Variation and commonality in phe

nomenographic research method

s
Gerlese S. Akerlind
 Absrtract
• This paper focuses on the data analysis st
age of phenomenographic research, elucid
ating( 闡明 ) what is involved in terms of b
oth commonality and variation in accepted
practice
 Introduction
• It has reached a surprising degree of
popularity over the subsequent 25 years,
particularly in the UK, Australia and Hong
Kong, as well as in Sweden, its point of
origin
Aims and outcomes of phenomeno
graphic research
• Outcomes are represented analytically as a
number of qualitatively different meanings or
ways of experiencing the phenomenon
(categories), but also including the structural
relationships linking these different ways of
experiencing.
• These relationships represent the structure of
the ‘outcome space’, in terms of providing an
elucidation of relations between different ways of
experiencing the one phenomenon.
Aims and outcomes of phenomeno
graphic research
• A core premise of phenomenographic is the ass
umption that different categories of description of
ways of experiencing a phenomenon are logicall
y related to one another, typically by way of hier
archically inclusive relationships.
• Phenomenographic research aims to explore the
range of meanings within a sample group, as a g
roup, not the range of meanings for each individ
ual within the group.
Aims and outcomes of phenomeno
graphic research
• Three primary criteria for judging the qualit
y
– That each category in the outcome space rev
eals something distinctive( 有特色 ) about a w
ay of understanding the phenomenon
– That the categories are logically related, typic
ally a hierarchy of structurally inclusive relatio
nships
– That the outcomes are parsimonious( 吝嗇 )(a
s few categories as possible)
 Commonalities in practice
• The researcher needs to be willing to constantly
adjust her/his thinking in the light of reflection,
discussion and new perspectives.
• Reading of individual transcripts and defining of
individual categories should occur within the
context of identifying similarities and differences
among transcripts and relationships between
categories, as a group.
 Commonalities in practice
• In the early stages, reading through
transcripts is characterized by a high
degree of openness to possible meanings,
subsequent readings becoming more
focused on particular aspects or criteria,
but still within a frame work of openness to
new interpretations, and the ultimate aim
of illuminating the whole by focusing on
different perspectives at different times
 Concrete descriptions of practice
• The first phrase of the analysis is a kind of
selection procedure based on criteria of
relevance.
• The selected quotes make up the data
pool which forms the basis for the next
and crucial step in the analysis
• The boundaries separating individuals are
abandoned and interest is focused on the
pool of meanings discovered in the data.
 Concrete descriptions of practice
• The process looks like this:
– Quotes are sorted into piles( 堆 )
– Borderline cases are examined
– And eventually the criterion attributes for each
group are made explicit
• In this way, the groups of quotes are arran
ged and rearranged, are narrowed into cat
egories, and finally are defined
 Variation in practice
• Variation in the amount of each transcript
considered
– Certain sections of each transcript are inevita
bly seen as more pertinent( 恰當的 ) to the res
earch question
– Working with whole transcript is seen as havin
g the danger of encouraging an analytic focus
on the individual interviewee, rather than the g
roup of interviewees as a collective
 Variation in practice
• Variation in the amount of each transcript
considered
– Taking a whole transcript approach to analysis may
reduce the clarity of the key aspects of meaning that
researchers search for
• Selecting excerpts that seem to exemplify
meanings present in the larger interview, while
removing perceived irrelevant or redundant
components of the interview, should assist in
making the data more manageable
 Variation in practice
• Variation in emphasis placed on collaborat
ion
– Most phenomenographic researchers work in
dividually during their data analysis
– An individual researcher can, at the least, ma
ke a substantial contribution to our understan
ding of a phenomenon, even if group research
might have taken that understanding further
 Variation in practice
• Variation in ways of managing the data
– Focusing on the referential (meaning) or
structural components of the categories of
description
– Focusing on ‘how’ or ‘what’ aspects of the
phenomenon
– Focusing on similarities and differences within
and between categories and transcripts
associated with particular categories
 Variation in practice
• Variation in ways of managing the data
– Attempting to resolve or understand mismatches or
inconsistencies between the interpretations of
different researchers involved in the project
– Focusing on borderline transcripts and those
transcripts in which there are aspects that do not fit
the proposed categories of description
– Looking for the implications for all of the categories of
description of a change in any one category
 Variation in practice
• Variation in ways of constituting structure
– The degree to which the logical structure of th
e outcome space needs to emerge as directly
as possible from the data
– The degree to which it may more explicitly refl
ect the professional judgement of the researc
her
 Validity and reliability: credibility
and trustworthiness
• Validity
– Communicative validity checks
• An interpretation that is defensible
• Seek feedback from the interview sample, and the
intended audience for the findings
– Pragmatic( 實用的 ) validity checks
• The extent to which the research outcomes are se
en as useful
• The extent to which they are meaningful to their int
ended audience
Validity and reliability: credibility an
d trustworthiness
• Reliability
– Coder reliability check
• Two researchers independently code
– Dialogic reliable check
• Agreement between researchers
• A common alternative to these particular forms
of reliability checks is for the researcher to make
their interpretive steps clear to readers by fully
detailing the steps, and presenting examples
that illustrate them