Phenomenological psychology and qualitative research

Abstract

This article presents the tradition of phenomenologically founded psychological research that was originally initiated by Amedeo Giorgi. This data analysis method is inseparable from the broader project of establishing an autonomous phenomenologically based human scientific psychology. After recounting the history of the method from the 1960’s to the present, we explain the rationale for why we view data collection as a process that should be adaptable to the unique mode of appearance of each particular phenomenon being researched. The substance of the article is then devoted to a detailed outline of the method’s whole-part-whole procedure of data analysis. We then offer a sample analysis of a brief description of an ordinary daydream. This is an anxiety daydream in response to the recent Covid-19 pandemic. We present this daydream analysis in full to show the concrete hands-on 5 step process through which the researcher explicated the participants’ expressions from the particular to the general. From this brief sample analysis, the researcher offers a first-person reflection on the data analysis process to offer the reader an introduction to the diacritical nature of phenomenological psychological elucidation.

A Phenomenological Psychology Study of University Teachers' Lived Experience of Being Pedagogical in Neoliberalism

“…Because the present study concerns ordinary people's directly lived mundane life in context (Englander and Morley, 2021), we chose phenomenological psychology as the research methodology to uncover university teachers' lived experience in neoliberalism. Phenomenological psychology was founded by Giorgi (1970) in the 1970s based on his critical reflection of the positivist-led modern psychology, which Giorgi (in Englander and Morley, 2021) critiqued because it was inadequate for studying human behavior.…”

“…Regarding the modified process of description, phenomenological psychology permits a third person, or research participant, to use naive or non-phenomenological language to describe their lived experience (Giorgi et al, 2017), which is distinct from many other phenomenological methods, like those in Van Manen (1990), which obtains data by cultivating the research participants to produce their first person's text. The modified reduction in phenomenological psychology avoids restraining research participants' subjective consciousness, as this methodology promotes humans as "being in the world" (Giorgi et al, 2017, p. 181), who have direct consciousness about their lived world (Englander and Morley, 2021). Unlike philosophical phenomenology, which aims at universal essence, phenomenological psychology can reach the typical essence based on structures derived from each case that can be compared with results from similar studies (Giorgi et al, 2017).…”

“…Although written anecdotes are often used in phenomenological research (Van Manen, 1990), we chose to interview them because research participants tend to produce more description than written ones (Giorgi et al, 2017). Phenomenological psychology's focus on people's lived world reminded us to choose a data collection protocol that fits with the participants' daily customs (Englander and Morley, 2021), and as the teacher participants in this research were used to delivering lectures and providing verbal explanations, we thought the interview would be more suitable and natural. After we made appointments with them, we sent the discussion items to them along with informed-consent forms to ensure they were aware of the topics and the voice-recording.…”

“…After changing the first person to the third person in each meaning unit of the transcripts, he pasted the near-original language of each meaning unit in succession in the 1st column of a table, according to the methods advised by the experts, i.e., psychological reduction (Englander and Morley, 2021). In doing so, the lead author finished the psychological epoche of the participants' descriptions by putting his own interpretations in parentheses (Englander and Morley, 2021). Then the second author reviewed the descriptions mirroring the meaning units in the 1st column.…”

“…We then added another two columns (2nd and 3rd) in parallel with the first column to, respectively, refer to our phenomenological and further elucidation of the meaning units. Englander and Morley (2021) pointed out that the 2nd and 3rd columns are for researchers to elucidate rather than to pamper the psychological meaning from the 1st column to help the participants' everyday consciousness emerging into generalisable psychological relevance. Although Giorgi et al and his colleagues suggested only two tiers, i.e., columns (e.g., Giorgi et al, 2017), we are more in favor of what Englander and Morley (2021) advised, that is, to extend the two-tier column into three or even more for the sake of crystallizing the lead author's analysis process because the second author in the present study needed to review and validate them.…”