Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) Dr Dario W Pellegrini M5- Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust

Aims To outline the theoretical bases of IPA To describe the main differences between IPA and other qualitative methods of data analysis To reflect on some of the critiques of IPA To describe the steps in IPA data analysis To watch a video clip describing IPA text analysis and discuss To carry out a short IPA data analysis activity To describe the expectations for an IPA study To reflect on issues of trustworthiness and validity in IPA based research

Theoretical bases of IPA Phenomenology Hermeneutics Idiography

Phenomenology Study of experience. Contributions to IPA are: Reflection on experience/ bracketing: Husserl: Dasein (there-being): Heidegger Embodiment: Merleau-Ponty

Hermeneutics Theory of interpretation of texts. Contributions to IPA are: Fore-structures/ bracketing: Heidegger Hermeneutics of empathy and hermeneutics of suspicion: Ricoeur Larkin et al (2006); Smith (2004) and Smith et al (2009) : propose hermeneutics of meaning / recollection (descriptive and interpretative)

Idiography Concern with the specific, the detail and the understanding of individual experience No claims about whole populations but focus on individual experience and proposes theoretical generalisation

IPA and other qualitative methods of data analysis IPA vs. Grounded Theory IPA vs. Thematic Analysis IPA vs. Discourse Analysis

Critiquing IPA IPA and language: language as a tool/ role of language in constructing experience Role of context in IPA Role of cognition in IPA

Steps in IPA data analysis Transcript is read and re-read Initial notes are made in the transcript Emergent themes are created from initial notes Emergent themes are clustered into sub-ordinate themes The same process is repeated for all individual transcripts Sub-ordinate themes for all individual transcripts are clustered into super-ordinate themes Super-ordinate themes are clustered into overarching concepts for the sample

IPA text analysis: Michael Larkin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQPzRefemw8

Activity Dewey One of six participants Middle aged Man EP for over 5 years FT for over 2 years

Trustworthiness QUAL-QUANT methodologies have different criteria to establish trustworthiness of research Trustworthiness needs to come from ‘within’ rather than ‘without’ factors (Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson & Spiers, 2002) Elliott, Fisher, Rennie (1999); Robson (2002; 2009); Yardley (2000; 2008) some strategies to ensure trustworthiness of Qualitative Research. Yardley (2008) has developed a set of four criteria, relevant to Qualitative Research.

Yardley (2008) Sensitivity to context Commitment and rigour Coherence and transparency Impact and importance

Trustworthiness of IPA research What makes a good IPA study? (Smith, 2011) Clear focus rather than broad reconnaissance Strong data obtained by a purposive sample typically small. Gives measure of prevalence for a theme: evidence base should be drawn from a large proportion of participants, but beware ‘THEMOLATRY’ (Dario’s neologism: Theme – idolatry) (Chamberlain, 2011; Smith, 2011) Sufficient elaboration of a theme Interpretative commentary, not just descriptions (difference between papers and theses) Show convergence and divergence between different participants, without losing the uniqueness of individual experience Well written

Aims To outline the theoretical bases of IPA To describe the main differences between IPA and other qualitative methods of data analysis To reflect on some of the critiques of IPA To describe the steps in IPA data analysis To watch a video clip describing IPA text analysis and discuss To carry out a short IPA data analysis activity To describe the expectations for an IPA study To reflect on issues of trustworthiness and validity in IPA based research

References Burr, V. (2002). The person in social psychology. Hove: Psychology Press Chamberlain, K. (2011). Troubling methodology. Health Psychology Review, 5 (1) 48-54. Elliott, R., Fischer, C.T. and Rennie, D.L. (1999) ‘Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields’, British Journal of Clinical Psychology 38: 215-29. Morse, J.M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1 (2), 13-22 Nightingale, D.J., and Cromby, J. (1999) (Eds.). Social constructionist psychology: A critical analysis of theory and practice. Buckingham: Open University Press Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research (2nd Ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. 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, 39-54. Willig, C. (2008). Introducing qualitative research in psychology (2nd Ed.). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press Yardley, L. (2000) ‘Dilemmas in qualitative health research’, Psychology and Health 15: 215-28. Yardley, L. (2008). Demonstrating validity in qualitative psychology. In. J.A.Smith (ed.). Qualitative psychology. A practical guide to research methods. (2nd ed.). London: SAGE, 235-251.