Sensor muscular de electromiografía

Sanders (1982) outlined the phenomenological paradigm (Table 3.3). He provided an outline of the characteristics of phenomenological inquiry,

3. Methodology 121

although he neglected to cite the principles that a phenomenologist should possess. Even though this summary is imperfect, it provides a starting point for discussing the design of this research (see Table 3.3).

3. Methodology 122

Phenomenological Paradigm Normative Paradigm

i. World View

The world is viewed as largely indeterminate and problematic. Phenomena under investigation are viewed as functions of perceptions, implicit, and personal meanings/commitments. The observer and the observed are not separate.

The world is viewed as more or less determinate and non-problematic. It is external and objective. Science is value-free

ii. Phenomena under Investigation

Considers ‘lived experience’ of subjects. Observed characteristics and specific qualities are perceived as personal forms of meaning.

Considers characteristics that are easily enumerated and empirically verifiable.

iii. Problem Formulation

Ideas are developed through induction from data.

Begins with a hypothesis of causal relationships. Hypotheses are tested by manipulating one or more independent variables to study an effect on a specific behaviour (dependent variable). iv. Preferred Methodology/Methods

Emphasis is placed upon describing the world from the point of view of those experiencing it. Concepts and theories emerge from data – inductive approach. Small samples are investigated in-depth or over time.

Broad abstract generalisations or theories are applied in a logical deductive fashion by means of hypotheses. Large samples and quantitative methods are used.

v. Validity and Reliability

Has the researcher gained full access to the knowledge and meaning of the subjects under investigation?

Will similar observations be made by different researchers on different occasions?

Does the instrument measure what it is supposed to measure?

Will the measure yield the same results if applied on different occasions?

vi. Generalisation of Results

3. Methodology 123 Generalisations only concern the specific subjects

under investigation. Generalisations can take the form of conceptual structures. Findings can be used as a data base for future research.

Generalisations are formulated based on an analysis of the data regarding similar classes or universal tendencies that are expressed in normative fashion.

Table 3.3: Contrasting Phenomenological with Normative Paradigms, adopted from Sanders (1982, p. 358)

Sanders (1982) argued that phenomenology is a qualitative research method, a detailed study of the lived experiences5 _{of the individuals who are being}

researched. Colaizzi (1978) suggested a series of seven steps to describe the phenomenological research process:

a. The first task of the researcher is to read the participants’ narratives, to acquire a feeling for their ideas in order to understand them fully.

b. The next step, “extracting significant statements,” requires the researcher to identify key words and sentences relating to the phenomenon under study.

c. The researcher then attempts to formulate meanings for each of these significant statements.

d. This process is repeated across participants’ stories, and recurrent meaningful themes are clustered. These may be validated by returning to the informants to check interpretation.

e. After this, the researcher should be able to integrate the resulting themes into a rich description of the phenomenon under study.

5 _{Husserl (1970, p. 385) noted “The appearing of things does not appear itself to us, we live}

3. Methodology 124

f. The next step is to reduce these themes to an essential structure that offers an explanation of the behaviour.

g. Finally, the researcher may return to the participants to conduct further interviews or to elicit their opinions on the analysis in order to cross check interpretation.

Later Hycner (1985) provided a more detailed catalogue of phases that the phenomenological inquiry may follow. His contribution builds on Colaizzi’s work by creating a more instrumental tool of phenomenological inquiry framing: See Table 3.4 for a comparison of the two methods.

3. Methodology 125

Colaizzi (1978) Hycner (1985)

Phase 1 Summaries reading to acquire the general idea.

Transcription.

Phase 2 Extraction of significant statements and identification of key words.

Bracketing and the phenomenological reduction.

Phase 3 Understanding the meaning of the significant statements.

Listening to the interview for a sense of the whole.

Phase 4 Validation of the process through repetition and revisit of the interviewees.

Delineating units of general meaning.

Phase 5 Development of a meaningful summary. Delineating meanings relevant to the research question.

Phase 6 Reduction to an essential structure that explain the behaviour of the interviewees.

Training independent judges to verify the units of relevant meaning.

Phase 7 Return to the interviewees for further clarification if required.

Eliminating redundancies.

Phase 8 Clustering units of relevant meanings.

Phase 9 Determining themes from clusters of

meaning.

Phase 10 Writing a summary for each individual interview.

Phase 11 Return to the participant with summary and themes: Conducting a second interview.

Phase 12 Modifying themes and summaries.

Phase 13 Identifying general and unique themes for all the interviews.

Phase 14 Contextualisation of themes.

Phase 15 Composite summary.

Table 3.4: The phenomenological inquiry method, adapted from Colaizzi (1978) and Hycner (1985)

3. Methodology 126

Comparing the two methods, Hycner’s (1985) work is more detailed and prescriptive in nature. It delivers a step-by-step roadmap with particular milestones that the researcher has to achieve. However, doing phenomenological research in this way is rather contradictory as the core idea of phenomenological research is the flexibility and looseness of the method, and the space that is given to the interviewees to express their feelings, emotion, knowledge and understandings. In those terms Colaizzi’s suggestion is closer to the ontological underpinning of phenomenology. Nevertheless Hycner’s contribution is also valuable because his account of the phases of phenomenological inquiry provides a useful checklist for the researcher, particularly the inexperienced phenomenological one.

Phenomenology is a qualitative way of researching social phenomena. Ahmad and Ali (2003, p. 2) noted that “qualitative research is used where there is a concern for understanding how things happen and how they are related, rather than only measuring the relationship between variables.” The objective of qualitative data is to provide depth and details of action, events, and perspectives through the eyes of the actors or those being investigated (Bryman & Cramer, 1988). As a result, a qualitative methodology can provide the investigator with meaningful insights by delving more deeply and examining the intangible aspects of complex issues of process (Lofland, 1971; Mintzberg, 1983; Van Maanen, 1983). Therefore, qualitative methodologies are characterised not only as “deep” (Sieber, 1973), “storytelling,” “full, rich, and real” (Miles and Hubert, 1984), but also as “soft” and “narrow” (Warneryd,

3. Methodology 127

1985). All these characteristics show the power of qualitative study to answer several research objectives suited to the use of this methodology. However, such methodology is costly and time-consuming, and data can only be gathered from a small sample size (Sekaran, 1992).

3.4.1. Issues in phenomenological research

The issues of validity and reliability from the phenomenological viewpoint have been addressed by Easterby-Smith (1994). The validity of research is dependent on the access that the researcher gains to the knowledge and meanings of the informants. With respect to that, Sanders (1982) suggested that the phenomenologist researcher should probe the research problem in- depth, without caring for the quantity of the interviewed or observed research objects. Reliability of the phenomenological research is gained if similar observations are made by different researchers in different locations.