section 1: introducing applied qualitative research in ... file3 applying qualitative research in...

v

Contents

Notes on the contributors vii

Section 1: Introducing Applied Qualitative Research in Psychology

1. Applying Qualitative Research in Psychology 3Joanna Brooks and Nigel King

2. Approaches to Qualitative Psychology 14Joanna Brooks and Nigel King

3. Carrying Out an Applied Qualitative Research Project 33Nigel King and Joanna Brooks

Section 2: Real World Examples of Applied Qualitative Research

4. Exploring Men’s Experiences of Diagnosis and Treatment for Prostate Cancer 69Peter Branney, Clare Strickland, Frances Darby, Lisa White and Sunjay Jain

5. Using Interpretative Phenomenological Psychology in Organisational Research with Working Carers 86Leah Tomkins

6. Participatory Methods in Research with Children: The Scripted Cartoons Narrative of Bullying (SCAN) Drawings Method 101Helen Cowie and Dawn Jennifer

7. Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis in Conjunction with the Think Aloud Technique to Examine Experience of Living with Disfiguring Conditions with a View to Developing Psychosocial Interventions 115Andrew Thompson

Copyrighted material – 9781137359124


vi CONTENTS

8. Methods for Community Research, Action and Change 132Michael Murray and Katie Wright-Bevans

9. Using Discourse Analysis in Social Psychology 144Kirsty Budds, Abigail Locke and Viv Burr

10. Digging Deeper: Using Grounded Theory to Explore Meanings of Gardens and Gardening across the Lifespan 158Harriet Gross and Vicky Alfrey

11. Understanding Disability, Physical Activity and Sport through Innovative Qualitative Methods: Mobile Interviewing, Autophotography and Creative Non-fiction 175Brett Smith and Anthony Papathomas

12. Exploring the Response to Diversity and Equality in English Prisons: An Appreciative Inquiry 188Victoria Lavis, Charles Elliott and Malcolm Cowburn

13. Using Construct Elicitation and Laddering in the Education of Social Work Students: Exercises in Reflexive Practice 210Viv Burr and Nigel King

14. The Pictor Technique: Exploring Experiences of Collaborative Working from the Perspectives of Generalist and Specialist Nurses 221Nigel King, Joanna Brooks, Alison Bravington, Beth Hardy, Jane Melvin and David Wilde

Section 3: Issues in Applying Qualitative Psychology in Real World Settings

15. Using Multiple Methods in Applied Qualitative Research 237Rachel Shaw and David Hiles

16. Public Involvement in Qualitative Research 251Delia Muir

17. Disseminating Qualitative Research: From Clarity of Writing to Collaborative Action 267Flora Cornish and Sarah Honeywell

Index 283



3

Applying Qualitative Research in PsychologyJoanna Brooks and Nigel King

The use of qualitative research methods in psychology has proliferated rapidly over recent years. In the United Kingdom, undergraduate psychology courses are expected, according to benchmarks stipulated by the discipline’s professional body (the British Psychological Society [BPS]), to cover qualitative methods, and the great majority of psychology courses include at least one module cover-ing qualitative research methods as a matter of course. The BPS’s Qualitative Methods section (QMiP: Qualitative Methods in Psychology) is now over ten years old and one of the largest sections in the Society. In the United States, the American Psychological Association (APA) set up a new ‘Society for Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology’ (SQiP) as part of their methodology section in 2013. There is increasing international interest in the use of qualitative methods amongst stu-dents, academics and clinicians in many sub-disciplines of psychology.

This trend is reflected in the recent and continuing publication of a number of popular and excellent textbooks on qualitative psychology methods (see the recommended reading list at the end of this chapter). So why do we see the need for yet another qualitative psychology textbook? What this book has to offer is its focus on situating qualitative psychological research in real-world settings. We see ourselves as applied psychologists – our focus is on using psychology the-ory and methods in a wide range of ‘real-world’ settings, undertaking research that addresses practical issues and has a meaningful impact on the society in which we live.

In this book, we situate qualitative psychological research in applied set-tings, and demonstrate the genuine utility of qualitative research methods. By showing some of the many different ways in which sub-disciplines and areas of psychology have usefully applied qualitative research methods, we very much hope that this book will appeal to those potentially disengaged from the abstract notion of research methods by demonstrating how and why qualitative research matters. In this chapter, we will introduce you to qualitative psychology and discuss how qualitative research differs from other ways of undertaking research in psychology. We will explain why we think

1Copyrighted material – 9781137359124


4 INTRODUCING APPLIED QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN PSYCHOLOGY

qualitative research has an important role to play in applied settings for psy-chologists, and describe the purpose and structure of this book.

What is qualitative psychology?

Qualitative psychology is often introduced as an alternative to quantitative psychology and it is highly unlikely that you are reading a book such as this without some awareness of the differences between the two approaches. Often, ‘qualitative’ and ‘quantitative’ research are presented to those new to research and to research methods as two very distinct and opposing ways of undertaking research. This is not necessarily the case: sometimes using both qualitative and quantitative methods and taking what is known as a mixed-methods approach can be the most effective way to answer your research question (see Rachel Shaw and David Hiles in Chapter 15 for more on this). And this, of course, is the crux of the matter: your approach to research should be determined by what you are investigating, what you want to know and how you can best find this out. It is not that one type of approach is better than another, but that different research questions require different research methods to provide the best and fullest answer. In this book, we will show you how, in applied psychology research (and we will go on to define what we mean by ‘applied’ research shortly), qualitative work can usefully explore and elucidate real-world issues in a distinctive, informative and valuable way.

However, it is true that there are some key ways in which qualitative and quantitative approaches differ. Biggerstaff (2012, p. 177) suggests that ‘a practical definition [of qualitative research] points to methods that use language rather than numbers’. Quantitative research is primarily concerned with accurate measure-ment of a phenomenon and with describing things like the frequency of an occur-rence, or statistical associations between particular phenomena. Fundamentally, qualitative research in psychology is about the study of meaning. The focus in qualitative psychology is on people as meaning-makers, and on describing and understanding the ways in which we experience and interpret our world. As two distinct research paradigms, then, qualitative and quantitative research offer us rather different ways of thinking about the world (King and Horrocks, 2010).

Historically, the focus in contemporary psychology has been on quanti-tative research, and the relatively recent increase in qualitative work being undertaken in the discipline does mark a shift in approach. Psychology itself is a relatively new academic discipline, developing in the second half of the nineteenth century, and the early psychologists (such as William James) were certainly interested in thinking about notions familiar to qualitative psycholo-gists such as subjective perception and personal accounts. However, from the beginning of the twentieth century onwards, mainstream psychology became increasingly concerned with establishing itself as a traditional ‘sci-ence’, measuring external and observable variables (Ashworth, 2003). Whilst other important fields of psychology such as psychoanalysis are based on



APPLYING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN PSYCHOLOGY 5

qualitative psychology methods (such as the narrative case study), and key figures in psychology (for example, Jean Piaget) certainly made use of qualita-tive observational methods and interviews, it was not really until the 1980s that there was increased focus on the development of qualitative psychology research as a legitimate and defensible method (Madill, 2015).

