“It’s like Top of the Pops!”. Exploring PHaR’s ‘favourite’ examples of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA).

 As some of us PHaR members lean more towards the ‘earlier’ stage of our research careers, we considered how newcomers to IPA (and qualitative methods more broadly) could best get a sense of what distinguishes IPA from other methods of analysis.

We thought it could be valuable to share our favourite examples of published IPA work: independent of research topic, research outputs that, for us, best ‘show off’ the method. Or to create the opportunity to talk about those papers we just really like.

Rather than read each other’s selections beforehand, we met (16^th May 2024), each attendee bringing a paper (or papers) in mind and ready to share. We then briefly outlined what drew us to each paper, before wandering into related discussions and topics. Below, we have captured some of these reflections, alongside the papers that were chosen in a (roughly) thematised series of three collections:

 

Being not just doing: IPA as a method.

Engward, H., & Goldspink, S. (2020). Lodgers in the house: Living with the data in interpretive phenomenological analysis research. Reflective Practice, 00(00), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2019.1708305

We felt this paper really captured the feelings of undertaking a piece of IPA research. We were really connected to what the authors were describing. A relatable account of what it’s like to engage with IPA. We particularly loved the metaphor of the lodger; the surprising ways that our participants' stories live with us.

 

Nizza, I. E., Farr, J., & Smith, J. A. (2021). Achieving excellence in interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): Four markers of high quality. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 00(00), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1854404

A useful set of guiding concepts for understanding how to elevate our attempts at IPA. Or, concepts that we can draw attention to as we evaluate our own research. An approach to quality that doesn’t lead to a ‘check box’ mentality but, instead, accommodates the flexibility and creativity of IPA as a method.

 

Creativity and innovations.

Morrey, T., Larkin, M., & Rolfe, A. (2022). “Screaming isolation” when is a chair more than a chair? Photographic encounters, IPA and capturing out of awareness experiencing: A novel approach to working with temporal, spatial and embodied dimensions. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 19(4), 1064-1093. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2021.2001704 

How does photography work as an amplification of the IPA process? “Screaming Isolation” introduces a wonderful concept of Photographic Encounter - attuning, enriching and accumulating. Great title too.

 

Nizza, I. E., Smith, J. A., & Kirkham, J. A. (2018). ‘Put the illness in a box’: A longitudinal interpretative phenomenological analysis of changes in a sufferer’s pictorial representations of pain following participation in a pain management programme. British Journal of Pain, 12(3), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/2049463717738804

Participant created drawings are centred within a longitudinal design, as the authors skilfully explore one woman’s changing relationship with chronic pain. The concise yet detailed analysis is attentive and insightful. The paper is a great example of how creative approaches to data collection can enrich our understanding.

 

Postavaru, G. I. (2019). A meta-ethnography of parents’ experiences of their children’s life-limiting conditions. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 16(2), 253-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2018.1543068

Extending the concept of what a qualitative meta-synthesis could achieve, this meta-ethnographic study remains firmly committed to a phenomenological framework. The evocatively titled concepts provide a higher-level analysis of parents’ experiences.

 

Bond, J., Kenny, A., Mesaric, A., Wilson, N., Pinfold, V., Kabir, T., Freeman, D., Waite, F., Larkin, M., & Robotham, D. J. (2022). A life more ordinary: A peer research method qualitative study of the Feeling Safe Programme for persecutory delusions. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 95(4), 1108-1125. https://doi.org/10.1111/papt.12421

It’s rare to see an IPA paper that has such a sizeable list of authors. But this publication is an impressive testament to the Feeling Safe Programme’s commitment to cocreated research. Data were collected and analysed by a peer research team, including researchers who had similar life experiences to the participants. Bond et al., give us an insight into how we could approach, and understand, the complexities of large team IPA studies.

 

The affective power of case studies (aka ‘the Virginia Eatough fan club’).

Eatough, V., & Smith, J. A. (2006). I feel like a scrambled egg in my head: An idiographic case study of meaning making and anger using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 79(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1348/147608305X41100

 

Eatough, V., & Shaw, K. (2019). “It’s like having an evil twin”: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the lifeworld of a person with Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Research in Nursing, 24(1–2), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987118821396

Critics of IPA will often gesture towards a perceived lack of engagement with phenomenological traditions. Taken together, these case studies are prime examples of how to incorporate phenomenological thinking into a qualitative analysis. Almost twenty years on, it is interesting to historicise “I feel like a scrambled egg in my head”: how the introduction builds to make space for an emerging, new, qualitative paradigm in British psychological research. But the real gems are in the findings. Eatough and colleagues create analyses that are empathetic, critical and detailed. Their affective writing brings participants’ accounts to life – we feel as though we there with Marilyn (2006) and Barbara (2019). Finding ourselves moved by the writers’ accounts of these participants lives, we can’t help but wonder where are they now?