The most appropriate way to collect data for an IPA study is through the use of semi-structured interviews (Smith & Osborn, 2007) as they tend to produce richer data than other qualitative methods. Consequently, data for the present study was collected using semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews involve the compilation of a list of pre-prepared questions prior to the commencement of the interviews. An advantage to this method is that it allows the researcher to elicit
in-57 depth information on relevant topics while also keeping the interview as close to normal, comfortable conversation as possible. This method of data collection therefore allows the researcher and participant to begin a dialogue and permits the researcher to guide the content of the interview through the use of open-ended questions and prompts (Smith & Osborn, 2007). The structure of the interview is not overly rigid and open-ended questions are used to guide rather than dictate the content of the interview (Smith & Osborn, 2007). Participants are given the opportunity to give in-depth accounts of their lived experiences and the space to determine how their interview progresses. A further advantage of semi-structured interviews is that they facilitate the collection of unanticipated data by affording the participant the flexibility and space to share unexpected but relevant data with the researcher. Often it is the unexpected or unanticipated which is more interesting to the researcher (Mayoux, 2005).
As semi-structured interviews allow the researcher to facilitate a rapport and show empathy (Smith & Osborn, 2007), this was the most appropriate data collection method for the present study given the understudied, personal and sensitive research topic (Mason, 2002) and the perceived stigma attached to suicidality as reported in the aforementioned studies in the literature review.
Four participant interviews were conducted in a face to face capacity in meeting rooms at Edinburgh Napier University. One interview was completed over the phone. Descriptive information was obtained from participants in order to contextualise participants’ experiences. With participants’ permission, semi-structured interviews were audio recorded and transcribed by the primary researcher. The data were anonymised by assigning pseudonyms to participants and their loved ones.
58 3.8.1 Interview Schedule
An interview schedule (Appendix 6) was created prior to data collection which included open-ended, non-leading questions and prompts for questions that may have been difficult for participants to answer. This was developed to guide the researcher within the interviews. However, in line with IPA, the interview schedule was not followed in a strict or rigid way by the researcher. Instead it aimed to begin a dialogue with the participant. The interview schedule was structured into a list of seventeen open-ended questions which covered a range of broad topics. The sequencing of questions involved the researcher beginning with the least sensitive topics first and progressing to more sensitive questions towards the end when the researcher was likely to have built a rapport with each participant. These broad topics included:
Overall experiences of living with a suicidal loved one
Participants thoughts and feelings in response to the suicide attempt(s)
The impact they had on participants’ wellbeing, sense of self, self-confidence and their identity.
The main challenges participants faced and their support needs during most
challenging times.
The researcher used a process of reflecting and paraphrasing back to the participant to probe and encourage them to tell their own story in their own words “You mentioned earlier there that….” or “Can you tell me more about that?”.
As the topic of investigation in the present study is sensitive and was likely be emotive for the participants, the interview schedule was prepared to allow the researcher to identify appropriate wording of questions to decrease the chance of
59 upsetting any participants and to loosely determine the manner in which the interviews would proceed. As recommended by Smith and Osborn (2007), the researcher familiarised themselves with the interview schedule prior to conducting the interviews so that the participant would have the researcher’s undivided attention during the interview and that the focus of the interviewer was on the content of what the participant was saying.
3.8.2 Pilot Interviews
Two interviews were conducted, transcribed and analysed before completing the remaining interviews. The data were shared with the supervisory research team to provide feedback on the interview schedule and the resultant interview technique.
The content and structure of the interview schedule were deemed to be satisfactory by the supervisory team and consequently no revisions were made to the interview schedule. However, suggestions were made regarding the researcher’s interview style and technique. Suggested amendments included increasing the use of paraphrasing and reflecting back to participants in order to prompt them to expand on certain topics. It was also advised that the researcher ensure that questions were stated clearly and one at a time.
In conducting pilot interviews, the researcher aimed to develop and assess the adequacy of the data collection and analysis methods and to discover any potential problems with these. Furthermore, the pilot interviews provided an opportunity for the researcher to gain constructive feedback on interview technique and to build confidence as an interviewer. Finally, it was felt that by conducting two pilot interviews, the researcher would be familiarised in the research process and could incorporate this preliminary data into the full study.
60 3.9 Data Analysis
The present study employed IPA as the method of data analysis in line with Smith and Osborn’s (2007) recommendations. IPA views data analysis as a two-stage process whereby the participant makes sense of their reality while the researcher makes sense of the participant making sense of their reality. IPA aims to explore in detail an area of interest or concern rather than make general claims and as a result, it emphasises theoretical rather than empirical generalizability (Smith & Osborn, 2007). This method of data analysis was deemed to be the most suitable as it complemented the study’s exploratory aim, the use of semi-structured interviews and a purposive sampling strategy.
Each interview was fully transcribed verbatim at a semantic level including pauses, emotional responses, (e.g., laughter, tears and similar features). Data were analysed by following the steps outlined by Smith, Flowers and Larkin (2009) which include reading and rereading the interview transcripts, taking initial notes, developing emergent themes, moving to the next case and then looking for patterns across cases.
Each transcript was reread several times in order for the researcher to be fully immersed in the data. Throughout the transcribed text, comments such as summaries, associations and preliminary interpretations were written in the left hand margin of each transcript (please see Appendix 9). On rereading the transcript, emerging themes were inserted on the right hand margin. An initial list of themes within each transcript was compiled and similar themes were clustered. As these themes were clustered the transcripts were repeatedly referred to, to ensure that the clusters were relevant to the primary source material. A table of themes in which
61 each cluster or theme was named and recognised as a superordinate theme was created for each participant’s transcript. The superordinate themes and subthemes were the result of the interaction between the researcher’s interpretation of the interviewee’s experiences and the interviewees personal experiences described in their own words (Eatough, Smith & Shaw, 2008).
Finally, a coding matrix outlining the key themes for the group of participants was created, including common themes found within each transcript and individual themes that were found in particular transcripts. A data extract verifying each of the themes and subthemes is given along with pseudonym of each interviewee. This is provided in Appendix 10 to ensure that if necessary, an external researcher can follow the present researcher’s analysis of the raw data to the end result.
Furthermore, a sample of transcripts (n=2) was also independently coded by a members of the supervisory team with expertise in IPA. Two members of the supervisory team also provided credibility checks on all of the codes that the primary researcher’s coding.