As the contents of this book clearly demonstrate, qualitative psychology research is an umbrella term and not a single ‘homogenous entity’ (Smith, 2003, p. 2). There are a number of different qualitative research approaches with different perspectives and procedures (we will go on to look at this in more detail in Chapters 2 and 3). What you want to research and your research question will determine what is a suitable method for you (be that a qualitative or a quantitative method, and if a qualitative method which one) – as we dis-cuss in Chapter 2, it is important that your research question is consistent with the approach you are using and vice versa. In this book, we will show how a number of research questions that one may wish to address in applied settings can be usefully and valuably answered using qualitative methods. Next, we will explain what we mean by ‘applied’ psychology and then we will move on to explain the relevance of qualitative psychology in applied settings.

What is ‘applied’ psychology?

So what is ‘applied’ research and how does it differ from other types of research? Notions of an ‘applied science’ originally derive from distinc-tions made in the natural sciences between ‘pure’ and ‘applied’ research. Traditionally, the notion of ‘applied’ research refers to taking knowledge derived from ‘pure’ or ‘basic’ research and applying it in the wider world beyond the four walls of the scientific laboratory. In this context, it is fairly easy to distinguish between the ‘pure’ and the ‘applied’ in terms of their focus on either the theoretical (refuting or supporting scientific theory) or the experimental (applying and utilising this knowledge).

‘Applied’ psychology is the application of psychological knowledge to solve practical issues and problems in real-world settings. As psychology covers a wide range of different areas, there are many different possible ‘real-world’ settings including health, clinical, educational, occupational, social and com-munity settings. For qualitative psychologists, whose central focus is often on human experience, notions of ‘pure’ and ‘applied’ research can be difficult to reconcile with an essential concern with human beings as meaning-makers. Traditional notions of moving from basic to applied research are often based on reductionism, the idea that we can understand larger systems by reducing them to their constituent parts. For example, understanding an illness in terms of biochemical activity or in terms of genetics may be very helpful indeed in ena-bling researchers to identify a cure for that illness. However, reductionism can be more problematic when considered in terms of human behaviour and experi-ence. Take the example of religious or mystical experience. Professor Michael




Persinger has suggested that stimulation of the temporal lobes (achieved by wearing a piece of apparatus known as ‘the God helmet’) is associated with sub-jects reporting ‘mystical experience and altered states’ (Persinger et al., 2010). But even if it is possible to identify which particular part of the brain it is that is ‘activated’ in ‘mystical experience’, this doesn’t mean that such experiences are now explained and understood. Others researching mystical experience might suggest that is how one interprets or frames the experience which is the crucial determinant of the perceived nature of the experience. What qualitative research can do is capture what people make of such experiences – how, for example, such an experience might contribute towards or be impacted on by religious identity, as well as consider what other factors might contribute to this. In the United Kingdom, for example, Professor Adrian Coyle has shown how qualitative research can develop useful insights into the psychology of religion (e.g. Coyle, 2008). An important point here is that, especially for those undertaking research in applied settings, there is no such thing as ‘decontextual-ised’ experience: experience, mystical or otherwise, does not occur in a vacuum. Trying to create a traditionally scientific ‘objective’ setting for our research may well result in us creating a situation so artificial that it has little to tell us about what happens in the ‘real world’ outside of our controlled environment.

For qualitative psychologists, rather than defining ‘applied’ research as a dichotomous alternative to ‘pure’ or ‘basic’ research, we think that a more meaningful distinction can be made in terms of the main focus of a piece of research. This may vary from those studies aimed primarily at addressing academic debates to those with a very pragmatic and practical research focus. Thus, for qualitative research in psychology, one can consider at what point on this ‘academic to practical’ spectrum a particular piece of work is situated, and consider this in dimensional rather than dichotomous terms. This means that we can think about applied qualitative psychology in terms of applying qualitative psychological approaches to practical issues in the world beyond academia. This does not mean that very practically-focused research cannot contribute to academic knowledge: it means thinking about who the research is principally addressing. We believe that for qualitative psychologists whose work involves them taking a ‘hands-on’ approach to pragmatic research ques-tions in real-world settings, it is essential that the methods they use should be able to genuinely incorporate the concerns of those whom the research is intending to help, as well as being accessible and intelligible to its intended audience. We also think that qualitative research has particular utility in applied settings, and we will now move on to explain why.

Why use qualitative methods in applied psychology?

We have briefly introduced what is meant by ‘qualitative psychology’ (more on this in Chapter 2) and ‘applied psychology’. So why might qualitative methods be an appropriate choice in applied settings?




The first point to make is that qualitative methods will not always be the most appropriate choice. As we have already said, different research methods are appropriate for different research questions. As Willig (2013) points out, research questions are best conceptualised in creative terms rather than in any mechanistic sense – your question should be ‘How can I find out about some-thing?’ rather than ‘How can I apply appropriate techniques to this topic?’ What Kinmond (2012) refers to as the ‘So what?’ test (‘Why is this research relevant and what useful knowledge will this research provide?’) is also likely to be especially pertinent in research undertaken in applied settings.

There may be both practical and philosophical reasons for choosing to use qualitative methods in applied psychological research. We have already suggested that qualitative methods can offer a rather different way of think-ing about the world compared to quantitative methods, and we will address this in more detail in Chapter 2. Qualitative methods are often appropriate when a researcher is interested in examining a psychology-related topic in an applied setting in depth rather than in breadth. Qualitative methods can help psychologists and others understand particular cases in rich detail, which may very useful in illuminating what is happening in a particular applied setting, and why – they may well be able to help explain what is going on behind the headline numbers and statistics, or why people are behaving in particular ways. For example, we undertook a qualitative study in which we interviewed people who had back pain and their spouses (Brooks et al., 2013). We were interested in finding out why some of our sample had managed to keep working with their condition, whilst others (with a clinically comparable condition) had not. Our findings highlighted ways in which generally under-researched wider social circumstances, including stigmatising socio-cultural beliefs about ‘benefit cheats’ and ‘malingering’, can contribute to different occupational outcomes. We found that people out of work were so anxious about others being sceptical of their back pain condition that they seemed to have become entrenched in a position whereby it was crucial that they were perceived as completely disabled. This presents an obvious tension with accepted clinical recommendations for the management of back pain which emphasise remaining active – in adopting this stance and limiting activity, the chances of any return to work and economic activity become increasingly remote. Qualitative work may be able to usefully highlight potential limita-tions of mainstream theory and taken for granted assumptions – for example, discursive approaches (such as those used by Kirsty Budds and colleagues in Chapter 9 of this book in their work on ‘older’ mothers) can effectively challenge taken for granted assumptions and discourses, as well as informing and promoting action and change (Willig, 1999). Qualitative methods are also often very useful in applied settings when a research topic is relatively new and unresearched – for example, in exploratory work which is primarily looking to explore phenomena rather than seeking to confirm hypotheses. Qualitative work can generate new, relevant questions for future research (be that qualitative and/or quantitative). In Chapter 4 in this volume, you can find




an example of this type of work: Peter Branney and colleagues describe how the one-day workshop events they ran with men with prostate cancer gave the research team the opportunity to learn more about the topic prior to designing a research programme.

As qualitative methods have become more accepted not just in the field of psychology but also more widely, their utility is increasingly recognised in applied settings. In health settings, for example, incorporating patient views is seen as increasingly important by those developing policies and initiatives (and see Delia Muir’s discussion in Chapter 16 for more on this). There is an acknowledged need for more community-centred ways of working in health and social care, and an increasing focus on empowering individuals and com-munities to engage in participatory development of, and decision making about, health and social care services (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2014). This shift has been mirrored by a change in the way that the public interacts with and contributes to health and social care research. Patient and public involvement in health care research has become increas-ingly common both in the UK and internationally (Gillard et al., 2012) and is often now a requirement for publicly funded research (there is addition-ally an important moral argument that society has a right to both shape and participate in publicly funded research). At the core of public involvement is recognition of the valuable understanding and knowledge gained through lived experience. Qualitative research can be very useful in exploring patients’ perspectives (as well as allowing these stories to be heard), and qualitative work is now often a routine component of much applied health research (McParland and Flowers, 2012).

