Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)

Submitted by

Noor Ul Huda

Roll no. 01

MS (One-Year)

(2024-2025)

Submitted to

Ms. Hira Liaqat

Centre for Clinical Psychology

University of the Punjab

Table of Contents

Phenomenology..........................................................................................................................1

Hermeneutics..............................................................................................................................3

Idiography..................................................................................................................................3

Beginning IPA: Selecting a Research Topic and Defining the Question...................................4

Data Collection in IPA: Ensuring Authenticity and Depth........................................................6

1. In-depth Interviews........................................................................................................6

2. Semi-Structured, In-Depth Interviews...........................................................................7

3. Unstructured Interviews..................................................................................................7

4. Focus Groups..................................................................................................................8

Analysis and Interpretation in IPA.............................................................................................8

1. Reading and Re-Reading.................................................................................................8

2. Initial Noting...................................................................................................................8

3. Developing Emergent Themes......................................................................................10

4. Searching for Connections across Themes...................................................................11

5. Reviewing and Refining Themes..................................................................................11

6. Moving to the Next Case..............................................................................................13

7. Looking for Patterns across Cases................................................................................13

Writing the IPA Report: From Data to Narrative.....................................................................15

Conclusion................................................................................................................................16

References................................................................................................................................17
 Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) is a qualitative research approach that

aims to explore how individuals make sense of their personal and social experiences. Smith,

Flowers, and Larkin (2009) characterize Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) as a

methodological process that rigorously attends to both the distinct and shared dimensions of

individual experiences. This approach enables researchers to explore subjective perspectives

in depth, facilitating a nuanced and thorough analysis of rich, personalized data. IPA typically

involves a detailed, iterative examination of individual cases, often with a small sample size,

to capture the complexity of human experience.

This method has been informed by concepts and debates from three key areas of the

philosophy of knowledge: phenomenology, hermeneutics and idiography.

Phenomenology

Phenomenology is a philosophical approach focused on studying experience as it is

directly encountered. This approach explores human existence, emphasizing the aspects that

form our lived world. It provides psychologists with insights on how to explore and

understand lived experiences (Husserl, 1927).

In defining phenomenology, four major philosophers are important: Husserl, Heidegger,

Merleau-Ponty, and Sartre, each of whom contributes to the core project of phenomenology.

1. Husserl's Transcendental Phenomenology focuses on "pure consciousness" and the essential

structures of experiences, emphasizing that objects are perceived through intentional acts,

which means that consciousness is always directed toward something. He proposed a

 method involving "bracketing," where researchers set aside preconceptions to focus on

their perception of the world. This approach utilizes a series of steps, aimed at uncovering

the essential qualities of experiences, enabling an understanding of consciousness and its

structures (Husserl, 1927).

2. Heidegger’s Existential Phenomenology emphasizes that meaning emerges from our

embedded consciousness in a “significant world” (Heidegger, 1962 & 1927). His

approach, which moves away from individual psychological processes, centers on

practical engagement with the world through relationships and activities. Heidegger

highlights that humans are “thrown” into a pre-existing world where objects are

encountered as “ready-to-hand,” thus emphasizing the relational nature of consciousness

and intersubjectivity. For IPA researchers, this perspective offers insights into how

individuals interpret their lived experiences within specific contexts, times, and

perspectives (Gallagher & Zahavi, 2008).

3. Merleau-Ponty's Embodied Phenomenology emphasizes the embodied nature of perception,

arguing that our understanding of the world arises from our bodily experience rather than

from detached cognitive processes and that our individual perspective shapes how we

engage with our surroundings (Merleau-Ponty, 1962).

4. Sartre’s Existential Phenomenology builds on Heidegger's work by emphasizing personal

freedom, choice, and the continuous process of becoming. He argues that identity is

defined through actions within a social context, highlighting the tension between self and

others. Sartre introduces "nothingness" to explain how absence shapes perception and

explores how others influence self-awareness through his concept of "The Look." This

relational dynamic provides IPA researchers with insight into how human experiences are

shaped by interpersonal and social contexts (Sartre, 1943).

Hermeneutics

Hermeneutics refers to the theory and methodology of interpretation, particularly applied

to texts, language, and symbols. Historically, it has been used in the context of religious,

philosophical, and literary texts, but it also applies to social, legal, and historical contexts.

