I have received ethical approval for my small scale research project using IPA to explore how students feel their vocational qualifications have supported their academic skills development. Phew. Now the difficult bit - recruiting some students!
And then the hard work really begins - interviews, transcription, close reading and analysis. And I've got a word limit of 8000 words, 4000 of which have to cover my philosophical stance...
Friday, 15 January 2016
Thursday, 7 January 2016
Does vocational training lead towrds or away from HE? Hillmert & Jacob
This paper is based on research completed in Germany. Germany seems to have a more 'joined up' system of academic/vocational education than the UK, with well-developed vocational pathways which lead towards HE. However, it seems all is not perfect in this world, and that VET students may be at a disadvantage. The authors produce a model to discuss the 'returns to education' - the value gained from the education taken. It also looks at social disparity and the effects this has on educational choices. The research is quantitative, but does indicate some useful areas for general consideration and discussion, including thoughts around parental education levels.
Hillmert, S. & Jacob, M. (2003). Social inequality in higher education: Is vocational training a pathway leading to or away from university? European Sociological Review, 19(3), 319-334. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3559614
The authors are interested in patterns of combinations of training and education in Germany, particularly with the increasing numbers of students attending HE ho have previously taken VET. The authors note the effect of parental education levels on the likelihood of children studying at HE level.
The authors suggest that the route of vocational training followed by HE is less risky than an either/or choice of HE or joining the workforce immediately after school - the people have an 'insurance policy' of their vocational training to fall back on should their HE experience end in failure. They suggest that school-leavers calculate the outcomes of the different scenarios and make a rational choice based on their expectations for success.
Why am I reading this?
I'm not sure how I came to this paper, perhaps solely by exploring literature around transition and VET.
What are the authors trying to do in writing this?
Produce a theoretical model which explores the choices made with regard to transition from school to vocational and/or HE. They seek to explain the choices made, and the effects of social inequality on access to HE.
What are they saying that is relevant to what I want to find out?
Not a lot really. Interesting general read but of no direct value to assignment one, except to perhaps consider asking about parental education. However, this would only be a scene-setting question rather than something I'm seeking to explore in my interview. Maybe I only reviewed this paper because I picked it up ages ago before my reading had become more focussed :-/
How convincing is what the authors are saying?
The authors are generally convincing in their specific methodology, although (as I suppose many theoretical models are) it does seem very simplistic.
In conclusion, what use can I make of this?
Not a lot. Background reading. Perhaps consider parental education levels.
Hillmert, S. & Jacob, M. (2003). Social inequality in higher education: Is vocational training a pathway leading to or away from university? European Sociological Review, 19(3), 319-334. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3559614
Introduction
The authors look to examine the effect that an intermediate training alternative has on participation in HE, particularly in relation to social inequality. They develop a model of decision making as to how students transition through education in Germany.Qualification levels and educational mobility
In Germany there is a marked wage differentiation between those who have studied at university and those with vocational qualifications, which is greater than the difference between those with VET and with no training.The authors are interested in patterns of combinations of training and education in Germany, particularly with the increasing numbers of students attending HE ho have previously taken VET. The authors note the effect of parental education levels on the likelihood of children studying at HE level.
The theoretical model
Previous research suggests that different factors affect the participant at different choice points in their educational career. The authors use an individual decision model to explain the patterns in educational differences. Previous studies have highlighted 'risk aversion' as a rational way of decision making about education choices. The authors go further than previous models, discussing the effects of family origin.The authors suggest that the route of vocational training followed by HE is less risky than an either/or choice of HE or joining the workforce immediately after school - the people have an 'insurance policy' of their vocational training to fall back on should their HE experience end in failure. They suggest that school-leavers calculate the outcomes of the different scenarios and make a rational choice based on their expectations for success.
Social inequality and educational systems
"Parents' education and income are strong predictors of the children's educational behaviour" (p. 329).Summary and outlook
This is a theoretical model, although empirical data have been used to support it. However, the model provides information on how variables such as parental education and income interact. The authors identify study limitations such as basing the model on the concept of individual choice.Why am I reading this?
I'm not sure how I came to this paper, perhaps solely by exploring literature around transition and VET.
What are the authors trying to do in writing this?
Produce a theoretical model which explores the choices made with regard to transition from school to vocational and/or HE. They seek to explain the choices made, and the effects of social inequality on access to HE.
What are they saying that is relevant to what I want to find out?
Not a lot really. Interesting general read but of no direct value to assignment one, except to perhaps consider asking about parental education. However, this would only be a scene-setting question rather than something I'm seeking to explore in my interview. Maybe I only reviewed this paper because I picked it up ages ago before my reading had become more focussed :-/
How convincing is what the authors are saying?
The authors are generally convincing in their specific methodology, although (as I suppose many theoretical models are) it does seem very simplistic.
In conclusion, what use can I make of this?
Not a lot. Background reading. Perhaps consider parental education levels.
