D ENSIDAD DE I NCIDENCIA O T ASA DE I NCIDENCIA

Having chosen to adopt the methodological approach of thematic analysis, an extensive amount of reading into the area was done, with the decision to implement the technique used by Braun and Clark (2006.) This decision was made partly because as a researcher, I was a qualitative methods novice and Braun and Clark outline an explicit way of carrying out thematic analysis (see Table 3.4 overleaf) which I intended to follow during the data analysis process.

Table 3.4: Braun and Clarke (2006) Six Phase Description of the Thematic Analysis process.

Thematic analysis is a qualitative method used for identifying, analysing, and reporting patterns or themes within a data set (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Hence, this method is appropriate to use in this study as I aimed to identify patterns and themes within the data sets. Additionally, it organises and describes the data set in rich, contextual detail. Braun and Clarke (2006) describe thematic analysis as an accessible method in qualitative data analysis. Furthermore, Braun and Clarke (2006) state that thematic analysis is a widely used method in qualitative analysis, but a clear agreement on an explicit set of rules which define how thematic analysis is conducted is lacking.

Thematic analysis is essentially independent of theory and epistemology, but can be applied across a variety of theoretical and epistemological approaches. It is often framed as an experiential method (Roulston, 2001; cited in Braun and Clarke, 2006). However, Braun and Clarke (2006) argue that it is also compatible with essentialist and constructionist theories within psychology. Therefore, this method demonstrates a fair amount of flexibility in that it can be applied across various

epistemological approaches which lead me to believe that it is an appropriate for this research study. Thematic analysis can be essentialist or realist; by reporting subjective experiences, meanings, and the reality of participants. Therefore, this method of analysis can work well in both reflecting the reality, and revealing the surface of a participant’s reality, which was the primary aim of the research by examining support worker perceptions and revealing their realities in dealing with bullying

behaviour. This point further emphasises that thematic analysis was indeed an appropriate method to use in the study, as I aimed to reflect and reveal the reality of participants and their opinions,

3.4.1. Inductive vs. Deductive Thematic Analysis

The themes identified during the process of thematic analysis could be performed using an inductive (bottom-up) or deductive (top-down) method. The inductive method is discussed by Frith and Gleeson (2004) as sharing similarity with grounded theory in the sense that the process of coding does not fit into a pre-existing framework, and that the codes identified are directly related to the data set which indicates a data driven method. In contrast, the deductive method discussed by Boyatzis (1998; cited in Braun and Clarke, 2006) tends to be driven by the researchers pre-existing interest in an area or theory. There is no correct or incorrect way when proceeding with thematic analysis; although it is noted by Braun and Clarke (2006) that an inductive approach would be enhanced by not engaging with previous literature in the early stages of analysis. Whereas, the deductive approach suggests that analysis could benefit from this. Further to this recommendation by Braun and Clarke (2006) there appears to be discord noted in the opinions of other researchers who argue that reading previous literature can narrow or bias your view by focusing on certain aspects of the data at the potential expense of other crucial aspects. Tuckett (2005) states that engaging with previous literature can enhance analysis, by raising awareness of subtle and important data features. This study

acknowledges the importance of both the inductive and deductive methods of performing thematic analysis; however, due to the extensive literature review conducted prior to data analysis the current research adopted a deductive approach.

Boyatzis (1998; cited in Braun and Clarke, 2006) states that the level (e.g. semantic or latent) at which themes are identified bears importance. Semantic level themes are identified within the surface of the data set, and the researcher does not look for anything beyond what the participants have said. Whereas, latent level themes go beyond this; that is they aim to identify underlying assumptions or ideologies. Ideally, the thematic analysis process should involve a progression from description (identifying patterns in semantic content) to interpretation (attempting to locate broader meanings and implications) and often in relation to previous research (Patton, 1990), which is evident in the Analysis chapter (see pages 45 - 71).

An extensive literature review was done prior to the commencement of the course, this background reading aimed to further my understandings of youth bullying in school environments. Furthermore, this literature review assisted in highlighting the key features that needed further exploration, and as such had a significant influence in the construction of the email interview schedule. This literature review did not negatively affect my views as every concerted effort was made to separate any preconceived notions from interfering with the view of the final data sets. Hence, I fully support the statement made by Tuckett (2005) as I too believe that engaging with previous literature can enhance analysis, by raising awareness of important data features such as specific theories associated with the subject at hand.