Phenomenological Analysis

1. PhenomenologicalAnalysis • Schools of phenomenology have developed different approaches to data analysis. • Three frequently used methods for descriptive phenomenology are the methods of Colaizzi (1978), Giorgi (1985), and Van Kaam (1966), all of whom are from the Duquesne school of phenomenology, based on Husserl’s philosophy.

2. PhenomenologicalAnalysis • The basic outcome of all three methods is the description of the meaning of an experience, often through the identification of essential themes. • Phenomenologists search for common patterns shared by particular instances.

3. PhenomenologicalAnalysis • Thereare, someimportantdifferencesamongthesethreeapproaches. • Colaizzi’smethod, for example, is the onlyone that calls for a validation of results by returning to studyparticipants. • Giorgi’sanalysisreliessolely on researchers. • His view is that it is inappropriateeither to return to participants to validatefindings or to useexternaljudges to review the analysis. • Van Kaam’smethodrequires that intersubjectiveagreement be reached with other expert judges.

4. Example of a studyusingColaizzi’smethod: • Bondasand Eriksson (2001) studied the livedexperiences of pregnancyamong Finnish women. • Eightyinterviews with 40 women, together with data from nonparticipant observations, wereanalyzedaccording to Colaizzi’smethod. • The researchers extractedsignificantstatementspertaining to the phenomena from transcriptions.

5. Example of a studyusingColaizzi’smethod: • Meanings were formulated and organized into 10 themes, which were clustered into 3 comprehensive categories and integrated into an exhaustive description. • The three broad categories were the perfect body, an altered mode of being, and striving for family communion (The act or an instance of sharing, as of thoughts or feelings).

6. A second school of phenomenology is the Utrecht School. • Phenomenologists using this Dutch approach combine characteristics of descriptive and interpretive phenomenology. • Van Manen’s (1990) method is an example of this combined approach in which researchers try to grasp the essential meaning of the experience being studied.

7. According to Van Manen, thematic aspects of experience can be uncovered or isolated from participants’ descriptions of the experience by three methods: • (1) the holistic approach • (2) the selective or highlighting approach • (3) the detailed or lineby- line approach.

8. In the holistic approach, researchers view the text as a whole and try to capture its meanings. • In the selective approach, researchers highlight or pull out statements or phrases that seem essential to the experience under study. • In the detailed approach, researchers analyze every sentence.

9. Once themes have been identified, they become the objects of reflection and interpretation through follow-up interviews with participants. • Through this process, essential themes are discovered.

10. In addition to identifying themes from the participants’ descriptions, Van Manen also calls for gleaning (the collection of leftover crops from farmers' fields after they have been mechanically harvested or on fields where it is not economically profitable to harvest. Often gleaning is practiced by humanitarian groups which distribute the gleaned food to the poor and hungry) thematic descriptions from artistic sources.

11. Van Manen urges qualitative researchers to keep in mind that poetry, literature, music, painting, and other art forms can provide a wealth of experiences that can be used to increase insights in the reflection process as the phenomenologist tries to interpret and grasp the essential meaning of the experience being studied. • These experiential descriptions in literature and art help challenge and stretch the phenomenologist’s interpretive sensibilities.

12. Example of a studyusing Van Manen’smethod: • Lauterbach (2001) used Van Manen’s method to investigate mothers’ experiences with the death of a wished-for baby. • Poetry, literature, mourning (state of sorrow over the death or departure of a loved one) art, and cemeteries (A place for burying the dead) were especially helpful in Lauterbach’s interpretation of the mothers’ experiences.

13. For instance, Robert Frost’s poem, “Home Burial,” and John Milton’s poem, “On the Death of a Fair Infant Dying of a Cough,” were used in data analysis. Also, a painting by Charles Wilson Peale called Rachel Weeping, depicting a mother mourning the loss of her infant from smallpox in 1772, and memorial art in cemeteries, provided insight

14. A third school of phenomenology is an interpretive approach called Heideggerian hermeneutics. Diekelmann, Allen, and Tanner (1989) have described a seven-stage process of data analysis, the outcome of which is a description of shared practices and common meanings.

15. Example of a studyusing Van Manen’smethod: • 1. All the interviews or texts are read for an overall understanding. • 2. Interpretivesummaries of eachinterview are written. • 3. A team of researchers analyzesselectedtranscribedinterviews or texts. • 4. Anydisagreements on interpretation are resolved by going back to the text. • 5. Commonmeanings and sharedpractices are identified by comparing and contrasting the text. مقارنة وتباين النص. • 6. Relationshipsamongthemesemerge. • 7. A draft of the themesalong with exemplars from texts are presented to the team. • Responses or suggestions are incorporatedinto the final draft.

16. Example of a Heideggerianhermeneuticalanalysis: • Foley, Minick, and Kee (2000) explored the experiences of militarynurses as theyengaged in advocacyduring a military operation, and describedtheirsharedpractices and commonmeanings. • The hermeneuticalanalysisused the sevenstagesdescribed by Diekelmann and colleagues. • The stories of the 24 interviewednursesrevealedoneconstitutivepattern— safeguarding—and fourrelatedthemes: advocating as protecting, advocating as attending the whole person, advocating as being the patient’svoice, and advocating as preservingpersonhood.

