This section narrates the path I have taken to arrive at a methodology which aligns with the aim of the research: to understand the meaning of sexual well-being for physically disabled adults, focusing on personal accounts of lived experience. The research methodology offers the philosophical underpinning of the study, to reveal the ontological (understanding of being) and epistemological (knowing) stance of the research(er). Research methodologies reflect different assumptions about “human behaviour, experience, meaning and knowledge and about how we learn about these phenomena” (De Poy and Gitlin, 2016 p.17). The methodology is arrived at after a process of “radical looking at, listening to, reading about and questioning” (Clough and Nutbrown, 2012, p.26) the research topic, to make the familiar strange. It forms the justification for the methods used within the study.
Reflection on this process has revealed my philosophical stance, which has
naturally led me to a specific methodological tradition. I have become aware of my pragmatic approach: having identified a gap in knowledge I have sought an
efficient means of uncovering new knowledge. It is a ‘real world’ (Benjamin, 2003) approach where knowledge acquisition is not a matter for the intellect alone but is related to action. I identify this pragmatism with my professional, systematic approach to problem solving where concerns are broken down into their
constituent parts and addressed methodically, with a clear focus on what needs to be done and why (Thompson, 2000). I am aware that such a ‘what works’
approach can overlook the unique personal perspective resulting in a procedural rather than responsive approach. I therefore balance pragmatism with a distrust of positivist accounts of apparent objective reality and truth. My distrust is built on lived experience where ‘truth’ has been demonstrably filtered through human perspectives, subject to individual psychological bias. I view current truth, meaning and knowledge as tentative and as changing over time (Robson, 20011). This leads me to a ‘what works for this person at this specific moment’ approach
(Creswell, 2013), which appreciates the shifting, complex and often contradictory nature of reality for humans whilst recognising that action is nonetheless required. Robson (20011) and Creswell (2013) provide further complementary accounts of the features of the pragmatic researcher, many of which I identify within my own approach, including my recognition of the existence and importance of the physical world as well as the social and psychological world, how knowledge is both
constructed and based on the reality of the experienced world and my rejection of the reduction of culture or beliefs to neurobiological processes.
My research aim, an exploration of the meaning of sexual well-being to physically disabled people, leads to the research question: What is the meaning of sexual well-being to physically disabled people? From the linked aim and question I have identified two key ideas in determining the methodology.
1.1 Exploring meaning
Personal meaning is assigned by the perspective of the individual encountering the phenomenon (Langdridge, 2007). Meaning in this personal realm is subjective, informed by, and interpreted through, the individual’s unique experience of the world and their conceptualisation of the micro and macro social context in which this experience occurs. Exploration to uncover meaning can be collaborative, requiring cognitive engagement and communication between the participant and researcher. Mere physical proximity involves communication through body
language and the unconscious signals given by our physical beings. Collaboration suggests the involvement of the researcher in the process to uncover data. The researcher is not, and cannot be, wholly objective from the research activity as their values and beliefs influence both the choice of research topic and
methodology (Alston and Bowles, 2003). The researcher makes judgements about what are considered critical elements of the study, both in its design and
engagement with the phenomenon at its heart (Robertson and Dearling, 2004).
I take a reflexive stance to this study, appreciating my own influence on the meaning uncovered by this research. The potential for bias this involvement introduces must be balanced by academic rigour and openness about my
presence (Robertson and Dearling, 2004). Nevertheless, the focus of the research is on the participant, with their voice being dominant. As researcher I bring to this exploratory project my own unique strengths which have been formed by my life experience. This includes my professional role as a social worker, which has had a profound influence on my personal skills, identity, values and world view. The researcher aids exploration through active, respectful listening, along with
responding and prompting when appropriate, in order to understand life from the “inside of other people's perspectives” (Alston and Bowles, p.10). Such
communication skills are essential in genuinely human-to-human encounters. Communication is as essential to research as it is to the social work task, which is often exploratory in nature; looking to understand life events and human behaviour.
Therefore, a research methodology acknowledging the presence of the researcher and one which utilises the power of human-to-human communication is necessary to successfully achieve the research aims and answer the research question.
1.2 Embodied physical disability
Physical disability is an embodied experience. Human consciousness exists within the embodied form, there being a dynamic relationship between the physical world, our physical selves and our consciousness. The world is experienced through our senses which are enabled by our physical bodies. Therefore, physical difference leads to different encounters with the external world. This can have diverse effects and meanings, for example, a stiff door is merely an inconvenience to me but a barrier to a wheelchair user, potentially impacting on their access to the social world and suggesting a judgement of the worth assigned by others to their inclusion in the world (Quarmby, 2011; Simcock and Castle, 2016).
Physically disabled people are not a homogeneous group with one voice. A research project cannot capture all of these voices. However, a research project can aim for depth of knowledge by focusing on a small number of participants and explore with them their perception of a particular phenomenon (in this case sexual well-being), and the meaning they assign to this. This provides unique information about contemporary life for physically disabled people, whilst also being a feasible
project for a lone researcher to undertake.
1.3 Influence of practice
There is a further factor to be taken into account in my journey to a successful methodology: this is a study for the qualification of Doctorate of Professional Practice, focused on both creating knowledge for, and development of, practice. Hence, my professional context makes demands on a methodology, it must be aligned with the aims, values and theories of that profession, in this case social work, and it must be able to create knowledge which positively contributes to professional development.
In summary, my search has been for a methodology which meets my needs imposed by the nature of the qualification, my professional context and my own world view which wants to hear often silenced voices. The methodology for this study has the following requirements:
1) focus on the unique perception of the participant resulting from their lived experience;
2) recognise the subjective role of the researcher, who becomes a co- producer of knowledge through a genuinely human to human encounter; 3) value the embodied nature of human consciousness; and
4) be compatible with social work with its fundamental respect for persons and its obligation to explore the personal, cultural and structural
influences on both participant and researcher.
With these four specific requirements in mind, I set off on my journey to identify an appropriate methodology.