The usefulness of archived qualitative data has been questioned where contextual information surrounding the conditions of its production is not provided. It has been assumed that, without this background information, the data remain incomplete. By the same token, it has been argued that the provision of such information will repair and complete the dataset for the purpose of generating new findings or theories. We suggest that these arguments stress practical solutions to what is in fact a more fundamental epistemological issue relating to the reflexive and interpretive nature of the research paradigm within which we, as qualitative researchers, reside. Our experiences of revisiting our own data, discussed in this paper, have highlighted the central part played by the researcher not only in the interpretation and theorising of data, but also in their construction. Because of this, we contend that the conditions under which data are produced are inescapable, thus rendering their re-interpretation at some later date problematic. Thus, we argue that, while ‘reflexivity’ is now recognised as a key feature of qualitative research across social science disciplines, the implications of this for the archiving and re-use of qualitative data have yet to be adequately addressed. Failure to acknowledge this epistemological issue leads researchers unwittingly to adopt a ‘naively realist’ position.