DATOS ECONÓMICOS DEL PROYECTO

In this section some issues will be presented, which need to be taken into account while evaluating this research project. Insofar as this research is a process rather than an ‘end result’ and does not seek to confirm or refute an a-priori theory, these issues can be seen as challenges which have a potential impact on the transferability and robustness of the research process, rather than purely as ‘limitations’ which obstruct empirical proof of prior hypotheses.

4.2.2.1Methodological Challenges

The use of IPA is not without its limitations. Some researchers have claimed that IPA is too dependent on language, thus requiring highly articulate participants who are able to communicate the meaning they make of their experiences (Willig, 2001). With regard to this research, it could be that the choice to conduct the interviews in a language which is not the participants’ mother tongue could have restricted their ability to fully and freely express themselves. As explained in the Method chapter, this decision was made for a number of reasons, and in any event the material which emerged is still significantly rich. Indeed, this research project could be seen as an exploration of how IPA could potentially yield interesting material even with more limited language abilities (for an interesting review on this matter see Lloyd, Gatherer

& Kalsy, 2006). Moreover, one aim of this research was to utilise the emphasis on language within IPA rather than diminish it. Within the analysis, careful attention was given to expressions, metaphors and ways of communicating experience. This in my opinion brought forth interesting insights about the explored phenomenon.

An additional concern raised about IPA is that it tends to be over-focused on cognition (Willig, 2001). It is claimed that the focus on meaning, thought processes and how the participants understand their experience gives less room for the embodiment of the experience, the ways in which it is implicitly felt in a direct, pre- reflective way (Willig, 2008). However, IPA researchers acknowledge that direct access to these levels is practically impossible, as we can not fully access an individual’s experience without the filter of his cognition and expression. Smith, Flowers & Larkin (2009) claim that the degree of phenomenological enquiry within IPA includes many different levels of reflexivity, including the ‘pre-reflective reflexivity’ (p.189), thus implying that every experience includes some basic level of awareness or reflexivity. However careful attention should indeed be paid to the pre- reflective experiences within interviews, not just to the ‘deliberate, controlled reflection’ (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009, p.189). This is attempted here by giving voice and importance to any expression of embodiment, feeling, and undefined pre- reflective processes, and by paying close attention to metaphoric and non verbal expressions which are taken into account and analysed alongside the verbal material. See the Method chapter for a discussion on the tensions between the ‘need to define/explain’ and the ‘need to express/feel’ which is reflected both by the participants and within my encounter with the material. It should be added here that initially it was assumed that the subject matter would be significantly ‘cognitive’ since the research set out to explore the meanings attached to a concept. However,

during the process of data gathering, it emerged that this was not the case, and the experience described was one that touched all aspects of the self and was in fact very much ‘felt’ rather than just ‘considered’.

An additional methodological challenge relates to the process of analysis. IPA does not provide clear guidelines on ways of moving from the theme stage to the overall picture (Larkin, Watts and Clifton, 2006). Within this study I try to develop some understanding of how themes relate to each other to create a certain model of the participants’ story. This might be viewed as partly contracting a complex and multifaceted experience into the boundaries of a theoretical model; possibly a slight diversion from the IPA standpoint, perhaps shifting to a more Grounded Theory perspective. The tensions between GT and IPA within this project were discussed in the Method chapter. However, I would like to add here that an attempt is made to present a model which allowed for wide variations and revealed the circularity, uncertainty and ambivalent nature of this experience as it is described by the participants.

4.2.2.2 Procedural challenges

The two main issues to consider in terms of the methodological procedures within this research are recruitment and language.

It could be argued that the recruitment was too focused on the Jewish Israeli community. Further effort to reach Israelis who do not have any contact with other Israelis could have brought up alternative issues and give voice to those who completely rejected their Israeli identity. This could have been done by further investing in advertising in non-Israeli parts of London and the UK. This was attempted to a certain extent, but there was a notable lack of response in those

avenues. Choosing to present the advert in English and Hebrew could have also impacted on the characteristics of the responders.

In addition, due to accessibility constraints I recruited mostly in urban settings. A more extended recruitment process (to rural areas as well) could possibly have allowed for additional perspectives to emerge.

An additional limitation lies in the choice of language (beyond the methodological challenge discussed earlier). Constructivist approaches see language as constructing rather than describing reality. This means that the transcript could be regarded mostly as a reflection of that particular encounter between researcher and participant and of the ways in which the participant talks about the experience (and to some degree also creates or shapes it) rather than the experience itself (Willig, 2001). Other forms of gathering data could have enhanced trustworthiness, such as using diaries, or gathering data from more than one point in time, creating a more complex picture of the experience and the participant’s process with it. All these concerns are particularly relevant in this research due to the interviews being conducted in English. As described in the Method chapter, the choice was made mainly in order to minimise ‘sameness’ between myself and the participants, to enhance transparency for the English speaking reader, and to stay as close as possible to the participants’ words rather than risking that the essence of their experience would be lost in translation. It could be that the participants would have been able to describe their experience more freely in their mother tongue. However, reflecting on the interview process, it seems that the participants were in fact able to discuss uncomfortable feelings in English, such as their difficult relationship with their Israeli identity. As can be seen in the short analysis of the Hebrew sections (see appendix 20), speaking

in Hebrew allowed some of the participants to ‘relax’ slightly more but did not seem qualitatively different in terms of the content.

An additional potential limitation concerns the presentation of the concept of psychological homelessness to the participants, even in the advertisements. It could be that the fact that the concept was introduced to the participants provided them with a way to organise chaotic thoughts and feelings, which otherwise could have been formulated differently, or remain vague. This raises the question whether this concept was in some way imposed on them rather than coming from them. However, I felt that the women were in desperate need for definition or explanation for their experience, and the introduction of the concept of psychological homelessness provided them with a valuable therapeutic tool to manage their struggle, as well as an intellectual tool to articulate their attitudes.

When reflecting on the experience of psychological homelessness, a wide variety of definitions and meanings were raised for each participant, reflecting their unique construction of identity and personal history. This raises the question whether the large number of participants reduced in some way the richness of the material gathered and analysed for each one. The developers of IPA have recently supported IPA research in the form of idiographic case studies (Smith, 2004), and this could have allowed for a deeper exploration of psychological homelessness as it is presented by one person. The richness of the interviews, such as the one conducted with Ayelet, raises the possibility that an in depth case study would yield deeper understanding of the phenomenon, perhaps allowing for more clarity in places which were expressed with much confusion and contradiction.

An additional limitation concerns the data gathering. The interview schedule and questionnaire were developed early on in the research process and, upon

reflection, could have been designed in a more open and participant-led way (see research log in appendix 22 for further discussion).