Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
and when the phenomenology is hermeneutical in style. They probably prior to the ‘fifth moment’ of qualitative research,
claimed that this enabled ‘turning the prism’ (p. 274) to view and progression in thinking about qualitative research needs
the phenomenon, and that this design provided ‘the breadth to guide evaluation of their suggestion. Presented below is an
and depth needed in nursing science’ (p. 275). Their experience of systematically considering this matter when
observation was that those who use grounded theory or planning a study.
hermeneutic phenomenology ‘share a commitment to a
qualitative, naturalistic, contextual, historic, intersubjective
An example
methodology to understand human responses and experien-
ces from a variety of perspectives as they are transformed The aim of the study was to research how flatus affected
over time’ (p. 267). In their opinion, grounded theory can people receiving nursing care. Having reviewed the literature,
inform practical intervention and further research, whilst I realized that there was an almost complete absence of
‘The rich and insightful detail of hermeneutics provides a research about this phenomenon. This is not surprising as the
depth of personal understanding that creates a dialogue and a social processes involved when flatus has affected a patient
beginning for a conversation’ (p. 275). However, they are not readily considered in the clinical world of nursing. As
emphasized that when using both approaches in a study to grounded theory provides understandings of people’s actions
seek different outcomes illuminating ‘clinical realities that and beliefs about a health phenomenon, including social
elude alternative approaches’ (p. 263), it is vital to maintain processes, and was recognized in the planning stage as being
the integrity of each approach – not only through separate useful when seeking to explain relationships between con-
data collection, but also through use of different interview cepts to form a substantive theory, this research approach
styles and data analysis processes. seemed useful to address the study aim. Increasingly, how-
Researchers contemplating this suggestion might be con- ever, I became aware that the impact of flatus on patients
cerned about the oft-cited warning in the seminal work of was a complex human phenomenon and that there was a
Baker et al. (1992) to avoid the ‘method slurring’ that could need to illuminate more than relevant social processes to
occur when grounded theory and phenomenology are adequately address the problem. As hermeneutical phenom-
entwined in a study. However, this is not relevant to Wilson enology focuses on comprehension or the meaning of text/
and Hutchinson’s (1991) suggestion as there would be two action, the need to use hermeneutic phenomenology to
discrete phases of research, with two products. Stern (1994, understand possible meanings of situations and experiences
p. 219) affirms this when stating that Wilson and Hutchin- pertaining to flatus impacting on patients, became clear.
son’s (1991) proposed two-phase study combined grounded When trawling the qualitative methodology literature to
theory and phenomenology ‘to great advantage’ without seek guidance about this dilemma, I found the 1991 proposal
making the mistake of aiming for a hybrid product. Coffey of Wilson and Hutchinson and some limited discussion about
and Atkinson (1996, p. 14), whilst emphatically rejecting a their proposal. This added impetus to my tentative plan not
summing or aggregating of alternative understandings from only to develop a substantive grounded theory focussing on
‘vulgar triangulation’ when applying varying research nurse–patient actions and interaction, but also to inquire
approaches in one study, do accept use of different approa- about possible meanings of the experience to give broader
ches if the resulting product/s juxtapose understandings that understanding of an existential nature. That is, I wanted to
acknowledge the complexity of the phenomenon studied. interpret stories about experiencing the phenomenon, not
Using grounded theory and phenomenology enables that sort only for intrinsic gains when the resulting product promoted
of juxtaposition. an empathetic vicarious response in the reader, but also to
The juxtaposition of understandings is acceptable in motivate application of the substantive grounded theory in
research in this postmodern era, but how acceptable is using nursing practice.
two qualitative approaches in the one study? According to
Denzin and Lincoln (2000, p. 1061), qualitative research is
A constraint
moving into a ‘seventh moment’ that is likely to feature
‘interpretive bricoleurs’ for whom ‘invention is not only the I was wary in the planning stage of the study about using
child of necessity, it is the demand of restless art’ and these two qualitative research approaches because of two
qualitative approaches ‘become the ‘‘invention’’, and the major issues arising from contemporary qualitative research
telling of the tales – the representation – becomes the art’. methodology concerns. The first was that the approach
When considering the 1991 proposal of Wilson and needed to be applied in a manner congruent with the
Hutchinson, it is vital to recognize that this was formulated philosophical paradigm about inquiry underpinning the
study. The second issue arose directly from the first: namely, enology that seem to be aligned to realism, such as the
if using two different qualitative research approaches, it statements that this approach aims to ‘unveil the shared
would be necessary to ensure that both were congruent with common practices’ (p. 268), ‘accurately describe and inter-
that philosophical paradigm and hence with each other. pret participant’s meaning’s’ (p. 268), ‘get the story straight’
Needing to identify paradigmatic stance about qualitative (p. 270), and ‘discover meaning’ (p. 271).