In applied settings, qualitative research can be accessible and powerful, and can incorporate rather novel ways of working to achieve research aims whilst including participant groups typically deemed ‘hard to reach’. With the drive to see members of the public as active members of research teams rather than passive subjects of research, for example, there has been a bur-geoning interest in participatory approaches to research, which often utilise qualitative methods. Participatory research methods seek to actively involve as ‘co-researchers’ those who would conventionally be regarded as ‘partici-pants’, and places strong emphasis on learning from the process of research co-production as much as from research outcomes. Where conventional forms of knowledge production distinguish between knowledge producers and consumers, co-production offers an alternative to find ways of generating, disseminating and using knowledge that blur these boundaries (Borg et al., 2012). There are striking similarities between criticisms which have been levelled at participatory approaches and those levelled at qualitative methods, suggesting that both are ‘soft’ (critiques often founded on crucial misunder-standings around the appropriate criteria on which such research should be judged) (Hammersley, 1992; Cornwall and Jewkes, 1995). There are interest-ing parallels with debates around how to ensure and demonstrate the quality of participatory research, and the development over the last 30 years of an




increasingly secure foothold in psychology for qualitative methods, driven by ‘the development of qualitative research as method, with a concern for rigour and an interest in epistemology’ (Madill and Todd, 2002, p. 5). Qualitative psychologists have the opportunity to usefully contribute to such applied research (e.g. drawing on their expertise to show how rich qualitative findings from individual participants might be meaningfully summarised and shared), and several of the authors in this book – see Peter Branney and colleagues, Chapter 4; Helen Cowie and Dawn Jennifer, Chapter 6; Michael Murray and Katie Wright-Bevans, Chapter 8; Victoria Lavis and colleagues, Chapter 12 – explicitly identify their work as taking a participatory approach.

Qualitative research can also offer alternative strategies to empower and engage participants by developing innovative methods which are accessible to and engaging for participants. For example, arts-based research, using a crea-tive format (which may include visual arts, music, dance, performance, poetry or some form of narrative inquiry method be it autobiography or fiction) to develop, explore, collect, analyse and/or present data (Leavy, 2008) can facilitate engagement and inclusivity, disrupting habitual ways of looking at a substantive research topic and expediting knowledge translation and transfer-ability (Leavy, 2008; Lapum et al., 2011). Such methods are also potentially far more accessible to diverse stakeholders and multiple audiences in applied settings (Gergen and Gergen, 2010). In Chapter 8, Michael Murray and Katie Wright-Bevans describe a community arts project undertaken with older residents of a disadvantaged neighbourhood, and explain how, as well as facilitating understanding, their approach promoted participants’ social inter-action and community empowerment. Participants in this project expressed particular satisfaction in being able to challenge negative representations of their community through public exhibition of the artwork they produced, which attracted attention from elected officials and the media as well as from other local residents.

Another example of the ways in which qualitative psychologists in applied settings have developed useful and innovative ways to facilitate reflection and talk is through the use of visual methods and materials (we will talk about this in more detail in Chapter 3). Pre-existing visual materials can be used to elicit verbal data – see Helen Cowie and Dawn Jennifer’s chapter on the use of pictorial vignettes to actively engage children and young people in research. Alternatively, participants may themselves produce some form of visual mate-rial that can be treated as data in its own right, or used to facilitate talk. In Chapter 14, we and some of our colleagues present a study in which we used a visual tool called ‘the Pictor technique’ (King et al., 2013) – using this method, participants create visual ‘Pictor’ charts which are used both as a basis for a research interview and as part of the research data in analysis. The Pictor technique was developed in response to some challenges we encountered when asking health care professionals to reflect on how they worked with others to provide patient care. Often, in an interview situation, it can be hard for a participant to bring to mind all of those who were involved in a particular




case, and equally difficult for the researcher to remember these details. When asked about their own involvement in and understanding of collaborative working, health care staff can sometimes present an ‘official’ version of care procedures, rather than an account of their own direct lived experience (Ross et al., 2005). Finally, especially when it comes to experienced professionals, the way they work can become so habitual and taken for granted that it is quite difficult for them to reflect on this in any depth in a research interview. The Pictor technique, which involves participants creating simple visual charts to represent a case of collaborative working, was developed in direct response to these challenges, and we describe how we used this method in a large quali-tative study with different health and social care professionals in Chapter 14. This and other techniques used by qualitative psychologists to help facilitate self-reflection (see Chapter 13 of this book, in which Nigel and our colleague Viv Burr present their work using personal construct psychology methods to facilitate reflexive practice amongst social work students) have obvious appli-cations in applied settings where the ability to demonstrate one’s proficiencies as a ‘reflexive practitioner’ are often important elements of practice-based professional development.

Overview of the book

In this book, we take a highly pragmatic approach which first and foremost situates qualitative psychological research in applied real-world settings. There are very many excellent resources available for psychology students wanting to know how to undertake qualitative research (see the recommended reading list at the end of this chapter for examples of some very good text-books on this subject). The differentiating focus in this book is on showing you how qualitative psychological research is actually undertaken by quali-tative psychology researchers in applied settings. We have examples from a wide range of psychology sub-disciplines including (amongst others) health, organisational, educational, clinical, community, social, forensic and envi-ronmental psychology. Following an introduction to the different approaches taken by qualitative researchers (Chapter 2) and guidance on the main steps undertaken when doing a qualitative study in psychology (Chapter 3), we will then present examples of qualitative research undertaken in different areas of psychology. Expert psychology researchers working in these different areas will explain how they have used qualitative methods in their work to show you how qualitative research can be used in applied settings. Each chapter provides an overview of the particular area of psychology in which the work was undertaken, a description of the qualitative approach used, a summary of the applied setting in which the work was undertaken and a specific exam-ple of the author’s research showing how qualitative methods contributed to understandings in this area of work. The final section of the book covers some




of the specific issues that arise in applied qualitative research including public involvement in research and the use of mixed (qualitative and quantitative) methods. Finally, Flora Cornish and Sarah Honeywell offer some thoughts on how findings from qualitative research can be used in applied fields so that research findings can be translated into actionable findings with real-world impact. We hope that reading about these varied worked examples of qualitative research will give you an idea of some of the interesting qualitative research undertaken by applied psychologists – and inspire you in your own qualitative research work.

Recommended reading

There are a number of excellent textbooks available which provide a detailed introduction for psychologists looking for guidance on how to go about undertaking a qualitative research project. Some of the ones we use and rec-ommend to our students are:

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE.

Forrester, M. (ed.) (2010). Doing Qualitative Research in Psychology: A Practical Guide. London: SAGE.

Frost, N. (2011). Qualitative Research Methods in Psychology: Combining Core Approaches. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Langdridge, D. and Hagger-Johnson, G. (2011). Introduction to Research Methods and Data Analysis in Psychology (3rd edn). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Smith, J. (ed.) (2007). Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods (2nd edn). London: SAGE.

Sullivan, C., Gibson, S. and Riley S. (eds) (2012). Doing Your Qualitative Psychology Project. London: SAGE.

Willig, C. (2013). Introducing Qualitative Research in Psychology (3rd edn). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Willig, C. and Stainton-Rogers, W. (2013). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology. London: SAGE.

References

Ashworth, P. (2003). The origins of qualitative psychology. In J. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. London: SAGE, 4–24.

Biggerstaff, D. (2012). Qualitative research methods in psychology. In G. Rossi (Ed.), Psychology: Selected Papers. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech, pp. 175–206.

Borg, M., Karlsson, B., Hesook, S.K. and McCormack, B. (2012). Opening up for many voices in knowledge construction. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1), Art. 1.




Brooks, J., McCluskey, S., King, N. and Burton, A. K. (2013). Illness perceptions in the context of differing work participation outcomes: exploring the influence of significant others in persistent back pain. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 14, 48, doi:10.1186/147124741448.

Cornwall, A. and Jewkes, R. (1995). The use of qualitative methods: What is participa-tory research? Social Science and Medicine, 41(12), 1667–1676.

Coyle, A. (2008). Qualitative methods and ‘the (partly) ineffable’ in psychological research on religion and spirituality. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5(1), 56–67.

Gergen, K. and Gergen, M. (2010). Performative social science and psychology. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(1), Art. 11.

Gillard, S., Simons, L., Turner, K., Lucock, M. and Edwards, C. (2012). Patient and public involvement in the coproduction of knowledge: Reflection on the analysis of qualitative data in a mental health study. Qualitative Health Research, 22(8), 1126–1137.

Hammersley, M. (1992). What’s Wrong with Ethnography? Routledge: London.King, N., Bravington, A., Brooks, J., Hardy, B., Melvin, J. and Wilde, D. (2013). The

Pictor technique: A method for exploring the experience of collaborative working. Qualitative Health Research, 23(8), 1138–1152.

King, N. and Horrocks, C. (2010). Interview in Qualitative Research. London: SAGE.Kinmond, K. (2012). Coming up with a research question. In C. Sullivan, S. Gibson

and S. Riley (Eds.), Doing Your Qualitative Psychology Project. London: SAGE, pp. 23–36.

Lapum, J., Ruttonsha, P., Church, K., Yau, T. and Matthews-David, A. (2011). Employing the arts in research as an analytical tool and dissemination method: Interpreting experience through the aesthetic. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(1), 100–115.

Leavy, P. (2008). Method Meets Art: Arts-Based Research Practice. New York: The Guilford Press.

Madill A. (2015). Let a thousand flowers bloom. The Psychologist, 28, 656–658.Madill, A. and Todd, K.Z. (2002). Proposal to the Council of the British Psychological

Society for the Formation of a New Section of the Society on ‘Qualitative Methods in Psychology’. Retrieved 11 June 2015 from: www.academia.edu/1635472/Madill_A._Todd_K._Z._2002_._Proposal_to_the_Council_of_the_British_Psychological_Society_for_the_formation_of_a_new_Section_of_the_Society_on_Qualitative_Methods_in_Psychology.

McParland, J. and Flowers, P. (2012). Nine lessons and recommendations from the conduct of focus group research in chronic pain samples. British Journal of Health Psychology, 17(3), 492–504.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2014). Community engagement to improve health. NICE local government briefings 2014. Available from www.publications.nice.org.uk/lgb16.

Persinger, M.A., Saroka, K., Koren, S.A. and St-Pierre, L.S. (2010). The electromag-netic induction of mystical and altered states within the laboratory. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(7), 808–830.

Ross, A., King, N. and Firth, J. (2005). Interprofessional relationships and col-laborative working: Encouraging reflective practice. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 10(1). Retrieved 30 January 2017 from: www.nursingworld.org/MainMenuCategories/ANAMarketplace/ANAPeriodicals/OJIN/TableofContents/Volume102005/No1Jan05/tpc26_316010.html.




Smith, J. (2003). Introduction. In J. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. London: SAGE, pp. 1–3.

Willig, C. (Ed.) (1999). Applied Discourse Analysis: Social and Psychological Interventions. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Willig, C. (2013). Introducing Qualitative Research in Psychology (Third Edition). Maidenhead: Open University Press.



283

Index

abstraction, 92academia, discourse analysis and, 27across-participant strategies, 226–7,

230–2action

fictional global foundations for, 205fictional specific foundations for, 205political, collaborative research as,

279–80reflection, in community action, 134–5study data for AI, as guide to future,

201–6action orientation, 29action rationality, 70, 73active listening, 78Adobe Connect, 40AI. See appreciative inquiryAlfrey, Vicky, 23–4alternative subject positions, 146Alvesson, M., 99ambivalence, 93–4anonymity

in data collection, 51in qualitative research, 60–1

anxiety, 95–6applied examples

discourse analysis, 30grounded theory, 23–4philosophical positions, 23–4, 27

applied psychologydefining, 5–6qualitative methods, 6–10

applied qualitative researchavoiding harm in, 58–9confidentiality/anonymity in, 60–1debriefing in, 61–2honesty/integrity in, 62informed consent/deception, 59–60methodology. See methodologyparticipation framework, 70quality issues in, 54–7right to withdraw from, 60 See also qualitative research

applied settings, disciplined inquiry in, 243

appreciative ethnography phase, of AI study, 197

appreciative generative questions, 192–3appreciative inquiry (AI)

applying AI methods, 197–200appreciative ethnography phase, 197appreciative framed prisoner interviews,

197–8appreciative question, 194benefits of using, 206case example introduction, 195change, energy for, future action, 203–4coded data, intellectual interrogate, 202data collection/analysis framework,

191–5defining, 188designing stage, 190, 193destiny stage, 190–1, 193discovery stage, 189–90, 192dreaming stage, 190, 192elements of structure of, 189establishing foundation, future action,

203–4focus groups, staff, 200foundations for future action, 204–6four stages, data collection, 197–200framing/reframing, 193–4future action, as guide to, 201–6generate foundations, 202–3identify what’s working, 203narrative analysis, 194–5noting/data production SPSS, 201observational/ethnographical phase of,

193performing, 188reflections on methodology, 206–7reframe negative answer, 194stage of, 190–1study data analysis, 200–1survey to all prisoners, 199–200tasks performed, 198–200thematic analysis, 194–5use of AI, 196–7

a priori themes, 53



284 INDEX

Arnstein, S., 253Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation, 253arts-based methods, 46

community, 136–7See also community research, action/

changearts-based research, 9Ashworth, P., 99asset-based approach, 253asynchronous focus groups, 44–5attachments, 110attitudes, IPA and, 87audit trail, 56authority, role-based, 96autonomy in study participation, 69–70

individual, action rationality and, 73public participation, 83

autophotography, 176–8axial coding, 22Ayling, R., 40

Bakhtin, M., 181barriers to qualitative research, 269–70being, fundamental question of, 99Benner, P., 94Beresford, P., 262‘Beyond the Usual Suspects’ (Beresford), 262Bhatti, Mark, 160bias

hindsight, 259reflexivity and, 57

Biophilia Hypothesis (Wilson), 159. See also environmental psychology

Bogart, L. M., 253Boren, M. T., 120bracketing, 25brain, temporal lobe stimulation, 5–6Branney, P., 72Braun, V., 43, 44, 53, 194–5Bravington, A., 227Bright, D., 207British Psychological Service, 117Brooks, J. M., 18, 56Brown, L. M., 108Burr, Viv, 50Buse, K., 270bystanders, emotions of, 103

