Chapter 3. Preparing to unfold the mentor experience
3.4 Developing a personal frame of reference
The process of defining and honing a methodology for this project was itself a process of engaging in a hermeneutic circle, moving from the particulars of the inquiry,
--- Preparing to unfold the mentor experience ---
out to the community of researchers and philosophers, importing established ideas and approaches into the thinking, trying them out for fit, asking new questions of the
limitations and possibilities that arose, and back to the larger picture. As it developed, the inquiry demanded new questions of the community of scholars in light of new insights, or unforeseen circumstances. Understanding developed, not only from engaging with the research question, participants and eventually the data, but also through continued engagement with scholarly and philosophical works, and this section positions the proposed methodological approach alongside such engagement.
Approaching the world of qualitative research seemed beset with contradictions and pieces that did not fit together. For example, Silverman (2005) stated that although Denzin and Lincoln (2000) apparently proposed a unitary model for qualitative research, in practical terms this needed sub-dividing into emotionalism (focusing on meaning and emotion) and constructionism (focusing on behaviour). This created a misfit when adopting a phenomenological perspective, which is broadly agreed to hold a
constructionist epistemology for researching experience and meaning (Caelli, 2000; Paley, 1997). Finlay and Ballinger (2006) drew attention to a different configuration and terminology, citing the four ‘World views’ as positivist and post-positivist; constructivist- interpretive (the best fit for phenomenology); critical (Marxist, emancipatory); and feminist-poststructural. White (2009) on the other hand, declared that foregrounding these worldviews created unhelpful polarisations and caricatures of research. As
identified earlier, hermeneutic ontology and interpretivist epistemology (Higgs and Trede, 2010), which can best be described as belonging to a constructivist-interpretive
worldview, are adopted in this study.
In addition to research, practice is also influenced by worldviews. Van Manen (2007: 19) asserted that professional practice is subject to a ‘hegemony of technological and calculative thought’, making it difficult to escape from a preoccupation with
‘outcomes, observables and standards’ dominating practice discourse. Drawing attention to the ‘pathic’ or ‘felt’ elements of practice, he claimed that a phenomenology of practice
--- Preparing to unfold the mentor experience ---
can break free from this hegemony. Such a phenomenology needs to be ‘sensitive to the thoughtfulness required in contingent, moral, and relational situations’ (van Manen, 2007: 21). Engaging, however, in this kind of research means being open to complexity and uncertainty at the same time as working within ‘a space of ethical and technical rigour’ (Cherry, 2010: 15). This is one of its great challenges.
The literature reveals that phenomenological research is also beset with difficulties of definition, generalisability, extent of interpretation, and researcher subjectivity (Finlay, 2009). Critique has been particularly strident in nursing research (Crotty, 1996; Earle, 2010; Norlyk and Harder, 2010; Paley, 1997; 1998; 2005). These critiques centred on perceived misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the key phenomenological concepts of essence and epoché, as well as the objectivity and generalisability of findings. Nevertheless, Benner (2001) used the ideas of Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty to develop her method of analysing ‘paradigm cases’ as exemplars of themes in nursing practice experience. It is useful to be mindful of the more relaxed approach taken in American phenomenology, which Benner (1994b: 99) described as ‘engaged reasoning and imaginative dwelling in the immediacy of the participants’ worlds’, as distinct from the ‘objectivizing projects of the traditional European phenomenologists’ (Caelli, 2000: 371).
Phenomenological research methods in psychology and professional practice have been developed by a number of well-respected academics, including Giorgi, Colaizzi, van Kaam, Wertz and Moustakas, who worked in the domain of psychology, and social scientist van Manen, who is the main figure in the phenomenological study of practice. Giorgi (2005; 2008), who remains actively involved with promoting
phenomenological research methods, has established a strident case in defence of phenomenology, based on the valuable insights it can provide into human experience. A ‘new’ phenomenology, which aspires to understand subjective or existential reality, has become popular in America, inspired by these pioneers (Caelli, 2000; Dowling, 2007).
--- Preparing to unfold the mentor experience ---
Van Manen’s (1997b) lifeworld existentials are derived from existential phenomenology, the basis of which was Heidegger’s (1962) thesis of ‘being-in-the- world’. They have been appropriated diversely within phenomenological research. For example, Råheim and Håland (2006) produced a theoretical interpretation of the meaning of the lived experience of chronic pain, structured around the four existential themes, in addition to a set of data-led themes. Merrill and Grassley (2008) applied the existentials differently to their data, observing four main themes of women’s experiences of being overweight, each of which could be aligned to one of the existentials. Savage (2006) similarly aligned certain data themes to existentials in her phenomenological research about first-time mothers’ experiences of knowing in childbirth. Hall et al (2010) utilised lifeworld existentials in interviews with neonatal nurses, asking them about their experiences of a new practice framework in relation to space, time, body and
relationships. As will be seen in Chapter 4, these lifeworld existentials have been used in this thesis to structure interpretation of the essence of being a mentor.
Historically, the existentials of Dasein’s care structure and its Lichtung have proved to be more elusive in empirical research. Despite numerous cases where elements of Dasein have been applied to empirical findings as an interpretive lens (including Benner, 1994b; Bennetts, 2002; James and Chapman, 2009; López and Sánchez-Criado, 2009; Sandberg and Pinnington, 2009), it is difficult to locate extant studies that engage the care structure in interpretation in the detailed way adopted in this thesis. Moreover, the combined application of the care structure and lifeworld existentials seems unique. Chapter 4 will show how the existentials of Dasein’s care structure were assigned to the main themes following initial analysis.
The object of inquiry was the subjective experience of mentors, accepted as their personal reality to be mined for meaning and its qualities as it was lived. It was also accepted that I, as the researcher, was engaged in the process as a self-interpreting being, capable also of interpreting the experiences of others. Therefore, there would be times I and participants had experience in common that enabled ready connection. Self-
--- Preparing to unfold the mentor experience ---
knowledge was a significant element of the process, which included clarity about
presuppositions. Some of the ‘fore-having’, or advance understanding, has been set out in Chapters 1 and 2. The ‘fore-sight’, or guiding point of view, has been covered in this chapter, with ‘fore-conception’, or articulated concepts, spanning all three chapters.
Chapter summary
Starting from the question about what it means to be a mentor, this chapter has made a case for the application of hermeneutic phenomenology in the investigation of the mentor experience. The thesis adopts a wide-angle-lens view of the experience of mentoring, taking in the elements of what it means to be a mentor and how experience can form a starting point. By applying established and yet sometimes contested
principles and processes set out here, the next chapter will account for the methods used in conducting the research. The final word here is provided by van Manen (2007: 26):
Sometimes reading a phenomenological study is a truly laborious effort. And yet, if we are willing to make the effort then we may be able to say that the text speaks to us not unlike the way in which a work of art may speak to us even when it requires attentive interpretive effort.
--- Engaging and dwelling in the hermeneutic circle ---