research arose as a concern around the fifth moment of Wilson and Hutchinson (1991) did not discuss the need for
qualitative research (Guba & Lincoln 1994); nursing research research to be ontologically congruent with the inquirer’s
methodologists began emphasizing this need around then as belief about the nature of reality, which always has meth-
exampled by Benoliel (1996), a pioneering grounded theorist, odological consequences. Neither did they address any need
who stressed the importance of being aware of the relation- for the two approaches to be ontologically congruent, or
ship between a chosen research approach and ‘underlying alternatively seek to justify how research approaches can be
assumptions about the nature of reality’ and a ‘particular used in a study when ontologically variant about research, as
philosophy’ (p. 417). their suggested combination of approaches somewhat seem to
My philosophical belief in relativist ontology, transac- be. Their philosophical discussion about the two approaches
tional/subjectivist epistemology, and need for a hermeneuti- commenced one step too late – that of epistemology rather
cal/dialectical methodology when conducting social research than ontology. It is important to note, however, that their
placed that perspective in a constructivist paradigm, as proposal was formulated prior to the issue of the philosoph-
identified by Lincoln and Guba (2000). Therefore, both ical congruency of paradigm of inquiry becoming widely
research approaches to be applied needed to be congruent accepted as necessary in major qualitative research methodo-
with constructivism and this required evaluation of how this logy forums; thus, it is understandable for that time to be
matched the suggestions of Wilson and Hutchinson (1991). recommending research approaches that have different
Evaluation of Wilson and Hutchinson’s (1991) discussion ontological roots.
of grounded theory suggested it reflected the positivist The question then was ‘What should I do in my research?’
philosophy of classic (or Glaserian) grounded theory (Glaser First, the preferred type of grounded theory to be applied was
& Strauss 1967, Glaser 1978, 1992, 1998, 1999) based on a modified mode of grounded theory, the ‘Straussian’ mode
realist ontology with a received view of knowledge. (Strauss & Corbin 1990, 1994, 1998), as this has a
Contrastingly, Wilson and Hutchinson (1991) made state- discernible slant to relativist ontology (a perceived view of
ments about Heideggerian phenomenology that reflected knowledge) and so was congruent with a constructivist
relativism and a perceived view of knowledge, such as when perspective to qualitative research, which was the philoso-
directing the researcher to be ‘a partner with the informant’ phical stance underpinning my intended study. As major
as ‘they work together to produce the interview’ (p. 270). works about grounded theory do not make explicit the
This is understandable as an evaluation of the ontological ‘relationships among assumptions, taken-for-granted pre-
roots and basis of hermeneutic phenomenology, including mises, and technical and analytic procedures’ (Benoliel
Heideggerian and Gadamerian forms, identifies relativist 1996, p. 413), others, including me (Annells 1996b,
ontology and a comfortable fit to a constructivist paradigm 1997a,b, 2003) have sought to clarify and disseminate
(Annells 1996a, 1999). This is congruent with discernible possible ontological roots, epistemological consequences
relativist ontology underpinning hermeneutic phenomenol- and subsequent methodological positions. I have argued that
ogy, as was widely accepted by the fifth moment of Strauss and Corbin’s (1990, 1994, 1998) mode of grounded
qualitative research (e.g. Ray 1994, Koch 1995, Grenz theory exhibits a leaning toward the constructivist paradigm
1996). The problem is, though, that this is at odds with a of research, although still reflecting some aspects of positivist
neopositivist form of grounded theory, the classic (or thought and language. This issue has been debated (e.g.
