Whether you are new to Interpretative Phenomenological
Analysis (IPA) or have been using it for a while, you may have noticed some
differences in the language associated with this qualitative approach to
This might seem confusing at first but don’t worry; help is at hand!
The guidance and steps suggested to conduct
your analysis remain the same. So do the underlying principles. All that’s changed
is some of the terminology.
Emergent Themes are now known as experiential statements, superordinate themes are now called personal experiential themes, and master themes are now referred to as group experiential themes.
This change in terminology can actually make things clearer as you work through your analysis. Experiential statements are just that, statements about the experiences captured in your data in terms of their meaning for the participant.
The example transcript includes the lines “so I really had to put in the effort and judge people quite quickly as well. So, yeah, I just had to put stuff out there quite a lot”. One of the experiential statements to arise from this analysis is ‘Selectively and purposively bonding with strangers’ (p. 41).
This statement is both concise and rich. It captures the participant’s description of forging relationships with other travellers and their sense of this being a deliberate, active process. A statement such as ‘Meeting new people’ or ‘Social aspects of travel’, although still reflective of the data, would not provide the same experiential detail.
Thinking in terms of experiential statements – rather than emergent themes – can help you orient yourself during the earlier analytic stages. An experiential statement involves summarising the meaning in a short portion of the text – perhaps just a few lines. At this stage, being too concerned with the bigger picture of ‘themes’ can distract you from looking carefully at each section of the transcript in a close, fine-grained fashion.
Personal experiential themes or PETs, are themes developed through an analysis of a
single case, meaning they are personal to that individual.
Group experiential themes or GETs are developed by looking across individual cases for patterns of
convergence and divergence. They are themes which represent the group.
As you can see, the revised terminology makes finding your way through the analysis easier.
Are you a postgrad student using qualitative methods to explore a social science topic?
Are you wrestling with your analysis, your themes, your write up? Or maybe you’re feeling nervous about your viva?
Qualitative research is an intense process that requires a lot of careful thinking. You need to hold many ideas in your mind as you consider connections between your themes and how your research fits into the wider picture. It’s no wonder analysis can cause a headache.
That’s why PGPR offers video consultations: hour-long sessions in which one of our team of qualitative experts talks you through the challenges you’re facing in your research project.
If you’re wondering whether a PGPR VC can help you, read the following examples to see how we’ve helped clients in the past…
Aimee was working on resubmitting a reflective assignment as part of her psychotherapy doctorate. She was finding it challenging to revise her previous submission to ensure she met the assessment criteria while expressing her lived experiences clearly in a formal academic style. Aimee sent us her original submission, along with the feedback from her assessors and the assessment criteria. Through a series of video consultations, we explored how Aimee could relate psychotherapeutic theory to both her personal and professional experiences. We identified specific areas where she could demonstrate her relevant understanding in relation to the required learning outcomes. By explaining her ideas verbally, Aimee felt more confident communicating her knowledge, and successfully reworked her assignment with a clearer narrative arc.
Bob had completed the write up of his interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) findings for his doctoral thesis. He had received feedback that his work was descriptive rather than interpretative and was unsure how to address this. Bob sent us his results chapter and we had a chat about how we could best support him. We agreed that a general discussion about how to be interpretative would be too abstract, so decided he would select some quotes from his findings which we could explore together. During the hour, we talked through a small selection of extracts in depth. This allowed Bob to get a sense of how to approach his data interpretatively, what to look for and the types of questions he could ask himself. He then felt more able to apply this to the rest of his findings chapter, which he continued to revise on his own.
Cathy had completed her PhD viva and was unsure how to approach her revisions. She sent us her viva report and thesis. In a series of video consultations, we focused on the different amendments required. In one session, we made a detailed plan for a chapter she had been asked to re-structure so that she could go away and organise her writing with clarity. In another, we discussed the examiners’ request that Cathy acknowledge the influence of her position on the research. We decided that writing a single reflexive statement would be appropriate and talked through what she might include in it. Cathy later sent some sections of her amended thesis for proofreading and written feedback to iron out the last details. Her revised thesis was accepted.
If you decide to book a VC with PGPR, we will spend an hour looking at your work before the session, and then an hour discussing the work once it’s done.
Previous PGPR VC client Andrea K said:
“I found my consultation meetings with Rachel incredibly helpful. When I felt stuck in my analysis, Rachel helped me to understand better what I am doing well (which motivated me to continue) as well as areas for further learning by discussing specific examples in my data. She definitely helped me to understand better how to put theory (IPA principles) into practice (analysis). Each consultation was used very efficiently thanks to Rachel’s clear focus, and she also made sure we had some time to discuss any questions/dilemmas that I had. I would recommend these consultations to anyone who feels stuck or wants to learn what they do well and what they can improve. Do not hesitate to contact the team if you have any other issues in your research study as they seem to consider individual needs and requests very well.”
Get in touch via the form below to book a session with one of our qualitative experts.
By this stage in your postgrad journey, you have probably
read thousands of academic papers – or at least it feels that way. Indeed, you
may have written one or two as well. But was the process quick and painless –
or did it involve tears, tantrums and having to cut far too many of your
carefully honed words? If you fall into the latter camp, you’ve come to the
right place. Don’t panic; paper writing is challenging at first. But the more
you practice, the slicker the process gets.
The method section is the simplest section of the paper.
What did you do? Can you remember? If so, write it down. Check your target
journal to see whether they have certain subheadings they want you to include
(examples might be data collection, analysis, ethics and so on). If they don’t,
have a look at other papers and copy their headings. Writing this short,
factual series of paragraphs gets you into your stride and breaks that
terrifying ‘blank page’ syndrome.
If you can, it’s often a good idea to start writing your
method section while you’re still conducting the research. This ensures that
you don’t forget any of those details about exactly where you found participant
14 or when you made those all-important changes to your interview schedule.
2. Use your table of themes to create your findings
The findings are the most important section of a qualitative paper. This should be the longest and most detailed element and will guide the material you include in your introduction and discussion sections. This is why, once you’ve got started with the super-simple method, you should tackle the findings next.
You’ve got a table of themes that you lovingly created
during your analysis, right? Well – I say lovingly created – what I mean is wrote,
crossed out, re-created, kicked down the stairs a few times and cried over
until you reached this final draft. Am I right?
Well, there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that
(nearly all) of the hard work is already done. Created correctly, your table of
themes should be the blueprint for your findings section. This means that you
already know what points you want to make, in what order, and supported by
which quotes. Brilliant, right? Well done past you. In theory, all you need to
do now is turn write about why you named the themes and subthemes as you did,
how those ideas are supported by the quotes and any interplay between the
themes. With the right table of themes, this is easier than it sounds – the
section almost writes itself.
The bad news – which really isn’t all that bad – is that analysis continues during writing. This means that, as you write your findings up, you are likely to realise that some quotes don’t quite do the right job, or that some points need shuffling around. You might need to seek out some different quotes, or re-order things. That’s fine; it’s good, in fact, as it shows you’re really engaging with the material. In this instance, use your new findings section to re-order the table.
The next stage is the introduction. These can be tough to
write when you start writing papers as opposed to a thesis. They are somewhat
equivalent to the lit review chapter of the thesis – but much, much shorter.
And shorter does not mean easier!
Start by making a bullet point list of all the points you
need to make in your introduction. These should include:
Setting the scene for your research question
The main points which need addressing from that
question. So, for example, if you’re asking what it is like to work in criminal
law (a heteronormative culture) as an LGBTQ person, you might have a bullet
point on heteronormativity, a bullet point on the culture in criminal law and a
bullet point on the challenges faced by LGBTQ people working in heteronormative
environments. (I kinda want to read that paper now…)
Why your approach is the best way to answer your
Once you have the list, approach this in the same way you did the method section – just fill in the blanks and write a paragraph (two at most) for each bullet point. If you’re lucky, you’ll already have done all the relevant reading. If you’re not, you’ll need to conduct a lit review at this point. However, knowing exactly what areas you’re interested in will make this quicker and easier than if you were just exploring the topic as a whole. Search for relevant, recent papers, plug them into EndNote or whichever referencing system you’re using, whizz through the relevant sections and make notes on anything useful. As you go, slot useful points into your skeleton intro, following the bullet points. You can refine it later. Ensure you don’t just look for papers that back up your pre-existing point of view; remember to be critical at all times, even of your own ideas.