Hermeneutics addresses the process of interpreting meaning, involving a dynamic interaction

between the interpreter and the text (Schleiermacher, 1998).

The Hermeneutic Circle

The hermeneutic circle is a key concept in hermeneutics, describing the dynamic

relationship between the part and the whole in interpretation. To understand a part (e.g., a

word), one must consider the whole (e.g., the sentence), and to understand the whole, one

must understand the parts. This non-linear, iterative process of interpretation reflects a back-

and-forth movement between different levels of meaning. In qualitative research, particularly

in Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), the hermeneutic circle emphasizes the

idea that understanding evolves through repeated engagement with the text, shaped by the

researcher’s history of interpretation (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009).

Idiography

Idiography focuses on the particular, emphasizing the in-depth study of individual cases,

events, or phenomena. In contrast to nomothetic approaches, idiography values the

uniqueness of specific experiences and contexts. Lamiell (1987) criticizes "individual

differences" research, arguing that such studies cannot provide insights into individual

behavior or functioning, as they aggregate data that mask individual experiences. This

commitment operates at two levels: thorough analysis of details and understanding how

specific individuals experience and interpret phenomena (Smith et al., 2009).

Beginning IPA: Selecting a Research Topic and Defining the Question

Researchers using IPA aim to capture the participants' perspectives and the meanings they

attach to their experiences within particular contexts. In IPA research, it is essential to collect

rich and detailed personal accounts from participants who are able and willing to provide

insights into their lived experiences. Successful IPA requires flexibility, creativity, and a

combination of critical, reflective, and conceptual thinking (Chamberlain, 2000; Salmon,

2002). Steps of conducting an IPA research study are as follows:

1. Choosing a Topic

Researchers often focus on topics that are meaningful, especially when aiming to facilitate

social change (Kidder & Fine, 1997). Additionally, considering the accessibility of

participants is crucial, as well as reflecting on prior knowledge and preconceptions about

their experiences. This reflection can help in understanding the researcher’s potential biases

and how they may impact the research.

2. Formulating the Research Question

Once the topic is chosen, it is important to narrow the focus and align the research

question with the chosen methodology. This stage requires careful consideration of how the

methodology of IPA, fits the research objectives. Researchers must reflect on their

connection to the subject matter and how it influences their data collection approach (Finlay,

2002). This reflection helps ensure that the research question is both relevant and suitable for

the chosen qualitative method.

3. Conducting a Literature Review

A literature review is critical in identifying research gaps and understanding participants’

experiences within the chosen topic. Although IPA research questions are generally not
theory-driven, the review can provide valuable insights into potential participant claims and

shape the development of the research question. An evaluative review allows the researcher

to position their study within the field and demonstrate its contribution (Finlay, 2002). This

helps refine the scope of the research and clarifies its purpose.

4. Choosing IPA

Different qualitative research methods such as grounded theory, discourse analysis, and

narrative analysis offer distinct perspectives on data. The selection of IPA is guided by its

alignment with the researcher’s epistemological stance and the type of insights they seek

from their participants. IPA is particularly well-suited for research that aims to explore

individuals’ personal experiences and the meaning they derive from these experiences. Its

focus on understanding the participant’s subjective perspective makes IPA an ideal choice for

exploring personal narratives and experiential claims.

5. Sample Size

There is no definitive answer to the ideal sample size for IPA studies, as it depends on

factors such as the level of analysis, the richness of each case, and organizational constraints.

IPA focuses on detailed individual experiences, so fewer participants, typically between three

and six, are preferred. This allows for a comprehensive analysis of each case without

overwhelming the researcher with data (Smith, 2008). Larger samples, are not necessarily

more beneficial, as they can hinder the depth of analysis required in IPA research (Smith,

Flowers, & Osborn, 1997).

6. Ethical Practice

Ethical considerations are integral throughout qualitative research. Researchers must

ensure informed consent is obtained, not just for participation, but also for data analysis,
especially when using verbatim extracts in published reports. Ensuring confidentiality is a

core principle, though complete anonymity can be challenging. The right to withdraw should

be extended as far as possible, with participants able to remove their data before analysis or

publication (Elliott, Fischer, & Rennie, 1999). Additional care should be taken to provide

support if sensitive issues arise during data collection, ensuring the well-being of both

participants and researchers.

Data Collection in IPA: Ensuring Authenticity and Depth

The critical aspect of choosing a data collection method for IPA is ensuring that it

facilitates the elicitation of rich data. It is important to not only collect detailed descriptions

but also allowing participants the space to reflect on their feelings, interpretations, and

meanings attached to those experiences (Smith, 2004). Unlike structured interviews or

questionnaires that limit responses, IPA encourages a more open and expansive dialogue

(Reid, Flowers, & Larkin, 2005). Such data are more likely to be obtained through in-depth

interviews, which offer flexibility for participants to share their experiences in detail. The use

of computer-mediated data collection tools, such as synchronous and asynchronous

interviews, has also been explored in IPA research (Flowers, 2008). After the interview,

researchers can make reflective notes to capture their impressions and interactions, which are

valuable for analyzing the data. IPA requires a verbatim transcription of the interview to

maintain accuracy and ensure that the analysis focuses on the participant's meanings.

Typically, this involves an audio recording of the interview, which is transcribed into text.

However, not all aspects of the recording need to be transcribed.

1. In-depth Interviews

An in-depth qualitative interview is typically preferred in IPA, in it, the researcher

facilitates the participant's narrative. IPA interviews are designed to open up dialogue,
allowing the participant to recount their personal experiences in their own words (Smith et

al., 2009). The creation of an interview schedule is an essential step in preparing for an IPA

interview. This schedule typically includes open-ended questions that encourage the

participant to elaborate on their thoughts, feelings, and experiences. The goal is to create an

environment where the participant feels comfortable sharing their personal stories, which will

provide the rich data needed for IPA analysis (Smith & Osborn, 2003).

2. Semi-Structured, In-Depth Interviews

Semi-structured interviews allow for flexibility and depth, providing a snapshot of the

participant's understanding and experiences. However, it is crucial to recognize that these

interviews are not objective truths but subjective interpretations. A sensitive approach to

interview dynamics, especially when managing participant discomfort or resistance, is

essential.

3. Unstructured Interviews

Unstructured interviews are a highly flexible approach where the interviewer begins with

a single core question and lets the participant's response guide the direction of the

conversation. For instance, questions like "What does happiness mean to you?" allow the

participant to express their experiences without predefined topics, offering deeper insights

into their perspectives. This method aligns with the inductive nature of interpretative

phenomenological analysis (IPA), encouraging exploration of unanticipated findings and

prioritizing participant-driven agendas. However, it requires experience and is best suited for

those familiar with IPA, as it can be challenging for beginners due to the lack of structure.
4. Focus Groups

Focus groups present particular challenges for IPA due to their dynamic, multi-voice

nature, which can complicate the elicitation of detailed, personal narratives (Flowers, Duncan

& Frankis, 2000). IPA researchers considering focus groups should critically examine their

research questions, planning to capture both group interactions and individual perspectives by

“deconstructing” transcripts for collective patterns and idiographic accounts. Groups of four

to five participants are optimal, and if facilitators work in pairs, slightly larger groups may be

manageable (Wilkinson, Joffe & Yardley, 2004).

Analysis and Interpretation in IPA

In Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), the analysis process focuses on

understanding the participant's experiences and how they make sense of them. The process is

iterative and involves several key steps:

1. Reading and Re-Reading

This step ensures immersion in the data by repeatedly reading the transcript. If available,

listening to the audio recording alongside reading helps to capture nuances in tone and

emotion. This stage is designed to focus on the participant’s experiences without rushing to

conclusions, slowing down habitual analysis tendencies.

2. Initial Noting

This stage involves a detailed, exploratory engagement with the transcript. Descriptive

comments highlight what the participant said, while linguistic comments examine how they

used language. Conceptual comments move the analysis to a deeper level, interpreting the
meaning behind the words. This process encourages a comprehensive understanding of the

participant’s lived experience.

a) Descriptive Comments. In IPA involve recording significant keywords, phrases, and

concepts from a participant’s transcript that highlight important aspects of their

experiences or worldview. This initial layer of notes focuses on straightforward

observations, identifying objects, events, and relationships that shape the participant’s

life. Descriptions might capture specific expressions, emotional reactions, and unique

phrases, offering an “at face value” look at what matters to the participant. As analysis

deepens, these initial observations evolve to capture more complex meanings, such as

how a participant's reference to a “wheelchair” may shift from a symbol of independence

to a sign of visible illness, reflecting the nuances of their lived experience.

b) Linguistic Comments. These focus on the participant's use of language and how this

shapes their experience. The aim is to identify how language reflects meaning, with an

emphasis on the following aspects:

1. Pronouns: They may reveal insights into the participant's sense of self or relationships

with others.