‘Glaserian mode’) suggested for application by Wilson and Charmaz 2000, Hall & Callery 2001, Heath & Cowley
Hutchinson (1991). Consequently, in their article there are 2004) but, whether this mode of grounded theory is leaning
non-harmonizing views about the role of the inquirer being to toward constructivism or not, it can be applied in a
generate text (a perceived view of knowledge) in the constructivist way, as has been explained amongst sugges-
hermeneutical phenomenology phase, contrasted to collecting tions for five major options in grounded theory modes
data (a received view of knowledge) for the grounded theory (Annells 1997b).
phase (Wilson & Hutchinson 1991, p. 270). Although critical hermeneutical phenomenology is also
Further complicating matters were some statements by possible, hermeneutical phenomenology (underpinned by the
Wilson and Hutchinson (1991) about hermeneutic phenom- tradition of philosophical hermeneutics) can be used in the
constructivist paradigm of research, as mentioned previously. constructions (not just the hermeneutic phenomenology), and
The form of hermeneutic phenomenology I selected for my rejection of realist notions of validity. These variations were
study was Gadamerian, as I consider Gadamer’s philosoph- derived from a postmodern position about research. More-
ical ideas (Gadamer 1975, 1976, 1987) to be well-reasoned over, I needed to apply more time and effort for the grounded
and justified. theory phase, but Wilson and Hutchinson (1991) were silent
on that matter.
The decision
Conclusion
Table 1 lists elements of the mode of grounded theory I used
for the first phase of the study, and also elements of the form
Recommendations
of hermeneutical phenomenology applied for the second
phase. Each phase had separate objectives, and a different Using grounded theory and hermeneutical phenomenology in
sample was used for each phase because of the traditionally two distinct phases in the study was a positive and productive
differing sampling strategies required by the two research experience. My opinion based on this experience is that the
approaches. It should be noted that I applied a slightly altered two products can be complementary for gaining vital but
version of Strauss and Corbin (1990, 1994, 1998) mode of different types of understandings that could be useful for best
grounded theory. Because of the need for congruency with practice about a phenomenon central to a problem or a
constructivism, the approaches were applied in different curiosity. Therefore, I recommend using this kind of triangu-
modes/forms to those proposed by Wilson and Hutchinson; lation to research a phenomenon when ‘turning the prism’ can
therefore, Table 1 is a modified version of a table presented be an advantage. Not only is a phenomenon interpreted
by Wilson and Hutchinson (1991, p. 226). according to the possible social processes that occur about the
However, there were three other ways in which my use of phenomenon, but understanding is enhanced about possible
the two approaches varied from the suggestions of Wilson meanings of existential human experience of the phenomenon.
and Hutchinson (1991): added use of reflexivity, both In this era, gratitude is due to Wilson and Hutchinson
approaches keeping the dialogue open about the resultant (1991) for initially suggesting use of the two approaches, and
Table 1 Comparison of a constructivist version of grounded theory and hermeneutical phenomenology with a Gadamerian influence (adapted
from Wilson & Hutchinson 1991, p. 266)
Grounded theory (Strauss and Corbin mode in influence) Hermeneutical phenomenology (Gadamerian in influence)
Derived from Strauss’s action theory with an emphasis on Derived from Gadamerian hermeneutics emphasising the
social interaction and social processes related to a possible existential meaning of an experienced phenomenon
phenomenon
Relativist ontology foundation and in the constructivist Relativist ontology foundation and in the constructivist
paradigm of research paradigm of research
Considers structural conditions and consequences Considers linguisticity of understanding, temporality and
historicality
Focuses on actors attempting to manage the course of the Considers the phenomenon in the everyday awareness of the
phenomenon person
Theoretical framework evolves during the research Interpretive scheme of hermeneutic philosophical ideas as
found appropriate
A modification of an established method Research process personally chosen
Theoretical sampling of incidents and situations with sampling Purposive text sources aiming to have sufficient text to provide
continuing until constructed categories are saturated richness and variation
Data generation through interviews, observations, and Conversations are sufficient for text generation, text being
document analysis, as appropriate to the phenomenon more than a transcript of the conversation
Constant-comparative data analysis Retrospective text interpretation
Writing clarifies the theory and reflexivity is encouraged Involves writing and thinking, including reflexivity through
through memo writing journal writing
Aiming for understanding to inform praxis Aiming for an empathetic vicarious response and
understanding to inform praxis
Product is a substantive grounded construct-as-theory Product is a synthesis of interpreted possible meanings
preservation of the theoretical sampling principle for groun- (Lincoln & Denzin 2000). These debates will continue, and
ded theory could occur with this design and usual sampling so it is wise to stay tuned to advances in thinking about these
strategies required for each approach be maintained. matters.