Think of your introduction as a funnel. You’re starting with
the wider context of the question and then narrowing down to the point where
the reader agrees with you that answering this is question is essential, and
that your stance is the best way to do so.
Once you’ve presented your findings and shown the reader why they are important via the introduction, the next stage is to discuss them (hence the name!) in the light of other people’s work. Discussion sections can be notoriously tricky, which is why we have an entire blog post dedicated to getting them just right.
Qualitative discussions will generally follow the same
structure as your findings. Work through each theme in the same order you
presented them, showing how your findings confirm, contradict or build on
If time is of the essence, you can start your discussion section simultaneously with the introduction – after all, the two map onto each other to a certain extent. As you read the papers and make notes in a skeleton discussion section too. Write out your theme names under the ‘discussion’ title and note down any useful findings from others. All you need is to polish up your notes (and potentially look for a few more papers), and voila! You’re nearly done.
Please tell me you’ve been doing these the whole time? And that you’re using a handy piece of referencing software like EndNote or Zotero? If so – easy peasy. Use your software to set the references to the right system for your chosen journal (APA 7, Chicago or Harvard, most likely), and away you go. If you haven’t been using software, step one is to amend this immediately for next time. I know it feels like an intimidating pain before you get started, but it is SUCH a lifesaver in the end. Step two, for now, is to get onto Google Scholar and copy and paste those bad boys in by hand.
And finally, the abstract. Journals often have tight rules
for how long an abstract should be and what structure it should follow, so
check those first. Your abstract needs to give a small flavour of all the other
elements of the paper. They can be hard to get right and might be best left for
a week or so (if you have time) so that you can get a bit of distance from the
work. Or, if you’ve done the bulk of the writing, you might ask another member of
your research team to have a crack at this bit.
7. Send to PGPR
Whether you’re a total paper-newbie or an old hand, we can
all use an extra pair of eyes now and then. If you’re struggling with any
element of your paper writing, just get in touch with us using the form below,
and we’ll be happy to help.
You’re committed to completing a rigorous, thorough and well-developed analysis. You’ve collected your data and spent hours immersing yourself in coding and organising your codes into themes. When are you ready to start writing up?
How final is the final
It’s useful to
address the perception of qualitative research as a linear process with writing
up as the conclusion. If you follow this model, you may be reluctant to move on
until you’re sure your codes are ‘finished’. Perhaps that idea comes from quantitative
research, where you analyse your data then write up your report to present to
others. Based on this, your concerns might be mostly about judging when you’re ‘ready’
to move onto writing.
Writing as a
writing as an integral part of continuing your analysis. The use of writing as
an analysis tool crops up across social sciences and qualitative methods. You
might have read about memo-writing in grounded theory, for instance.
Hermeneutic psychology writers have suggested writing should be an integral part
of developing an analysis.
In this vision, the
writing is less about reporting your fully formed ideas and more about refining
your thinking, ideas and arguments about your data. Codes only capture a small
part of your thinking and don’t allow you to explain or explore. As you write,
you can capture and develop initially nebulous ideas about your work.
How does writing
can be for yourself. You can test your arguments and reasoning. You might start
setting down your analytic claims about your data. How did you make sense of
the participants’ words? Which parts of the text do you think were particularly
relevant? These don’t have to be final ideas, but they can help you decide what
might be useful.
Writing can also help you get feedback from others. A narrative with quotes, analytic commentary and overarching comments communicates your ideas with more depth than code names or standalone quotes. A written account helps an outsider understand the reasoning that took you from data to themes and how you’re interpreting the data.
A short, written analysis example can reassure your supervisor that you’re engaging in a thorough analysis. They will then be able to see your work’s structure, content and analysis style, which can be vital to ensure you’re creating a well-developed piece of analysis.
What to write?
There are many options for when to write and how much.
