Qualitative analysis

There are many ways of analysing qualitative data … what links all the approaches is a central concern with transforming and interpreting the qualitative data – in a rigorous and scholarly way – in order to capture the complexities of the social world we seek to understand. (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996:3)

Decisions concerning the selection of analytic approach were made in collaboration with my academic supervisors and through formal research training which widened my appreciation of alternative approaches9_{. The selection of analytic approach resulted in a}

comparison between discourse analysis and interpretative phenomenological analysis (Table 4.2). Although discourse analysis has relevance to the epilepsy clinic consultation, and could be used to explore the discursive context of women attending the epilepsy clinic, it was felt to limit the scope of exploring experience and focus attention on the act of communication rather than the processes and products of the communication of risk and its influence upon decisions made by woman preparing for pregnancy, the majority of which lie outside of the influence of the consultation. Interpretative phenomenological analysis requires further distinction, as a number of approaches have been developed within health and social research (Smith et al., 2009; Benner, 1994; Van Manen, 1990). The approach selected recognised the necessity to value the social-cognitive paradigms, to explore the content of particular individuals’ beliefs and responses, and draw attention to the process operating between cognitions and behaviour consistent with the research objectives (Smith, 1996; Smith et al., 1997). The main assumptions of interpretative phenomenological analysis place

9 _{Research training ‘The design, conduct and analysis of qualitative research using depth interviews’ (4-}

8th July 2005) was provided by the National Centre for Social Research in London (NATCEN) and was invaluable in informing the writing of the study protocol and selection of methodology and methods.

interest in learning something about the participant’s psychological world in the form of beliefs and constructs; placing ‘meaning’ as the central aim of analysis – to try and understand the content and complexity of those meanings (Smith and Osborn, 2008). This quality was the main attraction, and was seen to offer a unique insight into the research subject:

…the participant, like me, is a unique individual worthy of an idiographic, holistic analysis. At the same time, however, there is the possibility of bridging the divide between selves because we are all at the same time part of a larger whole, a collectivity that allows the possibility of mutual understanding. (Smith, 2007:5)

Key features Discourse Analysis Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis

Philosophy Knowledge and meaning produced through interaction with multiple discourses.

People as psychological entities, able to reflect on actions which have existential consequences.

Goal Understand how people use language to create and enact identities and activities.

Exploring, describing, interpreting and situating the means by which individuals make sense of their experience.

Data Observation of participants in conversation in their natural

environment. Participant and researcher engage in dialogue, interviewer probes for inter-textual meaning.

Observation of participants in the context where the phenomenon is experienced. Participants describe their experiences; interviewer probes for detail and clarity.

Analytic methods

Examine how understanding is produced through a close look at the words. Interested in how the story is told, what identities, activities, relationships, and shared meaning are created through language.

Examine personal perceptions of the phenomenon to understand the participant’s point of view (the particular) with focus on personal meaning-making in particular contexts (an interpretative activity).

Analytic Relationship

Examine own place in the discourse(s). ‘Bracket’ or distance background beliefs and preconceptions, becoming open to the ‘insider perspective’.

Product Description of language-in-use; identify how different discourses shape how identities, relationships, and social goods are negotiated and produced.

Commitment to the person as a cognitive, linguistic, affective and physical being and assumes a chain of connection between people’s talk and their thinking and emotional state.

Application Broad application within the discourses of doctor-patient communication (Silverman, 1987; Mishler, 1984). In epilepsy research; focusing on the epilepsy clinic consultation (McCorry et al., 2009), and as a method to analyses the discursive terms of epilepsy (Valachovic et al., 1999).

Applied use: risk perception and chronic illness (Senior et al., 2002); risk

perception and decision-making in genetic counselling (Smith et al., 2002). Epilepsy research: experience of stigma (Kilinç and Campbell, 2009); patient involvement informing the epilepsy research agenda (Thomas et al., 2010). (Adapted from the following sources: Starks and Trinidad, 2007; Smith and Osborn, 2008)

Table 4.2 Comparison of analytic approaches

4.2.3.1 Consideration of ‘fit’ between data collection techniques and analysis In-depth interviews provide a detailed account of personal disclosures made within a closed setting. In contrast, the more public forum of focus group discussions results in

data reflecting debate between group members and disclosures between participants (Flowers et al., 2000). The potential value of multiple data sources, was balanced against the requirements for additional analytic commitment directed towards group process (Smith et al., 2009). My selection of approaches draws influence from the application of interpretative phenomenological analysis applied to focus group data (Flowers et al., 2000; Dunne and Quayle, 2001) and observation data (Larkin and Griffiths, 2002) (discussed further in Section 4.3.4 Methods of Analysis).

4.2.3.2 Selection of computer-assisted qualitative analysis methods

A number of different computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software packages are available, and their application is guided by pragmatic concerns surrounding data management and storage (Flowers et al., 2000). The adoption of computer-assisted methods here was based on their ability to support my analysis, by allowing different levels of investigation to be achieved, such as, coding and connecting ideas using memos and annotations, and data management supporting storage and retrieval of data (Spencer et al., 2003). NVivo 7 software was selected following formal training and discussions with my academic supervisors10_.