“…Also, they use varied forms of language in detailing their processes and findings, which complicates the development of uniform reporting standards. To provide a few examples, methods more widely used in psychology that fall under this rubric include narrative (e.g., Bamberg, 2012;Josselson, 2011), grounded theory (e.g., Charmaz, 2014;Glaser & Strauss, 1967), phenomenological (e.g., Giorgi, 2009;Smith, 2004), critical (e.g., Fine, 2013;Steinberg & Cannella, 2012), discursive (e.g., Pea, 1993;Potter & Wetherell, 1987), performative (e.g., Gergen & Gergen, 2012), ethnographic (e.g., Suzuki, Ahluwalia, Mattis, & Quizon, 2005;Wolcott, 2010), consensual qualitative research (e.g., Hill, 2012), case study (e.g., Fishman & Messer, 2013;Yin, 2013), psychobiography (e.g., Schultz, 2005), and thematic analysis approaches (e.g., Braun & Clarke, 2006;Finfgeld-Connett, 2014). Many of these approaches can take multiple forms by virtue of shifts in philosophical assumptions or the evolution of their procedures.…”