Wednesday, 6 January 2016
An interesting discussion on different phenomenological methods - Finlay (2009)
This text is handy as it gives an analysis of several types of phenomenology within one paper. It has helped situate me more clearly within hermeneutic phenomenology. I need to take a bit of time to read Giorgi, however, so that I can understand and engage with his objections to IPA (and most other forms of phenomenology, it seems...)
Finlay, L. (2009). Debating phenomenological research methods. Phenomenology and Practice, 3(1), 6-25.
Other phenomenological methods do not explicitly use Husserlian techniques such as eidetic variation, such as Smith's IPA. Smith, whilst claiming the method to be phenomenological, also identifies with hermeneutics, recognising the essential role of the researcher. This author suggests that Smith (2004) does not advocate the use of bracketing.
The discussion/argument over what qualifies as phenomenological frequently stems from disagreement over whether it follows the Husserlian viewpoint or not. Further, confusion is compounded when there is a mixing of philosophies and viewpoints, for example using Husserlian philosophy but perhaps being Heideggerian in acknowledging the role of the researcher's own experience, rather then reduction.
Finlay's definition of phenomenological research is work that provides rich description of experience, where the researcher adopts an open phenomenological attitude, setting aside judgements and initially avoiding theoretical frameworks. She also requires that the researcher follows a consistent philosophy/methodology.
There is frequently a delineation between descriptive phenomenology and interpretive (hermeneutic) phenomenology. Husserlian (descriptive) phenomenology stays close to the text and only make assertions that can be intuitively clearly drawn from the data. The users of interpretive phenomenology argue that interpretation cannot be separated from the description, it is an integral part of our 'being-in-the-world'. The data are already interpreted through the participant, and then through the researcher.
Finlay argues that there is a continuum between description and interpretation, upon which phenomenological research all sits. van Manen (1990) discusses that there is a greater level of interpretation in studies where nonverbal aspects are of greater importance, as well as when using other types of data such as artwork. van Manen finds it important to clarify the difference between interpretation that draws attention to a concept and interpretation that imposes an external framework on the description, developing Gadamer's ideas. Wertz (2005) suggests that interpretation is valid, so as to place the ideas within the whole, but the interpretation must remain grounded within the data.
The key difference between phenomenologists is whether the subjective experiences of the researcher are brought to the foreground and explored. Those following the Husserlian tradition seek to perform reduction, to reduce the influence the researcher has on the phenomenon. Researchers must bracket their preconceptions and past knowledge on the phenomenon. This "setting aside" must take place throughout the research, not just at the beginning.
Hermeneutic phenomenologists suggest that it is not possible to bracket one's experiences, but instead it is important to acknowledge one's pre-existing beliefs, and question them if new evidence comes to light. Within this field, subjectivity is placed in the foreground, so that one can recognise biases, whilst being open to the 'other' (Gadamer, 1975). In reality, this means the researcher must shift between a focus on personal assumptions and then returning to theparticipant's experiences with fresh eyes. However, navel-gazing must be avoided - it is the participant's experience which should be privileged, not the researcher's. Finlay discusses Merleau-Ponty's (1968) idea of a co-creation of data through the dialogic encounter of the interview.
Giorgi (2008) stresses the importance of maintaining scientific rigour, through systematic processes deeply based on the data. Other phenomenologists look to more artistic interpretations such as literary prose, art and poetry. Finlay tells us to look to our audience and determine how our argument can best be made.
This discussion of where phenomenology sits is confused not least by the differing definitions of postmodernism.
Giorgi (1989) One type of analysis of descriptive data: procedures involved in following a phenomenological method.
Giorgi (1997) The theory, practice and evaluation of the phenomenological method as a qualitative research procedure
Giorgi (2008) Concerning a serious misunderstanding of the essence of the phenomenological method in psychology
Halling (2008) Intimacy, transcendence and psychology: closeness and openness in everyday life
van Manen (1990) Researching lived experience: human science for an action sensitive pedagogy.
Wertz (2005) Phenomenological research methods for counselling psychology
Finlay, L. (2009). Debating phenomenological research methods. Phenomenology and Practice, 3(1), 6-25.
Introduction
There is great diversity in phenomenological research,however, all phenomenological researcher wish to gain rich description of lived experience. There is much debate over different methods, some of which appears unduly critical. The author highlights six questions to discuss in this paper, in order to help develop dialogue rather than diatribe between different approaches.What counts as phenomenology?
There area great any methods and techniques described as phenomenological. Psychological phenomenology, according to Giorgi (1989) has four core characteristics:- the research is descriptive
- it uses phenomenological reductions
- explores the intentional relationship between persons and situations
- discloses the essences of meaning in human experience
Other phenomenological methods do not explicitly use Husserlian techniques such as eidetic variation, such as Smith's IPA. Smith, whilst claiming the method to be phenomenological, also identifies with hermeneutics, recognising the essential role of the researcher. This author suggests that Smith (2004) does not advocate the use of bracketing.
