DE LOS PROCEDIMIENTOS

This project employed purposive sampling by selecting a small and homogenous group (Smith et al., 2009) of six participants. In contrast to the random or representative sampling strategies quantitative research usually adopts, IPA focuses on the detailed analysis of the experiences of small samples most suited to the research question (Smith & Osborn, 2003). As Langdridge (2007) suggested, by employing a purposive rather than a random sample more detailed information can be collected about a particular group of people who are considered suitable for the exploration of the examined phenomenon (in this case intersubjectively informed psychotherapy for psychosis). A distinctive feature of IPA consists of its commitment to a detailed interpretative account of the cases included, therefore sacrificing breadth for depth. In the recent past, five, six or seven has been recommended as a reasonable sample size for a student project using IPA (Smith & Osborn, 2008). Even though my initial aim was to recruit between seven to eight participants, the project finally recruited and interviewed six participants due to low response. Notwithstanding the difficulties in recruitment, the richness of the data that was produced through the interviews established that six interviews were sufficient for meaningful analysis to take place.

4.1.2 Inclusion criteria

The project initially aimed at recruiting English speaking, qualified counselling psychologists (registered with the BPS and Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC)) who work intersubjectively with people diagnosed with psychosis on a one-to-one basis. However, as difficulties in recruiting CoPts who work with psychosis were expected (Larsson, Loewenthal, & Brooks, 2012) – the recruitment process resulted in a very low response rate – I subsequently decided to also recruit psychotherapists (registered with the UKCP) who identified themselves as working from a relational/intersubjective vantage point with people diagnosed with psychosis. Moreover, the intersubjective therapeutic stance with which the participants identified was considered more important compared to their therapeutic techniques (e.g., Geekie & Read, 2009) or theoretical orientation. In other words, participants were invited to share their intersubjective experiences from an experiential and not a theoretical perspective. By incorporating a pluralistic stance, the gamut of background trainings and therapeutic orientations was assumed to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under investigation and an association with the existing literature, to facilitate applicability and dissemination. Moreover, the length of participants’ post-qualification experience was not considered to be an inclusion criterion because the research question invited participants to reflect on their subjective experiences, irrespectively of their years of clinical practice.

4.1.3 Recruitment

After the project gained ethical approval by both Middlesex University and the New School of Psychotherapy and Counselling (NSPC) (see Appendix I), an advertisement (Appendix II) was created and posted at the Society of Existential Analysis (SEA), the BPS division of Counselling Psychology, and the Universities Psychotherapy and Counselling Association (UPCA) websites. Moreover, the advertisement was forwarded to organisations and charities that campaign for mental health issues such as MIND, SANE, Mental Health Foundation, Mental Health Research UK and Rethink Mental Illness. The International Society for Psychological

and Social Approaches to Psychosis in the United Kingdom (ISPS-UK) was also approached and the advertisement was forwarded through the organisation to connected psychologists and psychotherapists who work with psychosis. A ‘snowball sampling’ method was also employed whereby participants who already expressed an interest for participating were encouraged to inform other colleagues who also met the selection criteria and could possibly be interested in participating. As Patton (2002, p.243) suggested, snowball sampling “(…) identifies cases of interest from people who know people who know people who know what cases are information-rich, that is, good examples for study, good interview subjects”. After several practitioners expressed an interest in participating (by receiving e-mails through a particular e-mail account I created for the purposes of this project: [email protected]), a screening procedure took place in order to make sure that they met the inclusion criteria. It should be noted that the most successful recruitment method proved to be the ‘snowball sampling’ as four out of the six participants who were recruited were informed and encouraged by the rest of participants who were already taking part and were informed by the advertisement which was forwarded to them by the aforementioned organisations. For those who met the criteria, a ‘Participant Information Sheet’ (see Appendix III) was firstly forwarded, and after they had carefully reviewed it, a ‘Background Information Sheet’ (see Appendix IV) and ‘Informed Consent Form’ (see Appendix V) were forwarded, which they were then encouraged to read carefully, sign, and return electronically. For each participant who agreed to take part in the project, a date and time were then arranged and participants were encouraged to contact me if they had any further enquiries regarding the interview procedure before the actual interview took place. Since at the period of recruitment I was located abroad, I decided to interview participants through videoconferencing (Skype) and therefore agreement upon the place of an interview was not needed. Based on this decision, pre-interview communications were considered fundamental in order consider participants’ experience and comfort level with the selected method of data collection and technology. All participants expressed that they were comfortable with videoconferencing, however they were encouraged to make sure that on the actual date of interview that they set up their internet connection, microphone and camera for a smooth videoconference experience. These pre-interview communications were