2. Pauses and Laughter: These often indicate emotional shifts or moments of reflection.

3. Repetition: Repeated phrases may highlight key concerns or unresolved issues.

4. Tone and Fluency: Variations in tone or hesitancy in speech can indicate the

emotional significance of what is being said.

5. Metaphor: Metaphors are especially powerful, as they often encapsulate complex

concepts or emotional states. For example, a metaphor like “shell shock” in describing

an experience can suggest trauma or deep emotional impact.

a) Conceptual Comments. Conceptual comments represent a more interpretative level of

analysis, where the researcher moves beyond what the participant explicitly says to

explore deeper meanings. This stage often involves asking reflective questions to push the

analysis towards more abstract interpretations. Key elements include:

1. Questioning and Reflection: Often, these comments are in the form of questions that

challenge the participant's statements, such as "Who were they if they weren’t

‘themselves’?" This can open up deeper reflections on identity, agency, and

psychological fragmentation.

2. Time Frame: Observing shifts in the narrative over time helps analysts understand the

temporal dynamics of the participant’s experience. For example, distinctions between

“early days” and the present moment might hint at emotional processing and stages of

adaptation.

3. Self and Identity: This can involve interpreting how the participant describes changes

in their sense of self, often triggered by life events or diagnoses. The analysis might

move from a concrete description of the participant’s struggles to a more abstract

concept of self-loss or transformation.

3. Developing Emergent Themes

In this step, the focus shifts from the detailed transcript and initial notes to identifying key

themes, which help to distill the psychological essence of the participant’s experiences

(Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). The analyst works with exploratory comments to generate

concise phrases that capture significant insights while maintaining complexity and staying

connected to the whole interview. This thematic distillation involves a "hermeneutic circle,"

interpreting each part in relation to the whole interview and vice versa (Smith et al., 2009).

Themes reflect a balance between participant language and researcher interpretation,

combining description with psychological abstraction, such as in themes like "questioning

self" and "lost self" to capture identity struggles post-diagnosis (Smith et al., 2009). These

themes, though concise, are grounded in data and designed to encapsulate both the specific

and conceptual dimensions of participant narratives.

4. Searching for Connections across Themes

The analysis process in IPA is flexible, allowing researchers to organize themes

innovatively rather than adhering to rigid guidelines. At this stage, not all emergent themes

need to be retained; those that align best with the research question are prioritized, while

others may be set aside. The process benefits from revisiting earlier transcripts as subsequent

data emerges, refining the analysis and possibly adjusting thematic importance.

To organize themes, two techniques are suggested: typing themes in chronological order

and arranging them into clusters based on similarity, or printing and cutting themes into

separate pieces to be spatially organized. The latter method, involving physical movement of

themes across a large surface, allows visual grouping by similarity, opposition, or other

relationships. Experimenting with these approaches can help uncover meaningful connections

and patterns among themes, but the most effective method depends on the research context

and the analyst's style (Smith et al., 2009).

5. Reviewing and Refining Themes

Themes are revisited and refined based on the data. This step ensures that the themes still

capture the essence of the participant’s lived experience while making sense of the broader

context. This is where the interpretative aspect of IPA becomes crucial: how the analyst

interprets the participant's meaning within their specific context. Several methods help refine
and organize emergent themes into meaningful superordinate themes, which then reveal

patterns and deeper insights into the participant’s lived experiences:

a) Abstraction. This method involves grouping similar themes together to create a new

superordinate theme that captures shared meanings. For instance, themes like

“excessive thinking,” “grief,” and “depression” may collectively represent “The

psychological consequences of diagnosis” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009).

b) Subsumption. In this approach, one particularly salient theme can become the super-

ordinate theme, helping to unify several related sub-themes. For example, a theme

like "Diagnosis as Transforming the Self" could encapsulate sub-themes such as

"Loss of Self," "Mourning the Self," and "Work of Managing the Self."