The discussion/argument over what qualifies as phenomenological frequently stems from disagreement over whether it follows the Husserlian viewpoint or not. Further, confusion is compounded when there is a mixing of philosophies and viewpoints, for example using Husserlian philosophy but perhaps being Heideggerian in acknowledging the role of the researcher's own experience, rather then reduction.
Finlay's definition of phenomenological research is work that provides rich description of experience, where the researcher adopts an open phenomenological attitude, setting aside judgements and initially avoiding theoretical frameworks. She also requires that the researcher follows a consistent philosophy/methodology.
General description or idiographic analysis?
There is disagreement over the focus of phenomenological research. Those of the Husserlian tradition, such as Giorgi seek the universal 'essences' of a phenomenon. Idiographic details are of no importance once analysis has been completed. For other researchers, idiographic meanings are of importance, whether or not they lead to generalisations. Smith (from other reading) believes that IPA must concentrate on the individual - generalisations may be made, but not at the loss of view of the individual. Halling (2008) follows the middle ground, suggesting that idiographic experiences can also illuminate more general structures of experience. Halling suggests following three levels of analysis: firstly looking at one person's experience of a phenomenon; secondly they explore those themes common to the phenomenon. Finally, they explore the philosophical and universal experiences of the phenomenon, moving between experience and abstraction as the researcher analyses the data.Description or interpretation?
Phenomenological research starts through a description of a person's experiences. The researcher then analyses these data to identify themes, drawing out implicit meanings as well as those that are explicit. The area of discussing implicit meanings in the data is where the researcher can move from description to interpretation.There is frequently a delineation between descriptive phenomenology and interpretive (hermeneutic) phenomenology. Husserlian (descriptive) phenomenology stays close to the text and only make assertions that can be intuitively clearly drawn from the data. The users of interpretive phenomenology argue that interpretation cannot be separated from the description, it is an integral part of our 'being-in-the-world'. The data are already interpreted through the participant, and then through the researcher.
Finlay argues that there is a continuum between description and interpretation, upon which phenomenological research all sits. van Manen (1990) discusses that there is a greater level of interpretation in studies where nonverbal aspects are of greater importance, as well as when using other types of data such as artwork. van Manen finds it important to clarify the difference between interpretation that draws attention to a concept and interpretation that imposes an external framework on the description, developing Gadamer's ideas. Wertz (2005) suggests that interpretation is valid, so as to place the ideas within the whole, but the interpretation must remain grounded within the data.
Researcher subjectivity
All phenomenological research is characterised by the connections between the researcher and the researched. However, there are differences in how this subjectivity is acknowledged. Whichever form of phenomenology one use, it is vital to be open to the "other" and retain an open attitude.The key difference between phenomenologists is whether the subjective experiences of the researcher are brought to the foreground and explored. Those following the Husserlian tradition seek to perform reduction, to reduce the influence the researcher has on the phenomenon. Researchers must bracket their preconceptions and past knowledge on the phenomenon. This "setting aside" must take place throughout the research, not just at the beginning.
Hermeneutic phenomenologists suggest that it is not possible to bracket one's experiences, but instead it is important to acknowledge one's pre-existing beliefs, and question them if new evidence comes to light. Within this field, subjectivity is placed in the foreground, so that one can recognise biases, whilst being open to the 'other' (Gadamer, 1975). In reality, this means the researcher must shift between a focus on personal assumptions and then returning to theparticipant's experiences with fresh eyes. However, navel-gazing must be avoided - it is the participant's experience which should be privileged, not the researcher's. Finlay discusses Merleau-Ponty's (1968) idea of a co-creation of data through the dialogic encounter of the interview.
Science or art?
Giorgi posits phenomenology as a human science, being systematic, methodological, general, and critical. However, others suggest that it can have close links with art as well as science. There is disagreement over the relative importance of the two elements.Giorgi (2008) stresses the importance of maintaining scientific rigour, through systematic processes deeply based on the data. Other phenomenologists look to more artistic interpretations such as literary prose, art and poetry. Finlay tells us to look to our audience and determine how our argument can best be made.
Modern or postmodern paradigms?
Finlay discusses the confusion over which paradigm phenomenology sits within. These paradigms don't seem to be in accord with those we've looked at. Giorgi suggests that his phenomenology comes from a grounded critical realist tradition, but with its roots in Husserlian phenomenology, it could be argues that his views sit within a naturalistic paradigm.This discussion of where phenomenology sits is confused not least by the differing definitions of postmodernism.
Conclusion
Phenomenology is adaptable.Further reading
Gadamer (1975) Truth and methodGiorgi (1989) One type of analysis of descriptive data: procedures involved in following a phenomenological method.
Giorgi (1997) The theory, practice and evaluation of the phenomenological method as a qualitative research procedure
Giorgi (2008) Concerning a serious misunderstanding of the essence of the phenomenological method in psychology
Halling (2008) Intimacy, transcendence and psychology: closeness and openness in everyday life
van Manen (1990) Researching lived experience: human science for an action sensitive pedagogy.
