Thematic analysis is a poorly demarcated, rarely acknowledged, yet widely used qualitative analytic method within psychology. In this paper, we argue that it offers an accessible and theoretically flexible approach to analysing qualitative data. We outline what thematic analysis is, locating it in relation to other qualitative analytic methods that search for themes or patterns, and in relation to different epistemological and ontological positions. We then provide clear guidelines to those wanting to start thematic analysis, or conduct it in a more deliberate and rigorous way, and consider potential pitfalls in conducting thematic analysis. Finally, we outline the disadvantages and advantages of thematic analysis. We conclude by advocating thematic analysis as a useful and flexible method for qualitative research in and beyond psychology.

Using thematic analysis in psychology

Introduction 1. Woman's Place in Man's Life Cycle 2. Images of Relationship 3. Concepts of Self and Morality 4. Crisis and Transition 5. Women's Rights and Women's Judgment 6. Visions of Maturity References Index of Study Participants General Index

In a Different Voice. Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA (Harvard University Press) 1982.

The aim of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) is to explore in detail how participants are making sense of their personal and social world, and the main currency for an IPA study is the meanings particular experiences, events, states hold for participants. The approach is phenomenological (see Chapter 3) in that it involves detailed examination of the participant’s lifeworld; it attempts to explore personal experience and is concerned with an individual’s personal perception or account of an object or event, as opposed to an attempt to produce an objective statement of the object or event itself. At the same time, IPA also emphasizes that the research exercise is a dynamic process with an active role for the researcher in that process. One is trying to get close to the participant’s personal world, to take, in Conrad’s (1987) words, an ‘insider’s perspective’, but one cannot do this directly or completely. Access depends on, and is complicated by, the researcher’s own conceptions; indeed, these are required in order to make sense of that other personal world through a process of interpretative activity. Thus, a two-stage interpretation process, or a double hermeneutic, is involved. The participants are trying to make sense of their world; the researcher is trying to make sense of the participants trying to make sense of their world. IPA is therefore intellectually connected to hermeneutics and theories of interpretation (Packer and Addison, 1989; Palmer, 1969; Smith, in press; see also Chapter 2 this volume). Different interpretative stances are possible, and IPA combines an empathic hermeneutics with a questioning hermeneutics. Thus, consistent with its phenomenological origins, IPA is concerned with trying to understand what it is like, from the point of view of the participants, to take their side. At the same time, a detailed IPA analysis can also involve asking critical questions of the texts from participants, such as the following: What is the person trying to achieve here? Is something leaking out here that wasn’t intended? Do I have a sense of something going on here that maybe the participants themselves are less aware of?

/pdf/interpretative-phenomenological-analysis-1rd3eyxs1j.pdf

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis

This article examines concepts of the trustworthiness, or credibility, of qualitative research. Following a “researcher-as-instrument,” or self-reflective, statement, the paradigmatic underpinnings of various criteria for judging the quality of qualitative research are explored, setting the stage for a discussion of more transcendent standards (those not associated with specific paradigms) for conducting quality research: social validity, subjectivity and reflexivity, adequacy of data, and adequacy of interpretation. Finally, current guidelines for writing and publishing qualitative research are reviewed, and strategies for conducting and writing qualitative research reports are suggested. Qualitative research, ensuing from a variety of disciplines, paradigms, and epistemologies, embraces multiple standards of quality, known variously as validity, credibility, rigor ,o rtrustworthiness. In addition to some standards that may be thought of as somewhat universal across disciplines and paradigms, the “goodness” (Morrow & Smith, 2000) of qualitative inquiry is assessed on the basis of the paradigmatic underpinnings of the research and the standards of the discipline. Thus, a grounded theory study or a consensual qualitative research investigation in counseling psychology that is rooted in a postpositivist or constructivist/interpretivist paradigm will look quite different from a critical ethnography in education; and the standards appropriate for evaluating these studies will vary accordingly. I begin this article by addressing the paradigmatic underpinnings of trustworthiness or rigor in qualitative research. Next, I discuss central topics related to trustworthiness or validity that span paradigms and may be thought of as relevant across most research designs. I then provide an overview of guidelines that have been suggested for evaluating qualitative research, particularly in psychology. Finally, I offer recommendations for enhancing the quality of qualitative research in counseling psychology and suggest strategies for writing and publishing. First, however, in keeping with the standard of reflexivity as a way for researchers to inform their audiences about their perspectives as well as to manage their subjectivities, I describe my own assumptions about qualitative research methodology and quality.

Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology.

We present a set of evolving guidelines for reviewing qualitative research, to serve four functions: to contribute to the process of legitimizing qualitative research; to ensure more appropriate and valid scientific reviews of qualitative manuscripts, theses, and dissertations; to encourage better quality control in qualitative research through better self- and other-monitoring; and to encourage further developments in approach and method. Building on a review of existing principles of good practice in qualitative research, we used an iterative process of revision and feedback from colleagues who engage in qualitative research, resulting in a set of seven guidelines common to both qualitative and quantitative research and seven guidelines especially pertinent to qualitative investigations in psychology and related social sciences. The Evolving Guidelines are subject to continuing revision and should not be used in a rigid manner, in order to avoid stifling creativity in this rapidly evolving, rich research tradition.

https://www.psy.au.dk/fileadmin/site_files/filer_psykologi/dokumenter/Forskerskolen/Kurser09/Fishman/No_7-Elliott__Fischer__Rennie__1999_Standards_Qual_Research.PDF

Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields.

Bracketing is presented as two forms of researcher engagement: with data and with evolving findings. The first form is the well-known identification and temporary setting aside of the researcher's assumptions. The second engagement is the hermeneutic revisiting of data and of one's evolving comprehension of it in light of a revised understanding of any aspect of the topic. Both of these processes are ongoing, and they include the careful development of language with which to represent findings. Extensive everyday examples of bracketing and of interviewing are presented. As a form of disclosure in qualitative research, the background from which this article was written is shared. At that point, Husserl's and Heidegger's historical introductions of bracketing are presented briefly, followed by a discussion of reflexivity and hermeneutics. The article closes with warnings of how residual positivism can work against qualitative rigor and with a suggested qualitative research study on bracketing.

Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters

Collaborative, individualized assessment is an approach to psychological assessment in which the assessor and the client work together to develop productive understandings. Collaboration is a means of individualizing the assessment-its process, resulting suggestions, and written accounts. In this approach, life events are regarded as primary data. Test scores, categories, and related research are used as bridges into a particular life and as tools for then exploring that life. This article, an invited Master Lecture presented at the 1999 Society for Personality Assessment (SPA) meeting, presents examples of contextualizing, intervening, describing in life-world terms, and writing individualized reports with suggestions. Historical struggles to promote individualized assessment and current openness to its practices, especially within SPA, are mentioned. A hermeneutic approach to impression formation is described.

/pdf/collaborative-individualized-assessment-1o3tqt8dn4.pdf

Collaborative, individualized assessment.

The testee as co-evaluator.

Phenomenological analyses of 50 victims' experiences are presented. The format of the results preserves what it was like to live through being victimized, including the temporal flow and the vicissitudes of the experience. This presentation tries to put readers in touch with existential meanings of being criminally victimized, especially the radical threat to the victims' sense of social order and of community. It also draws out implications for strengthening citizens' sense of mutuality. Concrete suggestions include advice to police officers and to designers of victim brochures. Theoretical integration of representative research studies is offered. The article provides clarifications about qualitative methods, including their advantages and constraints.

Constance T. Fischer

Papers

Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields.

Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters

Collaborative, individualized assessment.

The testee as co-evaluator.

A Phenomenological Study of Being Criminally Victimized: Contributions and Constraints of Qualitative Research