Des vs. Interpretative Pheno

8/2/2019 Des vs. Interpretative Pheno

1/28

Chapter 4: Research methodology 74

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Phenomenology is the science that studies truth. It stands back from our

rational involvement with things and marvels at the fact that there is disclosure,

that things do appear, that the world can be understood and that we in our life

thinking serve as datives for the manifestation of things

Sokolowski (2000, p. 185)

4.1. QUALITATIVE VERSUS QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

4.1.1. Introduction

In psychology research, few quantitative studies have definitively demonstrated the

complexities involved in the process of psychotherapeutic change. Many researchers in

the field are critical of existing quantitative research methods and argue that, in

controlling and measuring variables, results, although statistically significant, are often

clinically superficial (Giorgi, 1995; Yalom, 1995; Kotsch, 2000; McLeod, 2001). The

shortcomings of quantitative research methods for investigating phenomena such aspsychotherapeutic change are particularly evident when attempting to examine

psychotherapeutic interventions such as art therapy. Art therapy involves the use of art

images as symbolic communications in therapy. These images may reveal unconscious

meaning systems that are inexpressible in words. Although an emotional experience in art

therapy may be profound and life changing, it is not always immediately accessible or

recognisable to the client on a conscious or cognitive level. It is often months (or years)

later that the client may be able to put into words what has taken place on an unconscious

level. This makes therapeutic change in art therapy particularly unyielding to research in

general, but especially unyielding to the use of quantitative methods.

In contrast to quantitative methodologies, which focus on causal relationships explicated

in terms of observational statements, verifications and predictions, qualitative

methodologies (or qualitative inquiry) offer alternative ways of exploring human

behaviour, thoughts and relationships in a manner more appropriate for studying

phenomena such as therapeutic change (Maggs-Rapport, 2001).


2/28


4.1.2. Qualitative inquiry as an alternative philosophy of science

It is not so much that phenomenology is against empiricism, as it is more

than merely empirical.

Giorgi (1997, p. 236)

Giorgi (1995) discusses what phenomenology can offer the science of psychology. He

describes qualitative inquiry techniques as arising in reaction to a discrepancy between

the natural scientific framework (adopted by psychologists as being the only scientific

framework that is considered useful), and the essential characteristics of human

phenomena as they spontaneously unfold in everyday life. He argues that because thedefinition of science accepted in psychology was initially the one defined by the natural

sciences, psychology was placed in a dilemma: either it meets the scientific criteria as

established by the natural sciences or it has to identify itself with the arts or humanities.

Psychology as a science leaves many human phenomena (for example, creativity and

freedom) without explanation, whilst psychology as an art is marginalised as not being

rigorous and exact in academic circles. Phenomenological thought offers a way out of

this dilemma by providing a better understanding of psychological phenomena as

spontaneously lived, within an expanded idea of science.

Giorgi (1995, p. 27) reasons that the natural sciences developed on the basis of the non-

conscious object as its model, in contrast to the human sciences that focus on human

phenomena and the subjective acts of people that are directed towards aspects of their

world. The phenomenon being studied is thus humans in relation to others and the world.

Non-conscious objects exist in space and time and are subject to causal laws, whereas

human perceptions cannot be subject to the same causal laws. The act of perceiving

belongs to consciousness; the object perceived (or phenomenon) is neither the act of

perceiving nor the object itself. Thus the object being studied is acknowledged as

possessing the same consciousness as the researcher. The analysis of the phenomenon

thus needs to be different to the analysis of a natural object. He suggests that concepts

such as forces and motivations unfolding over time are more appropriate for

describing human relationships in research.


3/28


Scientific thinking is defined as a way of approaching knowledge that is systematic,

methodical and critical as well as general (Giorgi, 1995). Giorgi posits that

phenomenology, whilst embracing these aspects of scientific thinking, emphasises the

fact of knowledge as correlated with consciousness and a phenomenon. He asserts that

phenomenology makes thematic, consciousness, and all of the objects, events and

processes that come to awareness by means of this consciousness. In thematising

consciousness in this way, he sees scientific understandings as being opened up to allow

for a more precise comprehension of psychological subject matter.

Qualitative inquiry strives to achieve an understanding of how people co-construct their

life-world as meaningful. Not only do humans possess consciousness, but thisconsciousness is also a creative participant in the relationship between people and their

experience of the world. People are creative co-contributors to their life-world, and

reality is co-constructed between people. The term co-construct refers to the way

people construct their life-world through their talk (narratives), through their actions,

through their systems of meaning, through their memories, through their rituals and

institutions and through the ways in which they physically and materially shape the

world. The concept of reality as co-created implies that there may be many alternative or

complementary definitions or understandings of reality (Valle, King & Halling, 1989;

Slife & Williams, 1995; Drew, 2001; McLeod, 2001).

McLeod (2001) suggests that there are three areas within which qualitative inquiry

produces useful new forms of knowing. These are knowledge of the other (involving a

category of persons such as in this study, bereaved parents); knowledge of phenomena

(categories of events such as psychotherapy for traumatic bereavement); and reflexive

knowledge (the researcher turns his or her attention on to his or her own internal

processes). Qualitative inquiry involves the exploration and mapping of meaning systems

within all of these areas of human experience.


4/28


4.1.3. Different directions within qualitative inquiry

Different methodologies have arisen within the broader field of qualitative inquiry that

emphasise and focus on diverse aspects of the ways in which people construct reality.

Ethnography focuses on the way that people construct their world through social

practices and rituals. Discourse, conversational and narrative analysis focuses on how

people make sense of the world through talk and language. Hermeneutics seeks to

uncover, through the interpretation of text such as written documents, conversation, and

images, the hidden meanings (or the taken-for-granted historical and cultural horizons of

meaning) through which people experience the world. Grounded theory and

phenomenology focus on the meanings through which people construct realities(McLeod, 2001).