Wertz (2005) Phenomenological research methods for counselling psychology
Tuesday, 5 January 2016
Use of IPA in education: Cooper, Fleischer and Cotton (2012)
This paper uses IPA to explore how students experience the learning of qualitative research techniques. It has some useful information on quality control, and talks through the process of undertaking IPA. I've not gone into details of the theory surrounding the topic, as it doesn't relate to my interests, although the use of IPA in an education setting does. The researchers do not discuss the philosophical underpinnings of their research, but the use of IPA relating to the lives experience is mentioned, so it appears an appropriate method.
Cooper, R., Fleischer, A., & Cotton, F. A. (2012). Building connections: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of qualitative research students' learning experiences. The Qualitative Report, 17(1), 1-16.
This research, according to the authors differs from previous research by looking at students from a range of academic fields, learning a range of different qualitative techniques rather than concentrating on one academic field or one type of qualitative research.
They also discuss ethics within this section.
Cooper, R., Fleischer, A., & Cotton, F. A. (2012). Building connections: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of qualitative research students' learning experiences. The Qualitative Report, 17(1), 1-16.
This research, according to the authors differs from previous research by looking at students from a range of academic fields, learning a range of different qualitative techniques rather than concentrating on one academic field or one type of qualitative research.
Methods
Research design
The authors used a qualitative method to gather rich data, from which to draw themes and theoretical structures. The research centred around how students make sense of their experiences in learning qualitative research.Sampling
Purposive (though they use 'purposeful'). Six respondents, with data saturation claimed at that point.Data collection
Semi-structured in-depth telephone interviews.Data analysis
Transcription followed by reading and re-reading. Initial noting, including descriptive, linguistic and conceptual comments. Then analysis across respondents, once individual respondents were exhausted.QC
The researchers bracketed their biases and prior knowledge - through bracketing interviews, the maintenance of a research journal to identify and bracket biases. The authors use a quote from Hein & Austin (2001, p. 5) about setting aside biases. However, I've also read an acknowledgement that this can't be done in reality and that this isn't what Husserl meant - I'll have to check where I read that.They also discuss ethics within this section.
Results
Findings reflect the lived experience and meaning of the process of learning qualitative research processes. They also discuss the use of double hermeneutic approach. The researchers identified five themes through their analysis: emotions, active learning, pivotal experience, the role of story, impact of prior experience and knowledge. The authors mention that the focus in phenomenology is on the common elements of the phenomenon rather than on the individual.. However, this is at odds with the stress that Smith lays on the story and experiences of the individual in IPA, whose story should not be subsumed within the generalisations to come to wider essences. The sentence here tends to sound more like Husserl's phenomenology that Smith's IPA.Theme 1: The experience of learning qualitative research inspires a range of emotions
I can identify with the feelings of the students - perhaps these are universal essences! Panic, elation.Theme 2: Learning qualitative research requires active learning
Learning by doing.Theme 3: A pivotal experience plays a role in motivating students to learn qualitative research
A pivotal experience served as a catalyst in their learning methods; often this was a moment of connection - with a method, with a person.Theme 4: Story plays a central role in the experience of learning qualitative research
Listening to stories shared during interviews, memories of learning from stories as a child.Theme 5: Students make meaning of their experience of learning qualitative research by relating it to their prior research knowledge and experience
Summary of results: Building connections
Learning qualitative research is a process of building connections, broadening understanding and opening up new vistas.Discussion
Support of previous findings, whilst identifying new ones. Discussion of limitations: study participants all have prior experience of qualitative methods, all from a single university.Sunday, 3 January 2016
Development of IPA - Smith (2004)
This paper has been referred to in a couple of papers I've read. Seeing as it was Smith who originally developed IPA, it's probably important for me to get a thorough understanding of his viewpoints. I'll also need to gain an understanding of some of the criticisms levelled at Smith and his technique - Giorgi seems to lead on this.
Smith, J. A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1(1), 39-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088704qp004oa
The theoretical position of IPA is to explore in detail the lived experience of individuals and how the individual makes sense of the personal experience. IPA is phenomenological because it concentrates on individuals' perception of experiences, but further than this, the researcher has a key role in interpreting the lived experience, as relates to the hermeneutic tradition. Indeed, Smith suggests the use of a double hermeneutic - the participant attempts to make sense of the experience and the researcher seeks to make sense of the participant as they attempt to make sense of their world. Smith acknowledges that IPA a distinctive epistemological or methodological position, suggesting that it is closely allied to a range of similar approaches, such as those of Ashworth (1999), Benner (1994), Giorgi (1985), Halling (1994), Moustakas (1994) and van Manen (2002). Smith says that there will be a discussion of IPA in relation to these other approaches in a subsequent paper. There is then a discussion of its role in cognitive psychology, and indeed, a discussion of what is meant by cognitive psychology.
IPA begins with the detailed examination of one case until further meaning cannot be gained, before moving on to another Only after full analysis of individual cases is complete are they analysed as a group, to develop themes for convergence and divergence between cases.
