SlideShare utilise les cookies pour améliorer les fonctionnalités et les performances, et également pour vous montrer des publicités pertinentes. Si vous continuez à naviguer sur ce site, vous acceptez l’utilisation de cookies. Consultez nos Conditions d’utilisation et notre Politique de confidentialité.
SlideShare utilise les cookies pour améliorer les fonctionnalités et les performances, et également pour vous montrer des publicités pertinentes. Si vous continuez à naviguer sur ce site, vous acceptez l’utilisation de cookies. Consultez notre Politique de confidentialité et nos Conditions d’utilisation pour en savoir plus.
Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis for the study of lesbian couples experiences of parenthood Hanna Van Parys Faculty of Psycholgy and Educational Sciences, Ghent University Dialogical Practices Conference, Leuven 2013 firstname.lastname@example.org
CONTENTQualitative research in psychologyStudying couple experiences: individual versus couple dataAnalysing joint interviewsInterpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) with couplesImplementation of IPA with couplesQuestions and feedback
Research Clinical practiceStart 2008:PhD: Exploring parentification: Trained as family therapist atChildren‟s experiences of growing Context, Center for marital, familyup with a depressed parent and sextherapy, University(University of Leuven) Hospital Leuven Supervisor: Peter Rober Co-supervisor: Jonathan A. SmithNow… Family therapist at the GhentResearch project about social and University Hospitalgenetic parenthood (Ghent University)
Current research project Parents and Children - Retrospective Prospective parents Own gametes Donor gametes Lesbian Heterosexual Transsexual Hetero Hetero and Hetero Own gametes Oocyte donation Sperm lesbian IVF/ICSI/KIE donation Wissel Known* Interview 10 10 10 10 10 5 10 10 10 parents Interview 10 10 10 10 5 5 - - - children 85 couple interviews
Qualitative research in psychologyContent analysisThematic analysisNarrative analysisConversation analysisDiscourse analysisMicroanalysisGrounded theory analysisInterpretative phenomenological analysis
Qualitative research in psychologyQualitative research methods are expandingGrowing number of „modificications‟ of established methodsSearch for specific qualitative methods for the analysis ofcouples‟ experiences
Studying couples: individual versus couple data Eisikovits & Koren, 2012Mode of data collection ExamplesSeparate interviews Reilly et al. (2010), Wane et al. (2009), Dancyger et al. (2010), Eisikovits & Koren (2012)Separate interviews performedsimultaneously by different interviewersJoint interviews Morris (2001), Walker & Dickson (2004)Both separate and joint interviews with sameparticipantsSeparate interviews with some participantsand joint interviews with others
Analysing joint interviewsJoint interviews = common method for data collectionHowever, couple data often treated as individual dataE.g. Glover et al. (2009), Hargreaves (2006)Some other examples show how a closer look at coupledynamics in joint interviews is worthwile:- Walker & Dickson (2004)- Morris (2001)- …
Analysing joint interviewsWalker & Dickson (2004): experience of coping with minorhealth problems in couplesData-analysis: grounded theory analysisAnalysis of couple narratives is organised in five „couple types‟ (sympathetic couple, independent couple, mixed couple, nonreciprocal couple, rejecting couple)Quotes illustrate couple dynamics such as negotiating of careResearch question congruent with data collection
Analysing joint interviewsMorris (2001): experiences of cancer patients and their carersData analysis: dialogic discourse analysisFocus on co-construction, turntaking, power dynamics, etc.Focus of analysis is on relationship between patient and carer
Analysing joint interviewsThese studies can be used as examples for our ownresearch project on lesbian couples experiences ofparenthood after medically assisted reproductionAim of this study is to get a closer understanding of bothshared and unshared experiences of parenthood.However: clear methodological guidelines are missing
Analysing joint interviewsAim: to build a methodological framework connecting bothphenomenological qualitative analysis and the analysis unitof couples and familiesStarting point: interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA)Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009 Focus on lived experience Idiographic commitment Established method for research about family relationshipsHow to modify IPA to the analysis of couple interviews?
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009)Case by case analysis:1. Read the transcript and make descriptive/linguistic/conceptual notes (paper and pencil)2. Do a first coding (paper and pencil)3. Transfer the first coding into a Word document4. Cluster the themes into higher order themes5. Make a table of themes holding information about key phrases and locations in the transcript6. Write an accompanying short narrative about the caseCase by case analysis followed by comparison across cases
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couplesAdditional focus on:- shared experience- interactional processes- reported differences between partnersExploring other research methods compatible to IPA:- Performative analysis- Microanalysis- Conversation analysis…
Performative analysis Riessman (2008)“dialogic/performance analysis … interrogates how talk amongspeakers is interactively (dialogically) produced and performedas narrative” (Riessman, 2008 p. 105)- Focus on the manner of speaking together, the process of co- construction of the narrative- Theoretical base: symbolic interactionism- Utterences situated in I-thou relationship, this I-thou relationship is manifest in couple interviews
Microanalysis Bavelas et al. (2000, 2010)Method applied to research in family therapyMicroanalysis of communication = “the detailed and reliableexamination of observable communication sequences as theyproceed, moment by moment, in the dialogue” (Bavelas et al.,2010, p. 18).Focus on collaborative, reciprocal dialogue and moment-by-moment „micro‟ influence
Microanalysis Bavelas et al. (2000, 2010)Four questions guiding microanalysis:- what actually happened?- what preceded it?- what followed it?- how did it function?
