1.1 Overview
In this chapter, I will consider the focus of my research project and the methodological techniques that are best suited to achieve the aims and objectives of this thesis. The basis for discussion will be to consider the chosen methodological framework for analysis; Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) (Smith et al., 2013), as well as the format for data collection; semi-structured interviewing. Also discussed is the use of two separate conceptual frameworks, including the patient pathway (DH, 2007) and use of NPT constructs (May et al., 2010) to help guide and focus the inquiry. Two small homogenous samples were recruited for interviewing with the chapter broken up to reflect this. The process for recruitment, analysis …show more content…
However, understanding the experiences and processes involved in the implementation and operation of services requires the use of exploratory and in-depth approaches (Atkins, Smith, Kelly, Michie, 2013; Benzer et al., 2013; McEvoy et al., 2014; Palinkas et al., 2013). Implementation is understood as a continual, social and relational process along multiple levels (May & Finch, 2009; Palinkas et al., 2013) making cross-sectional analysis unsuitable and in-depth, detailed analysis preferable. Researchers adopting a qualitative methodology tend to define their approach in opposition to the underlying principles of the positivist position, or are at least perceived to do so (Ormston et al., 2013). Alternatively, the pursuit of methodological pluralism and PBE seeks to emphasise these perspectives as complementary and not in opposition (Barkham et al., 2010). In like manner, a multi-perspectival approach can be used to develop a more detailed and multifaceted account of phenomena (May & Finch, 2009; McEvoy et al., 2014; Smith et al., 2013). A complementary strengths standpoint acknowledges the philosophical assumptions of different approaches as distinct and complementary (Greene, 2006), so long as each standpoint is honoured and differences made explicit …show more content…
45). It is a qualitative, phenomenological and hermeneutic approach that explores how people make sense of their experiences and the meanings they attach to them in a particular context (Finlay, 2012; Larkin et al., 2006; Smith et al., 2013). The approach can be used to re-evaluate a specific phenomenon, inform the understanding of novel or under-researched areas, as well as inform and contextualise existing quantitative data (Cassidy, Reynolds, Naylor & De Souza, 2011; Larkin & Thompson, 2012). It is a contemporary methodological approach, grounded in psychology that draws on the research philosophies and theoretical concepts of phenomenology, hermeneutics and idiography (Finlay, 2009; 2012; Smith et al.,
In this chapter, I will consider the focus of my research project and the methodological techniques that are best suited to achieve the aims and objectives of this thesis. The basis for discussion will be to consider the chosen methodological framework for analysis; Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) (Smith et al., 2013), as well as the format for data collection; semi-structured interviewing. Also discussed is the use of two separate conceptual frameworks, including the patient pathway (DH, 2007) and use of NPT constructs (May et al., 2010) to help guide and focus the inquiry. Two small homogenous samples were recruited for interviewing with the chapter broken up to reflect this. The process for recruitment, analysis …show more content…
However, understanding the experiences and processes involved in the implementation and operation of services requires the use of exploratory and in-depth approaches (Atkins, Smith, Kelly, Michie, 2013; Benzer et al., 2013; McEvoy et al., 2014; Palinkas et al., 2013). Implementation is understood as a continual, social and relational process along multiple levels (May & Finch, 2009; Palinkas et al., 2013) making cross-sectional analysis unsuitable and in-depth, detailed analysis preferable. Researchers adopting a qualitative methodology tend to define their approach in opposition to the underlying principles of the positivist position, or are at least perceived to do so (Ormston et al., 2013). Alternatively, the pursuit of methodological pluralism and PBE seeks to emphasise these perspectives as complementary and not in opposition (Barkham et al., 2010). In like manner, a multi-perspectival approach can be used to develop a more detailed and multifaceted account of phenomena (May & Finch, 2009; McEvoy et al., 2014; Smith et al., 2013). A complementary strengths standpoint acknowledges the philosophical assumptions of different approaches as distinct and complementary (Greene, 2006), so long as each standpoint is honoured and differences made explicit …show more content…
45). It is a qualitative, phenomenological and hermeneutic approach that explores how people make sense of their experiences and the meanings they attach to them in a particular context (Finlay, 2012; Larkin et al., 2006; Smith et al., 2013). The approach can be used to re-evaluate a specific phenomenon, inform the understanding of novel or under-researched areas, as well as inform and contextualise existing quantitative data (Cassidy, Reynolds, Naylor & De Souza, 2011; Larkin & Thompson, 2012). It is a contemporary methodological approach, grounded in psychology that draws on the research philosophies and theoretical concepts of phenomenology, hermeneutics and idiography (Finlay, 2009; 2012; Smith et al.,