Denzin and Lincoln (1994) point out that in contemporary social science there has been a

blurring of genres, with successful and influential studies straying into the border

between art and science. They suggest that the demands of qualitative research require

the researcher to improvise and create personalised techniques for collecting and

analysing material. Often the method emerges in response to the research, rather than the

researcher imposing a predetermined method onto the topic. They suggest the term

bricoleur to describe the researcher who, whilst well informed of alternative

approaches, selects from these what will best get the job done. The challenge for

qualitative researchers is to negotiate their own personal route through the research. They

see the key difference between this type of approach and taking a more conventional

route lies in the kind of knowledge claims made by bricoleurs who cobble stories

together rather than producing grand theories.

The idea of a bricoleur is appealing, and the image of cobbling together stories rather

than producing a grand theory seems to fit with the aims and limitations of this research.

It is envisaged that a combination of qualitative approaches that emerge in response to the

needs of the research, rather than following a set method, will prove to be the most useful

for coaxing the themes from the matrix of the text of the research. It is believed that by

assuming a position of not knowing and keeping an open mind, the research process, as a


5/28


journey of discovery, will unfold to reveal the deeper meanings that will act as plausible

insights that lead to an expanded understanding of the phenomenon.

4.2. PHENOMENOLOGY4.2.1. Origins of phenomenology

The term phenomenology has been known in philosophy since the middle of the 18th

century, and was subsequently elaborated on by a number of philosophers into a variety

of divergent themes. At the beginning of the 20th century, Edmund Husserl (1962), the

founder of modern phenomenology, gave phenomenology new meaning, which gainedsignificance as his theory of a Science of Consciousness. This theory involved the study

of phenomena (things, objects) as they present themselves in consciousness as immediate

experience. Husserl does not accept that certainty (or ultimate truth) can be achieved

solely through the use of rationality and logic. He argues that to attain certainty it is

necessary to examine the bedrock of everyday experience, because it is in peoples

emotions, actions and perceptions of things and relationships that an ultimately true

understanding arises (McLeod 2001). For Husserl, the aim of phenomenology is a

description of how the world is constituted and experienced through consciousness (Van

Manen, 1990). He maintains that conscious awareness is the one certainty for humans

and is thus the starting point of all knowledge. By suspending commonly held beliefs or

presuppositions about the world (bracketing), he believes that researchers are able to

describe the fundamental structures of the life-world or the world of lived experience

(Draucker, 1999). Husserls philosophy is eidectic in that he believes that there are

essential structures to human experience that can be understood. By means of the study of

consciousness, Husserl tried to reduce the perception of phenomena to their essence

(Farber, 1966).

Husserl (1962) questions the assumption that objects of consciousness can have a

separate existence from the person who is conscious of them, arguing that it is not the

existential existence of objects that is important, but the recognition that objects exist as

objects of consciousness (Kvale 1983; Giorgi, 1997; Maggs-Rapport, 2001). Husserl

shows that phenomena (which means to appear) are perceived and observed by both


6/28


peoples senses and minds. Phenomena include visible, touchable and audible things in

the world, as well as thoughts, feelings, dreams, fantasies and all that stems from the

human mind and spirit and belongs in the realm of the mental experience (Sokolowski,

2000).

Heidegger (1962), a contemporary of Husserl, took phenomenology in new directions. He

sought answers to the meaning of peoples being-in-the-world. He believes that people

are inseparable from the world in which they live, and are largely unaware of their being

in the world in everyday life. His sees ordinary pre-theoretical understandings of being,

which are part of everyday experience, as being the key to answering questions about the

lived experience of people. Heidegger saw people as constantly finding significance andmeaning in their being in the world. He emphasised understanding more than description

for revealing human experiences in research (Draucker, 1999).

4.2.2. Basic concepts in phenomenology

Husserl (1962) presents, as some of the epistemological elements of phenomenology, the

notions of intentionality and transcendentality. These theoretical concepts denote

important aspect of human consciousness and contribute to an understanding of the

human experience (Drew, 2001).

4.2.2.1. Intentionality and meaning

The term intentionality refers to the relationship between people and the objects or

events of their experience. It means that what a person focuses on appears more clearly to

the consciousness than before it was focused on. The object of attention begins to exist

more than it did before, and thereby becomes meaningful. Intentionality is embodied in

the idea that every act of consciousness is directed towards an object of some kind, or

that consciousness is directed towards consciousness of something (Giorgi, 1997;

Sokolowski, 2000).

A researcher adopting a phenomenological approach is interested in the way that

consciousness of an object or event is ascribed as having meaning. The object is looked at


7/28


not simply as an object, but as an object that is experienced in a certain way. As residents

of the life-world people understand the worlds phenomena from the perspective of

their particular situatedness within a historical context. In the moment of perceiving,

people experience the life-world in an all-at-once way intuitively grasping its meaning.

The active relationship in which things are experienced and events endowed with

meaning is the essence of intentionality (Drew, 2001)

4.2.2.2. Transcendence and the phenomenological attitude

Phenomenological thinking posits that there are two attitudes of human consciousness

that people are able to move between. These two attitudes are known as the natural andthe phenomenological attitude respectively. Whilst the natural attitude is a world-directed

stance, the phenomenological attitude is reflexive on the natural attitude and the

intentionalities that occur within it. The phenomenological attitude is also known as the

transcendental attitude. Adopting a phenomenological attitude, rather than remaining in

the natural attitude, is thought to facilitate philosophical analysis (Sokolowski, 2000).