17. Pollio, Henley, and Thompson (1997) propose anothermethod for conducting a hermeneuticphenomenologicalstudy. • Theirmethodbegins with bracketing. • Theirbracketing is not, however, viewed as a subtractive process of removingone’spresuppositions, butinstead as a positive process, a way of seeing. • Instead of suspendingpreconceivednotions, as described by Husserl, Pollio, and colleaguescall for researchers to apply a world view. تلك هي بين أقواس ومع ذلك ، لا ينظر إليه على أنه عملية مطروح إزالة الافتراضات واحد ، ولكن بدلا من ذلك عملية إيجابية ، وسيلة للرؤية.بدلا من تعليق الأفكار المسبقة ، كما وصفها هوسرل ، بوليو ، ودعوة الزملاء للباحثين لتطبيق وجهة نظر العالم.

18. Pollio and colleagues’ method begins with a bracketing interview. • The researcher is the first person to be interviewed about the topic under study, which raises his or her awareness of presuppositions (a supposition made prior to having knowledge). • Once interviews have been conducted and transcribed, the hermeneutic circle begins. • This is an interpretive process of continuously relating a part of the text (the transcribed interview) to the whole of the text. • Pollio and colleagues described three types of interpretation: group, idiographic (particular), and nomothetic (general).

19. In group interpretation, a transcript is read aloud. • Meanings and relationshipsamongmeanings are discussed. • After onetranscript is interpreted, the remainingtranscripts are usuallyinterpreted by the primary researcher. • At certaintimes the researcher goes back to the group with idiographicdescriptions and nomotheticthemes. • The group provides feedback on whether the descriptions and themes are supported by the data. • Eachtranscript is interpreted in the context of all otherinterviewtranscripts.

20. Figure 23-4 provides aschematic summary of Pollio and colleagues’ intervie process (p. 587) in the nursing research book

21. F I G U R E 2 3 . 4 Schematic summary of Pollio and colleagues’ interview Choose topic Self as focus Participant as focus Research community as focus Text as focus (Hermeneutic analysis part-to-whole dialectic) All (most) analyses are done within context of research group Perform bracketing interview Interview participants Transcribe interviews Read for meaning units Cluster initial thematic meaning Develop thematic structure Present structure to research group Report findings to participants Prepare final report Read for sense of whole

22. ExampleusingPollio and colleagues’ method: • Secrest (2000) investigated the quality of life of primary support persons of stroke survivors. • Before data collection, the researcher’sbracketing (A series or group of brackets; brackets, collectively) interviewoccurred. • Once it wastranscribed, the bracketinginterviewwasanalyzed by the research group. • In-depthinterviewswerenextconducted with 10 participants.

23. Selectedtranscripts from the 10 interviewswere read aloud to members of the research group and wereanalyzed, comparing the part of a transcript with itswhole, and the wholetranscript with othertranscripts. • Through this interpretive process, threethemeemerged: fragility (quality of beingeasilydamaged or destroyed), vigilance (the process of payingclose and continuousattention; "wakefulness, watchfulness) , and loss/responsibility.

24. Example of a PhenomenologicalAnalysis • Beck (1998) conducted a descriptivephenomenologicalstudy of the experience of panic disorder in new mothers. • The purposivesampleconsisted of sixwomen who hadexperiencedtheir initial onset of panic disorder in the postpartum period. • Eachmotherparticipated in an in-depthinterview in whichshedescribedherexperiencesliving with panic after delivery. All interviews, whichlasted from 50 minutes to 2 hours, wereaudiotaped and transcribed

25. Colaizzi’s (1978) methodwasused to analyze verbatim transcripts. • After reading the transcripts, Beck extractedsignificantstatements, formulatedtheirmeanings, and categorizedstatementsintotheme clusters. • The findingswerethenintegratedinto an exhaustive (performedcomprehensively and completely) description of the phenomenon of postpartumpanic and validated by twomothers who hadparticipated in the study.

26. During the early stage of data analysis, Beck initially identified eight themes. • After further deliberation (planning something carefully and intentionally) she combined two preliminary themes with other themes. • Beck concluded that the following six themes described the essence of the experience of postpartum panic:

27. 1. The terrifying physical and emotional componeof panic paralyzed women, leaving them feeling totally out of control. • 2. During panic attacks, women’s cognitive functioning abruptly diminished; between attacks, women experienced a more insidious decrease in cognitive functioning. • 3. During the attacks, women feverishly struggled to maintain their composure (A calm or tranquil state of mind), leading to exhaustion. • 4. Because of the terrifying nature of panic, preventing further attacks was paramount in the lives of the women.

28. 5. As a result of recurring panic attacks, negative changes in women’s lifestyles ensued (To take place subsequently), lowering their self-esteem and leaving them to bear the burden of disappointing both themselves and their families. • 6. Mothers were haunted (having or showing excessive or compulsive concern with something) by the prospect (the possibility of future success) that their panic could have residual effects on themselves and their families. • As depicted in these six themes, panic permeated (pass through) all aspects of a mother’s life as she struggled to fulfill her maternal role.

29. Analysis of Focus Group Data • Focus group interviews yield rich and complex data that pose special analytic challenges. • Indeed, there is little consensus about the analysis of focusgroup data, despite its use by researchers in several qualitative research traditions.

30. Unlike data from individual interviews, focus group interviews are very difficult to transcribe, partly because there are often technical problems. For example, it is difficult to place microphones so that the voices of all group members are picked up with equal clarity, particularly because participants tend to speak at different volumes. • An additional issue is that, because of the group situation, it is inevitable that several participants will speak at once, making it impossible for transcriptionists to discern everything being said.

31. A major controversy in the analysis of focus group data is whether the unit of analysis is the group or individual participants. • Some writers (e.g., Morrison-Beedy, Côté-Arsenault, and Feinstein, 2001) maintain that the group is the proper unit of analysis. • Analysis of group-level data involves a scrutiny (A close, careful examination or study) of themes, interactions, and sequences within and between groups. • Others, however (e.g., Carey and Smith, 1994; Kidd and Parshall, 2000), argue that analysis should occur at both the group level and the individual level.

32. Those who insist that only group-level analysis is appropriate argue that what individuals say in focus groups cannot be treated as personal disclosures because they are inevitably influenced by the dynamics of the group. • However, even in personal interviews individual responses are shaped by social processes, and analysis of individual-level data (independent of group) is thought by some analysts to add important insights. • Carey and Smith (1994) advocate a third level of analysis—namely, the analysis of individual responses in relation to group context (e.g., is a participant’s view in accord with or in contrast to majority opinion, and how does that get expressed—or suppressed?).

33. For those who wish to analyze data from individual participants, it is essential to maintain information about what each person said—a task that is impossible to do if researchers are relying solely on audiotapes. Videotapes, as supplements to audiotapes, are sometimes used to identify who said what in focus group sessions. More frequently, however, researchers have several members of the research team in attendance at the sessions, whose job it is to take detailed field notes about the order of speakers and about significant nonverbal behavior, such as pounding (A heavy blow) or clenching of fists, crying, aggressive body language, and so on.

34. Many focus group researchers agree, regardless of their position on the unit of analysis, on the benefit of certain methods of enhancing data quality and analytic rigor (Strictness or severity, as in temperament, action, or judgment). • First, it is usually recommended that member checking occur in situ (in the original or natural place or site) . That is, moderators develop a summary of major themes or viewpoints in real time, and present that summary to focus group participants at the end of the session for their feedback.

35. Especially rich data often emerge from participants’ reactions to those summaries. • Second, postsession debriefings are critical. • Team members who were present during the session meet immediately afterward to discuss issues and themes that arose.

36. During these debriefings, which should be tape recorded, team members also share their views about group dynamics, such as coercive (having great power or force or potency or effect) group members, censoring (To examine ) of controversial opinions, individual conformity to group viewpoints, and discrepancies between verbal and nonverbal behavior.

37. Transcription quality is especially important in focus group interviews: Emotional content as well as words must be faithfully recorded because participants are responding not only to the questions being posed (To assume or hold a particular position or posture) but also to the experience of being in a group. • Field notes, debriefing notes (report of a mission or task), and verbatim transcripts ideally must be integrated to yield a more comprehensive transcript for analysis.

38. Example of integrating focus group data: • Morrison-Beedy and her co-authors (2001) provided several examples of integrating data across sources from their own focus group research. • For example, one verbatim quote was, “It was no big deal.” This was supplemented with data from the field notes that the woman’s eyes were cast downward as she said this, and that the words were delivered sarcastically (ironic ).

39. The complete transcript for this entry, which includes researcher interpretation in brackets, was as follows: • “‘It was no big deal.’ (said sarcastically, with eyes looking downward). [It really was a very big deal to her, but others had not acknowledged that.]”

40. Because of group dynamics, focus group analysts must be sensitive to both the thematic content of these interviews, and also to how, when, and why themes are developed. • Some of the issues that could be central to focus group analysis are the following:

41. Does an issue raised in a focus group constitute a theme or merely a strongly held viewpoint of one or two members? • Do the same issues or themes arise in more than one group? • If there are group differences, why might this be the case—were participants different in background characteristics and experiences, or did group processes affect the discussions?

42. Are some issues sufficiently salient (having a quality that thrusts itself into attention) that they are discussed not only in direct response to specific questions posed by the moderator, but also spontaneously emerge at multiple points in the session? • Do group members find certain issues both interesting and important?

43. Some focus group analysts, such as Kidd and Parshall (2000), use quantitative methods as adjuncts (Added or connected in a subordinate or auxiliary capacity) to their qualitative analysis. • Using NUD*IST they conduct such analyses as assessing similarities and differences between groups, determining coding frequencies to aid pattern detection, examining codes in relation to participant characteristics, and examining how much individual members contributed.

44. They use such methods not so that interpretation can be based on frequencies, but so that they can better understand context and identify issues that require further critical scrutiny and interpretation. • Focus group data are sometimes analyzed according to the procedures of a formal research tradition, such as grounded theory.