The aim of this paper is to show the way in which the decision trail of a qualitative research process can be maintained. It is argued that the trustworthiness (rigour) of a study may be established if the reader is able to audit the events, influences and actions of the researcher. The actual study containing the recording of this decision trail aimed to express the concerns of older patients who were admitted to the acute care sector. The study took place in two care of the elderly wards in a 1000‐bed National Health Service hospital in the UK, in 1991. Eventually, 14 patients were interviewed, each on several occasions, and their concerns are expressed in themes, namely: routine geriatric style of care, depersonalization, care deprivation and geriatric segregation. I describe the preparations that were undertaken before patient interviews could commence. The literature recording the process of the interviewer's experience as data in qualitative research is scarce. I show the researcher's participation in making the data as part of an existential phenomenological research process. Existential phenomenology relies on recording influences while generating data such as significant literature, media reports, my value position and journal data.
This paper aims to throw some light on Husserlian phenomenology and Heideggerian hermeneutics, and to discuss their influences and applicability to the nursing research agenda. There are definite distinctions between Husserlian transcendental phenomenology and Heideggerian hermeneutic phenomenology and these distinctions have implications for the methodology employed. These traditions are discussed with respect to some fundamental research issues: the philosophical perspectives of the traditions and the notion that data that result from the inquiry are created by the interaction between researcher and researched. The central recommendation in this paper is that nurse researchers appraise the philosophical underpinnings of the methodologies they pursue.
The thesis of this paper is that researchers working in interpretive traditions need to address three central issues: philosophy, rigour and representation. This paper discusses the process of an hermeneutic inquiry as a research methodology used in seeking to understand the experiences of older patients admitted to an acute hospital. The methodology includes the philosophical framework and assumptions underpinning the research. Philosophical hermeneutics guides the inquiry as a reflection of the research process. Three issues concerning legitimation of the hermeneutic research process arise: the philosophical underpinnings of the methodology, representation, or the participation of the researcher in making data, and rigour, or the way in which trustworthiness of hermeneutic research can be established. I recommend that Gadamer's primacy of application to the understanding of texts can also be applied to understanding of health environments. I conclude that Gadamer's post-modern sensibility regarding text and the framework of Guba & Lincoln's fourth generation evaluation are compatible within a hermeneutic inquiry.
This paper is a critical review of recent discussions of rigour in nursing research. We will argue that 'borrowing' evaluation criteria from one paradigm of inquiry and applying them to another is problematic. We attempt to map the 'rigour' field and add a dimension to the existing debate about rigour and qualitative research through inclusion of reflexivity guided by philosophical hermeneutics. We describe reflexivity and appeal to writers to incorporate a reflexive account into their research product by signposting to readers 'what is going on' while researching. We contend that researchers bring to the research product, data generated, a range of literature, a positioning of this literature, a positioning of oneself, and moral socio-political contexts. We suggest that reflexive research is characterized by ongoing self-critique and self-appraisal and that the research product can be given shape by the politics of location and positioning. We emphasize that in the creation of a text (the research product) it is desirable that the researcher be a skilled writer. Finally we claim that if the research product is well signposted, the readers will be able to travel easily through the worlds of the participants and makers of the text (the researchers) and decide for themselves whether the text is believable or plausible (our terms for rigour).
Clinical nursing intervention for people with a long term illness may be enhanced when self-management is approached from a broad, contextual perspective and self-management processes are integrated into clinical practice. The challenge is for nurses to embrace processes in nursing practice that will facilitate interactions with clients without obstructing the diversity of perspectives, create an environment conducive to learning and engage individuals in identifying self-management strategies that have meaning in their lives.
In this paper I will suggest ways in which you may consider a story as a legitimate research product. I view the story as interpreted work communicated through writing as the research product. 'Doing' interpretive research is not an easy option in research. In this paper I will focus upon some of the complexities in creating an acceptable and accessible research product. I will cover five interrelated areas: journaling, observing, listening, writing and rigour. The term 'research product' refers to the outcome of the research process. By that I mean the dissertation, the research report or the published article. The notion of legitimacy is informed by Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics which does not show us what to do, but asks us to question what is 'going on' while researching. In this paper I ask you to consider the entire research process as a reflexive exercise which provides answers to the question: 'What is going on in methods?'. I claim that if the research product is well sign-posted, the readers will be able to travel easily through the worlds of the participants and makers of the story and decide for themselves whether the story is a legitimate research endeavour.
Healthcare professionals are urged to challenge the stage model of adjustment as a way of understanding the response to illness and to listen instead to the stories people tell. They are encouraged to privilege the person's experience as the basis for developing a sensitive, client-focussed response that takes into account the wider social context of people's lives as well as the medical aspects.
The aim of this paper is to show the way in which the decision trail of a qualitative research process can be maintained. It is argued that the trustworthiness (rigour) of a study may be established if the reader is able to audit the events, influences and actions of the researcher. The actual study containing the recording of this decision trail aimed to express the concerns of older patients who were admitted to the acute care sector. The study took place in two care of the elderly wards in a 1000-bed National Health Service hospital in the UK, in 1991. Eventually, 14 patients were interviewed, each on several occasions, and their concerns are expressed in themes, namely: routine geriatric style of care, depersonalization, care deprivation and geriatric segregation. I describe the preparations that were undertaken before patient interviews could commence. The literature recording the process of the interviewer's experience as data in qualitative research is scarce. I show the researcher's participation in making the data as part of an existential phenomenological research process. Existential phenomenology relies on recording influences while generating data such as significant literature, media reports, my value position and journal data.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.