also aimed at reducing the pressure on both participants and myself and provided the appropriate space for remaining clarifications and proved valuable for developing the relationship needed for a productive and open dialogue throughout the interview. As Finlay and Evans (2008) have stressed, “In this pre-research stage, the foundations of mutual trust within a dialogical relationship need to be put in place and the research aims and process generally agreed upon. In Buber’s terms, we are called on to move beyond functional ‘I-It’ relationship in which we see the other in terms of their use to us, towards an I-Thou relationship – one of openness to their personhood” (p.1).

4.1.4 Demographics

Table 1: Demographic Data

PARTICIPANT PSEUDONYM

GENDER AGE PROFESSION ETHNIC ORIGINS THEORETICAL ORIENTATION CLINICAL EXPERIENCE SECTOR YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

1. Paula Female 31 Counselling Psychologist

White (British)

Integrative Public (Assertive Outreach Mental Health

& Early Intervention Teams)

3

2. Barbara Female 38 Psychotherapist White (Israeli of European origins)

Psychoanalytic Public (Inpatient, Outpatient, & Rehabilitation Settings)

10

3. Beth Female 36 Counselling Psychologist

White (Greek/Bri

tish)

Integrative Public (Community Mental Health Team and Residential Care)

7

4. Carla Female 58 Psychotherapist White (Greek) Phenomenological & Psychoanalytic Public (Inpatient Settings) 22

5. George Male 38 Counselling Psychologist & Psychotherapist White (German) Existential- Phenomenological & Psychoanalytic Public (Inpatient settings) & Private 10

6. John Male 62 Psychotherapist White (British)

Psychoanalytic Public (Inpatient settings, Residential

Care and Early Intervention Services) &

Private

In the table above (Table 1), I present the main demographic information, which was taken into consideration for the analysis of the data in general. The pluralistic stance this project has endorsed invited both the unique contributions of CoPts and psychotherapists and their diverse theoretical orientations. Participants’ professional identities were considered significant in terms of their subjective experiences in working with psychosis and the way in which they made sense of their intersubjective work could have been influenced by these experiences. The exploration of the possible differentiations amongst them was therefore considered important. Also, even though I assumed that participants’ shared experiences of their intersubjective work with psychosis were independent of their theoretical orientations (hence they were not invited to conceptualise intersubjectivity from a theoretical point of view per se, but from an experiential perspective instead), these were considered as qualitative indicators of the broader sense-making tendency of their experiences.

Furthermore, in consideration of participants’ ethnic origins, the qualitative and phenomenological origins of this project directed a critical focus onto the researcher role and this included race and ethnicity variables which are considered to interact with participant variables and data collected (Springman, Wherry & Notaro, 2006). For example, the fact that all participants shared a White/European origin and a middle-class background was taken into consideration in the analysis of data because it has affected the interview process and data collected: also that I, the researcher, share an ethnic and linguistic background with some participants. Matching researcher and participant ethnic and racial backgrounds have been shown to enhance comfort levels throughout the interview process and increase participants’ disclosures (Sherman, 2002). What I noticed with two participants (Beth & Carla) with whom I shared the same mother tongue (Greek) was that they were sharing their vulnerability in a more direct and explicit manner throughout their interview as compared to the rest of the sample. This was perhaps also related to my interview style, which as I have retrospectively reflected upon, was more encouraging in sharing a fuller description of their stream of consciousness by focusing on the here and now of the interview and their emotional temperatures in the process. I am also assuming that the fact that interaction was taking part through a language different from our common first language, being more open in the here and now of the

interview process acted as a compensatory mode for negotiating proximity. Moreover, even though participants’ years of clinical experience or settings within which they have worked were not taken into consideration in the inclusion criteria, they were considered demographically significant in exploring how the multiplicity of professional settings (emphasis on context) within which the practitioners gained their experience through the years, could have possibly influenced their intersubjective experiences.