Análisis de los principios del BGC en la Coopac NSR

Data were analysed following the six-step process specified by Smith et al 2009, these include; reading and re-reading each transcript, initial noting, developing emergent themes, searching for connections across emergent themes, moving to the next

transcript and finally looking for patterns across transcripts. This six-step process was additionally supported by Heidegger’s notion of the ‘clearing’ or Lichtung (Heidegger 1971) (Figure 2). In its simplest terms the clearing is a metaphor for a clearing in a forest, a space where the trees thin and clear and through which light can pass.

“In the midst of beings as a whole an open place occurs. There is a clearing a lighting…” (Heidegger 1971 p.53).

On a deeper level Heidegger’s clearing is an aperture through which the concealed can be revealed.

“…Only this clearing grants and guarantees to us humans a passage to those beings that we ourselves are not, and access to the being that we ourselves are” (Heidegger 1971 p.53).

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis requires dynamic, iterative and

multidirectional activity, where the researcher shifts between expansion and reduction a process which requires the researcher to engage in an in-depth immersion with each individual participant’s accounts, moving in and out of the data, a process that Wagstaff et al (2014) liken to the movement of an accordion. However, as a novice IPA

researcher I should like to offer an alternative analogy and suggest that, for me, the process of IPA data analysis equates more fittingly to being labyrinthine. When one follows the path of the labyrinth, one must move away from the central goal and follow a complex but pre-determined path before turning inwards once again to arrive at the central goal. I believe that the process of IPA data analysis aligns very strongly to this journey, as data analysis begins with close association to the participant’s articulated experiences, then moves away from them when considering emerging themes, only to return to reveal sub-ordinate and super-ordinate themes.

It could also be argued that IPA offers the researcher a ‘theatre-in-the-round’

opportunity, in that the researcher is able to move figuratively in and out of the data from different directions, bringing the researcher into the same space as the

participants, facilitating creative connectivity. IPA enables the researcher to look into an individual’s sense making processes, how they negotiate and navigate through their experiences. This sense making process aligns to Heidegger’s concept of

‘thrownness’, meaning that people are thrown into the world; that they are constantly trying to make sense of their world; that they are aware of and contained by the features of that world (Heidegger 1982a).

Remaining true to IPA’s commitment to idiography each interview transcript was analysed individually. Analysis began with an active engagement with the data. This was achieved by immersing myself in each participant’s account by listening to each digital recording several times and then listening to the recording again whilst reading the interview transcript for the first time. This was then followed by further re-reading of the transcript. I actively engaged with the data to enable me to become fully immersed in the participant’s world. I wanted to ensure that I captured my first impressions of the transcript but was wary to bracket them off at this initial phase of the analysis.

Analysis occurred line by line looking for similarities, differences, contradictions etc.

Therefore, each transcript was converted to one and a half line spacing and wide margins were left on each transcript to enable me to write initial comments on the left side and emergent themes on the right side. Following this preliminary reading I began to examine the language and semantic content of each individual transcript writing exploratory comments in the left-hand margin, developing thorough initial notes.

Coloured pens were used to highlight the different levels of analysis at this stage; one to denote the descriptive elements, one for the linguistic and one for conceptual comments. From these initial descriptive notes, more interpretative notes were developed which helped me to understand the participant’s explicit meaning (Larkin et al 2006). I was thus engaging in the double hermeneutic recommended in IPA in that I was trying to make sense of the participants making sense of their experiences. I was drawn to the tenets of hermeneutics advocated by Schleiermacher (1998) who

suggests the adoption of a holistic approach to iterative and interpretive analysis recommending the use of a range of skills including intuition. Equally, I was aware of the importance of entering into the hermeneutic circle (Dowling 2011), to consider the non-linear nature of analysis by exploring the interrelatedness of the parts to the whole and vice versa. I was equally mindful to adopt rigor and diligence in my analysis to increase the potential for it to reveal what Smith (2011b p.7) describes as the gem(s).

These are rare words that can provide “analytic leverage” and add significant value to the research.

Smith (2011b) considers that there are three types of gem; the suggestive, the shining, and the secret. The suggestive gem is described as the one in the text which is, as its name implies, suggestive, where the phenomenon is partially present. It would require repeated employment of the hermeneutic circle to reveal it. The shining gem is

described as one that requires less engagement with the hermeneutic circle to reveal its existence and meaning as it is more obvious (Smith 2011b). The secret gem is

more difficult to find than the others, requiring closer scrutiny to identify and interpret.

By definition, a gem is a rare item that may be difficult to find, therefore Smith (2011b) contends that when looking for them one should consider Husserl’s recommendation to

‘go back to the things themselves’. This I have been mindful to do.

The next phase of the analysis involved the cautious development of the emergent themes. I constructed a table of the major themes in chronological order, being careful to represent each theme truthfully by using verbatim extracts from the transcript. I was mindful to note any connections that revealed themselves across the themes and subordinate themes.

This process detailed above was repeated for each transcript. It was acknowledged that the analysis undertaken for the first transcript had the potential to influence the analysis of subsequent transcripts, however I endeavoured to observe IPA’s idiographic commitment and bracketed any emerging ideas and concepts until all transcripts had been analysed. Once each transcript had been interpreted and analysed I then searched for emerging patterns across them all. This table of themes forms the basis for the narrative account which detailed the interpretative process, highlighting the issues that mattered to the participants and what these meant to them.

Figure 2: Data Analysis Process

Chapter Five: Findings