Hello all! I'm doing my Master's research on experiences of younger siblings after the elder sibling has moved out from parental home. Since it is a qualitative study I conducted around 11 interviews and few of them lasted 30-35 mins and few 45-60 mins. Initially I was following IPA approach. While conducting the interviews and also while doing the transcripts I found a lot of recurring themes. Now I'm confused whether I should go ahead with Interpretative phenomenological analysis or thematic analysis. What exactly are the differences between both and how do we know which is a suitable method?
Of course you are going to find themes in your analysis, but that does not eliminate Interpretative phenomenological analysis as an analysis strategy. I suggest you go over the second edition of Smith et al. on IPA and review their approach to coding and drawing conclusions from analysis. That said, eleven interviews is a bit large for an IPA sample, so you might consider switching to another mode of analysis on that basis.
Smith recommends that your sample could be adequate. The problem is Smith makes clear IPA is an end-to-end method, from the problem statement, purpose statement, research questions, and analysis. Even the interview guide, length of interviews, and number of interviews seem suspect. A common problem, which my team will discuss in a forthcoming article, is that many act like phenomenology is thematic analysis. For example, Smith does not advocate coding! You do not have a phenomenology study unless clearly designed. What was your original purpose and design?
David L Morgan Thank you for the suggestion! I would really appreciate it if you could let me know where exactly I can find the second edition of Smith on IPA as the resources I have on IPA are more of articles on how to do IPA. I took eleven interviews, as the first few of my interviews were around only 30 minutes, as I am a novice qualitative researcher. After discussing with my guide, I was able to refine my interviewing skills and take more in-depth interviews.
David C. Coker, I was following the IPA approach from the start, while designing my research objectives and interview questions as well. My original purpose was to understand the experiences of younger siblings after their elder sibling moved out (a two-child family) and understand how they make sense of their experiences. If you would like to know more, I would be happy to share more details.
The second edition of Smith on IPA is a book that is available on Amazon, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research.
Divsha Kiyasudeen part of following IPA from the beginning is Smith does not use coding (other phenomenologist do not, but some do) and Smith does not advocate themes. He advocates experiential statements, with two sides of descriptions and inferences (since he believes in hermeneutical phenomenology, he believes the researcher's worldview and interpretations are part of the process). 30-minute interviews are very brief, making it difficult to have depth and angularity of the data. Smith would also see the textural-structural level (which Moustakas also speaks of), where you report the idiosyncracies of the participants but if a homogeneous sample, then one can speak about the group experiences and the larger social process of the essence of the experience. Since you start with IPA, stick with IPA, epecially if you have read about it. Try to be faithful! IPA is beyond themes!
David C. Coker, Thanks a lot for the clarification! I'll surely try to stick with IPA.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction