Qualitative researchers have a number of different analysis methods available to them, which can sometimes make choosing the right one a difficult task. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) has recently gained popularity as the go-to analysis method, particularly among novice researchers, due to the accessibility of its detailed yet flexible step-by-step guide (Smith, 2004). Most other analysis methods do not have such a guide, or may have less well-defined steps to follow e.g. content, thematic, or discourse analysis. Grounded Theory is perhaps the only other method providing thorough and structured practical guidance, although it is much more rigid and complex than IPA, hence less accessible to novice researchers. Of course, choosing the right method to use is not based on its accessibility, but on whether it can suitably contribute to answering the research question(s) posed within a specific philosophical framework. This begs the question: can IPA be used in a realist inquiry?
IPA is fundamentally grounded in Phenomenology, which seeks to understand and describe experiences. It also acknowledges the notion of double hermeneutics, recognising that accessing and making sense of experiences involves interpretation not only on the researcher’s part, but also the participant’s. Realist research (in the social sciences), on the other hand, draws on the philosophy of Critical Realism, which intends to go beyond the experiential surface to uncover causal mechanisms. However, this often necessarily depends on making sense of people’s experiences first and scrutinising their interpretations of why they experienced it so, before further inferences (e.g. abstraction and retroduction) of causal theories can be made. The interpretative step in IPA does not put a limit on what could be inferred, therefore it is possible to direct the interpretative function of this analysis method towards deciphering causal mechanisms. Thus, IPA could potentially be adopted and adapted to suit the realist philosophy. However, practically speaking, how might this be done and would it really work?
This paper intends to explore this possibility by reflecting on my own analysis process as a novice researcher in my attempt to find causal mechanisms using IPA. Relevant literature on IPA, realist research, and other qualitative analysis methods will accompany the demonstration of theoretical applications to practice. Although critical realism is a well-established philosophy of science, there is a shortage of guidance on the practical implications and applications of its theories to conducting analysis. IPA, on the other hand, provides a good example of how theory meets practice in an accessible manner to produce a rigorous yet flexible approach to conducting qualitative analysis. It is hoped that by applying the realist philosophy to IPA, we may stand to gain a more structured practical guide that would be accessible to novice researchers. A discussion therefore is encouraged regarding (1) the appropriateness of this method in realist inquiry; and (2) whether it could contribute to improving realist methodology to help novice researchers conduct rigorous research that is unhindered by confusion, nor tied down by over-restrictive guidelines.
Please select one of the following:: Realist research (other) , Please select a maximum of two themes from the following list:: Innovation in Realist Inqu , Please select a maximum of two themes from the following list:: Realist Methodology in Und
