they think she wants to hear. In qualitative research, there are two basic approaches to reactivity. The traditional position maintains that data should be uncontaminated by reactivity since data otherwise fail to be informative about social life independently of its being studied. In short, good data are reactivity-free. By contrast, the more recent view holds that data about situations with reactivity are also informative about social life independently of its being studied. This is the case insofar as the researcher is aware of the reactivity and takes it into account when drawing inferences from her data.
Thus far, the more recent approach to reactivity has not been spelled out and defended in any detail. In this paper, I take on this task. More precisely, I argue that good data are reactivity-transparent, and I consider the implications of this view for the practice of qualitative data collection. Finally, I briefly indicate how my reflections on reactivity-transparent data contribute to recent philosophical discussions of data quality.