Only a small number of individuals are used, as the process is detailed - see Smith & Osborn (2003) for a discussion of the sampling rationale. The key process of IPA is to write the analysis in a way that allows the reader to parse it in two different ways:
a. For the themes which have emerged and which the participants share (but illustrate in particular ways)
b. For the individual's own account, through the linking of data from that individual through the write-up.
This allows the reader to develop an understanding both of more general themes and those pertinent to one individual's experiences. This is in contrast to nomothetic qualitative research, where group level claims are explored.
Smith does suggest the possibility of using IPA to explore an individual, as a case study, if the data are sufficiently rich. Smith suggests that a deep exploration of an individual can lead us to more universal truths, linking the idiography of IPA to Husserlian phenomenology, seeking a more general human 'essence' of an experience.
2. Inductive
IPA techniques are flexible, to allow for the development of emerging themes within the data collection and analysis. Broad research questions are constructed, to allow for this, and may become modified during the research process.
3. Interrogative
Unlike much phenomenological research, analysis of the case studies is followed by a discussion of the findings in relation to other relevant literature, for example discussing theories which may relate to the data.
1. Social comparison
2. Use of metaphor as self-image
3. Struggle over the development of a new self, as indicated by changes in tense during the extract
Smith argues that within the bounds of IPA other forms of analysis should not be overlayed, for example psychodynamic theory. This is unlikely to be something I would do! If one does draw on a more theoretical account to assist the analysis, it is important to couch the discussion in more speculative language because of the distance between the text and the interpretation. Links to more formal theories can be suggested, but after the close textual analysis and guided by the emerging analysis.
Generally beginning researchers would be expected to be working at level 1 or occasionally level 2 analysis
Smith counters the critique of others that IPA (and qualitative methods in general) require a level of articulacy more common in the middle classes.
There then follows a discussion of methods of data collection. whilst the individual semi-structured interview is most common, this is not the only means of gathering data. Written records such as diaries can be used. Smith discusses the potential use of focus groups but stresses the further analysis required to ensure that the individual's voice is heard, due to the ideographic basis of IPA.
1. IPA has an ideographic commitment to the individual; he suggests that a single case study can be done. There is the possibility of developing the microtextual analysis of small excerpts of text, which will inform the emerging analysis of the study as a whole.
2. The use of IPA can be developed both in the methods of data collection and the populations studied.
3. As IPA is sued more widely, Smith suggests a consideration of the patterns which emerge, to determine whether there is the development of core constructs.
4. It is important to critically discuss IPA in relation to other phenomenological methods, to determine similarities and differences, and how these influence the nature of studies and their analysis.
Benner (1994) (Ed.) Interpretative phenomenology
Giorgi (1985) Phenomenology and psychological research
Halling (1994) Embracing human fallibility: on forgiving oneself and forgiving others
Moustakas (1994) Phenomenological research methods
Smith & Osborn (2003) IPA in Smith's Qualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods - see for sampling rationale.
van Manen (2002) Writing in the dark: phenomenological studies in interpretive enquiry
Smith, J. A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1(1), 39-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088704qp004oa
Introduction
IPA is has become well established in qualitative psychology, especially within the UK. IPA is composed of three broad elements: an epistemological position, a set of guidelines for conducting research and as a description of a corpus of empirical research.The theoretical position of IPA is to explore in detail the lived experience of individuals and how the individual makes sense of the personal experience. IPA is phenomenological because it concentrates on individuals' perception of experiences, but further than this, the researcher has a key role in interpreting the lived experience, as relates to the hermeneutic tradition. Indeed, Smith suggests the use of a double hermeneutic - the participant attempts to make sense of the experience and the researcher seeks to make sense of the participant as they attempt to make sense of their world. Smith acknowledges that IPA a distinctive epistemological or methodological position, suggesting that it is closely allied to a range of similar approaches, such as those of Ashworth (1999), Benner (1994), Giorgi (1985), Halling (1994), Moustakas (1994) and van Manen (2002). Smith says that there will be a discussion of IPA in relation to these other approaches in a subsequent paper. There is then a discussion of its role in cognitive psychology, and indeed, a discussion of what is meant by cognitive psychology.
The characteristic features of IPA
1. IdiographicIPA begins with the detailed examination of one case until further meaning cannot be gained, before moving on to another Only after full analysis of individual cases is complete are they analysed as a group, to develop themes for convergence and divergence between cases.
Only a small number of individuals are used, as the process is detailed - see Smith & Osborn (2003) for a discussion of the sampling rationale. The key process of IPA is to write the analysis in a way that allows the reader to parse it in two different ways:
a. For the themes which have emerged and which the participants share (but illustrate in particular ways)
b. For the individual's own account, through the linking of data from that individual through the write-up.
This allows the reader to develop an understanding both of more general themes and those pertinent to one individual's experiences. This is in contrast to nomothetic qualitative research, where group level claims are explored.
Smith does suggest the possibility of using IPA to explore an individual, as a case study, if the data are sufficiently rich. Smith suggests that a deep exploration of an individual can lead us to more universal truths, linking the idiography of IPA to Husserlian phenomenology, seeking a more general human 'essence' of an experience.
