This paper explores memoing in the context of qualitative research methodologies. The functions of memos in the research process are discussed and a number of techniques for employing memo writing to enhance the research experience and outcomes are examined. Memoing is often discussed in the literature as a technique employed in grounded theory research, yet there is limited exploration of the value of memo writing in qualitative methodologies generally. Memoing serves to assist the researcher in making conceptual leaps from raw data to those abstractions that explain research phenomena in the context in which it is examined. Memos can be effectively employed by both the novice and experienced researcher as a procedural and analytical strategy throughout the research process. Data exploration is enhanced, continuity of conception and contemplation is enabled and communication is facilitated through the use of memoing. While guidelines exist to aid in the production and use of memos, memoing remains a flexible strategy wherein the process of construction and nature of content is determined by the preferences and abilities of the researcher and the aims and focus of the specific research study.

This study aimed to explore complexities in nursing documentation and related factors. Nursing documentation has been one of the most important functions of nurses since the time of Florence Nightingale because it serves multiple and diverse purposes. Current health-care systems require that documentation ensures continuity of care, furnishes legal evidence of the process of care and supports evaluation of quality of patient care. However, nursing documentation has not served such objectives because of its complexities. This study explores nursing documentation complexities and related factors through both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The study used multiple methods of inquiry: in-depth interviewing; participant observation; nominal group processing; focus group meetings; time and motion study of nursing activities; and auditing of completeness of nursing documentation. Complexities in nursing documentation include three aspects: disruption, incompleteness and inappropriate charting. Related factors that influenced documentation comprised: limited nurses' competence, motivation and confidence; ineffective nursing procedures; and inadequate nursing audit, supervision and staff development. These findings suggest that complexities in nursing documentation require extensive resolution and implicitly dictate strategies for nurse managers and nurses to take part in solving these complicated obstacles.

Introduced as an alternative to empirical science, phenomenology offers nursing an insightful means for understanding nursing phenomena specifically in relation to lived experiences. However, not all phenomenologies were created equal, a point which has left many a nursing researcher not only confused. Furthermore, this confusion might result in the choosing of a philosophical framework that is neither cognizant with the research question nor the epistemological lens through which the researcher operates. Drawing on common nursing examples to illustrate concepts, the authors closely examine and debate the disparities between Husserl's transcendental phenomenology and Heidegger's hermeneutic approach to phenomenology. The aim of the article is to demystify the dense language used and present the fundamental beliefs of each philosopher in a format that is accessible to novice phenomenologists.

No abstract

No abstract

The review suggests that the majority of people with diabetes self-manage, although there is variation in adherence to key self-management activities. How self-management practices change over time and whether this impacts on health outcomes is an area for future research.

Variations in grounded theory (GT) interpretation are the subject of ongoing debate. Divergences of opinion, genres, approaches, methodologies, and methods exist, resulting in disagreement on what GT methodology is and how it comes to be. From the postpositivism of Glaser and Strauss, to the symbolic interactionist roots of Strauss and Corbin, through to the constructivism of Charmaz, the field of GT methodology is distinctive in the sense that those using it offer new ontological, epistemological, and methodological perspectives at specific moments in time. We explore the unusual dynamism attached to GT's underpinnings. Our view is that through a process of symbolic interactionism, in which generations of researchers interact with their context, moments are formed and philosophical perspectives are interpreted in a manner congruent with GT's essential methods. We call this methodological dynamism, a process characterized by contextual awareness and moment formation, contemporaneous translation, generational methodology, and methodological consumerism.

Although member-checking has long been accepted as the gold standard in quantitative research, it is not the pinnacle for expressing rigour in Heideggerian phenomenology because it contradicts many o the underpinning philosophies. Similarly, employing 'experts' to confirm findings conflicts with the values of interpretivism. In this paper, th authors argue that member-checking is frequently used to cover poor interview technique or a lack of understanding of the methodology chosen to underpin the study. They debate why member-checking is incongruent with Heideggerian philosophy and suggest strategies that enhance the generation of data and render the follow-u interview redundant.