Cameron, K., 207Campbell, C., 135canonical narratives, 99care, morality and, 94care orientations, SCAN study, 110–11Cassell, C., 51

causal attributions, 106CDP. See critical discursive psychology

(CDP)Chamberlain, K., 42change processes, 141, 189, 206Charmaz, Kathy, 22children in research. See participatory meth-

ods, childrenchoice, of study participants, 72citizen, 69Clarke, V., 43, 44, 53, 194–5client-therapist relationship, 53clinical psychology, IPA and, 86, 116–17codes

thematic analysis and, 52–3think aloud example, 126

codingdescriptive/interpretive, 52discourse analysis and, 29in grounded theory, 23independent, 56IPA initial transcript, 124line-by-line, GT study, 167one-day participatory workshop, 79–81Pictor technique study, 233subcoding, 81–2vivo (GT theory), 167

cognition, discourse analysis and, 146–7cognitive dissonance, 46collaboration

community action research and, 133dissemination, of research via, 276–7participatory research and, 252–3public involvement research and, 261. See

also public involvement, in qualitative research

collaborative actionknowledge exchange, 278–9participatory workshops, 277–8

collaborative working, Pictor technique, 221–2. See also Pictor technique

combined methods research, 240communal autonomy, 69communication

openness/ease of, 53of qualitative research, 271

communicative rationality, 70community

arts-based methods, 46participatory research and, 253

community action researchaction/reflection, 134–5art and, 136–7collaboration and, 133



INDEX 285

community worker interviews, 139–40cycles of, evaluation and, 135–6data analysis, 140–1dissemination of, 135empowerment, 133–4ethical/power issues in use of, 142illustrative findings, 141information gathering, 138initial planning stage, 138–40participants, 139project development, 140psychology research and, 132–3reflections on project, 141–2study introduction, 137tools for, 134use of, 37–8

comparative analysis, 23concern, 90–1concrete examples, 211confidentiality, in qualitative research, 60–1conflict

in community action research, 135resolution, AI and, 189

conscientization, 134conscious beings, 24consent

informed. See informed consentprocessual, 122

construct, 30, 211construct elicitation

case example, 215–17inspecting constructs, 213–14ladder constructs, 214–15personal construct theory and (PCT),

210–12reflections on use of, 217–19using construct elicitation, 212–13

construction, in discourse analysis, 30, 152, 154

constructionist ontology, 144–5constructionists, grounded theory and, 22–4constructivist grounded theory, 37constructivist-interpretive method, 239context of experience, 91context-of-ideas, 96contextualisation, thematic Gestalt, 92contextualism, 17, 19–20Cooper, D. E., 91, 96co-production, participatory research and,

253Corbin, Juliet, 22Cornish, F., 135counselling psychology, 86counter-discourses, 146

covert observer, 46, 47Coyle, Adrian, 6creative non-fiction

autophotography, 176–8character development, 182as creative analytic practice, 178dialogue, use, 182edit story, 183embodiment/social relations, 182–3engage through writing, 182friends, share with, 183as performative, 185plot development, 183realist tales, 177–8reflections, 183–5risk of performing, 184scene setting, 183selectivity and, 183show, tell v., 182spinal cord injured, subjects of,

175–6story example, 178–80synthesis of results, 181–2tips to perform, 181–3writing, as inquiry method, 181

Creswell, J. W., 237critical discursive psychology (CDP), 147–9critical discursive psychology (CDP),

case example, 149–55applying CDP to qualitative data, 152–5doing CDP, 150–2introduction, 149–50reflections on use of method, 155

critical evaluation, 242critical qualitative method, 239critical realism, 18, 29critical sense-making, IPA and, 96–8crude realism, 18culturally shared discourses, 77cultural understanding, 19culture, linguistic repositories of meaning

and, 148–9cyberbullying research, 102

datagrounded theory, collection/analysis of, 23interrogating, 202reliability in think aloud technique, 120

data analysis, 51–2AI study, strategies for, 191–5community research, action, change,

140–1discourse analysis, 151in IPA study, 92–4, 119, 124–7



286 INDEX

data analysis (cont.)in one-day participatory workshop, 76–7public involvement qualitative research,

257of SCAN, 108–9template, 53thematic, 53–4themes/codes, 52–3

data collectionAI study, 191–5, 197analysis of. See data analysisdiscourse analysis, 150experiential expertise and, 121face-to-face individual interviews, 38–9four stages of, AI study, 197–200GT gardening study, 167in IPA study, 91–2, 118–19methodology. See methodology entriesin one-day participatory workshop, 76Pictor technique, 226public involvement qualitative research,

256–7therapeutic intervention and, 122using SCAN, 107–8

data-driven logic of inquiry, 241–2data transcription, discourse analysis, 150–1Deakin, H., 40debriefing, in research, 61–2deception, informed consent and, 59–60deductive approach, 241–2Delphi method, for focus groups, 45–6demographics of normality, 98Denzin, N. K., 239description, as selective, 18descriptive approach, 25descriptive coding, 52designing, AI and, 190, 193Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods

Research (Creswell), 237designing stage of AI, 189destiny, AI and, 189, 193diagrammatic methods, 50diary techniques, data collection, 51, 56dilemma, choice, 72direct communication, children and, 107direct quotes from participants, 56–7disciplinary reflexivity, 99disciplined inquiry, 240–3, 247discourse

context-of-ideas and, 96culturally shared, 77

discourse analysisapplied example, 30defining, 27–8

implications of, 117method key features, 29–30philosophical positioning, 28–9

discourse analysis, social psychology andanalytical concepts of, 148–9applying to quantitative data, 152–5constructions, stage five, 152, 154crisis in, 144–5critical discursive psychology (CDP),

147–55data analysis, 151data collection, 150discursive psychology (DP), 146–7Foucauldian discourse analysis (FDA) and,

145–6language, role in psychology, 145

Discourse and Social Psychology (Potter & Wetherell), 28

discourses of normality, 96, 97–8, 99discovery stage of AI, 189–92discursive accomplishments, discourse analy-

sis, 152, 154–5discursive constructions, 151–2discursive psychology, 28, 37, 145, 146–7dissemination methods

of public inquiry, 259of qualitative research, 272–7

double hermeneutic interpretation, 87DP. See discourse psychologydreaming stage, of AI, 189, 190, 192drivers, for participatory research, 254Duberley, J., 18dyadic interview, 43

Eccles, M., 269, 272Ecomaps, 50Edley, Nigel, 147–9effectiveness task, 198Elliott, E., 256Elwood, J., 102emancipatory research, participatory, 252–3embodied being, 25embodiment, 24, 25emergent themes, 53, 88empathy, 19empiricism, 14–15empowerment

community action research and, 133–4participatory research and, 253

engagement, 90–1England, M., 256Entwistle, V. A., 261environmental psychology

age/health/othering strategies, 169



INDEX 287

applying GT in the garden, 162–5defining, 158–9ethical issues, 161–2findings, reflections on, 170–1interviews, data collection, sheltered

housing, 165–8methodology used, grounded theory, 160–1qualitative methods, using in, 159–60reflexivity in, 171study introduction, gardening, 162themes of interviews, 163–4, 167–8work, gardening as, 168–9

epistemology, 15contextualism and, 19discourse analysis and, 28grounded theory, 22–3IPA and, 118qualitative neo-positivism and, 18radical constructionalism, 20realist/relativist, 19

epoche, 24–5Ericsson, K., 120escapism, GT and, 164essences, 24–5ethics in research, 58–62

clinical psychologists and, 121–2community action, 142confidentiality/anonymity and, 60–1debriefing, 61–2environmental psychology, 161–2harm avoiding, 58–9honesty/integrity, in result representation, 62informed consent, deception and, 59–60participatory, 254power imbalances, 106right to withdraw, 60

ethnographical style observations, 135ethnographic creative non-fiction, 181–2. See

also creative non-fictionevaluation

community action research and, 135–6public involvement, 261

Evans-Pritchard, 46evidence-based practice

health care mode, 116movement, 267–8paradigm, evidence hierarchy, 268

experiential methods, in organisational research, 90–1

expert patients, 71explanation-driven logic of inquiry, 241–2

FaceTime, 40face-to-face individual interviews, 38–9

facilitator perspective, 78–9false dilemma, 72family therapy, Pictor technique and,

