Purposive Sampling

As this study aimed at understanding/exploring how a certain group of people experience a certain phenomenon, random sampling was not an appropriate sampling strategy. A purposive and somewhat homogenous sample of participants was required. The study therefore aimed to include five participants who all were educated music therapists. This number of participants is appropriate to the chosen method (Larkin et al., 2010). Including five participants would

17 _{I often confuse the words analyzing, or analysis, and interpretation. According to Oxford Concise}

English Dictionary (2006), to analyze is to examine something in detail in order to interpret or explain it. An interpretation is explanation of the meaning of something (OCED, 2006). My understanding is then that the analysis is the process of interpretation.

allow for some to fall out along the way, but possibly have some variety in perspectives on the phenomenon of interest.

The selection of participants was done through several processes. The researcher’s thought was to include participants who would represent different perspectives in music therapy; who work with different client groups, from different traditions, different educational institutions etc. Therefore, it was decided to invite/include music therapists from five different countries. After a long process of contacting music therapists around the world, the project finally included participants from Australia, Finland, Canada, USA and Great Britain. None of the participants left the study before it was finished.

The potential participants received a document with information about what their participation would imply, as well as potential risks and benefits associated with the study (see Section 4.8). In hermeneutic phenomenological research it is essential that the

participants actually have experienced the phenomenon in focus of the study, in this case flow (Laverty, 2003). As described in Chapter 2 and 3, many music therapists, music therapy researchers, musicians and people in general talk about “flow in music” or “when the music flows”. Sometimes the word flow is used to describe the musical aspects, and sometimes to describe the experience while listening to or performing music. One can read about flow in published literature without any reference to core theorists and publications. This flow might be the same as the flow that was theoretically described by Csikszentmihalyi (1975, 2009), but one cannot be sure. Because of this non-theoretical way of talking about flow, some information about flow theory and core literature was included in the information sheet.

Because it was essential that all the participants actually had the possibility of having experienced flow during music therapy improvisation, it was necessary to state some criteria of inclusion and exclusion.

4.4.1. Criteria of Inclusion

There were four criteria of inclusion to this study:

1. The participant is educated and certificated music therapist.

2. The participant has worked as a music therapist for five years or more, using improvisation as a method in their work with clients.

3. The participant is able to communicate fluently in English, both verbally and written. 4. The participant has access to a computer with Internet connection and possibility of

4.4.1.1. Comments on the criteria

In Norway, Music Therapist is not a formally authorized professional title such as Physician or Dentist. This implies that anyone could call himself or herself a music therapist. This is why one of the word “educated” is included in the criterion.

The participant should have experience from several years of work as a music therapist. This criterion is important, to ensure that the music therapist talks out of his or her own experience and not only out of assumptions based on literature, or other music therapists etc. This criterion also insured that the participants regularly use improvisation as technique when working with their clients.

As this study aimed at including music therapists from different corners of the world, it was important that the participants understand and can communicate in the English

language, though they were not presented to any test.

Criterion number 4 is simply a practical criterion, but it is nonetheless important. As the participants was interviewed from a long distance, it was crucial that they had access to the communication tools that was necessary to conduct an interview when the parts are physically separated by hundreds of miles.

4.4.1.2. Elements that were not included in the criteria

The aspect of age was not included in the criteria of inclusion. This might at first seem out of place here, however, studies show that age may be one of many factors that affect the

frequency of flow experiences. It seems that older people experience flow in a larger variety of activities than younger people (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, Csikszentmihalyi &

Csikszentmihalyi, 1988). As this is an aspect of flow theory that is not studied explicitly, age was not included as a criterion for this study (though one can say that criterion number 1 demands a certain age). Gender and social class are other factors that seem to affect the frequency of flow experiences, but for the same reason as age, these are not included as criteria of inclusion or exclusion in this study.

4.4.2. Criteria of Exclusion

It is necessary to include three simple criteria of exclusion, as some participants may fulfil the criteria of inclusion, but would still not be advantageous to include in the study.

1. The participant no longer works as a music therapy clinician.

2. The participant has not used improvisation in his or her work the last five years. 3. The participant has no interest in the concept of flow and/or how it may be related to