c) Polarization. Rather than looking for similarities, polarization identifies oppositional

relationships among themes. For example, negative themes around self-change from

diagnosis might contrast with positive themes of self-growth, offering a balanced

perspective on the participant’s adaptation process.

d) Contextualization. Here, themes are organized based on the participant’s narrative

context or timeline, emphasizing themes that relate to key life events (e.g., initial

diagnosis or first disclosure to family). This helps highlight how themes evolve or

cluster around important life stages (Smith & Osborn, 2008).

e) Numeration. This approach notes how frequently themes appear throughout the

transcript. While frequency alone isn’t indicative of significance, recurring themes

may underscore important aspects of the participant’s experiences, adding weight to

certain ideas without being purely quantitative.

f) Function. Finally, this method interprets the role themes play within the participant’s

narrative, often highlighting how language reflects identity and self-presentation. For
 instance, themes portraying the participant as a “victim” may emphasize a need for

empathy, while “survivor” themes suggest resilience (Smith et al., 2009).

These steps in IPA are iterative, with the aim of creating a synthesis of the participant’s

words and the analyst's interpretation. As themes emerge, they help to map connections

between different aspects of the experience, forming a richer understanding of the

participant's world.

6. Moving to the Next Case

Each new participant’s account is analyzed independently, treating it as a unique

narrative. This step involves bracketing any preconceived notions from prior cases to focus

on each new participant’s individual experience. Such an approach aligns with IPA’s

idiographic focus, which emphasizes understanding the particularity of each participant’s

lived experience (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009).

7. Looking for Patterns across Cases

After analyzing each case, the analyst compares themes across cases to find patterns or

contrasts. This step often involves re-examining and possibly re-labeling themes to capture

shared experiences while still acknowledging each participant's unique perspective. By

recognizing commonalities, themes may be abstracted into higher-order concepts, capturing

both unique and shared aspects of participants' experiences, thus enhancing the analysis to a

theoretical level (Smith et al., 2009).

Once the researcher has grouped and organized the emergent themes, it's helpful to create

a visual or tabular representation. This allows the researcher to see how the themes fit

together and to further refine the analysis. The aim is not only to understand the participant's
individual experience but also to uncover shared, higher-order concepts that may be present

across cases.

8. Levels of interpretation

In IPA levels of interpretation refer to the varying depths at which researchers engage

with the data. As the analysis progresses, different levels can reveal deeper insights into

participants' lived experiences. These levels help researchers move from surface-level

observations to more intricate understandings of the participant’s world, and they are:

1. Surface-Level (Descriptive). At this level, the researcher provides a basic

interpretation of the text, identifying straightforward meanings or social comparisons.

2. Metaphorical Interpretation. Moving deeper, the researcher identifies metaphors or

symbolic language used by the participant. For example, a girl compares herself to a

"horse," which symbolizes strength and capability in her past. This metaphor serves to

exaggerate her past self and to underscore the contrast with her current weakness. A

metaphor such as "cut down" can be interpreted symbolically, invoking an image of

fragility or loss, thereby giving insight into how she perceives her vulnerability.

3. Temporal Analysis. The third level involves analyzing temporal shifts, focusing on

how the participant's narrative changes across time. For instance, a person's shift from

the present ("I’m the fittest") to the past ("I used to work like a horse") is analyzed for

the psychological struggle between holding on to a past identity (strong and

independent) and reconciling with a new identity shaped by her chronic pain.

4. External Theory-Based Interpretation (Boundaries of IPA). The final level of

interpretation, which should be avoided in IPA, would involve importing external

theoretical frameworks, such as psychoanalysis, into the interpretation. For example,

interpreting the horse metaphor as a symbol of sexual frustration would be an

 example of imposing an external theory onto the data, which contrasts with IPA's

focus on grounding interpretation in the text itself. While it is possible to draw on

external theories to enrich the analysis, IPA emphasizes remaining faithful to the

participant’s experience without inserting pre-existing theoretical interpretations.

In larger samples, IPA also emphasizes the balance between idiographic (individual case)

and nomothetic (group-wide) perspectives. Identifying recurring themes across multiple

participants can provide broader insights while maintaining an individualized focus.

