Interpretative phenomenological

analysis: a discussion and critique

Cite this article as: Pringle J, Drummond J, McLafferty E, Hendry C (2011) Interpretative phenomenological
analysis: a discussion and critique. Nurse Researcher. 18, 3, 20-24.

Received November 23 2009; accepted December 1 2010

Abstract

IPA has its roots in psychology, and

INTERPRETATIVE PHENOMENOLOGICAL analysis (IPA) recognises ‘the central role for the analyst’ in
is an approach to qualitative, experiential research making sense of the personal experiences of
that has gained momentum and popularity over the research participants (Smith 2004). It is this
past 10-15 years (Smith et al 2009). As Biggerstaff perspective that distinguishes it in part from
and Thompson (2008) discussed, once healthcare more descriptive phenomenological approaches,
professionals become aware of the potential of such as those advocated by Husserl, one of the
qualitative approaches such as IPA, they can value founding fathers of phenomenology. Discussion
the real contribution that such research makes to of themes ‘emerging’ or ‘being discovered’ in
‘understanding healthcare and illness from the patient more descriptive accounts can only be considered
or service user perspective’. This article aims to add to ‘bear witness’ to experiences (Barbour 2007),
to discussions regarding the contribution that the but this could deny the active role the researcher
approach can make to healthcare research, as well as can play in analysis (Braun and Clarke 2006). It
examining potential limitations and issues of rigour. is possible that without this active involvement
of the researcher in the analysis, accounts may as Malim et al (1992) pointed out, generalisations
not more fully uncover or ‘bring into the light’ the are largely not feasible and idiographic studies
meanings phenomenology is seeking to achieve are potentially ‘subjective, intuitive and
(Pringle et al in press). impressionistic’. This, in turn, can make it difficult
Finlay and Ballinger (2006) described IPA as a to establish which variables are important,
‘variant of phenomenology’ that ‘aims to explore especially given the small numbers advocated for
individuals’ perceptions and experiences. Taking an most IPA studies (Smith et al 2009).
idiographic approach, the focus is on individuals’ However, although broad generalisations may
cognitive, linguistic, affective and physical being’. not be possible, Reid et al (2005) considered that
Interpretative phenomenological analysis commonalities across accounts and ‘analytic
also involves a two-stage interpretation process commentary’ can lead to useful insights which have
through which the researcher tries to interpret wider implications. Caldwell (2008) argued that
the participant’s sense-making activity. This while ‘Theory’ with a capital ‘T’ is not the purpose
is also described as a ‘double hermeneutic’ or remit of IPA studies, findings can nevertheless
by Smith (2004), referring to the twofold influence and contribute to theory in a broader
sense-making process. ‘lower case’ sense.
As Caldwell (2008) discussed, the ‘theoretical
dialogue’ resulting from IPA studies can
According to Bäckström and Sundin (2007), while contextualise the contribution the research
phenomenology uncovers meanings, hermeneutics makes to the wider literature, thereby arguably
interprets the meaning. Van der Zalm and Bergum making contribution to ‘Theory’ seem more valid
(2000) considered hermeneutic phenomenology than perhaps some quantitative researchers,
as having descriptive and interpretive elements, for example, would acknowledge. Therefore, by
enabling ‘inter-subjective understanding’ gaining insight into the individual, insight into
(Standing 2009). However, the differences between the whole can also be achieved. In this respect,
phenomenological approaches can seem confusing Smith et al (2009) advised IPA researchers to think
and contradictory (Pringle et al in press) and it is in terms of ‘theoretical transferability rather than
arguable whether it is possible to describe something empirical generalizability’.
without adding an interpretation at the same time.