When engaging the natural attitude, people go about their lives with little reflection on

their intentionality. The world is experienced as a context, a background, a container, or a

setting for their being. The world does not compete with other objects, rather it is

perceived as a whole, or a sum of all objects. The singular I, ego or self is experienced

as the centre around which the widest whole is arranged. The manner in which people

accept the things in the world and the world itself is one of belief or reality. However

when engaging in the phenomenological or transcendental attitude, the researcher

disengages from the natural attitude. He or she focuses in a reflective way on all of his or

her particular intentionalities, including his or her underlying world beliefs. In doing this,

the researcher must distance him or herself from the natural attitude, reflect upon it and

make it thematic. He or she does not change his or her intentionalities; rather he or she

contemplates them. In the transcendent attitude it is believed that the researchers

intentionalities can be suspended, allowing for the contemplation and description of his

or her underlying world beliefs. During this process the researcher becomes a detached

observer or onlooker to the natural attitude.


8/28


The process of suspending the natural attitude and of adopting a transcendent attitude is

known as phenomenological reduction. In phenomenological reduction the researchers

beliefs are bracketed and the object is considered precisely as it is intended by an

intentionality within the natural attitude. For example, if it is a perceived object, it is

examined as perceived, if it is remembered, it is examined as remembered. In adopting

this mode of observing, an enhancement of the self occurs in which the researcher begins

to live in the phenomenological attitude. From this reflective stance it is possible to make

the appearances thematic, because the researcher is able to look at what is normally

looked through (Sokolowski, 2000).

Husserl (1962) assumes that the turn towards a phenomenological attitude signifies areduction to a simple targeting of the intentionalities themselves. The researcher suspends

the intentionalities he or she now contemplates in order to suspend his or her judgement

or refrain from judging until the evidence in clear. This is known as epoche or the

neutralising of the natural intentions in order to contemplate them (Sokolowski, 2000).

Heidegger (1962) questions Husserls assumption that people are able to suspend their

being in the world in order to attain this attitude.

4.2.3. Phenomenology as the basis for research

Phenomenology advocates that the scientific study of peoples immediate experience

should be the basis of psychological research. Whilst it does not deny the existence of an

objective reality, attention is turned towards the individuals subjective experience of

reality, as opposed to the individual being studied as an object (Tesch, 1990). The focus

in phenomenology is on how an individual deals with, perceives and experiences events

in their life-world.

Phenomenologists believe that real meaning can be derived from observing an

individuals reaction to these events (Neuman, 1997). The emphasis is therefore on

attempting to understand the psychological conceptions of the individual participants in

the research. It is assumed that, as one persons reality differs from that of another, each

person is likely to perceive things differently. Phenomenological researchers attempt to

study the ordinary life-world of people. Their focus is on how people experience their


9/28


world. They study how people explain themselves and what goes on around them, and

how these explanations or conceptualisations change (Tesch, 1990). Phenomenologists

are opposed to restricting psychology to the study of behaviours, or mechanistic,

associationistic views, and to reductionist tendencies in the study of people. Formal,

abstract theorising is viewed as the antithesis of the intuitive truth that varies from

person to person (Maddi, 1996).

Phenomenology is thus concerned with describing and analysing human consciousness as

it is perceived and experienced independent of other theories. Phenomenology de-

emphasises external behaviour in favour of internal processes and experiences. It calls for

a return to things themselves, and to an investigation of subjective experiencing ofthings away from preconceived or inferred theories about them (Sokolowski, 2000).

4.2.3.1. Phenomenology as transcendental subjectivity

In order to gain experience of other peoples life-worlds, phenomenological researchers

believe it is necessary to explore of their own thinking (Tesch, 1990). Any research

project designed to explain the natural world begins with an awareness of the researchers

own experience of the phenomenon under study. The term transcendental subjectivity

has been coined to describe the researchers thinking about his or her thinking as a part of

the research (Drew, 2001). Implicit in this approach is the idea that transcendental,

reflexive activity itself should be part of the focus in research.

As phenomenologically based research examines the lived experience and the life-

world of the participants, it needs to include a consideration of the reciprocity between

the perceptions of the life-world and how these perceptions contribute to the lived

experience (Drew, 2001). To achieve this, the researcher needs to incorporate his or her

own experience into the research and to reflect on how he or she sees and understands the

process of knowing itself. The researchers life-world would need to be made

transparent in the research. Thus all phenomenological research, of necessity, involves a

journey of self-discovery and calls forth self-awareness in the researcher (McLeod,

2001).


10/28


4.2.4. Descriptive versus interpretative phenomenological research

Draucker (1999) and Maggs-Rapport (2001) distinguish between qualitative research

methodologies that are based on descriptive phenomenology following Husserls

thinking, and research methodologies that are based on interpretive phenomenology

following the thinking of both Husserl and Heidegger. The key distinction between the

two is to be found in Heideggers (1962) position that presupposition (or bracketing)

cannot be suspended because it is integral in defining what constitutes meaning in the

phenomenon. In Husserls (1962) thinking, bracketing or suspension of the researchers

presuppositions about the phenomenon under study is believed to be a possible and

necessary step in the research process. Heidegger questions the possibility of theresearcher being able to be completely free of his or her own worldview and prejudice.

He believes that the phenomenon can only be truly understood in terms of the

researchers background and social context. He suggests that instead of attempting to

bracket personal prejudice, the researcher should carefully examine his or her prejudice

and use this understanding as a counterfoil for understanding the experience of the

participants in the research.

4.2.4.1. Descriptive phenomenology

Descriptive phenomenologists approach a research topic by collecting intensive and

exhaustive descriptions from the participants. They then attempt to present the essential

features of the phenomenon. To achieve this, descriptions are analysed to reveal themes.

A theme is something akin to a content, or topic, or statement, or fact that emerges from

the data. Finding commonalities and uniqueness in these themes then allows the

researcher to crystallise the constituents of the phenomenon. The result is a description

of the general structure of the phenomenon studied (Maggs-Rapport, 2001).