2. Inductive
IPA techniques are flexible, to allow for the development of emerging themes within the data collection and analysis. Broad research questions are constructed, to allow for this, and may become modified during the research process.
3. Interrogative
Unlike much phenomenological research, analysis of the case studies is followed by a discussion of the findings in relation to other relevant literature, for example discussing theories which may relate to the data.
Levels of interpretation
IPA operates at a level which is clearly grounded in the text but which also moves beyond the text to a more interpretative level. However, different levels of interpretation are possible. Smith gives a useful example of this in relation to a women talking about chronic back pain. The different levels are identified by him as:1. Social comparison
2. Use of metaphor as self-image
3. Struggle over the development of a new self, as indicated by changes in tense during the extract
Smith argues that within the bounds of IPA other forms of analysis should not be overlayed, for example psychodynamic theory. This is unlikely to be something I would do! If one does draw on a more theoretical account to assist the analysis, it is important to couch the discussion in more speculative language because of the distance between the text and the interpretation. Links to more formal theories can be suggested, but after the close textual analysis and guided by the emerging analysis.
Generally beginning researchers would be expected to be working at level 1 or occasionally level 2 analysis
Checking boundaries: domains, topics and constructs
Smith declares emphatically that IPA is not just suitable for health psychology. He goes into some detail of its history in this field. In general, IPA is used to explore existential issues of participants which are of import to the researcher. Many studies can be identified as linking to the super-ordinate theme of identity.Expanding horizons: type of participant, type of data collection
Most IPA studies have been conducted within individual, semi-structured interviews with English speaking adults. Smith speculates how this can be developed to include those for whom English is not their first language, children and people with learning disabilities. This may require gentle probing, in addition to the semi-structured questions, as well as perhaps getting to know the participants prior to the interview.Smith counters the critique of others that IPA (and qualitative methods in general) require a level of articulacy more common in the middle classes.
There then follows a discussion of methods of data collection. whilst the individual semi-structured interview is most common, this is not the only means of gathering data. Written records such as diaries can be used. Smith discusses the potential use of focus groups but stresses the further analysis required to ensure that the individual's voice is heard, due to the ideographic basis of IPA.
Concluding comments on future developments in IPA
Smiths draws together key thoughts from the paper:1. IPA has an ideographic commitment to the individual; he suggests that a single case study can be done. There is the possibility of developing the microtextual analysis of small excerpts of text, which will inform the emerging analysis of the study as a whole.
2. The use of IPA can be developed both in the methods of data collection and the populations studied.
3. As IPA is sued more widely, Smith suggests a consideration of the patterns which emerge, to determine whether there is the development of core constructs.
4. It is important to critically discuss IPA in relation to other phenomenological methods, to determine similarities and differences, and how these influence the nature of studies and their analysis.
Further reading:
Ashworth (1999) Bracketing in phenomenology: renouncing assumptions in hearing about student cheatingBenner (1994) (Ed.) Interpretative phenomenology
Giorgi (1985) Phenomenology and psychological research
Halling (1994) Embracing human fallibility: on forgiving oneself and forgiving others
Moustakas (1994) Phenomenological research methods
Smith & Osborn (2003) IPA in Smith's Qualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods - see for sampling rationale.
van Manen (2002) Writing in the dark: phenomenological studies in interpretive enquiry
Saturday, 2 January 2016
IPA insights: Callary, Rathwell & Young
To be honest, reading the papers I have done so far, I'm quite surprised at the sorts of papers that get published. I seem to have hit a seam of research papers analysing how they have done research. This is a bit weird or me, with my science background. It does make me somewhat concerned - if so many people feel they need to write papers explaining how they completed a research process, then maybe it's going to be rather difficult to do for a first assignment due to be handed in by early March.
Then again, maybe there are a lot of qualitative journals out there, looking for material to fill them, and a lot of researchers out there looking to get papers published.
Anyway, this paper was worth reviewing because it looks specifically at IPA rather than other forms of phenomenology. I suppose my key concern from this paper is that they talk about bracketing. I'm going to have to look more closely about how bracketing does or does not fit into IPA. My understanding was that it isn't done. Perhaps their use of language here is imprecise, as they also talk about writing reflexively on their own experiences of the topic. This sounds more like the reflexivity required of interpretative phenomenology rather than transcendental. Perhaps this is the point that the authors of the previous paper I read were trying to make - unless the author is explicit on the theoretical underpinnings of their work, confusion can reign. I will need to explore Smith's work on IPA to see where I stand with regard to bracketing.
There are some useful examples within this paper of how they have tried to attain rigour (trustworthiness?) through use of group discussion of the themes drawn out and their analysis. Not something I will be able to do, but it gives an indication of the sorts of process I should put myself through to increase trustworthiness.
Callary, B., Rathwell, S., & Young, B. W. (2015). Insights on the process of using interpretative phenomenological analysis in a sport coaching research project. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 63-75.