221Farrington, D. P., 103FDA. See Foucauldian discourse analysis

(FDA)fear, phenomenology and, 24feedback

community action research and, 136respondent, 56usability, 123

feminism, 241feminist method, 239Festinger, L., 46, 47, 59field notes, format for observatory, 49Fletcher, A. J., 45Flick, U., 43focus groups, 42–5

in public involvement, 260short-term public participation, 74. See

also short-term public participation, example

Foucauldian discourse analysis (FDA), 27–9, 96, 145–6, 151, 194. See also discourse analysis entries

Foucault, Michel, 28, 96, 99, 145–6Fox, S., 90framework analysis, one-day participatory

workshopcharting, 81–2coding, 79–81mapping/interpretation, 82–3thematic framework, identifying,

77–9Freud, Sigmund, 38function

in discourse analysis, 30thematic Gestalt, 92

functional reflexivity, 99Furness, P. J., 51

Garrud, P., 51gender

balance in interviews, 166in focus groups, power and, 43

Gifford, R., 161Gillard, S., 257giving voice, IPA and, 118Glaser, Barney, 21–4God helmet, 6Google+ Hangout, 40Greene, J. C., 238–40green exercise, 158



288 INDEX

Grimshaw, J., 269, 272Gross, Harriet, 23–4grounded theory (GT), 21–4, 117

applied example, 23–4choosing, 37defining, 21–2environmental psychology and, 160–1. See

also environmental psychologykey features of, 23philosophical position, 22–3

group interviewsfocus groups, 42–5other types of, 45–6trial steering groups, 71

groupshierarchical structures of, 109marginalised, public involvement research,

261–2GT. See grounded theory (GT)Guba, E. G., 55, 240, 241

Haak, M. V. D., 125Hardy, B., 224harm, avoiding, in research, 58–9Harper, D., 116, 117health care evidence-based practice model,

116Health Care Professions Council (HCPC)

UK, 116health psychology, 86Health settings, qualitative research and, 8Heideggarian tradition, 90–1, 99Heidegger, Martin, 24, 90–1, 99heliotropic principle, 189Helms Mills, J., 97hermeneutic position, IPA, 118Hesse-Biber, S., 239heterogeneity in focus groups, 43hierarchical organisation

construct system, 212themes, 53

hierarchical structures of groups, 109Hiles, D. R., 240, 241, 247hindsight bias, 259Hinrichs, G., 189Hobson, Thomas, 72Hobson’s choice, 72home-based world, 165homogeneity in focus groups, 43Horrocks, C., 39, 41Hudson, Adrienne, 244Huser, C., 102Husserl, Edmund, 24hypothetico-deductive method, 241–2

identityanxieties about, 95–6CDP and, 148conflicts about, 98gardening, 165nature and, 159. See also environmental

psychologysense-making and, 93–5uncertainty about, 97

ideological function, of discourse, 154idiography

AI study and, 199IPA and, 88

idiomatic vocabulary, 104–5, 106illustrative findings, SCAN study,

109–11imagery, 96implementation methods, public inquire, 259independent coding, 56individual autonomy, 69, 73individual interviews

critiques of, 42face-to-face, 38–9guidelines for conducting, 41narrative, 39online textual, 40–41remote video, 40

informed consentchildren and, 102confidentiality, anonymity and, 61IPA and, 122

integrity in research, 58–62debriefing, 61–2harm, avoiding, 58–9honesty and, in result representation, 62informed consent, deception and, 59–60right to withdraw, 60

intensive approach, to interviews, 166intentionality, 24International Collaboration for Participatory

Health Research (ICPHR), 253Internet

online focus groups, 44secondary research on pre-existing texts,

50interpersonal relationships

attachments in, 110complexity, 109

interpretationinfluences on, IPA and, 89one-day participatory workshop, 82–3

interpretive coding, 52interpretive framing, polarisation

technique, 98–9



INDEX 289

Interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA), 25–6

anxieties, identity and, 95–6competing discourses of normality, 99critical sense-making, interpretive frame-

work, 96–8data analysis, 92–4data collection, 91–2defining/uses of, 86–7double hermeneutic interpretation, 87emergent themes, develop, 88identity, sense-making of, 93–5influences on interpretation, 89initial noting, 88moving on, 88–9patterning techniques, 92patterns across cases, 89personal experiences/sense making and,

86–7polarisation technique, reflecting on, 98–9reading/re-reading data, 87–8study introduction, 89–90validation IPA usage, 90–1within-participant patterning, 88See also phenomenology

interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA), think aloud technique and

about IPA, 118case study introduction, 122–3clinical psychology/qualitative

methods in, 116–17ethics, clinical psychologists qualitative

research and, 121–2example of applications of, 124–7introduction to, 115performing IPA, 118–20reflections on clinical psychology uses of,

127–8thematic analysis, 121use of, 123–4verbalisation, importance, 120

interpretive repertoires, 30, 77, 151–3inter-subjective rationality, 70, 73intervention

developing qualitative methods and, 117measuring outcomes, 116sheltered housing as, 165–6

interviewsappreciatively framed, AI study, 197–8individual. See individual interviewsintensive approach, GT, 166interactive analysis of, GT and, 163mobile, 176photo-elicitation, 176–8

Pictor, 222–3. See also Pictor techniquesemi-structured, for creative non-fiction

study, 176. See also creative non-fiction

interview schedule, example, 80in-the-worldness, 90INVOLVE, participatory research, 252–3IPA. See interpretive phenomenological

analysis (IPA)item validation, AI study, 200Ives, J., 260

Jack, Susan, 272–3James, N., 41James, William, 120James Lind Alliance (JLA), 255jargon-free language, 274Jefferson, G., 150Jefferson’s transcription notation system, 150Journal of Environmental Psychology,

159–60Jung, Carl, 38justice orientations, SCAN study,

110–11

Kelly, George, 210Kernaghan, D., 102King, N., 18, 39, 41, 50, 56, 60Kinmond, K., 7knowledge

as culturally/historically located, 28transferring qualitative research, 272–3as universal, 19

knowledge café events. See World Café eventsknowledge exchange

as collaborative action, 278–9process, 277–8

knowledge transfer, qualitative research and, 269

Kornos, C., 161

laboratory settings, 144laddering. See construct elicitation,

laddering and, reflective practiceLangdridge, D., 99language

discourse analysis and, 27–8of involvement, 251–2jargon-free, in research material, 274as performative, 146–7psychology and, 145reality, as creating, 20shared, public involvement research, 256 See also discourse analysis entries



290 INDEX

Larkin, M., 116, 118Latour, B, 181Lavis, J., 273Leeman, J., 274Lewin, Kurt, 135lifeworld, 24, 99limited realism, 17–19Lincoln, Y. S., 55, 239, 240, 241line-by-line coding, 167linguistic repositories of meaning,

148–9live interview exercise, 258

Macmillan Listening Study, 73, 74making sense, IPA and, 118Malinowski, 46mapping, one-day participatory workshop,

82–3Marchildon, G. P., 45marginalised groups, public involvement

and, 261–2Maxwell, J. A., 20McNaughton Nicholls, C., 49meaning-makers, 225Media as data source, ethics and, 59–60memo writing, 23, 202mental health, environmental psychology

and, 158–9Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, 24methodological reflexivity, 57methodological tools, community action

research, 133–4methodology

approach, choosing, 36–7community research, action and change.