Maggs-Rapport (2001) sees the essential features of research based on descriptive

phenomenology to be

self exploration of how the researcher knows an object of consciousness(phenomenon)

recognising that he or she is inseparable from the phenomenon


11/28


suspension of pre-existing beliefs about the phenomenon through bracketing phenomenological reduction using free imaginative variation rediscovering phenomena exactly as they are presented to consciousness engaging in a search for essences generating descriptions that illuminating these essential connections.

Giorgi (1980; 1995; 1997) advocates that phenomenological research be based upon

descriptions of experiences as they occur in everyday life. These descriptions of lived

experiences should be collected in the form of transcribed interviews or texts written by

the participants in the research. Once compiled, they constitute the raw data of the

research. They are then systematically and methodically analysed so that explicit and

implicit meanings are identified, clarified and organised so that underlying psychological

structures are revealed.

Giorgi (1995) offers five key ideas as being instrumental to this process:

The primacy of consciousness as a privileged realm of being Phenomenology as a philosophy of intuition; intuitionin this instance means that

consciousness is present to something in some particular modality.

The distinction between two different types of intuition; a distinction is drawnbetween experiential intuitions that present empirical real objects, and ideative

intuitions that present objects that are not empirically real such as ideas or images.

Phenomenology correlates the phenomenon of consciousness with thepresentation of an object rather than on the objects reality.

The concept of intentionality; refers tothe essence of consciousness that is alwaysdirected towards an object. Consciousness is always directed towards an object inthat, to be conscious is always to be conscious of something.

Giorgi (1995) believes that the structures revealed through applying this method include:

the objective sequence of the processes involved in the research; the non-objective

characteristics (such as the subjective feelings of the participant); the roles played by

others in the processes, as well as critical points along the path of the research. He

suggests that the greater the number of participants, the more variations of a single


12/28


experience are possible, thereby leading to a greater possibility of the discovery of the

invariants in the structure of the phenomenon.

4.2.4.2. Interpretive phenomenology

Research based on interpretive phenomenology differs from descriptive phenomenology

in that the possibility of the researcher being able to bracket personal presuppositions is

brought into question. It is posited that gaining an understanding of the phenomenon is

more important than the description of the phenomenon (Draucker, 1999). He posited that

it is through language and communication that peoples being in the world can best be

understood, and that the researcher cannot divorce him or herself from his or her ownbeing in the world. He points out that he or she is using language in attempting to

understand language. Interpretive phenomenology aims to uncover the concealed

meanings that are embedded in the words of the participants narratives.

Gadamer (1975) believes that to understand and interpret a phenomenon, the researcher

must overcome the phenomenons strangeness and transform it into something familiar.

He sees prejudice on the part of the researcher with regards to the phenomenon as being

the means by which the truth about the phenomenon is revealed. Thus he sees the

relationship between truth and prejudice as being positive and of integral importance to

an understanding of the phenomenon.

Maggs-Rapport (2001) sees the essential features of research based on interpretive

phenomenology to be

attempting to make sense of the world through our existence within it understanding and interpreting the phenomenon being in the world (being open to, and yet inseparable from, the world) making sense of the life-world through speech and language incorporating the researchers personal prejudice into the research acknowledging the researchers historical understanding of the phenomenon viewing all understanding as incomplete and circular.


13/28


Draucker (1999) suggests that research based on Heideggers (1962) and Gadamers

(1975) thinking should be evaluated by indices of convergence, rather than by indices of

objectivity. The extent to which the perspectives of the clients, the researcher and other

data sources merge in the interpretation should be taken into account when evaluating the

research. The narratives of the participants, the presuppositions of the researcher and the

processes by which these viewpoints merge should be described in enough detail for the

reader to evaluate the quality of the analysis. In other words, the reader of the research

needs to be able to audit the events, influences and actions of the researcher that result in

his or her interpretive findings.

4.2.5. Phenomenology and research in psychotherapy

McLeod (2001) sees all qualitative inquiry as being more than a process of following a

set of procedural guidelines or applying a method, but rather a way of working within a

philosophical framework. He argues that the principle source of understanding or

knowing in qualitative inquiry into psychotherapy is the researchers personal

engagement in a search for meaning and truth in relation to the topic of inquiry. He

believes that it is in this struggle to know that new and useful insights in the research

are generated.

McLeod (2001) believes that phenomenological methodology is particularly useful for

researching topics such as counselling and psychotherapy. He delineates the three

main trends in research into psychotherapy that involve the use of phenomenological

principles. These three approaches are briefly summarised below:

4.2.5.1. The Duquesne school of empirical phenomenology

This approach would fit into the category of descriptive phenomenology. It involves

codifying and systematising phenomenological methods into a number of steps. These

steps involve collecting descriptions of the experience; reading these descriptions to get a

sense of the whole; extracting significant statements; eliminating irrelevant material;

identifying themes; and integrating these themes into an exhaustive description of the

phenomenon.


14/28


In this process the researcher strives to develop an attitude of openness to the

phenomenon and to bracket his or her personal experience, whilst regarding no one

meaning as being more important than another. The researcher engages in imaginative

variation in order to distinguish the essential features of the situation and develop an

empathic presence and immersion in the situation. He or she needs to amplify details in

this process and attune to the particulars of the clients meaning of objects and events as

they are lived by them. The researcher should meditate on the phenomenon in order to get

an expanded understanding of it (McLeod, 2001).

4.2.5.2. De Riveras conceptual encounter approach

The primary goal in this research method is to produce a map of human experience

through an encounter between the investigator and the clients in therapy (De Rivera,

1981). The researcher carries out some preliminary reflections of his or her personal

experience of the phenomenon before starting the research and thus enters the study

sensitised to the topic and with tentative ideas about the phenomenon. The researcher

then asks facilitative questions of the clients to draw out different aspects of the

experience. He or she attempts to appreciate the experience from the clients point of

view. They share abstract ideas about the nature of the phenomenon and check how these

fit with their experience of the phenomenon. Through dialogue the researcher gets

confirmation of some of the features of his or her model of the phenomenon, but also

finds elements that are challenged and require revision or further differentiation.

