Almost all forms of qualitative research deal with some kind of "lived experience," but phenomenology takes a very specific approach to this topic, which is probably not a good match to your interviews.

Unless, you consider each separate participant to represent some kind of case, case studies also are unlikely to match your goals.

For an "explanatory sequential" design in mixed methods, you would follow up on a survey with a qualitative study that would help you understand the results of your original study.

Overall, why are you seeking a label for your research? In qualitative research, it is quite common to conduct semi-structured interviews and examine them through some form of thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). That approach does not have any specific name or label, nor does it need one.

Almost all forms of qualitative research deal with some kind of "lived experience," but phenomenology takes a very specific approach to this topic, which is probably not a good match to your interviews.

Unless, you consider each separate participant to represent some kind of case, case studies also are unlikely to match your goals.

For an "explanatory sequential" design in mixed methods, you would follow up on a survey with a qualitative study that would help you understand the results of your original study.

Overall, why are you seeking a label for your research? In qualitative research, it is quite common to conduct semi-structured interviews and examine them through some form of thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). That approach does not have any specific name or label, nor does it need one.

Johan - David is correct. If your data collection methods were not driven by a pre-existing qualitative theoretical/philosophical framework - then it is not wise to add one 'after-the-fact.' Thta impacts the overall rigour of the study. You are probably best advised to adopt a generic qualitative descriptive/exploratory (free-form) approach.

Dear David and Dean,

Thank you both for your response and the clear information provided! I will adopt a generic Qualitative Approach for my study.

David is right. You do not have to label it as a phenomenology or any other form of qualitative. Use of semi structured interviews make sense. Generic approach to qualitative research needs no qualification. Also its important to understand what is the objective of your study which may help u clasify it as a case study or otherwise.. good luck.

Maybe case study with qualitative methods based content/document analysis.

@Spyridon Fragkos, that is also an option. I have quantitative data from a survey that I can combine. The dataset is small, an part of a larger dataset, so combining them could be very usefull in answering the researcher question. Thanks!

I'd just add a note of caution. There's a difference between methodology and methods. So while Braun & Clarke do advocate thematic analysis as an 'everybody' approach, this view is not shared by all in qualitative work. To get any depth to your themes, the method does need to be located within the methodology. Or you'll end up with purely descriptive themes and a surface study

You might want to align your method more with your research question. You say, this about your question,

The research question is focus on a process related knowledge (decision-making process in emergency care). A while back, I did a study on what ICU nurses needed to know to take care of patients. I used grounded theory combined with Phenomenological interviews. Depending on more precisely what you want to know you might just want to use the experiences of ambulance professionals without a preconceived case study. Let them give you cases that they experienced and let them tell you how they decided what to do. A more focused qualitative approach using triangulation might get closer to answering your research question,. In my case I interviewed the nurses, observed them and checked what they wrote about the patients in the charts.

One thing I found in doing that was in the interviews the nurses talked about younger patients who were very critical. One pulled out his chest tube, for example. When I observed them and looked at the records, the average age was much older and the work had more mundane but important aspects to the care, like getting a patient up out of bed with all manner of tubes and equipment.

As a side, I found the nurses preferred different aspects of care - technical, physiological, psychological and physical. They would focus more on what aspect they preferred. The interviews with nurses who were physiologically oriented were full of physiological descriptions. My transcriptionists did not have a medical background and to save me some money, I told her not to spend a lot of time with words she didn't understand. I could tell right away the nurse in the interview was physiologically oriented when the transcription came back full of empty spaces. You might want to watch for that kind of perspective from the interviews.

Good luck with this project - enjoy the ambulance rides if you choose to go that route.

It depends on the aim of the study and the research question. Every tool in qualitative methods has its strengths and limitations, and you should select your devices based on the research question. You may ask your self, will a questionnaire enables me to answer my research question adequately? Do I need to use focus groups as well? Why?

Another example, complex problems in a community or an organisation that need in-depth evaluation can not be answered by using questionnaires or interviews; you may need to use "case study".