Strauss and Corbin (1994, p. 283) predicted that adapta-
tion of the grounded theory approach ‘will include combining
References
it with other methodologies (hermeneutical, phenomenolog-
ical, for instance)’. It is not clear if this is meant to be two Ammenwerth E., Iller C. & Mansmann U. (2003) Can evaluation
entirely discrete phases, as proposed by Wilson and Hut- studies benefit from triangulation? A case study. International
Journal of Medical Informatics 70(2–3), 237–248.
chinson (1991), or a closer fusion.
Annells M. (1996a) Hermeneutic phenomenology: philosophical
A revolutionary possibility of pursuing a closer fusion
perspectives and current use in nursing research. Journal of
could be one set of data collection and analysis for Advanced Nursing 23, 705–713.
constructing a grounded theory, but with attention in data Annells M. (1996b) Grounded theory method: philosophical per-
collection also to exploring the meaning of experience spectives, paradigm of research, and postmodernism. Qualitative
phenomenologically; then data would be reinterpreted in a Health Research 6(3), 379–393.
Annells M. (1997a) Grounded theory method, Part 1: within the five
discrete, separate phase – that is, two foci of data collection,
moments of qualitative research. Nursing Inquiry 4, 120–129.
but with analysis quite separate. This is different from using Annells M. (1997b) Grounded theory method, part 2: options for
different theories in different ‘readings of data’ to construct users of the method. Nursing Inquiry 4, 176–180.
different products (e.g. Honan et al. 2000), as data collection Annells M. (1999) Evaluating phenomenology: usefulness, quality
would then have two separate foci. However, such a study and philosophical foundations. Nurse Researcher (Phenomenology
would have to justify diverting from separate sampling Revisited) 6(3), 5–19.
Annells M. (2003) Grounded theory. In Nursing Research: Methods,
techniques, a commonly believed ‘immutable law’ about
Critical Appraisal and Utilisation, 2nd edn (Schneider Z., Elliott
comparison of grounded theory and phenomenology research D., LoBiondo-Wood G. & Haber J., eds), Mosby, Sydney,
processes. pp. 163–178.
New ideas are emerging about both mixed research Baker C., Wuest J. & Stern P. (1992) Method slurring: the grounded
approach design and challenging of supposed immutable theory/phenomenology example. Journal of Advanced Nursing
17, 1355–1360.
laws about research approaches. For instance, Wimpenny
Benoliel J. (1996) Grounded theory and nursing knowledge. Qual-
and Gass (2000) have explored whether there is an intrinsic itative Health Research 6(3), 406–428.
difference between interviewing in phenomenology and Charmaz K. (2000) Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist
grounded theory, and conclude that purpose is the core methods. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn
issue. The avoidance of ‘method slurring’ is being challenged (Denzin N. & Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA,
by writers such as Johnson et al. (2001), with their advocacy pp. 509–535.
Coffey A. & Atkinson P. (1996) Making Sense of Qualitative Data.
of ‘British pluralism’.
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
One other possibility about mixed research approaches Denzin N. & Lincoln Y. (2000) The seventh moment: out of the past.
design is that in a primarily quantitative study grounded In Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn (Denzin N. &
theory and/or phenomenology can be applied to ‘turn the Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 1047–1065.
prism’, but philosophical issues need to influence choice of Gadamer H.-G. (1975) Truth & Method (Barden G. & Cumming J.,
trans.). Sheed & Ward, London.
versions of approaches used. When planning a combination
Gadamer H.-G. (1976) Philosophical Hermeneutics (Linge D.,
of naturalistic and quantitative research approaches, poten- trans.). University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
tial tension between the underlying ontology of each needs to Gadamer H.-G. (1987) Hermeneutics as practical philosophy. In
be considered, as realized and assessed in a study by After Philosophy: End or Transformation? (Bayner K., Bohman J.
Johnstone (2004). In addition to congruent philosophical & McCarthy T., eds), The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA,
underpinnings about what is inquiry for modes of research pp. 325–350.