Eventually the researcher converges on the essential features of the phenomenon being

studied.

The conceptual encounter is envisaged as a dialectic process in which the researcher does

not rely solely on his or her own personal experience or on the informants account, but

sets up a dynamic interplay between the two. In this way the researcher gradually

becomes more alert to the nuances and patterns of the phenomenon both as experienced

his or herself and by the other person.


15/28


4.2.5.3. Existential-phenomenological research

Existential-phenomenological researchers go directly to the clients in therapy in order to

investigate the way the client perceives the phenomenon in question (McLeod, 2001).

The process of accessing the clients perception of the phenomenon may involve

discourse analysis of the language in general use around the client (in his or her family

and society) in order to describe the phenomenon. The belief is that when the taken-for-

granted assumptions are bracketed off, then the persons real experience of the

phenomenon becomes visible. Existential-phenomenological researchers use both

narrative life histories (the clients words) and paradigmatic ways (existential concepts

such as ontological insecurity, embodiment, falseness, collusion, elusion and pretence) tomaking sense of the clients experience. Thus both existential and phenomenological

approaches are woven together to form the basis of the research.

What emerges initially from existential-phenomenological research is the natural

attitude or the taken-for-granted ways of understanding the phenomenon. These are

exposed and demystified. The researchers then attempt to broaden the descriptions of the

phenomenon, thereby arriving at a new way of seeing (from a transcendent attitude)

which reveals the underlying themes of the research.

For the purposes of the current study a combination of both descriptive and interpretive

approaches would appear to offer the greatest scope for gaining an understanding of art

therapy as a healing intervention for traumatic bereavement.

4.3. DATA ANALYSIS

Traditional deductive data analysis is not usually considered to be congruent with a

phenomenological methodology in research (Janesick, 1994; Stake, 1994; Van Manen,

1997). Instead alternative ways of looking at the data are suggested. For example

Janesick (1994) encourages researchers to become immersed in the setting of the research

thereby allowing an incubation process to occur in which nuances of meanings and

intuitive insights come to light. She suggests descriptive and exploratory ways of

capturing the participants experience through an expanded awareness. She believes that


16/28


through a creative synthesis, the participants stories are brought together to illuminate

the meaning of their lived experience.

Van Manen (1997, p. 345) suggests that insight generated in qualitative inquiry speaks

not only to peoples intellect but also to their intuitive capabilities. He believes that a

good qualitative text speaks to the readers cognitive and non-cognitive sensibilities,

thereby allowing them to see the phenomenon being studied in a manner that enriches

their understanding of everyday experiences. This alternative way of knowing appears

to offer a pathway for conducting research that is congruent with the aims and aspirations

of this study.

4.3.1. Inductive analysis of data

Phenomenological analysis of data or text necessitates the use of an inductive rather than

a deductive approach, as being more congruent with its underlying philosophy. Inductive

analysis requires the researcher to be reflective and committed to pondering impressions

rather than isolating facts, according to Stake (1994, p. 242). He maintains that the

researcher should learn enough about the [phenomenon] to encapsulate complex

meanings into a finite report but to describe [it] in sufficient descriptive narrative so that

readers can vicariously experience these happenings, and draw their own conclusions.

Inductive analysis in qualitative research allows categories, themes and patterns to

emerge from, rather than be imposed on, the data (Janesick, 1994). Janesick (1994, p.

215) argues that there is no one best system for [data] analysis [and that] staying close to

the data is the most powerful means of telling the story. She encourages the qualitative

researcher to focus on the substance of the findings and to avoid becoming too focused

on methodology. She believes that qualitative research depends on the presentation of

solid descriptive data that leads the reader to a deeper understanding of the meaning of

the experience under study.

Janesick (1994) cites Moustakis in providing a helpful approach to data analysis.

Moustakis suggests an inductive approach through five phases:

Immersion in the setting


17/28


An incubation process, which allows thinking, becoming aware of nuances andmeanings in the settings, and capturing intuitive insights.

Illumination, which allows expanded awareness. Description and exploration to capture the participants experience. Creative synthesis, bringing together the participants story, including the meaning of

the lived experience.

The purpose of following this disciplined approach is to describe and explain the

essence of the experience, as well as the meaning of the experience in the participants

lives (Janesick, 1994).

In this study, the verbalisations, artworks and writings of the participants constitute the

text of the research. In a search for greater depth, this text is then analysed for

categories, themes and patterns that illuminate the clients perceptions of their experience

of traumatic bereavement and of the usefulness (or otherwise) of art therapy. The content

of the artworks themselves, as well as the creative processes involved in making them, is

analysed to gain insight into the role that the artworks and the creative process plays in

making a difference in the therapy.

4.3.2. Analysis of visual text

Steiner (1978) and Bacon (2002) describe the elusive nature of finding themes in the

analysis of a visual image (an oil painting):

What is here? The canvas? The brushstrokes? The spots of colour? All of these

things, which we so confidently name, are there. But the existential presentness of

the painting, that in its existence which reaches our being, cannot be adequately

defined as the material assemblance of linseed oil, pigment and stretched canvas.

We feel, we know, urges Heidegger, that there is something else there, something

utterly decisive. But when we seek to articulate it, it is always as though we were

reaching into the void (Steiner, 1978, pp. 45-46).


18/28


I have often tried to talk about painting, but writing or talking about it is only an

approximation, as painting is its own language and is not translatable into words

(Francis Bacon, Artist, b.1929- d.1992).

Both Steiner (1978) and Bacon (2002) (a modern British artist) draw attention to the

limitations involved in interpreting or analysing a visual image. Bacon believes that

painting and image making generally are forms of visual communication that are not

translatable into language. His observations are especially relevant with regard to the

images made in art therapy.

