Phenomenology is interested in a person's lived experience, and that person may person may well provide an account of that experience in narrative form. So, there is definitely room for overlap. Even so, I would see narrative analysis as more interested in how stories get told, and phenomenology as more interested in the content of those stories. 

I'd suggest this is partly down to data types. While narrative research always privileges the stories we tell as meaning-making devices, phenomenology can more easily accommodate a wider range of data into the analysis (eg. ethnographic observation, fieldnotes, etc). Though be aware some narrative studies do incorporate other forms of data to supplement the stories. Kerry Chamberlain has done some nice work on experiences of homelessness incorporating autoethnographic photographs, and Alan Radley's "Works of Illness" includes artworks and dramatic performances alongside narratives to enrich the picture. In addition, narrative studies often take a smaller sample size to look in more depth at a few stories, since often narrative thinkers view the story as a 'whole' which is difficult to break down into 'themes' a la grounded theory. I remember when I was trained in narrative interviewing, I was told a n of 5 would be suitable for a full PhD - yep, you read me right - FIVE!!

Methodologically speaking, it strikes me that phenomenology is interested in how things appear to research participants subjectively, and assumes we can access this subjectivity through our data sources. Narratives by contrast can be analysed with a range of approaches. For example, Hollway & Jefferson's "Doing Qualitative Research Differently" tome takes an explicitly psychoanalytic lens to the analysis, Catherine Kohler Riessman takes a social constructionist perspective (drawing especially on Goffman) in her early work, while other forms of narrative analysis take a more 'humanistic' approach which tallies nicely with phenomenology - I am thinking here of the work of Arthur Frank, Alan Radley and others.

But, as is often the case with qualitative methodologies, I don't think there are hard & fast boundaries between these approaches. At the end of the day, both seem to me to represent attempts to understand subjectivity in all its wonderful complexity.

I think we can differentiate Narrative Research from Phenomenological Research. In fact, I think that they are very different. "Phenomenology" is the investigation of phenomena. Phenomenology attempts to identify, isolate, formalize - to produce an analysis of the phenomenon in question. For example, to analyze melancholy as melancholy. In doing so, Phenomenology can use narratives. But if you are studing narratives you will not, necessarily, need Phenomenology. Narrative research rely on stories as told by individuals - the lives of individuals as told through their own stories. The emphasis is on the story, both what and how is narrated. So, in certain circunstances, Narrative Research and Phenomenological Research can and will touch each other... but this is circumstantial.

I will give two answers: the first is pragmatic, simplistic, yet very "true" in the sense that this is how things seem to work; the second is more methodological. 

So, the simple answer is as follows. When your research aspires to understand lived experience by examining individuals' narratives, what discerns phenomenological research from narrative research is HOW YOU CHOOSE TO CALL WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND THE LITERATURE YOU USE TO GROUND YOUR WORK. Both methodologies are socially constructed, and have a wide overlap. For instance, in work by Josselson you may find that she refers to her narrative inquiry as phenomenological, and in interpretative phenomenological analysis (APA; Smith et al., 2009) you may see that htey draw on narratives for their research (though they do attempt towards the end of the book to discern IPA from grounded theory and narrative research). Qualitative research methods have fuzzy boundaries, and generally draw on multidisciplinary fields (e.g., narrative, hermeneutics, phenomenology, ethnomethodology etc.).

Nevertheless, if you wish to be rigorous and "precise", then a certain difference may be delineated. As a rule, phenomenology (in all of its forms, and there are many) is interested in experience. People are instrumental, so to speak, in the uncovering of the meaning of experience. Though different modes of phenomenology vary in the manner in which they detach the experience from the experiencing persons at the end of the research (e.g., seek the "essence" of an experience or its various contextualized manifestations), in the bottom line the experience is the point of interest.

Narrative researchers are typically more interested in a chain of experiences as these are weaved into narrative. They are interested not in the experience per se, but the manner in which people make sense of their experience via by encoding it in narrative. They seek the plot, the connection of events in a semi-causal manner, and the characters that are important in this sense-making process. As you may see, phenomenology is in the bedrock of such research, whether the researcher realizes this or not.

Hope this helps,

Cobi.

The question is a little bit like comparing fruit with apples. Narratives can be an approach but is most often used as a part of other approaches such as phenomenology, ethnography or grounded theory.

In all comparisons phenomenology is outstanding due to its thorough philosophy, including ontology and epistemology, as well as methodology.

To “use narratives” tends more to be about using “a method” (which phenomenology never can be) and it says nothing about, for example, the relation between content and meaning, description of meaning or interpretation, or how to include theory in the analysis of the narratives. Phenomenology relates to all of this and more.

By the way, phenomenology is always about meaning, i.e. not content, even if one, so to speak, can read the content to see meanings, etcetera.

Kindly,

Karin

Thank you to everyone for your comments.  This will help my students immensely.

In addition to what Cobi has explained with regards to Narrative and Phenomenological research, in P, participants are from lets say 5 and above, in NI, you may have a participant or two (Creswell 2003) because of the depth of the investigation.

