Interpretative phenomenological analysis

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) is a qualitative research method for gaining an insight into how an individual perceives a phenomenon.Using the technique, researchers gather qualitative data from the individual using one of a number of techniques such as interview or focus group. The responses given are then intrepreted by the researcher to extract themes relevant to their research question. The technique is similar in approach to grounded theory in that the researcher does not start the data collection with hypotheses already in mind. Instead, the data defines how the research question is answered.IPA can be used to answer such questions as why soldiers decide to enlist or what is it like to lose a limb.

IPA is "phenomenological" because, rather than trying to make objective descriptions, it focuses on the uniqueness of an individual's thoughts and perceptions. Thus, it relies on a researcher's capacity to become immersed in the private world of each participant as a phenomenological insider.Nevertheless, IPA is "interpretive" because the researcher must also make sense of the participant's experience in a way that addresses a particular research question.

IPA is a bottom-up, inductive approach, that avoids prior assumptions.

The researcher begins by recruiting participants who have expertise with the phenomenon under study by virtue of it being an integral part of their life experiences.An IPA analysis is understood to be subjective, resulting from the participants and researcher's act of coming to terms with the phenomenon.

Unlike quantitative methods, IPA encourages an open-ended dialog between the researcher and participants and may, therefore, lead to unforeseen answers, including a new perspective on the research question.

Thus, IPA supports data-driven theorizing.

Data used in an analysis may come from structured one-on-one interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, experience diaries, and other qualitative methods of data collection.An IPA analysis typically involves 5 to 15 participants and includes a number of verbatim excerpts from the data.IPA may juxtapose the personal and cultural aspects of each individual's constructed existence.

To reduce bias IPA employs several methods of cross-validation, including cooperative inquiry and researcher, method, and analysis triangulation.Cooperative inquiry allows participants to agree with or challenge a researcher's interpretation.Researcher triangulation involves having different researchers approach the same issue and then compare their analyses.

Method triangulation compares the results of different qualitative methods, while analysis triangulation compares the results of different types of analyses.

IPA has exhibited growing popularity among psychologists, especially those working in health psychology.

References

* Heron, J. (1996). Co-operative Inquiry: Research into the human condition. London: Sage.
* [http://www.gla.ac.uk/adulteducation/Personnel/Katie/KATE%20REID%20WebPage.htm Reid, K.,] Flowers, P. & Larkin, M. (2005). [http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archive/archive_home.cfm/volumeID_18-editionID_114-ArticleID_798-getfile_getPDF/thepsychologist%5C0105reid.pdf Exploring lived experience,] [http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/ The Psychologist,] 18(1), 20-23.
* Shaw, R. L. (2001). [http://www.hs.le.ac.uk/research/qualquan/Shaw_HPU2001.pdf Why use interpretative phenomenological analysis in Health Psychology?] Health Psychology Update, 10(4), 48-52.
* Smith, J., Jarman, M. & Osborne, M. (1999). Doing interpretative phenomenological analysis. In M. Murray & K. Chamberlain (Eds.), Qualitative Health Psychology. London: Sage.
* Smith, J.A. and Osborn, M. (2003) Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J.A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Methods. London: Sage.

See also

*Action research
*Emic and etic
*Ethnography
*Jonathan Smith (psychologist)
*Participatory action research
*Phenomenology
*Triangulation (social science)