IPA, when considered in relation to other forms
of phenomenology, tends to interpret belief and As has been discussed, IPA accounts privilege the
accept participants’ stories, albeit in a questioning individual and so offer a different perspective
way. This is again different from the ‘interpretation from approaches such as grounded theory,
of suspicion’ (Smith et al 2009) or critical analysis which tends to use larger sample numbers to
advocated by Langdridge (2007), which is in turn substantiate theory (Barbour 2007). Although
influenced by the phenomenological writings of smaller sample sizes might be a further limitation
the French philosopher Ricoeur. However, although of IPA studies, Smith et al (2009) considered that
interpretation and increased understanding are reduced participant numbers allows for a richer
important in IPA and a degree of ‘questioning’ depth of analysis that might be inhibited with
(Smith et al 2009) is considered beneficial to a larger sample. A deeper and more interpretative
depth of analysis, IPA does not follow the critical analysis could be seen as drawing the analyst away
interpretive framework discussed by Koch (1999). from the original meanings, and indeed Smith et al
Implications stemming from IPA therefore need (2009) encouraged researchers to ‘go beyond’
to be firmly rooted in what the participants are immediately apparent content.
actually saying, with direct quotes being used However, the aim of IPA is to illustrate, inform
widely to substantiate findings. and master themes by firmly anchoring findings
in direct quotes from participant accounts
(Smith et al 2009).
The individual or idiographic nature of the Quotes and metaphors used by participants
analysis in IPA studies is something highlighted by can also be used in theme titles or descriptions
Smith et al (2009). Malim et al (1992) considered to further root the analysis directly in their words.
such research as addressing ‘the wholeness and In this respect, IPA aims to go beyond a ‘standard
uniqueness of the individual’ with the aim of giving thematic analysis’ (Brocki and Wearden 2006).
a complete and in-depth picture. However, this Braun and Clarke (2006) argued that thematic
could also be seen as a weakness of the approach: analysis is ‘a method in its own right’ that provides
 core skills for other forms of qualitative analysis;
they also considered methods such as IPA to be Smith et al (2009) stressed the non-prescriptive,
constrained by their theoretical roots. However, adaptable nature of IPA and although this may
theoretical roots can add a sense of depth and seem alien to researchers of a more positivist
purpose that thematic analysis may lack. persuasion, Giorgi (2000) was openly critical of trying
With regard to the study participants, to represent phenomenological research methods as
Smith et al (2009) advised researchers to find a fixed set of prescribed stages. However, Smith et al
a ‘fairly homogenous sample’. However, they (2009), while describing the approach of IPA in a
also concluded that the effectiveness of an IPA series of ‘steps’, also continually acknowledged
study should be judged by the light it sheds in that such guidelines are only just that and are open
a broader context (Smith et al 2009). This might to adaptation in the given research situation – in
seem difficult to achieve if the sample group is too particular to more experienced IPA researchers.
specific or unique. It is the very complexity of such openness that can
To overcome this, Smith et al (2009) suggested baffle those used to operating in the more rigid
that if the research account is rich and transparent world of scientific experimentation and randomised
enough, and sufficiently related to current controlled trials.
literature, the reader should be able to assess and Giorgi and Giorgi (2008) and Smith et al (2009)
evaluate transferability. This further emphasises the sought to ‘operationalise’ phenomenology, moving
skill required when the account is written up and it from its philosophical roots through to a more
contextualised, but suggests that too narrow and user-friendly approach. Smith et al (2009) also
homogenous a sample may make judgements emphasised the need for researchers to appreciate
about transferability and links to other areas or and acknowledge the philosophical background
groups more difficult to make. This would seem to understand fully the subtleties of the method.
to be an inevitable tension in IPA studies that can In contrast to Giorgi’s descriptive approach
be overcome if limitations relating to participants (Giorgi 1997). IPA stresses the interpretative and
are acknowledged and clarified by researchers. hermeneutic elements, seeking to capture examples
In further relation to limitations, Brocki of convergence and divergence, rather than focusing
and Wearden (2006) discussed the merits and solely on commonalities, which Giorgi’s approach
drawbacks of various data collection methods prioritises (Smith et al 2009).