Glaser B. (1978) Theoretical Sensitivity: Further Advances in the
approaches used, a parallel recommendation is to ensure
Methodology of Grounded Theory. Sociology Press, Mill Valley,
congruency of approaches/s with the researcher’s philosoph- CA.
ical perspective about research. Glaser B. (1992) Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence vs
In conclusion, when contemplating methodological trian- Forcing. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
gulation and mixed approach design in this seventh moment Glaser B. (1998) Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions.
Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
of qualitative research, new dialogue is likely to emerge
Glaser B. (1999) The future of grounded theory. Qualitative Health
amongst methodological adherents about what paradigms Research 9(6), 836–845.
mean and related issues, such as the trusting of results
Glaser B. & Strauss A. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: van Manen M. (1990) Researching Lived Experience. State Univer-
Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, New York. sity of New York Press, New York.
Grenz S. (1996) A Primer on Postmodernism. William B. Eerdmans, van Manen M. (2002) Writing in the Dark: Phenomenological
Grand Rapids. Studies in Interpretative Research. Althouse, London, Canada.
Guba E. & Lincoln Y. (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative McKibbon K. & Gadd C. (2004) A quantitative analysis of qualita-
research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin N. & tive studies in clinical journals for the 2000 publishing year. BMC
Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 105–117. Medical Informatics and Decision Making 4(1), 11.
Hall W. & Callery P. (2001) Enhancing the rigor of grounded theory: Merleau-Ponty M. (1974) Phenomenology Language & Sociology –
incorporating reflexivity and relationality. Qualitative Health Selected Essays (O’Neill J., ed.). Heinemann, London.
Research 11(2), 257–272. Merleau-Ponty M. (1989) Phenomenology of Perception (Smith C.,
Heath H. & Cowley S. (2004) Developing a grounded theory trans.). Routledge, London.
approach: a comparison of Glaser & Strauss. International Journal Ray M. (1994) The richness of phenomenology: philosophic, theor-
of Nursing Studies 41, 141–150. etic, and methodologic concerns. In Critical Issues in Qualitative
Honan E., Knobel M., Baker C. & Davies B. (2000) Producing Research Methods (Morse J., ed.), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA,
possible Hannahs: theory and the subject of research. Qualitative pp. 117–133.
Inquiry 6(1), 9–24. Risjord M., Dunbar S. & Maloney M. (2002) A new foundation for
Husserl E. (1982) General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology methodological triangulation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship
(Kersten F., trans.). Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague. 34(3), 269–275.
Johnson M., Long T. & White A. (2001) Arguments for ‘British Stern P. (1994) Eroding grounded theory. In Critical Issues in
Pluralism’ in qualitative health research. Journal of Advanced Qualitative Research Methods (Morse J., ed.), Sage, Thousand
Nursing 33(2), 243–249. Oaks, CA, pp. 212–223.
Johnstone P. (2004) Mixed methods, mixed methodology, health Strauss A. & Corbin J. (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research:
services research in practice. Qualitative Health Research 14(2), Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage, Newbury
259–271. Park.
Koch T. (1995) Interpretive approaches in nursing research: the Strauss A. & Corbin J. (1994) Grounded theory methodology: an
influence of Husserl and Heidegger. Journal of Advanced Nursing overview. In Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin N. &
21, 827–836. Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 273–285.
Kushner K. & Morrow R. (2003) Grounded theory, feminist theory, Strauss A. & Corbin J. (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research:
critical theory: toward theoretical triangulation. Advances in Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd
Nursing Science 26(1), 30–43. edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Lincoln Y. & Denzin N. (2000) The seventh moment: out of the past. Wilson H. & Hutchinson S. (1991) Triangulation of qualitative
In Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn (Denzin N. & methods: Heideggerian hermeneutics and grounded theory.
Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 1047–1065. Qualitative Health Research 1(2), 263–276.
Lincoln Y. & Guba E. (2000) Paradigmatic controversies, contra- Wimpenny P. & Gass J. (2000) Interviewing in phenomenology
dictions, and emerging confluences. In Handbook of Qualitative and grounded theory: is there a difference? Journal of Advanced
Research, 2nd edn (Denzin N. & Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Thousand Nursing 31(6), 1485–1492.
Oaks, CA, pp. 163–188.