Phenomenology is narrative stance to life and human experience.

Phenomenology is not a narrative stance to life and human experience. In fact, of the great phenomenologists, only Ricoeur is famous for addressing also narrative and its phenomenology.

For phenomenologists narrative is but a means to assess structures of experience, whereas for for narrative researchers phenomenology is a philosophical underpinning for thier approach to human experience but not in a srtuctural way. Human experience is viewed by narrative researchers as constituted in narrative form (Sarbin, 1986). Narrative and the way it connects various elements sheds lite on the connectivity of elements in the experience for each individual (Polkinghorne, 1988).

Hello, depending on the study, both methods can be valuable. An additional aspect is research approach.

Yes, phenomenology is the study of the lived experience by the subject, described in first-person. Researchers, immerse into the experience to the point where they are actually part of the experience. Concepts such as bracketing and triangulation assist with data collection.

Narrative studies also involve subjects describing an experience. Researchers using narrative methods are not concerned with the lived experience. Focus is on the experience; researchers describe experiences in a story-like fashion in which the environment, plot and characters are important.

I agree that you can, to an extent, overlap phenomenology and narratives. In emphasizing the experience for instance , you may write narratives as storylines that deepen understanding of such experiences and what they mean via interpretation.In all cases you need to justify why you are making certain choices.

Phenomenology is ontological stance that give primacy for relation rather than independent subject or object .This relational nature of life is best described as narrative .Hence , we can say that the input and output of the phenomenological system is narrative .

Jacob Y. Stein answer with absolute certainty that phenomenology is not narrative stance , but if he know that the starting point in phenomenology is lifeworld , the lived experience , i think this certainty will become less .I quote his reply to my view about phenomenology as narrative stance :

"Phenomenology is not a narrative stance to life and human experience. In fact, of the great phenomenologists, only Ricoeur is famous for addressing also narrative and its phenomenology. then he says that : " For phenomenologists narrative is but a means to assess structures of experience, whereas for for narrative researchers phenomenology is a philosophical underpinning for thier approach to human experience but not in a structural way. Human experience is viewed by narrative researchers as constituted in narrative form (Sarbin, 1986). Narrative and the way it connects various elements sheds lite on the connectivity of elements in the experience for each individual (Polkinghorne, 1988)."

I hope researcher read carefully before recommend such contradictions : in summary :

If we now that the starting point in phenomenology is lived experience , lifeworld , the contradiction will be clear.

The condition that make lived experience narratively structured is the intentionality which is the core element in Husserlian Phenomenology , without intentionality there is no narrative , no story .

I hope we go back to things themselves before adopting certain ,final response .

I know that phenomenology is more than narrative stance , but if we know that intentionality as embodied semiosis is primary in phenomenology , we can know that lifeworld is narratively ,intersubjectivly ,socially constructed .

I like the answer given by Lindsay GM(2006) Experiencing nursing education research: narrative inquiry and interpretive phenomenology.

Narrative inquiry concerns with epistemology and participants and researcher are co-participants. The stories told are seen from the past, present and future in a continuous way, as a flow, moving and alive, and expected to change with time.

Phenomenology concern itself with ontology and participants and researcher are separate. The stories are also seen from past/present/future but conflated in a present moment, and free from time.

I would argue that the two combine well because narratives never highlight life in its entirety but chosen moments of significance. As such each choice of entry would provide what Giorgio would call a meaning unit through which individual 'lifeworlds' can be understood

What is the main differences between narrative inquiry and phenomenology

In my opinion, narrative research focuses more on the experience of individuals, but phenomenology focuses on the essence of the experiences of individuals rather than on the experiences of individuals; That is, on the experiences that are shared between people.

I agree with Seyed when thinking about the two as concepts, but I feel that separating the two in action is problematic, and that one without the other may hinder efforts to reach a holistic understanding of the individual where essence is revealed through narrative.

Hi All - We should not be reduced to opinions about the differences. They should be obvious. I don't think they are. I agree with Mark Tymms. Separating the two is not productive (and does not advance a thing) when it comes to inquiry or its analysis.

Iam faced with this dilemma over choosing one over the other cause of their distinct similarities and overlap, however your contribution has given me some insight into the differences! Pamela thank you for asking this question! I was in de same boat!

From my understanding in non-academic terms, phenomenology is more about finding the essence of an experience, which could be framed as a participant’s story but usually collected as mini-stories in responses through semi-structured interviews. Interpretive phenomenological analysis is about finding the common essence of an experience in multiple interviews.  Narrative inquiry is research through story and how the story is told and unfolds.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiVk-Sb1Pr3AhUyTmwGHRGfBuYQFnoECBgQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cram.com%2Fessay%2FTwo-Forms-Of-Phenomenology-Vs-Narrative-Methodology%2FF334R5LGR4E5&usg=AOvVaw2WxpIG4VUNYV-hAMOm_uUx