PS There's a technique called Think-Aloud. Basically it involves having subjects talk about what they are thinking while they are carrying out the experience of interest. Some of my students used this with ED nurses.

Elizabeth Charters (2003).The Use of Think-aloud Methods in Qualitative Research

An Introduction to Think-aloud Methods. Brock 12(2)

Qualitative studies require detailed context, focus and depth which will yield rich data, transferable (as opposed to 'generalizable' data for quantitaive approach) to other similar case sets.

To build data credibility and depth , you must carefully select the best samples such as via delphi methods (e.g select 5 most experienced drivers/the most decorated, most recognized ambulance driving expert)and follow up with in-depth interviews, member-check, think aloud protocol-verbal reporting, focus group interviews and tie up expert verification of the data coding and sample of analysis.

This could be done for 1 case study or case site or multiple. The contexts within which the drivers operate also matter as they could influence the whys-the underlying factors determining their responses/reactions in your research.

Good Luck

Ingrid Holme Is absolutely right about mentioning the distinction between method and methodology. Method refers to the specific way that you obtain your data, while methodology refers to your "theory of method", so to speak, or what exactly you do with your data.

You already seem to have your method decided—these are the semi-structured interviews you're conducting. This method could be used as a part of a wide range of methodologies, and so the next step will be choosing which methodology you want to apply.

I want to clear something up really quickly about phenomenology, as someone who's currently studying it. I think that what a lot of people don't quite understand about it (some of whom are involved in this discussion) is that it isn't really a research method, but a research methodology. Phenomenology is more of a theory on what to pay attention to when doing qualitative research than a specific method of obtaining data. If you want to conduct a phenomenological study, you must:

1. Pay attention, during your interviews (or whichever method you're using), to your participants' lived experiences and the meanings they make of these experiences. What a lot of people don't realize is that phenomenology doesn't stop at gaining a knowledge of the experiences a person has had but rather goes on to try and understand what these experiences mean for the person in the here-and-now as well as for their future just as much as in the past. So do not forget to look at how the experiences have influenced the person!

2. Pay attention to the relationships and context with which the participants interact during these experiences. One major assumption of phenomenology is that a person cannot be seen in isolation from their social/cultural/physical environment but rather should always be seen as in constant interaction with their world.

3. Describe and interpret—there is debate as to which of these should be prioritized during phenomenological research, but just about all phenomenological researchers now agree that any phenomenological study involves at least some level of both description (or recreation of the participant's experience as they themselves perceive it—preferably verbatim) and interpretation (or analysis of the meaning behind what a participant is saying.)

If you have done all of these things, then your study is likely to have been at least influenced by phenomenological methodology. If these are not your objectives in your study, then it may have more influence from other methodologies.

The following publications may further help in clarification/understanding/guidance:

• Bogner, A., Littig, B. and Menz, W. (2009) Introduction: Expert Interviews - An Introduction to a New Methodological Debate, in Bogner, A., Littig, B. and Menz, W. (eds.) Interviewing Experts. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1-13.
• Gallagher, S. (2012) What Is Phenomenology?, in Gallagher, S. (ed.) Phenomenology. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 7-18.
• Heale, R. and Twycross, A. (2018) What is a case study?, Evidence-Based Nursing, 21, 1, pp. 7-8.
• Nakayama, Y. (1994) Phenomenology and qualitative research methods, Seiroka Kango Daigaku Kiyo, 20, 3, pp. 22-34.
• Qu, S. Q. and Dumay, J. (2011) The qualitative research interview, Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, 8, 3, pp. 238-264.
• Shiva, E. and Sadeghi Moghadam, M. R. (2018) Toward developing a framework for conducting case study research, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17, 1, pp. 1-11.

With the descriptions (i.e., semi-structured to in-depth interviews focusing on decision-making in emergency care, etc.), I think that the case study method or expert interview method is most suitable. Though I prefer the latter.

The best method is phenomenology, but it is hard and widely misunderstood.

The best textbook by far is Book The phenomenological mind, second edition

Many thanks for your response Heather! The focus is indeed not entirely clear. I will go back to the "drawing board" to redefine my problem statement and research question.