Process for Collecting Phenomenological Material

post-intentional phenomenological design of this study. Phenomenological material was collected through the completion of a demographic form, and a 60-90 minute Open View discussion (Fenton, 2013) that included arts-based data collection methods. A review of materials collected can be found in Table 2.

Strengths-based research suggests against the use of the term interview in favor of the term, Open View (Fenton, 2013), as prior research participants/collaborators have explained that the term interview has a “power-over” connotation (McCashen, 2005, p. 32), such as being put on

the spot, or going to a job interview (Fenton, Walsh, Wong, & Cumming, 2015). According to Fenton (2013), an Open View should take place in a familiar setting for the participant as a manner for reducing the power dynamic. All material collection took place in a location chosen

Table 2

Phenomenological Material Collection

Research Question Phenomenological Material

RQ1: How is a sense of safety experienced by three-generation families who report incomes at a maximum of 150% of the federal poverty level?

Demographic form Open View

Family Sculpting activity Children’s drawings

by the family. Two visits occurred in the family home, one at a neighborhood pizza place, and one at the researcher’s place of work. At the start of the visit, informed consent information and signature documents approved by the Montclair State University Institutional Review Board were offered to the families for their review, consideration and signature before the Open View conversation began. Examples of the consent forms for the adults (Appendix E), consent for child participation (Appendix F), and assent forms for the children (Appendix G) are included.

Open View Material Collection

Fenton’s (2013) Open View holds space for lines of flight (Deleuze and Guatarri, 1987) or aspects of the intentionality of the phenomenon that may prompt wonder and surprise (Givens, 2015) through the utilization of prompts guided by the researchers instead of direct questions.

This type of discussion fits with a phenomenological lens that prefers interviews to be

unstructured or semi-structured in order to allow the experience of the phenomenon to emerge, to show itself, to come-to-be (Vagle, 2008) without too much interference from the researcher. In post-intentional phenomenology, the interview is meant to have enough structure to frame the phenomenon of study, but also enough space to elicit contextual variation of the phenomenon (Vagle, 2014). To balance the post-intentional aims of both frame and freedom, the Open View

began with the grand tour prompt of, “Please share how you experience a sense of safety together as a family.” The protocol for the Open View is included as Appendix H.

Expressive Methods Material Collection

The Open View also included non-discursive methods of data collection. In arts-based research, defined as the use of artistic processes in meaning making and inquiry (McNiff, 1998;

2007; 2008), providing variation of options for demonstrating understanding and experience allows for greater empathic understanding of both the lives of the collaborators, and the complex phenomena of inquiry (Barone & Eisner, 2012; Greenwood, 2012; McNiff, 2008). Additionally, non-discursive methods provide opportunities to capture multiple ways of meaning making (Kay, 2013; Pentassuglia, 2017), and allow expression of that which would otherwise be unintelligible.

This is often the case for sensorial or kinesthetic experiences (Barone & Eisner, 2012), such as is assumed of the sense of safety. Body-based expression, specifically, allows the physical body to bring encultured and embodied knowing to inquiry, a form of knowing which is often

overlooked or ignored (Snowber, 2012). Employing options for the expressive ways of knowing is consistent with a constructivist paradigm, as the arts can be considered a physical form of the construction of meaning (Green, 2015). It is also consistent with a strengths-based perspective epistemology, as arts-based expression allows for the liberation of a more natural and indigenous meaning making (Green, 2015). The use of expressive methods within the Open View format also fits a post-intentional phenomenological design that does not believe in the linear

progression of the investigation of essence, but instead in an interactive, non-linear, rhizomatic interview (Deluze & Guattari, 1987).

This study used a drawing assignment offered to the children to complete during the

discussion, and an exercise of non-verbal expression known as Family Sculpting (Duhl, Kantor

& Duhl, 1974; Satir, 1972) conducted with all members of the family. The children were provided an option to draw their responses during the Open View, and then describe their

drawing. Researchers who use drawing with children stress that drawings may be more symbolic than true-to-life (Malchiodi, 1998), so having the children describe their meaning of the drawing is critical (Katz, McLeigh, & El szwec, 2017). Then, the family was asked to engage in a

technique known as Family Sculpting (Satir, 1972) to demonstrate how the phenomenon of safety manifests in their family system. The family was asked to be a team of sculptors to

“mold” the bodies of their family members in the shape or motion of what it feels like when safety is present in the family, taking into account the space of the room, shape of the bodies, pacing and type of motion, and placement of the family members in relation to each other. More information about the expressive process is included in the Open View protocol in Appendix H.

Trustworthiness

Qualitative research works toward creating a level of trustworthiness, comprised of credibility and dependability which act as indicators of rigor and the likelihood that findings captured the participants’ lived experiences (Creswell, 2013), as well as triangulation of data to be sure that the phenomenon is considered from multiple sources. Credibility in qualitative research is the process by which researchers weigh their own interpretation of the participant’s story against the participant’s report. Dependability is the extent that researchers document their processes transparently, following ethical guidelines for research (Merriam, 2009).

Triangulation is the use of two or more data sources, methods, and/or theoretical perspectives to allow for multiple ways of experiencing the data and understanding the phenomenon (Cho

&Trent, 2006; Green, 2015). To establish triangulation, this study collected the audio files and transcriptions of the Open Views, photographs of the family sculptures, and photographs of the family drawings as multiple forms of data. To establish credibility, the researcher used member checking (Cho & Trent, 2006; Creswell, 2013). The researcher emailed a summary of the Open View discussion to one adult member of each family to be sure of accuracy of the interpretation of what they have said and expressed, and sent a version of the final found poem (detailed later)

that was co-constructed through the stories of the collaborating families, and asked for their feedback. To work towards dependability, the same forms and protocols were used across all collaborator engagement in data collection and storage.

Trustworthiness is also established through following proper ethnical guidelines in research, including confidentiality and protection of human subjects. All print data was labeled and kept confidential in a double locked cabinet following ethical and Montclair State University IRB guidelines. All electronic data was backed up and uploaded to a HIPAA compliant drive accessible only to the researcher and three identified graduate assistants responsible for transcription assistance. Photos were taken on the researchers’ phone, downloaded backed up, labeled, and subsequently deleted from the phone. All families were assigned a numerical code on a coding chart that was based on the day of the month when the visit with the family took place, coupled with a family role code, and a sequence in the family code (i.e. 26FAM as a code for the family, with M26 as the mother, D26 as the father, G26 as the grandparent, and C126 for the oldest child and C226 as the younger child). Three of the Open Views were video recorded, backed-up and both copies uploaded. The fourth Open View that was conducted at the

researchers’ place of work was saved on the HIPAA compliant video system within the building, with access only to the researcher and graduate student responsible for transcription assistance.

Transcription began directly following the first Open View, uploaded and printed, with print copies in the double locked system of the researcher’s office. The researcher also kept a

reflective journal, which began at the start of screening calls.. The researcher also worked with a peer reviewer to check the researcher for unconscious or implicit bias in the data collection or analysis process.