across a range of IPA studies. The studies examined In relation to the process of analysis, earlier
interviews, written narrative accounts, diaries, IPA discussions (Smith et al 1999) suggested that
email discussions and focus groups. Brocki and themes may be carried forward from the first
Weardon (2006) concluded that IPA offers sufficient participant account to be built on or added to with
flexibility to allow such diversity of data collection subsequent accounts.
methods. However, they also considered that However, later discussion by Smith et al (2009)
limitations are not always reported in sufficient gave greater emphasis to the need to approach
detail and caution researchers to acknowledge and each case ‘on its own terms, to do justice to its own
discuss the advantages and disadvantages of their individuality’, while also acknowledging the difficulty
chosen collection methods. of bracketing the ideas that may have emerged from
Willig (2001) asserted that IPA allows ‘more earlier transcripts. This perhaps shows the evolving
room for creativity and freedom’ than other nature of the approach, with earlier ideas being
approaches. This may be of particular importance superseded by enhanced and developing guidance.
when unusual groups, situations or means of data In further relation to bracketing, other authors
collection are being contemplated. This may be of also considered the difficulties of disregarding
relevance in healthcare research, if the views of prior knowledge and understanding (Theobald
groups that are difficult to reach are being sought 1997, Finlay 2008). However, as Smith et al (2009)
or where beliefs and expectations may be ‘outside discussed, ‘the rigour of systematically following
the perceptual field’ of healthcare professionals the steps outlined should ensure that there is scope
(Biggerstaff and Thompson 2008). for this to happen’, while still acknowledging that
previous researcher experience will be part of the
Qualitative approaches such as interpretative interpretative analysis. Again, authors such as Giorgi
would argue against a rigorous set of steps while
phenomenological analysis do not seek to Smith et al (2009) appeared to be advocating a clear,
auditable, systematic process, rather than a rigid,
find one single answer or truth prescriptive one.
 The use of computer software in qualitative using more than one method of data collection
analysis has also been open to different opinions (for example, interviews combined with diaries)
(Popay et al 1998, St John and Johnson 2000). can improve triangulation ‘within method’,
Although Popay et al (1998) argued that the use improving the completeness of data, as well as
of such tools is insufficient for rigorous analysis enhancing findings. According to Smith et al
in qualitative research, there is a body of IPA (2009), IPA studies should aim to go beyond
researchers who have found these packages useful an analysis that is just ‘good enough’. They
(IPA@Yahoo Groups 2009). therefore require more explicit detail regarding
Given that Smith et al (2009) made no the commitment and rigour with which the study
specific suggestions or recommendations in has been carried out.
this respect, it would seem to be down to
individual preference. According to Clarke
(2009), manual coding can help to develop ‘an Husserl considered phenomenology from a
intimacy that might not have been achieved scientific and philosophical standpoint, and
otherwise’ and it therefore seems worth putting was not trying to create a research method that
some careful thought into how the data are to would be meaningful in health science, where
be dealt with at an early stage in the research understanding behaviours is at the crux of
planning and before making a decision one way influencing health promotion. As Lawler (1998)
or the other. discussed, these historical methodologies were
‘not necessarily designed to deal with people
who are ill and outside their normal contexts
There has also been much debate on assessing the and surroundings’.
rigour and validity of qualitative research studies With regard to positivistic research results,
(Sandelowski 1993, Dixon-Woods et al 2004, theory tends to be generated from the mean or
Barbour 2007). Yardley (2000) proposes four broad middle ground of the findings, with less emphasis
principles for assessing quality: on the findings that fall outside these perimeters.
Sensitivity to context. However, it is those who come outside the ‘norm’
Commitment and rigour. who are usually the very people in greater need
Transparency and coherence. of our attention as nurses.
Impact and importance. According to Munhall (1994), unless we
Smith et al (2009) detailed ways in which such understand meanings, we cannot alter health
criteria can be fulfilled in IPA studies, and also behaviour and lifestyles. It is surely only by
discussed how being open to external audit can maintaining an open, adaptable approach that
enhance rigour. This is similar to the ‘decision we can truly reach, hear, understand and access
trail’ advocated by Koch (2006) and is an our participants’ experiences, particularly of
important aspect of validity. those who may be in greatest need of our support.
