The Qualitative Open Mic quahrc

This episode reflects on how lived experience can engender insights, support the interpretative process and enhance the trustworthiness of qualitative research. We consider the different kinds of experience that can enhance this process, the limits of individual lived experience, and what this means for researchers who don’t have personal experience of the phenomenon under study.

Constructivist grounded theory's origins lie in criticisms of classical grounded theory as overly objectivist and insufficiently reflexive when it comes to interpretive processes. Sohail and Elaine discuss this context before going on to unpack the whys and hows of interpretation in constructivist grounded theory, how researchers can make the vital leap from description of data to higher-level conceptualisation, plus the pitfalls to avoid along the way.

The use of creative and participatory methods throws up complex issues for researchers. How do we interpret creative work? What knowledge and skills do qualitative researchers need to do this ethically? Is interpretation even the right word for this context? Sohail speaks to artist and academic Alda Terracciano to explore how visual art, poetry, and theatre can open up qualitative research into sensitive or stigmatised topics.

This episode reflects on the history and theory of Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis: where does its approach to meaning sit in relation to other qualitative methods and methodologies? How have new ways of collecting data and the expansion of creative methods changed IPA research? We go on to consider the insights IPA can bring to key questions actively being debated across qualitative research: the inclusion of lived experience perspectives, decolonisation, and open science.

This episode explores the role of supervisors and mentors in furnishing the interpretative processes. How can they support novice and more experienced qualitative researchers in making interpretations? What training and reading might they provide to prepare them and what does supervision look like at this stage in the analytical process? Finally, how can the wider context be shaped in a way that is conducive to making interpretations?

In this episode, we explore Nishita’s research on whether social research ethics codes and institutional processes effectively aid researchers working with ethnic minority communities in the UK. Her study, involving semi-structured interviews with researchers from King’s College London and the UCL Institute of Education, seeks to uncover both the benefits and limitations of these codes and processes.