Phenomenological method

Often in research projects related to understanding the influence of religion on human experience researchers often use the phenomenological method. This approach prompts the researcher to get in the shoes of the research participants in order to interactively explore and interpret the outcome of the research (Cope, 2003; Radwan, 2009). Phenomenology is a Greek

word where “Phenomenon” means appearance and “logos” refer to as reason or word

(Pivcevic, 1970). Pettit (1969), consider Phenomenology as a study of phenomena or description as one experiences them or as one's experience of things. The main objective of a

phenomenological study is to disclose the “essence of experiences” (phenomena) and at the

same time describing the underlying reasons for such experiences (Pivevic, 1970).

The goal is to persuade the research participant to reconstruct their experience regarding the topic under study (Seidman, 2013), and to collect in depth data from a small population (Radwan, 2009). This is in contrast to giving more value to the large sample size to formulate generalizations (Mukherji & Albon 2012; Howell, 2013). “The emphasis is thus placed on the production of ‘thick description’ (i.e., rich and highly detailed accounts about what is seen, heard, and felt) and ‘thick interpretation’ (i.e., the analysis of events within a research context” ( Denzin 1989; Howell 2013, cited in Potrac et al, 2014. p.34). This often entails researcher to spend considerable time with the research participants while using various qualitative methods such as ethnography or in-depth interviews in order to gain reliable knowledge about the subject's experience (Sparkes 1992; Markula & Silk 2011; Howell 2013). In contrast to the positivist research, where the researcher uses a set of standardized instruments, phemenologists are themselves act as research tools “to identify, collect and analyse data” (Ball 1990, p. 157).

136

This also includes carefully considering and documenting the relationship of the researcher with the research subjects in the field (Howell 2013). It also involves how these relationships may have an impact on the data collection, how one identifies and analyse further data and most importantly the analysis and interpretation of the data collected by the researcher (Mukherji & Albon 2012).

In light of the subjective experience of a researcher, one cannot assume that the reality which the researcher brings forward would be same by another researcher with different life experience (Schutt, 2006). Hence, there are multiple realities in the interpretation of the researcher based on the varied interpretation of both researcher's and participant's unique lived experiences (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Moreover, Phenomenology is also considered a much sought after approach especially when one is attempting to understand how religion affects the lived experiences of its followers (Spickard, 2011. cited in Stausberg & Engler,2013). Phenomenology in a religious study attempts to draw the researcher to understand the religious experience of their research participants. Friedrich Schleiermacher's (1799, cited in Stausberg & Engler, 2013) argued that religion is not just about ideas, but emotional experiences of its followers. For instance, it is the experience of feeling utter dependence that led people to believe in all-powerful, benevolent God. As stated by In James's (1961) "words, religious Ideas ‘presuppose immediate experiences as their subject matter. They are [. .] consequent Upon religious feeling, not coordinate with it, not independent of what it ascertains" (p. 424).

Psychologists Amedeo and Giorgi (2003), has developed a phenomenological model through which one can analyse the subjective experience of the research participants in empirical research. Stausberg and Engler (2013), has used this method in order to understand the influence of religion on the lived experience of its followers. The model is divided into four parts. The first part deals with the need of researcher to obtain data from a reasonable number of people regarding their experience. Data collection from multiple sources that are familiar

137

with a particular experience decrease the chances of personal biases and increase validity in research (Amedeo & Giorgi, 2003). In the second step, the researcher engages in a phenemological reduction in order to gain access to the subject's lived experience. In other words, the described experience "are taken exactly as they present themselves [to consciousness] except that [. . .] the claim that what is present [. . .] exists [. . .] is not affirmed" (Giorgi & Giorgi 2003.p.249). For example, if one is discussing the experience of holding a hot cup of coffee, then one must only imagine the experience the hot cup of coffee has on him and her and not the physical cup.

After the collection of the description of lived experiences, the researcher then analyse them in order to come up with basic structures in relation to that experiences. This process would be difficult since one needs to have an adequate number of interview materials in order to determine which experience is central to the research and which one is idiosyncratic. The researcher has read between the lines in order to identify the pattern that it represents. Some accounts would have less material, and some would have more material related to the research project. There is also a possibility that some accounts may use idiosyncratic language in order to communicate the common structure. It is up to the researcher to identify and decide which part of the information is important and which is idiosyncratic and must gain the ability to justify it in accordance with the collected data. The last step involves re-description of the experience focused on the identified structure to the research participants. The objective is to describe the experience so that the research participant can recognize it without taking into account the interpretation of such experience which the individual has about it. The summarized version of this model is presented in box 5.1.

138

● Locate and interview informants who have shared a particular experience.

● Help your informants focus on exactly how this experience presented itself to their

consciousness, leaving aside what they (or you) think was ‘really’ happening.

● Compare and analyse these accounts to identify the basic structures of the experience.

● Redescribe/summarize the experience, boiled down to these basic structures.

Source: Stausberg and Engler (2013).