Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis Rachel Shaw Aston University r.l.shaw@aston.ac.uk

1. Interpretative Phenomenological AnalysisRachel ShawAston Universityr.l.shaw@aston.ac.uk

2. Objectives • To introduce the theoretical underpinnings of IPA • To outline the relationship between IPA in Psychology • To describe the appropriate research questions, sampling & data collection methods • To describe analytic process • To offer the opportunity to do some IPA • To offer some suggestions for emphasis in teaching • To offer some suggestions for supervising IPA projects

3. Assumptions & aims of IPA • People are “self-interpreting beings” (Taylor, 1985) • Interpretative activity - “sense-making” – is central to human experience & action • Central concern: how do people make sense of their experiences? • Dual Aim - To provide: • an in-depth exploration of people’s lived experiences • a close examination of how people make sense of these experiences

4. Theoretical underpinnings of IPA • Phenomenology • Concerned with how things appear to us in experience • As individuals, how do we perceive & talk about objects & events • This is in contrast with: • The attempt to produce an objective statement about the object or event in itself • Examining the event or object in terms of pre-existing conceptual or scientific criteria

5. Theoretical underpinnings of IPA • Hermeneutic inquiry • Concerned with people as interpreting and sense-making individuals • IPA’s aim is achieved through interpretative activity on the part of the researcher • Research is a dynamic process & the researcher has an active role • Researcher aims to assume an insider perspective (Conrad, 1987) – to stand in the shoes of the participant

6. Theoretical underpinnings of IPA • Double hermeneutic (dual interpretation process) • Access to the participant’s experience depends on, & is complicated by, the researcher’s own conceptions • These processes are necessary in order to make sense of that other personal world through a process of interpretative activity • “the participants are tying to make sense of their world; the researcher is trying to make sense of the participants trying to make sense of their world.” (Smith & Osborn, 2003: 51)

7. Theoretical underpinnings of IPA • Idiography • Focusing on the particular rather than the universal • Nomothetic studies work at the group/population level to make probabilistic claims/predictions • Idiographic studies work at the individual level to make specific statements about those individuals • NOT either/or, rather we argue for: “(a) the intensive examination of the individual in her or his own right as an intrinsic part of psychology’s remit, and (b) that the logical route to universal laws & structures is an idiographic-nomothetic one” (Harré, 1979 cited in Smith & Eatough, 2006: 326)

8. Basic principles of IPA • Inductive – rejects the hypothesis in favour of open-ended questions • Idiographic – works at the individual level • Assumes agency to the individual • Individuals actively interpret their experiences & their world (in fact we can’t not interpret) • It is concerned with understanding individuals’ lived experiences & how they make sense of those experiences • It is data-driven (bottom-up) – prioritises participants’ accounts • Research is a dynamic process – the researcher is active in the research

9. IPA and Psychology • Cognition is a central analytic concern • Social cognition: “a concern with unravelling the relationship between what people think (cognition), say (account) and do (behaviour)” (Smith & Eatough, 2006:325) • IPA method is in contrast to cognitive psychology: • Cognitive psychology as a science of meaning-making rather than information processing (Bruner, 1990)

10. Research questions in IPA • Open-ended questions (rather than hypotheses) to gain rich & detailed descriptions of the phenomenon being studied • How do people make the decision whether or not to have a genetic test? • What does jealousy feel like? • How do people view voluntary childlessness? • Focus – significant issues either ongoing or at a critical juncture in life: • Identity, sense of self • Hot cognition – current issues, emotive, dilemmatic • Cool cognition – longer term, reflection across life course • Key – meticulous exploration of lived experience of the participant

11. Sampling & data collection • Small sample sizes because of the case-by-case, idiographic approach to analysis • How many? It depends on: • One’s commitment to the case study level of analysis • The richness of the individual cases • How one wants to compare or contrast cases • The pragmatic restrictions one is working under • Data collection needs to focus on experience & recognise multiple influences on that experience • Semi-structured interviews

12. Doing the analysisIdentifying Themes • Identify themes in the first case • This involves lots of reading & re-reading • Write comments in the left margin: summaries, associations, connections, preliminary interpretations • Document emerging theme titles in the right margin: these need not be definitive but should enable you to articulate something about the concept identified

13. Theme Clusters • Looking for connections: list the emerging themes & look for connections between them • Cluster themes together into super-ordinate themes made up of subordinate themes • Create a table of master themes • Ensure each theme is represented by data in the transcript to avoid researcher bias

14. Continuing with Other Cases • Continue with other cases • Start with the master themes from case 1 & look for further evidence in case 2 • Be ready for new themes to emerge in case 2 • The process is cyclical: go back case 1 to see if they are represented there also • Be prepared to go over the phases of analysis several times, going back over transcripts & rethinking theme clusters

15. Writing Up • This is the final stage of analysis • The aim is to translate your themes into a narrative account • Deciding which themes to focus on requires you to be selective • The choice is not purely based on prevalence but also on the richness of particular passages that highlight the theme & how the theme illuminates other aspects of the account

16. Tips for emphasis in teaching • IPA is about individuals’ experiences • IPA is interpretative –we want participants to reflect on & interpret their experiences in the interview & we want to interpret them in the analysis • Interviews are analysed on a case-by-case basis (there may only one case – a case study) • Doing IPA is a creative process – the active interpretative role of the researcher is valued • An IPA analysis usually reveals something about participants’ meaning-making processes & how an event or state impacts on identity

17. Tips for supervision • IPA involves in-depth & systematic exploration of lived experiences • Homogeneous sample – people who have had the same experience • Interviews need to focus on concrete experiences & participants’ reflections on those experiences • Detailed transcription coding is not always necessary • Analysis is time consuming – don’t leave it too late

18. Key references • Smith, J.A. & Eatough, V. (2006) Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In G.M. Breakwell, S. Hammond, C. Fife-Schaw & J.A. Smith (Eds) Research Methods in Psychology (3rd edition). London: Sage. • Smith, J.A. & Osborn, M. (2003) Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J.A. Smith (Ed) Qualitative Psychology: a practical guide to research methods. London: Sage.[A 2nd edition is available published 2008.] • Smith, J.A. & Osborn, M. (2004) Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In G.M. Breakwell (Ed) Doing social psychology research. Oxford: BPS Blackwell.