Art therapy provides a context in which images are viewed as intensely personal productsthat illuminate the artists inner world. Unlike art that is created for exhibition, these

images are not cognitively constructed for an audience outside the therapy space. They

are not meant to hang on a wall, or to advertise a product; on the contrary, they often

need a protected space in which to be assimilated, as the clients vulnerability is

represented in them. The audience to which these images are given consists of the

therapist, fellow members of the therapy group and the artists own reflexive self. Any

attempt to analyse these images for the purpose of research needs to take these

considerations into account.

The inter-subjective experience between the art therapist and the client needs to be

acknowledged as being the space in which the clients self is supported (Goodman &

Williams, 1998). It is this space rather than the image itself that needs to be held in mind

if any interpretation or description of the image is to be meaningful. It is important in

attempting an analysis of an image that both client and therapist look at the image in a

variety of ways in order to reveal its content. For example, the image may need to be

viewed from different perspectives, in different time settings, in different contexts and

across different conversations, in order for submerged meanings to come to light. It is

only in this kind of detailed looking that the iconological power of the image becomes

apparent.

Artistic expression in images, particularly images whose original creative impulse have

arisen from the unconscious, will be a unique configuration of forms and associated


19/28


affects. In analysing or interpreting such an image, it is important to focus on both the

image produced and the clients associations around the image, otherwise there is a risk

that what is most important to the artist may be missed (Edwards, 1987; Synder, 1997;

Gantt, 1998). The art image is viewed as reflecting the inner, unconscious world of the

artists self and providing a bridge that links this inner world to the outer world of the

conscious self. Thus interpreting images made in art therapy requires a special kind of

looking that takes into account the context of their creation, as well as an open

mindedness to their multifaceted nature.

A literature review revealed no documentation that dealt specifically with the analysis of

art images as a means of illuminating the usefulness of psychotherapy. Authors who havedealt with visual data methods (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Flick, 1998; Emmison & Smith,

2000; Rose, 2001) have focused mostly on the use of photography in ethnography. The

author who has most comprehensively dealt with analysis of visual material is Rose

(2001). In her book on visual methodologies, Rose overviews the analysis of visual

imagery in general. Her interests are primarily with images that are produced for public

viewing and not with images made in art therapy. However, her writing offers an

increased awareness of the many possible ways of looking at images.

Rose (2001, p. 12) believes that all visual material is intended by the artist and interpreted

by the viewer as a form of communication and is therefore open to interpretation. She

believes that for the interpretation of visual material to be meaningful, a passionate

engagement with what the interpreter sees is required. She posits that the use of formal

methodologies acts to discipline passion, thereby adding meaningfully to the

interpretation of the image. In the following section, a brief summary of Roses (2001)

thoughts on the analysis of visual imagery is presented. Her ideas offer expanded

possibilities for observing and interpreting images, in ways that are pertinent to this

research.

4.3.2.1. The primacy of images in the formation of subjectivities

Rose (2001, p 12) believes that the visual is the most fundamental of all the senses. She

posits that depicting, picturing and seeing are [the way in which] most people


20/28


come to know what the world really is for them. As evidence for this, she observes that

seeing and visual connection to the world come before words and language as a natural

progression in childhood development. She cites Freuds belief that pleasure in looking is

one of the most basic drives that people are born with.

Rose (2001) points to Lacans (1977) work on the fundamentality of the visual image.

Lacan claims that certain moments of seeing and particular ways of seeing are central to

how subjectivities are formed in people. Subjectivity refers to the way that people

make sense of their life-world through a whole range of complex and often non-rational

ways of understanding. They feel, dream, fantasise, take pleasure and are repulsed, can be

ambivalent and contradictory, panic stricken or in love, and can react to things in waysthat feel beyond words. Even rationality can be seen as a kind of emotion often secretly

dependent on these other non-rational states of mind.

Lacan (1977) posits that babies go through a mirror stage in which they recognise an

image in a mirror as self. This vision allows for the identification of other people and

creates the founding moment of interrelations between self (subject) and other people

(object). He notes that this mirror image also involves misrecognition, as the image is not

the real self. This misrecognition entails an alienation from the image. Lacans mirror

stage thus involves identification with the image and detachment from it simultaneously.

Lacan believes that the dynamics of the mirror stage continue to structure subjectivity

later in life, which explains the importance of the visual to peoples sense of self.

If, as Lacan (1977) suggests, vision is central to subjectivity, then it follows that an

image, as a self-portrait of the clients inner world, can be a useful tool in psychotherapy

for facilitating the clients reconstruction of a secure sense of self. One of the negative

psychological consequences of the experience of traumatic bereavement is the erosion of

the bereaved clients sense of self (Neimeyer, 2000a).

4.3.2.2. Images as cultural expressions

Emmison and Smith (2000) and Rose (2001) have drawn attention to the fact that over

the last two decades cultural expression has become the way that many social science


21/28


researchers have started to understand human processes/identity/social changes and

conflicts. These researchers have focused on the way social life has been constructed

around the ideas that people have about themselves and the behaviour that flows from

those ideas. Rose defines cultural expression as the production of and/or exchange of

meanings, or the giving and taking of meaning between people. Culture is seen as being

dependent on peoples meaningful interpretation of what is around them, and thereby

making sense of the world. These meanings may be implicit, explicit, conscious, or

unconscious and are conveyed through both speech/language and imagery. Both

language, in the form of narratives, and imagery may be viewed as text for analysis to

reveal the underlying human processes of a particular society or community.

This idea has implications for the use of the images made in art therapy as part of the

text in this research. The images can be conceived of as having a culture-forming and a

culture-revealing function within the group in a way that is similar to written or spoken

language. Themes emerging from the images could reveal the emergent microcosm of the

group as a healing community, as well as revealing therapeutic changes taking place in

the clients inner world that may be preverbal.