Smith (2004) links the four key characteristics of IPA to these three positions:
Smith's guidelines for good quality IPA studies include having a clear focus, having both a descriptive and interpretative analysis with both convergent and divergent themes notes.
The paper continues with an overview of previous sport science studies and identifies the gap in the literature which this study seeks to add to: a sharing of methodology.
Giorgi (2011) IPA and science: A response to Jonathan Smith
Smith (2004) Reflecting on the development of IPA
Smith, Flowers, & Larkin (2013). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: theory, method and research.
Smith & Osborn (2003) IPA in JA Smith (Ed) qualitative psychology: a practical guide to methods
Then again, maybe there are a lot of qualitative journals out there, looking for material to fill them, and a lot of researchers out there looking to get papers published.
Anyway, this paper was worth reviewing because it looks specifically at IPA rather than other forms of phenomenology. I suppose my key concern from this paper is that they talk about bracketing. I'm going to have to look more closely about how bracketing does or does not fit into IPA. My understanding was that it isn't done. Perhaps their use of language here is imprecise, as they also talk about writing reflexively on their own experiences of the topic. This sounds more like the reflexivity required of interpretative phenomenology rather than transcendental. Perhaps this is the point that the authors of the previous paper I read were trying to make - unless the author is explicit on the theoretical underpinnings of their work, confusion can reign. I will need to explore Smith's work on IPA to see where I stand with regard to bracketing.
There are some useful examples within this paper of how they have tried to attain rigour (trustworthiness?) through use of group discussion of the themes drawn out and their analysis. Not something I will be able to do, but it gives an indication of the sorts of process I should put myself through to increase trustworthiness.
Callary, B., Rathwell, S., & Young, B. W. (2015). Insights on the process of using interpretative phenomenological analysis in a sport coaching research project. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 63-75.
Using IPA
IPA is informed by three key positions: phenomenology, hermeneutics and idiography (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2013). Phenomenology describes the 'what' and 'how' of individuals' experienced phenomena, describes the essences of an experience but does not analyse - according to Cresswell (2013). However, what if we're looking at interpretative phenomenology? Hermeneutics seeks to interpret the spoken or written word to identify the meaning of the speaker. Idiography pertains to small scale research relatable to one or a few people rather than generalising the findings to a larger population.Smith (2004) links the four key characteristics of IPA to these three positions:
- IPA is idiographic because a detailed analysis is made of one case before moving on to the next
- IPA is inductive - research questions are broadly constructed to allow for unanticipated themes to emerge.
- Results are discussed in relation to existing literature
- IPA researchers are influenced by their own lived experience and interpret data through their own lens.
Smith's guidelines for good quality IPA studies include having a clear focus, having both a descriptive and interpretative analysis with both convergent and divergent themes notes.
IPA in sport studies
A range of studies in sport science have been completed using IPA but papers based on the research do not always indicate how the study was performed. Giorgi (2011) complains that because IPA does not follow fixed methods, it is impossible to replicate IPA studies. OK, so, I know I'm only a beginner in all of this, and I haven't read much of Smith's books yet, but I thought that qualitative work wasn't so hung up on replicability. I'll have to read both Giorgi and SMith and see what's going on here. Not much love lost, for sure.The paper continues with an overview of previous sport science studies and identifies the gap in the literature which this study seeks to add to: a sharing of methodology.
Preparing the IPA study
A discussion of how the discovering of IPA as a methodology caused a change in the team's research question, to concentrate on lived experiences is followed by an explanation of how data were gathered: numbers, development of interview questions, and (confusingly) bracketing.Collecting rich and personal data on participants' lived experiences
The team explain how interviewing did not go to plan and the interviewer had to think on their feet to get the personal experiences required rather than more general thoughts. This is something I will need to be aware of as I would imagine it is easy to fall into. Methods to avoid this include funnelling (Smith & Osborn, 2003): a three step approach - personalising the statement, understanding the meaning and acquiring the lived experience. They also prompted the participants ahead of the interview that they were interested in the interviewee's own experiences.Individual level analysis
Each interview is analysed separately to discover emerging themes. These can then be examined across the interviews. Read the interview as a whole, then line by line analysis of the transcript to code the experiences. These allow patterns in the text to be seen - the development of inductive themes. In this study, each team member did it separately.Group level analysis
List all themes in each transcript, examine the operational definitions to find similarities across all participants and combine similar themes under 4 or 5 broad higher order themes.Challenges and strategies in IPA data analysis
It is key to lay to one side the coding from previous transcripts, so that convergences and divergences in the data are respected. Through reflexion of emerging themes, this can be done (though this paper again talks about bracketing). Rigour in the process was supported by the group discussions throughout the process - team members' challenging coding and interpretation meant that each stage was rigorously discussed and agreed upon.Conclusions for researchers interested in using IPA
IPA produces rich data allowing for in-depth understanding of the phenomenon under study.Further reading:
Cresswell (2013) Qualitative enquiry and research designGiorgi (2011) IPA and science: A response to Jonathan Smith
Smith (2004) Reflecting on the development of IPA
Smith, Flowers, & Larkin (2013). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: theory, method and research.