See community research, action/changedata analysis. See data analysisdata collection. See also data collectiondiary techniques, 51ethics/integrity, 58–62group interviews, 42–6honesty/integrity, in representing, 62observational, 46–9pre-existing texts, 50–1questions, define research, 33–6reflexivity, 57–8visual, 49–50

methods of research, 14–16Mewse, A. J., 40Milligan, C., 160Millward, L., 108mind-map, example, 126mixed-method approach, 117, 237–40mobile interviewing, 176

model building approaches, 117moderator, focus group, 44moral accountability, GT and, 169, 170moral emotional attributions, 106morality, care and, 94moral rationale, participatory research,

254Morgan, D. L., 43Morris, P., 260Morrow, R., 25Morton’s choice, 73Mosaic Approach, multi-method, 102multi-method research, 240multiple method, applied qualitative

researchanalysis, 246critical evaluation, 242–3, 246–7disciplined inquiry, 240–3logics of inquiry, 241–2methods, 246mixed-methods research v., 237–40paradigm, 246pluralism and, 238–9problem, identify, 243–4project description, 245question, central research, 244reasons to mix methods, 239–40reflections, 247–8research team, 244strategy, 241, 246

mystical experiences, 5–6

narrative analysis, AI and, 194–4narrative interviews, 39narratives, canonical, 99National Health Service (NHS), 116National Institute for Health and Clinical

Excellence (NICE), 268National Institute for Health Research

(NIHR), 252–3native realism, 18natural attitude, 25, 87natural environment. See environmental

psychologynegative associations, 207neo-positivism, 17, 55network chart, 230–1New Dynamics of Aging initiative, 137New Economics Foundation, 253Noddings, N., 94non-verbal

input, 78messages, of children, 102

Nord, W. R., 90



INDEX 291

normalitydemographics of, 968discourses of, 96, 97–8

notingAI study, 201GT interviews and, 166

noting, initial, IPA, 88Nutley, S., 271, 272N-Vivo, organisational tool, 201, 202

observationethnographic style, 135as selective, 18

observational research methods, 46–9observer, of focus groups, 44one-day participative workshop

charting, 81–2coding, 79–81facilitator perspective, 78–9framework analysis for, 77–83. See also

framework analysis, one-day participa-tive workshop

interview schedule, 80mapping/interpretation, 82–3planning, sample/recruitment, 75reflections on, 83–4as short-term participatory format, 73–4

one-to-one interviews, AI study, 191, 193online focus groups, 44online textual interviews, 40–41ontology, 15

contextualism and, 19discourse analysis, 28grounded theory, 22qualitative neo-positivism and, 18radical constructionalism, 20realist, 19

open coding, 22organisational barriers to qualitative

research use, 269organisational change, AI and, 189organisational normality, 96–7organisational research, IPA use and, 90–1othering, allegations of, 122outcome measures, psychotherapeutic prac-

tices and, 117overt observer, 46ownership, GT and, 164, 166

pain, qualitative research and, 7paradigm

defined, 241participatory research as, 253

paradigmatic assumptions, 243

paradigm wars, 238Parker, I., 29participatory methods, children

analysis of SCAN data, 108–9bullying in social group context, 111 bystander emotions, 103data collection with, 107–8guidelines to implement, 106illustrative findings, 109–11introduction to, 101–2overprotection of children, 102perceptions/experience of children, 102pictorial vignette content, 104reflections on, 111–12use of SCAN method, 106–7See community research, action/change

participatory observation, researcher identity and, 47–8

participatory research methods, 8public involvement and, 252–3See also public involvement, in

qualitative researchpartnership, participatory research and, 253patient and public involvement (PPI), 69patterning techniques

polarisation, 98thematic Gestalt, 92

patterns across cases, IPA and, 89Pattison, Helen, 244PCT. See personal construct theory (PCT)peer group barriers, to qualitative research

use, 269peer-to-peer interviews, 256, 260performative social sciences, 275–6Persinger, Michael, 5–6personal choice, 72personal construct psychology (PCP), 51personal construct theory (PCT)

construct elicitation laddering and, 210–12

Pictor technique, collaborative experiences and, 225

personal experiences, IPA and, 86–7personal reflexivity, 57, 99phenomenological attitude, 87phenomenological methods, IPA and, 90–1phenomenology

applied example, 27defining, 24–5IPA and, 25method, key features of, 26–7philosophical positioning, 25–6

philosophical approaches, 14–16philosophical assumptions, 14



292 INDEX

philosophical position contextualism, 19–20discourse analysis, 27–30four different, 17grounded theory, 22–3identifying a, 17limited realism, 18–19phenomenology/IPA, 25–7qualitative neo-positivism, 18radical constructionism, 20 See also individual positions

photo-elicitation, 50, 61, 176–8photography, visual method and, 50Photovoice, in community action research,

134Pictor chart, 221–3, 230–1. See also Pictor

techniquepictorial vignettes. See participatory meth-

ods, childrenPictor technique, 9–10, 50

across-participant analysis, 230–2collaborative working and, 221–2construct elicitation/laddering and, 210data collection using, 226defining, 221illustrative findings, 227–9implementation, guidelines for, 222–4PCT and, 225reflections on, 232–3study introduction, 224–5use of, 194, 225within/across participant data analysis,

226–7within-participant analysis, 229–30

place attachment, 159, 165place identity, 159play, in research, 101plural autonomy, 69, 70, 73pluralism, 238–9, 240, 243polarisation technique

identity and, 98as interpretive framing, reflecting, 98–9as thematic Gestalt, 92

policy context of qualitative research, 267–70

political action, collaborative research, 279–80political/ideological factors, of

qualitative research, 270positivism, 241positivist experimental methods, 144Potter, Jonathan, 28, 30, 148power

imbalance with adult interviewer/child participant, 106

bullying and, 110in community action research, 142gender, focus groups and, 43imbalance of, aggression and, 103role-based authority and, 96

practice, discourse analysis, 151–2, 154pragmatism, 246pre-existing texts, secondary sources, 50–1prioritising, 15, 198, 199, 204, 255privacy, in qualitative research, 122problem-based approaches, 189processual consent, 122professional barriers, to qualitative research

use, 269professionalised, 260professional-patient interaction barriers, to

qualitative research use, 269prompts, 121psychology, defining applied, 5–6psychosocial interventions. See interpretive

phenomenological analysis (IPA), think aloud technique and

psychotherapeutic practices, outcome measures and, 117

public involvement, in qualitative researchabout, 251Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation,