Conversation analysisDetailed analysis of conversation in context.Importance of high level of detail in the transcriptsFocus on “seen but unnoticed dialogical practices”Question: how do dialogical features contribute to theconstruction of “realities”?Conducted in „natural dialogues‟, e.g. telephone conversation
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couplesHow can the experiential starting point of IPA and a dialogic/performative focus be integrated?
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couples: implementationSix steps of IPATwo additional phases:- Four instead of three types of ‘notes‟: process/couple notes including interpretation of interaction between partners (e.g. elaborating on each others story, nuancing, illustrating) and the ways partners take each other into account when talking (e.g. biological mother validating parental role of parnter)- Colour coding of these ‘co-constructions’ of partners in MAXQDA (software for qualitative data-analysis) experiential analysis integrating dialogic aspects
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couples: implementationResearch question: how do lesbian parents experiencefamily communication about the donor conception?
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couples: implementationScreenshot of Word documentScreenshot of MAXqda
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couples: implementationExcerpt from interview 1: 00:17:00Hanna: How is it for you to talk about it (the donor conception) when Tim doesn‟t ask anyquestions about it?Sara: look, then we don‟t talk about it huh. They just told us: the only thing you have tomake sure is not to say anything more than what your children are asking for. So themoment he has a question, we‟ll answer it. So the moment there is a question, we‟llanswer him.Hanna: yes yesSara: but just give the information they (children) are asking for.Lisa: not elaborating on itSara: “do I have a dad?”, we‟ll answer: “no you don‟t have a dad”. We won‟ t say: “do youknow how come” or “no you don‟t have a dad because…”
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couples: implementation(exerpt continued)Sara: If they want to know they will ask.Lisa: And then we will, then we will answer them of course.Sara: With Tim that‟s very easy: the question has never been raised (laughs)Lisa: but maybe it‟ll come in the future (laughs)Sara: Lien sometimes asks “don‟t I have a dad?” “no you don‟t have a dad”. “who‟s bellydid I grow in?”, she already asked. Yes, things like that.
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couples: implementationExcercise: can you make some process/couple notes for thisexperpt?-descriptive notes-linguistic notes-conceptual notes-couple/process notes
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis with couples: implementationOverview of (preliminary) themes for interview 1:Only answering when child asks questionsTalking about donor conception spontaneouslyMeaning of parents‟ „names‟Fearful expectations towards the futureWorried about the child not talking to peersCouple communicationCommunication with wider social context
Conclusion- Growing number of qualitative studies focusing on couple experiences- Difficulty to find analysis method that preserves the richness of couple data and allows for systematic analysis of co- constructed meanings- Need to specify data-analysis and to apply it consequently- Recent developments in experiential qualitative research with couples can also inspire research about therapeutic processes
The goal?Adding to the developmentof qualitative research inthe field of couple andfamily studiesDoing meaningfulqualitative researchusing these methods
References• Bavelas, J. B., Healing, S., Tomori, C., & Gerwing, J. (2010). Microanalysis workshop manual (unpublished manuscript). University of Victoria, Victoria BC, Canada.• Bavelas, J. B., McGee, D., Philips, B., & Routledge, R. (2000). Microanalysis of communication in psychotherapy. Human Systems: The Journal of Systemic Consultations & Management, 11(1), 3-22.• Dancyger, C., Smith, J.A., Jacobs, C., Wallace, M., Michie, S. (2010), Comparing family members‟ motivations and attitudes towards genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a qualitative analysis. European Journal of Human Genetics, 18, 1289-1295,• Eiskovits, Z., & Koren, C. (2012). Approaches to and outcomes of dyadic interview analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 1642-1655.• Glover, L., McLellan, A., & Weaver, S. M. (2009). What does having a fertility problem mean to couples? Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 27(4), 401-418,• Hargreaves, K. (2006). Constructing families and kinship through donor insemination. Sociology of Health & Illness, 28(3), 261-283,
References• Morris, S. M., (2001). Joint and individual interviewing in the context of cancer. Qualitative Health Research, 11(4), 553-567,• Reilly, D., Huws, J., Hastings, R., & Vaughan, F. (2010). Life and death of a child with down syndrome and a congenital heart condition: experiences of six couples. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 48(6), 403-416,• Riessman, C. K. (2008), Narrative methods for the human sciences. London: Sage.• Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis : theory, method and research. London : Sage.• Walker, K. L. & Dickson, F. C. (2004). An exploration of illness-related narratives in marriage: The identification of illness-identy sripts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21 (4), 527-544,• Wane, J., Larkin, M., Earl-Gray, M., & Smith, H. (2009). Understanding the impact of an Assertive Outreach Team on couples caring for adult children with psychosis. Journal of Family Therapy, 31, 284- 309,