Two of the major documentary modes identified by Bill Nichols are the Participatory mode and the Reflexive mode. Both are similar to each other but have some specific differences. One of the most striking features of both modes is the presence of the filmmaker in the story. Unlike the Observational mode, the filmmaker has a distinct voice in the film. They can talk, appear on camera, and otherwise make their presence known to the audience. 

However, the differences between the Participatory mode and the Reflexive mode render the purposes of each mode different from each other. The Participatory mode inserts the filmmaker as a character in the film. They interact with subjects on screen and often attempt to make some sort of statement. The interaction of the filmmaker and the subject becomes a major element of the film. 

For example, in Time Indefinite (1993), Ross McElwee examines his own life in an autobiographical documentary. Throughout the film, McElwee interacts with loved ones as he wrestles with the concepts of grief and death and struggles to understand his own difficulties in connecting with people. McElwee, as both the filmmaker and the main subject of the film, narrates his stream of conscious for the audience as we watch the images he had taken over several years of his life. McElwee uses his interactions with others to frame all of his thoughts and arguments.

The Reflexive mode, on the other hand, calls attention to the medium itself. The filmmaker will generally have a presence in the film, but that presence offers an opportunity to the viewers to consider the implications of the documentary itself. The purpose of the Reflexive mode is to illuminate the audience to the limitations of a documentary’s ability to accurately portray the truth.

In Stranger with a Camera (2000), Elizabeth Barret has the interesting perspective of being both a filmmaker and a resident of the area that she’s filming in. In investigating the death of the documentarian Hugh O’Connor, Barret seizes the opportunity to interrogate the divide between how people would like to be represented and how others might represent them. The reflexive approach that she takes allows for Barret to examine the dichotomy between the filmmaker and the subject. Throughout the film, Barret talks about her own experiences growing up and living in the Appalachians. Being both from the region and a filmmaker, Barret is put in the unique position of understanding not only O’Connor’s drive to truthfully capture what’s happening in front of him but also Ison’s drive to protect the image of his homeland.

Sometimes, however, a documentary can borrow elements from both the Participatory and Reflexive modes. Time Indefinite, while primarily presented in the Participatory mode, has elements of the Reflexive mode as well. There are several moments throughout the film where McElwee calls attention to the process of filming. He talks about how he prefers looking at the world through a lens, making the camera as much a part of his identity as anything else. One particularly Reflexive moment is where the name of the film comes from. There’s a scene where he’s speaking with Jehovah’s Witnesses while filming them. In the narration, McElwee talks about how he was trying to adjust the exposure of the camera to capture the shadows on the Jehovah’s Witness’ face, but only registered several moments later that he had been talking about “time indefinite,” and how that relates to the uncertainty of mortality.

The Participatory mode and the Reflexive mode of documentary are both powerful tools to convey concepts to the audience, but they do so in different ways. The actual presence of the filmmaker is felt in both modes, but the Reflexive mode reminds the audience that they’re watching a documentary where the Participatory mode usually doesn’t do so as bluntly.