4.3.3. Interpreting images

The power of the painting is there, in the thousands of gazes caught by its surface,

and the resultant turning, and the shifting, the redirecting of the discursive flow.

Bryson, (1991, p.71)

Rose (2001) suggests that in interpreting an image there is a need to focus on questions

such as, what is the image saying? Or, what does the image say that expands ones vision

of oneself? She suggests the following points to bear in mind when analysing visual

images:

An image has its own visual effects. An image mobilises the way the viewer sees it. An image represents a vision of social difference. An image is always created in and viewed from a social context. The viewers bring their own visualities to the viewing of an image.


22/28


Thinking about the image in this way is helpful for revealing subtleties and themes that

otherwise may be missed. It sensitises both the creator and the viewer to look more

deeply into the image as a reflection of a deeper process within the inner world of the

artist. This is particularly relevant when interpreting images created in the context of

psychotherapy.

4.3.3.1. Compositional analysis

Rose (2001) suggests that there are three modalities in which meaning is made in the

process of creating an art image. These are

the actual production of the image (the circumstances under which the image ismade, contributes to its effect on the viewer)

the image itself (all images have a number of formal components such as content,colour, spatial organisation and perspective that influence how it is perceived).

the audiencing of the image (each observer of the image will bring his or herunique way of seeing to the image; different audiences will interpret the image in

different ways).

She suggests that compositional interpretations of images involve an examination of the

content of the image (what the image is showing) colour, this includes hue (the actual colour); saturation (how vivid the colour is);

and value (brightness). It also involves the effect that the colour has, for example

how harmonious or disharmonious the colours are, and the atmospheric

perspective created by the colour.

spatial organisation (how the volumes are arranged in relation to each other in theimage)

perspective (where the viewer is placed in relation to the image) light (what is highlighted) expressive content (what is the feel of the image).


23/28


4.3.3.2. Content analysis

Whereas compositional analysis is concerned with an art image as a compositional

modality that requires the intense attention of the observer, content analysis does not

demand this intense reflexivity. Content analysis is a method of textual analysis that deals

only with the image itself. The image is broken down into component parts. These

elements are then counted in order to obtain a set of descriptive categories that can then

be related to theoretical concerns.

The usefulness of this method of analysis is that it offers a way of understanding the

symbolic qualities of the image. It allows for the discovery of patterns that may beotherwise missed, and provides protection against an unconscious search in the image for

that which would confirm the researchers initial theory.

4.3.3.3. Semiology

Semiology encourages the observer of an image to explore how images make meaning

and the social effects of this meaning. It involves the analysis of signs and symbols and

their use in the image in relation to dominant codes or mythologies in the particular

culture from which they arose.

To give an example, a semiological analysis of an image of a human form would involve an

examination of the following:

Age. What is the significance of age in the image? What does age signify(innocence, wisdom, senility, strength, weakness etc)?

Gender. Male is often associated with rational/active, whilst female is associatedwith passive/emotional;

Race. What does race mean in this context? Body size. Is the body whole or incomplete? What is made big in the body? Looks. Who looks at whom, and what is the meaning in the look? Expression. Happy, sad, fearful or haughty, etc. Positional communication. Spatial arrangement of figure, standing, sitting or

lying


24/28


Touch. Who touches what and to what effect? Movement. Is movement active or passive? (Rose, 2001)

The underlying idea in semiology is that visual signs are motivated by some underlying

rationale for their choice, which may be conscious or unconscious. Examining the

symbolism in an image can reveal the creators inner world as well as their outer worldview.

However, care needs to be taken that the signs belong to the artist and not to the observer of

the image. Verification of a semiological interpretation of an image by its creator is

necessary to avoid bias (Rose, 2001).

4.3.3.4. Psychoanalysis

The unconscious is the only defence against a language frozen into pure fixed or

institutionalized meaning, and in its capacity to unsettle the subject, is a break

against the intolerable limits of common sense.

Rose (1986, p. 38)

Psychoanalytic art critics emphasise that there is no absolute way to interpret an image

(Rose, 2001). Different psychoanalytic concepts, when brought to bear on the same

image, will produce very different interpretations of that image. The concept of the

unconscious serves to focus attention on the uncertainties inherent in subjectivity, and

therefore on the uncertainties involved in the analysis of any image.

A psychoanalytic perspective focuses attention on the emotional effects of the visual

image. Rose (2001) suggests that psychoanalysts are interested in the way that the impact

of an image may be immediate and powerful even when its precise meaning remains

vague and suspended. Understanding an emotional reaction to a visual image requires a

recognition that not all reactions are working at a wholly conscious level. Some reactions

may be coming from the unconscious. Subjectivity is always influenced by the discipline

imposed by culture and is psychically constructed in a continuous way. It is never fully

conscious, coherent or complete. People learn to see in certain ways, which they repeat

every time an image is appraised, as they never know themselves fully. As viewers of an


25/28


image they bring a certain subjectivity to bear on the image that is imbricated onto the

image, thus the viewer and viewed are mutually constitutive.

Psychoanalytic theorists are turning to other theorists, most notably Foucault (1972), to

ground their accounts of visuality in social practices. Foucault believes that human

subjectivity is constructed through particular discursive processes. He pays close

attention to the ways in which various social practices define what it is to be human.

4.3.3.5. Discourse analysis and visual images

Compositional and content analysis, semiology and psychoanalysis all assume that theanalysis of images needs somehow to delve behind the surface appearances of the image

in order to discover its real meaning. Compositional and content analysis seek out latent

meaning, whilst semiology searches for the dominant codes or myths that underlie the

surface appearance of signs, whilst psychoanalysis looks for signs of the unconscious as

they disrupt the conscious making of meaning in the image.