In IPA studies, the analysis account is, Expansive, honest and reflective accounts may
by its very nature, the interpretation of one be less forthcoming and more difficult to access
researcher (or research team). As has already from participants if a rigid set of questions or
been discussed, this may give rise to doubts about a more structured interviewing technique are
any claims regarding the significance of findings. used. This argument could well extend to the data
However, according to Smith et al (2009), audit analysis process, which also requires researchers
is there to ‘ensure that the account produced is to be flexible.
a credible one, not the only credible one’. As has already been discussed, IPA is grounded
Although again this concept may seem alien in psychology, which could be seen to lessen
to more quantitative researchers, qualitative its applicability to other disciplines. However,
approaches such as IPA do not seek to find one Smith et al (2009) argued that analysis should
single answer or truth, but rather a coherent and be informed more by a general psychological
legitimate account that is attentive to the words interest, rather than being approached from
of the participants. Narratives should resonate or a ‘pre-existing formal theoretical position’.
‘strike a chord’ with the reader (Van der Zalm and This would potentially allow for different
Bergum 2000). disciplines to draw on theories from a number
Practically, reflection, team discussion and of sources during a discussion of interpretation,
method triangulation can all help to achieve while still grounding the interpretation firmly
validity. As Casey and Murphy (2009) discussed, in the text of participants’ words.
 It is by understanding and bringing to the nurses’ desire to offer holistic care. Just as nursing
fore individual accounts that we can begin to seeks to deliver care that is evidence-based, the
understand ‘life worlds’ in a phenomenological findings of IPA studies are firmly rooted in the
sense that is meaningful to nursing (Munhall 1994). ‘evidence’ of the words of participants.
As Warren (1994) argues, individual accounts and Interpretative phenomenological
understandings offer ‘one clear way of demonstrating analysis has already been of value in other
that human beings are the subject of nursing, not health-related research studies as detailed
their medical condition’. Making phenomenology in Smith et al (2009,and would therefore be
accessible and usable in such circumstances is one well suited to greater use in phenomenological
of the aims and strengths of IPA (Smith et al 2009). nursing research.
The use of IPA seems certain to expand in
coming years.
Interpretative phenomenological analysis can
offer an adaptable and accessible approach
to phenomenological research that adheres to
Online archive
guidelines regarding rigour and validity. It is an
approach that emphasises the importance of
individual accounts, so has much in common with

Bäckström B, Sundin K (2007) The meaning Dixon-Woods M, Shaw RL, Agarwal S et al Langdridge D (2007) Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research.
of being a middle-aged relative of a person who (2004) The problem of appraising qualitative Psychology: Theory, Research and Method. Sage Publications, London.
has suffered a stroke, 1 month after discharge research. Quality and Safety in Health Care. Pearson Education, Harlow.
Smith JA, Jarman M, Osborne M (1999)
from a rehabilitation clinic. Nursing Inquiry. 13, 3, 223-225.
Lawler J (1998) Phenomenologies as research Doing phenomenological analysis. In
14, 3, 243-254.
Finlay L (2008) A dance between the methodologies for nursing: from philosophy Murray M, Chamberlain K (Eds) Qualitative
Barbour R (2007) Introducing Qualitative reduction and reflexivity: explicating the to researching practice. Nursing Inquiry. Health Psychology: Theories and Methods.
Research: A Student Guide to the Craft of Doing “phenomenological psychological attitude”. 5, 2, 104-111. Sage Publications, London.
Qualitative Research. Sage Publications. London. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology.
Malim T, Birch A, Wadeley A (1992) Standing M (2009) A new critical framework
39, 1, 1-32.
Biggerstaff D, Thompson AR (2008) Perspectives in Psychology. First edition. for applying hermeneutic phenomenology.