Personally, I like to write often, even if many of those narratives only
collect virtual cobwebs on my laptop (I always believe I’ll use them one day).
You can write a brief reflection on each interview and after transcription. You
might want to write up some key themes from one transcript, explain what you
think is important about a small group of quotes, or write a full analysis of
each participant’s account.
happen when you write. Despite rigorous attention to coding, our analytic ideas
can prove frustratingly slippery when we try to explain them. You might find that
some themes develop beyond their original scope as you find more to say about
them. Others may turn out to be uninteresting once you start writing. Either
situation should nudge you to return to your data and see what was happening
(moving back around the hermeneutic circle). Are there multiple ideas within
one initial code that might benefit from more thought? Are there other parts of
the data that might elaborate your ideas and develop those dull themes? If you
encounter these questions early, it’s an exciting way to advance your analysis.
How can PGPR help
If you’re unsure or
reluctant to take the plunge, we can help. A Skype session might help make
decisions about writing. If your supervisor can’t review all your developing
ideas, you can ask for feedback from our team. We can review early drafts and
help you refine and focus further analysis.
Starting to write and explain your ideas is an exciting time in your research. Take the plunge to see where it can take you.
reading this blog, you’re either a PGPR client or you’re thinking about
becoming one. Either way – welcome! We hope we’ll get the chance to read some of
your research soon.
We offer four
levels of service here at PGPR. This is a blog to explain what you’ll get when
you book each of those services.
1. Basic proof-reading
First and foremost, proof-reading is about ensuring that your spelling and grammar are correct. You probably realised that, but PGPR proof-readers also look out for and help you with more than just those factors. Those extra areas include:
Tightening your writing by cutting down overly long sentences
Clarifying confusing text
Ensuring consistency of formatting, terminology, punctuation and so on
Checking your in-text references and, for a small extra charge, your reference list
We’ll amend your piece using Word’s track changes feature and send you back two copies: one with the changes still marked and one clean copy. It might be that we also include some comments to ensure we haven’t changed your meaning or that you agree with any suggested re-formatting.
should use our basic proof-reading service? Clients who are happy with the structure and
meaning of their work, but who struggle with English or academic writing.
Read more about why you should work with a proof-reader here.
2. Feedback only
The PGPR team includes a wealth of qualitative experts. As such, we can offer feedback on your structure, methodology, findings and discussion sections. We might ask whether you could dig a bit deeper with a certain interpretation, or if you can find links between certain themes. We may also suggest papers which would be useful to read, point out methodological errors or highlight sections of your thesis which your examiners might question you about.
We can also
offer feedback on earlier stages of analysis, such as tables of themes or
transcripts. It might be helpful for you to consider a Skype session with one
of our experts if you’re at this earlier stage – more on those below.
If you book feedback only, you’ll get a single copy of your work back, marked up with helpful comments from one of our team. Read more about our brilliant team here.
Who should use our feedback only service? If you are confident that your writing is strong, but you feel less sure about whether your analysis or methodology are as robust as they can be, this is the service for you.
3. Proof-reading plus feedback
This is our deluxe service and is fairly self-explanatory! If you book this service, we’ll combine all the elements of basic proof-reading and feedback. This means you’ll get two copies of your work back: one with the tracked changes still there for you to look at and one clean copy. Both copies will include the feedback comments.
Who should book proof-reading plus feedback? If you’re feeling unsure about your English or academic writing skills and need some extra assistance with your analysis, book this service.
4. Video consultations
The PGPR team now offers video consultations for its qualitative clients. These are an ideal opportunity to talk through difficulties you’re having at any stage of your research project with one of our team of experts.
Once you’ve booked a session and been paired with a team member, you can send some examples of your work for your expert to look over. They will then spend up to an hour discussing the work with you via a video chat. Note it’s fine to turn the video function off if you feel shy – you’ll still be able to hear our advice and questions.
You can read more about the benefits of our video consultations here.
Who should book a video consultation? Anyone who is feeling stuck with any stage of their qualitative research project.
If any of these services sound like they might be helpful for you, get in touch via the form below and have a chat with us about what we can offer.