253challenges of, 256co-production and, 253data analysis/interpretation, 257data collection, 256–7defining (INVOLVE), 252–3dissemination/implementation, 259drivers for, 254engaging marginalised groups, 261–2evaluating/reporting activities of, 261examples of, 254–5identifying/prioritising topics, 255language of, 251–2moral rationale, 254outcomes, 263research design, 255–6study example of, 257–9training/support/preparation for, 260

public participation, 69autonomy in, 69–70rational decisions, 69–70short-term, 71. See also short-term public

participation

qualitatively driven mixed-methods research, 239, 240

qualitative neo-positivism, 18



INDEX 293

qualitative psychologydefining, 4–5grounded theory, 21–4use of, 6–10

qualitative questionnaire, 51qualitative research, disseminating

action research, 279–80applied, methodology for. See methodol-

ogy entriesaudience, writing for, 275barriers to use of, 269–71clinical psychology and, 116–17collaborative action, 276–80communicating findings, 274ethics in, clinical psychologists and, 121–2factors influencing uptake, 271–2history/trends, 3non-traditional methods, 275–6overview of book, 10–11participatory v., 8philosophies/methodologies, 14–16Pictor technique, 9–10policy context, 267–9political action as, 279–80quantitative v., 4–5research-based theatre, 276strategic dissemination, 273transfer of, 272–3use of, 269writing accessible material, 274–5

quality issues, in applied qualitative research, 54–7

assessing, techniques for, 55–7core principles of, 55criteria for, 54–5

quality testsaudit trail, 56diary, research, 56direct quotes, from participants, 56–7independent coding, 56respondent feedback, 56thick description, 56

questionsaims/objectives of, 34appreciatively generative, AI research,

192–3central research, multiple method,

244define research, 33–6for discursive psychologists, 147in one-day public participation study,

77–8participatory research, 254revision of, 35

Radcliffe, L. S., 51Radcliffe-Brown, 46radical constructionism, 17, 20, 28–9Ramey, J., 120RAND corporation, 45rarefication, of summary data, 119rational decisions, 69–70rationalistic mental operation, 225rationality, in public participation, 70,

83reading data, IPA, 87–8realist epistemology, 57realist position, 16, 17, 24realist tales, 177–8recording

field notes, observational, 49remote interviews, 40

Reed, J., 189reflection

in community action research, 134–5

facilitating, 9, 222reflective journal, 125, 134reflexivity

in GT environmental psychology study, 171

of researcher, 19Wilkinson’s model of, 99

relational method, voice-centred, 108relativist position

positions of, 17realist v., 16

reliability of research, 54religion, temporal lobe stimulation

and, 5–6remote video interviews, 40reporting, public involvement, 261reputation, of qualitative research,

271Research Advisory Group (RAG), 102research-based theatre, 276research diary, 56researcher identity, participatory observation

and, 47–8research memos, 202research objective, disciplined inquiry and,

240–1respondent feedback, 56retrospective case study methodology,

257risk, in qualitative research, 270Robertson, M., 45role-based authority, 96Russo, K., 121–2



294 INDEX

sample recruitment, for one-day participatory workshop, 75

samplingpre-existing texts and, 50–1strategies, for AI study, 191

Sandelowski, M., 274Sartre, Jean-Paul, 24SCAN. See scripted cartoons narrative of

bullying (SCAN)scientific uncertainty, qualitative research, 270scientist-practitioner model, 116scripted cartoons narrative of bullying

(SCAN)selective coding, 22self-presentation, of interviewers, 41semi-structured interviewing, IPA and. See

interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA), think aloud technique and

sense-making, IPA and, 86–7critical, interpretive framework, 96–8identity, 93–5

shared experiences, public involvement research, 256

Shaw, Rachel, 244short-term public participation, example

data analysis, 76–7data collection, running workshop, 76framework analysis, 77–83. See also

framework analysis, one-day participatory workshop

Macmillan Listening Study, 73, 74objectives, 74one-day participative workshop, 73–4planning, sample/recruitment, 75prostate cancer study, 71–3reflections on, 83–4study guidelines, 71–2study rationale, 71–2

Simon, H., 120Skype, 40Smith, B., 180Smith, Jonathan, 25Sobaih, A. E. E., 45social action, CDP and, 148social care, qualitative research and, 8social construction, grounded theory and, 22social group context, bullying and, 111social identity theory, 97social interaction, 141social isolation, 137social network analysis, 231social psychological theoretical framework, 141social psychology, discourse analysis and,

144–5. See also discourse analysis, social psychology and

SPSS, for data production, 201, 203stakeholders, identify, 191Staley, K., 256, 260Stavros, J. M., 189Steel, R., 262steering group, for AI study, 191Stewart, K., 44, 45storytelling. See creative-nonfictionStrauss, Anselm, 21–4structural barriers, to qualitative research

use, 269structural choice, 72subjectivity, 15, 146subject position, ways of being, discourse

analysis, 151–2, 153–4subtle realism, 18systematic search and review method, 182.

See also creative non-fiction

talkdiscursive analysis and, 29facilitating, 9

Taylor, Nicholas, 128telephone interviews, 39template analysis, 53temporal lobe stimulation, 5–6thematic analysis

AI and, 194–5codes and, 52–3structures, 53–4of think aloud IPA study, 121think aloud technique and. See interpre-

tive phenomenological analysis (IPA), think aloud technique and

thematic framework, identifying, 77–9thematic Gestalt, in IPA, 89, 92theme(s)

defined, 52emergent, in IPA, 88GT gardening study, 167–8of GT research interviews, 163–4hierarchical organisation of, 53of IPA research, 118within-participant patterning, IPA, 88

theoretical sampling, 23theoretical saturation, 23theorisation of subjectivity, 146theory-driven logic of inquiry, 241–2thick description, 56think aloud technique, IPA and. See interpre-

tive phenomenological analysis (IPA), think aloud technique and

third paradigm, 238Thompson, A. R., 116, 118, 121–2Thompson, J., 254



INDEX 295

Thorne, S., 269timeline-format charts, 232Tompkins, Leah, 27transformative spaces, 134trial steering groups, 71truths, generalisable, 116Ttofi, M. M., 103

UK Mass Observation Archive, 160UK Professional Capabilities Framework

(PCF), 268United Kingdom, study guidelines, 71–2usability

feedback, 123issues, in data, 126problems, 121

user, 69user-led research, participatory, 252–3Uyeda, K., 253

van Manen, M., 99variables, measuring external/observable, 16variation, in discourse analysis, 30Veale, A., 102verbalisation, importance of, IPA and, 120video, remote interviews, 40violation of fairness, 110violence, impact of on children, 102visual/experimental facilitation method,

257visual methods, of research, 49–50, 176–8,

221. See also Pictor techniqueVitamin G, 158vivo coding, 167voice-centred relational method, 108

voices, maximising, in community action research, 135

vulnerable groups, ethical considerations, 161–2

Wakefield, K., 40Ward, P. R., 252, 254, 278Weber, Max, 15Webinar software, 40Weick, K. E., 97, 99Wetherell, Margaret, 28, 30, 147, 148When Prophecy Fails (Festinger), 46White, M. P., 158whole person approach, 99Wikinson’s model of reflexivities, 99Wilkinson, S., 99Williams, M., 44, 45Williams, V., 256Willig, C., 7, 18, 29, 30, 151Willig, Carla, 151Willmott, H., 99Willott, S., 116within-participant data analysis (Pictor tech-

nique), 226–7, 229–30within-participant patterning (IPA), 88Woods, L., 108World Café events, 45, 134world-view, shared, 53writing

to audience (example), 275creative non-fiction, 181disseminating research through, 272–5jargon-free language in research, 274

Wundt, Wilhelm, 120

Yardley, L., 55



section 1: introducing applied qualitative research in ... file3 applying qualitative research in...

Documents