Smith & Osborn (2003) IPA in JA Smith (Ed) qualitative psychology: a practical guide to methods
Friday, 1 January 2016
Phenomenology and hermeneutic phenomenology - Sloan & Bowe
I'm not sure this paper add much more to my thoughts on Heideggerian phenomenology being the way to go than the previous paper. However, it does talk through some examples of extracts from interviews. This is of use as it shows what does and what doesn't constitute experience (at least in the authors' minds) as opposed to opinion. It concentrates on van Manen's phenomenology, which categorises themes that emerge from the data into four 'existentials':
Sloan, A. & Bowe, B. (2014). Phenomenology and hermeneutic phenomenology: The philosophy, the methodologies, and using hermeneutic phenomenology to investigate lecturers' experiences of curriculum design. Quality & Quantity, 48, 1291-1303.
Reflexivity is frequently discussed in hermeneutic phenomenology - the researcher uses empathy or prior experience to aid data analysis and/or interpretation.
van Manen's phenomenology allows the use of common experiences between researcher and participant to conduct a structural analysis of the most common, familiar and self-evident. Through this, an evocative description of human actions and experiences as they occur in the life-world are developed.
- Lived space - spatiality
- Lived body - corporeality
- Lived time - temporality
- lived human relation - relationality.
Sloan, A. & Bowe, B. (2014). Phenomenology and hermeneutic phenomenology: The philosophy, the methodologies, and using hermeneutic phenomenology to investigate lecturers' experiences of curriculum design. Quality & Quantity, 48, 1291-1303.
1. Introduction
There is always an element of the ineffable to life (van Manen, 1997). This article discusses hermeneutic phenomenology. Within this methodology, one must read texts, which are the spoken accounts of personal experience, and isolate themes, as van Manen describes. Themes are written interpretations of lived experiences. Identifying themes, rather than opinions, can be difficult for an early stage researcher.2. What is qualitative methodology and what is phenomenology?
Qualitative methodologies recognise the experiential, subjective life world of humans, to describe their experiences in depth. The article then gives an overview of the process.3. An historical perspective on phenomenology
A discussion of Husserl and then Heidegger's views on phenomenology. Gadamer further developed hermeneutic phenomenology and developed interpretative phenomenological thought into a philosophy now known as gadamerian hermeneutics. This concentrates on how language reveals being understanding can only come through language. Language is seen as a mode of being (ontological) rather than a mode of knowing (epistemological). van Manen developed Gadamer's work, showing how language reveals being within cultural and historical contexts understood by participant and researcher, and through language.4. Descriptive vs hermeneutic
Both Husserlian and Heideggerian phenomenology are valid. However, there are differences. Husserlian involves bracketing off influences to reach the essences of the experience.5. Phenomenology becoming a methodology or approach
As well as a philosophy, phenomenology has developed into a range of methodologies, including: descriptive; hermeneutic, IPA and template analysis.6. van Manen's hermeneutic phenomenology
van Manen's approach follows that of Gadamer through language revealing being (or existence) within some historical and cultural contexts. The researcher moves through the hermeneutic circle, from part of the text tot the whole and then back to part, to establish truth by discovering phenomena and interpreting them. Through the hermeneutic circle, understanding is brought to a part of the text by its relation to the whole. This then illuminates the part further.7. Hermeneutic phenomenology and reflexivity
Reflexivity (reflection upon or examination of a situation or experience) can help in interpreting the meanings discovered when using hermeneutic phenomenology. Researchers need to be conscious of, and reflect upon, the ways in which their questions, methods and subject position might impact on the data or interpretation of that data. This is retrospective reflection - on that which has already occurred.Reflexivity is frequently discussed in hermeneutic phenomenology - the researcher uses empathy or prior experience to aid data analysis and/or interpretation.
8. Interviewing
Open, deep and dialogic interviews are frequently used to gather data in qualitative research methodologies.9. The research method
Phenomenology seeks to co-construct knowledge. The focus of the researcher - their questions, their responses - will aid in data gathering as much as the recorded experiences of the participants. When using reflexivity, the researcher's own background, prior knowledge and experience may influence data gathering and analysis.van Manen's phenomenology allows the use of common experiences between researcher and participant to conduct a structural analysis of the most common, familiar and self-evident. Through this, an evocative description of human actions and experiences as they occur in the life-world are developed.
10. Examples of isolated thematic statements
The authors then run through some excerpts from transcripts from their own research and discuss whether experiences and then themes have been identified or whether the researcher has merely identified opinion.11. Conclusion
There is a requirement to get to know the text, so that data can be isolated and recognised as being of value to the study or not. When isolated, the experience must be interpreted to represent the phenomenon that the researcher wishes to bring to light. This bringing to light is the contribution to knowledge.Further Reading
van Manen 1997. Phenomenology of practice
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)