Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics as a useful methodological framework for the Delphi technique

Abstract

In this article we aim to demonstrate how Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics may provide a sound methodological framework for researchers using the Delphi Technique (Delphi) in studies exploring health and well-being. Reporting of the use of Delphi in health and well-being research is increasing, but less attention has been given to covering its methodological underpinnings. In Delphi, a structured anonymous conversation between participants is facilitated, via an iterative survey process. Participants are specifically selected for their knowledge and experience with the topic of interest. The purpose of structuring conversation in this manner is to cultivate collective opinion and highlight areas of disagreement, using a process that minimizes the influence of group dynamics. The underlying premise is that the opinion of a collective is more useful than that of an individual. In designing our study into health literacy, Delphi aligned well with our research focus and would enable us to capture collective views. However, we were interested in the methodology that would inform our study. As researchers, we believe that methodology provides the framework and principles for a study and is integral to research integrity. In assessing the suitability of Delphi for our research purpose, we found little information about underpinning methodology. The absence of a universally recognized or consistent methodology associated with Delphi was highlighted through a scoping review we undertook to assist us in our methodological thinking. This led us to consider alternative methodologies, which might be congruent with the key principles of Delphi. We identified Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics as a methodology that could provide a supportive framework and principles. We suggest that this methodology may be useful in health and well-being studies utilizing the Delphi method.

A transdiagnostic dimensional approach towards a neuropsychological assessment for addiction: an international Delphi consensus study

“…The criterion for concluding the Delphi was not solely contingent upon reaching consensus, but also on the stability of responses [62,63], allowing for any well-defined disagreement to be maintained. The process was therefore deemed complete either when all items had achieved consensus or movement between rounds was less than 15%, indicating that opinions were not likely to change further [64].…”

Scriptural Coping: An Empirical Test of Hermeneutic Theory

“…Put differently, readers not only read texts. Texts, in a manner of speaking, also read readers by engaging their assumptions and reflecting their concerns about the world (see Bernstein 1983;Guzys et al 2010;McCaffey, Raffin-Bouchal, and Moules 2012;Ricoeur 1981). We then argue that the act of reading scripture for relevant insights should serve as a coping resource that, for better or for worse, moderates the effects of life exigencies on psychological well-being.…”

Re‐imagining occupational wellbeing: Development of an evidence‐based framework

“…). The Ranking Delphi asks experts to rank and add to existing themes or statements and is merited when the statements in the first questionnaire can be generated from the literature or from other sources (Guzys et al …”

“…This questionnaire was administered to international occupational therapy academics via email, using the Delphi Technique (Guzys, Dickson-Swift, Kenny & Threlkeld, 2015). Delphi technique was selected to pool expert knowledge in order to develop, refine and gain collective agreement, on the revised domains of occupational wellbeing (Guzys et al, 2015). The Ranking Delphi asks experts to rank and add to existing themes or statements and is merited when the statements in the first questionnaire can be generated from the literature or from other sources (Guzys et al, 2015).…”

“…Delphi technique was selected to pool expert knowledge in order to develop, refine and gain collective agreement, on the revised domains of occupational wellbeing (Guzys et al, 2015). The Ranking Delphi asks experts to rank and add to existing themes or statements and is merited when the statements in the first questionnaire can be generated from the literature or from other sources (Guzys et al, 2015). This study used the Ranking Delphi technique, with two rounds of data collection, to determine whether an expert panel supported the newly described domains of occupational wellbeing developed within the first phase of the study.…”