Foucault refutes the premise from which these analytic methods work (Rose, 2001).

Foucault avoids explanatory accounts of why a text (such as an image) works in the

way it does. He rejects penetrative models of interpretation at both the level of method

and explanation. Instead he focuses on detail, on casual assumptions, on everyday

mundane routines and banalities to explain how subject and object are discursively

produced.

Foucault (1972) believes that human subjectivity is produced through discourse.

Discourse refers to a group of statements that structures the way a phenomenon is

thought about and the way people act on that thinking. Art can be understood as a

particular form of discourse. Intertextuality in discourse analysis refers to the way the

meanings of any one discursive image depend not only on that one image, but also on the

meanings carried by other images. Visuality, or the way people see, can be viewed as a

form of discourse in itself, in that a specific visuality will make certain things visible and

render other things un-see-able in an image. This idea carries the implication that an


26/28


awareness of the way people see an image, as well as what they do not permit themselves

to see, could be a source of enriched understanding when analysing an image.

In taking a social constructionist perspective, discourse analysis using the image as text

can be used to explore how images construct specific views of the social world of the

client in therapy. Discourse is seen as socially produced rather than created by an

individual. It explores how specific views of the social world are constructed as real,

truthful or natural. The underlying belief is that there can be no essential tendencies of the

human mind or therefore of an art work, because human subjectivity is entirely

constructed in the interaction between people.

A discourse analytic approach to images involves paying careful attention to the images

themselves, and to the web of intertextuality in which any individual image is embedded.

The focus is on how social difference is produced through visual imagery, and reading

the image for what is not seen or is invisible as having just as powerful effect as what is

visible.

4.3.3.6. Phenomenology and image analysis

A phenomenological approach to visual analysis involves adopting a transcendent or

phenomenological attitude towards the image. Sokolowski (2000) describes the

phenomenological attitude as the researchers attempt to disengagement from his or her

natural attitude, and to reflectively focus on the image by becoming a detached observer

of the image. From this attitude the researcher looks at and describes analytically all the

particular intentionalities and world beliefs as portrayed in the image. This means that the

researcher distances him or herself from, reflects upon and makes thematic the natural

attitude as portrayed in the image. The observer also contemplates his or her own

intentionalities and become aware of what he or she brings to seeing the image. He or she

suspends all intentionalities in order to contemplate the intentionalities in the image.

From this reflective stance appearances are made thematic. This enables the researcher to

look at what is normally looked through.


27/28


Phenomenology posits that the researcher cannot completely disengage from his or her

preconceptions, or from the natural attitude. Instead he or she needs to develop a deep

understanding of these preconceptions and how they may influence the research process,

so as to make them explicit in the research. The researcher needs to be aware of the

different possible ways of seeing an image (such as compositional and content analysis,

semiology, psychoanalysis and discourse analysis) in order to contemplate the images

many messages and to find connection among its parts. This awareness will lead to a

deepened understanding of the image as a text. This understanding can then become a

base line from which to create a dialogue around the image with the participants. This

process has the potential to build up, in a circular way, an expanded understanding of the

image for both the artist and the researcher.

4.4. SUMMARY

Qualitative methodologies offer a viable alternative to quantitative methods for

understanding the complexities involved in a phenomenon such as therapeutic change.

Qualitative methods attempt to achieve an insider perspective of a phenomenon, by

making the subjective or lived experiences of the participants visible in the research.

Rather than focusing on establishing concrete facts, these methods are discovery

orientated and critical. The underlying assumptions are that formal, abstract theorising is

the antithesis of the intuitive truth that varies between people; and that there are many

alternative or complementary definitions of reality.

Within a qualitative paradigm, phenomenology offers a way of structuring the research

that is congruent with its endeavours and focus. Phenomenology is unique in its respect

of the capacity of the participant for self-knowing, and its encouragement of the

researcher to reflect on this knowledge. Phenomenology promotes thinking about

thinking as part of the inquiry process. It attempts to present the essential features of the

phenomenon through a detailed analysis of a text, which consists of the participants

descriptions of their lived experience. Attention is paid to meaningful patterns and

themes that arise from this text, for achieving insight. To attain a meta-perspective of the

phenomenon, the researcher needs to adopt a transcendent attitude that facilitates an

expanded understanding of the text.


28/28


Phenomenology encourages the use of inductive analysis, as opposed to deductive

analysis, for extracting themes from the text. The text of this research consists of the

artworks made by the participants and their written self-reflections about their experience

of being part of the art therapy group. The artworks are viewed as a form of symbolic

language that can potentially reveal the clients inner world. Interpreting such images

requires an expansive and inclusive perspective, rather than a reductive focus. Awareness

of compositional, content and semiotic analytic techniques is helpful for achieving an in-

depth observation of the artworks. Combining these different ways of seeing, allows the

observer to look at what is usually looked through and thereby to obtain an enriched

understanding of the phenomenon.

Discourse analysts and psychoanalytic art critics emphasise that there is no absolute way

to interpret an artwork. They believe that the viewer and viewed are mutually constitutive

and inseparable. They suggest that the researcher needs to become aware of the way

people see an image, as well as what they do not permit themselves to see as a way of

achieving a deeper understanding of an artwork. Further, they believe that there are no

essential tendencies of the human mind (and therefore of an artwork). They view self-

reflexivity as being the base line from which dialogue around an artwork is created. This

has the potential to generate an expanded understanding of the artworks in the text, for

both the participant and the researcher. They suggest that, as the researcher cannot fully

disengage from his or her being-in-the world (or subjectivities), that his or her

preconceptions need to become clear and transparent in the research.

In the next chapter the research design is laid out and the manner in which the text is

presented is explicated.

Des vs. Interpretative Pheno

Documents

Transcript of Des vs. Interpretative Pheno