Writing the IPA Report: From Data to Narrative

This section typically starts with an overview, using tables or schematics of the main

themes, followed by a detailed breakdown of each theme, supported by participant quotes to

illustrate and validate findings. The structure can vary; a “case within theme” approach

presents each theme with supporting evidence from all participants, while a “theme within

case” approach discusses themes case-by-case, emphasizing each participant's unique

insights. Super-ordinate and sub-themes are organized to highlight both individual and shared

experiences (Smith & Osborn, 2008).

The writing process for IPA is iterative, involving multiple drafts to balance descriptive

and interpretative elements. The first draft may focus on participant quotes, while subsequent

revisions emphasize the researcher’s analytic commentary, allowing deeper engagement with

the data. In projects with smaller samples, each case can be discussed in detail, whereas

larger samples require selectivity in using quotes to maintain depth without redundancy.

In IPA research, quality and validity are important, but must be applied flexibly as IPA is

a creative process. Researchers need to strike a balance between producing high-quality work
and knowing what is "good enough." With a growing body of IPA research, it's possible to

evaluate studies based on criteria for validity, helping to refine practices and standards.

Conclusion

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) offers a comprehensive approach to

understanding individual experiences by emphasizing the personal and subjective nature of

lived experiences. By integrating both the participant’s voice and the researcher’s

interpretation, IPA bridges the gap between individual stories and broader psychological

insights, offering valuable contributions to qualitative research. This approach's flexibility

and focus on the participant’s lived experience make it particularly suited for studies that aim

to uncover complex psychological phenomena, such as those related to mental health,

identity, and personal transformation.

 18

References

Chamberlain, K. (2000). Methodolatry and qualitative health research. Journal of Health

Psychology, 5(3), 285–296.

Elliott, R., Fischer, C. T., & Rennie, D. L. (1999). Evolving guidelines for publication of

qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields. British Journal of Clinical

Psychology, 38, 215–229.

Finlay, L. (2002). Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in

research practice. Qualitative Research, 2, 209–230.

Flowers, P. (2008). Temporal tales: The use of multiple interviews with the same participant.

Qualitative Methods in Psychology Newsletter, 5, 24–27.

Flowers, P., Duncan, B., & Frankis, J. (2000). Community, responsibility and culpability:

HIV risk management amongst Scottish gay men. Journal of Community and Applied

Social Psychology, 10, 285–300.

Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. (2007). The phenomenological mind: An introduction to

philosophy of mind and cognitive science. Routledge.

Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Blackwell.

(Original work published 1927)

Husserl, E. (1927). Phenomenology. In Encyclopaedia Britannica (R. Palmer, Trans. and

revised).

Kidder, L. H., & Fine, M. (1997). Qualitative inquiry in psychology: A radical tradition. In D.

Fox & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Critical psychology (pp. 133–144). Sage.

 19

Lamiell, J. T. (1987). The psychology of personality: An epistemological inquiry. Columbia

University Press.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). Routledge.

(Original work published 1945)

Reid, K., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2005). Exploring lived experience: An introduction to

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. The Psychologist, 18, 20–23.

Salmon, P. (2002). How do we recognise good research when we see it? Anarchism,

methodologism and the quantitative vs qualitative debate. The Psychologist, 16, 24–27.

Sartre, J.-P. (1956). Being and nothingness (H. Barnes, Trans.). Washington Square Press.

(Original work published 1943)

Schleiermacher, F. (1998). Hermeneutics and criticism and other writings (A. Bowie,

Trans.). Cambridge University Press.

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis:

Theory, method, and research. Sage.

Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith

(Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (2nd ed., pp. 53–80).

Sage.

Smith, J. A. (2003). Shifting identities: The negotiation of meanings between texts and

between persons. In L. Finlay & B. Gough (Eds.), Reflexivity: A practical guide for

researchers in health and social sciences (pp. 176–186). Blackwell.

 20

Smith, J. A. (2007). Hermeneutics, human sciences and health: Linking theory and practice.

International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 2(1), 3–11.

Smith, J. A. (Ed.). (2008). Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods

(2nd ed.). Sage.

Wilkinson, S. (2003). Focus groups. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical

guide to research methods (pp. 184–204). Sage.

Wilkinson, S., Joffe, H., & Yardley, L. (2004). Interviews and focus groups. In D. F. Marks

& L. Yardley (Eds.), Research methods for clinical and health psychology (pp. 39–55).

Sage.