Interpretative phenomenological analysis Finlay L, Ballinger C (2006) Glossary. In: Finlay Macmillan Press, Hampshire. Nurse Researcher. 16, 4, 20-30.
(IPA): a qualitative methodology of choice in L, Ballinger C (Eds) Qualitative Research for
Munhall PL (Ed) (1994) Revisioning St John W, Johnson P (2000) The pros and
healthcare research. Qualitative Research in Allied Health Professionals: Challenging Choices.
Phenomenology: Nursing and Health Science cons of data analysis software for qualitative
Psychology. 5, 3, 214-224. Whurr Publishers, Chichester.
Research. National League for Nursing Press, research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 32, 4,
Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic Giorgi A (1997) The theory, practice and New York NY. 393-397.
analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research evalutaion of the phenomenolgical method as
Popay J, Rogers A, Williams G (1998) Rationale Theobald K (1997) The experience of spouses
in Psychology. 3, 77-101. a qualitative research procedure. Journal of
and standards for the systematic review of whose partners have suffered a myocardial
Phenomenological Psychology. 28, 2, 235-260.
Brocki JM, Wearden AJ (2006) A critical qualitative literature in health services research. infarction: a phenomenological study. Journal
evaluation of the use of interpretative Giorgi A (2000) Concerning the application Qualitative Health Research. 8, 3, 341-351. of Advanced Nursing. 26, 3, 595-601.
phenomenological analysis (IPA) in health of phenomenology to caring research.
Pringle J, Hendry C, McLafferty E (in Van der Zalm JE, Bergum V (2000)
psychology. Psychology and Health. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences.
press) Choosing between phenomenological Hermeneutic-phenomenology: providing living
21, 1, 87-108. 14, 1, 11-15.
approaches: a discussion. Nurse Researcher. knowledge for nursing practice. Journal of
Caldwell G (2008) Theory With A Capital Giorgi A, Giorgi B (2008) Phenomenology. Advanced Nursing. 31, 1, 211-218.
Reid K, Flowers P, Larkin M (2005) Exploring
‘T’: Exploring The Various Roles Of In Smith JA (Ed) Qualitative Psychology: A
lived experience. The Psychologist. 18, 1, 20-23. Warren L (1994) A study as an exemplar.
Theory Within The IPA Research Process. Practical Guide to Research Methods. Second
The experience of feeling cared for: a
[Link] edition. Sage Publications, London. Sandelowski M (1993) Rigor or rigor mortis:
phenomenological perspective. In: Munhall PL
(Last accessed: February 17 2011.) the problem of rigor in qualitative research
IPA@yahoogroups (2009) Correspondence. (Ed) Revisioning Phenomenology: Nursing and
revisited. Advances in Nursing Science. 16, 2, 1-8.
Casey D, Murphy K (2009) Issues in using [Link] Health Science Research. National League for
methodological triangulation in research. (Last accessed: February 17 2011.) Smith JA (2004) Reflecting on the development Nursing Press, New York NY.
Nurse Researcher. 16, 4, 40-55. of interpretative phenomenological analysis
Koch T (1999) An interpretive research process: Willig C (2001) Introducing Qualitative Research
and its contribution to qualitative research in
Clarke KA (2009) Uses of a research revisiting phenomenological and hermeneutical in Psychology: Adventures in Theory and
psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology.
diary: learning reflectively, developing approaches. Nurse Researcher. 6, 3, 20-34. Method. Open University Press, Buckingham.
1, 1, 39-54.
understanding and establishing transparency.
Koch T (2006) Establishing rigour in qualitative Yardley L (2000) Dilemmas in qualitative health
Nurse Researcher. 17, 1, 68-76. Smith JA, Flowers P, Larkin M (2009)
research: the decision trail. 1993. Journal of research. Psychology and Health. 15, 2, 215-228.
Interpretative Phenomenological
Advanced Nursing. 53, 1, 91-100.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.