Annells Merilyn
Professor of Community Nursing, La Trobe University, RDNS Helen Macpherson Smith Institute of Community Health, St Kilda, Victoria, Australia.
J Adv Nurs. 2006 Oct;56(1):55-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03979.x.
In this paper, suggestions are offered about the appropriate use of hermeneutic phenomenology and grounded theory in one study.
As an alternative to selecting only one qualitative research approach to illuminate a topic of interest about which little is known, two qualitative approaches could be used in a study. Fear of 'method slurring' may prevent this alternative being used. Occasionally, however, credible qualitative researchers have advocated using various research approaches in one study, for example using hermeneutical phenomenology and grounded theory in triangulation. However, if pursuing this direction, several advances in thinking about using qualitative research approaches should be considered.
An experience is presented of deciding to use grounded theory and hermeneutic phenomenology in one study. Cautions, practical considerations and alternative options are offered for using these approaches in one study, and the implications of some other possible ways to 'triangulate' qualitative approaches are discussed.
Different research approaches can be creatively and successfully used in one study if there has been adequate consideration of vital factors that determine if there is a good 'fit' of the approaches not only with the research problem and question, but also with each other, while also maintaining the integrity of each approach.
本文针对在一项研究中恰当运用诠释现象学和扎根理论提出建议。
作为仅选择一种定性研究方法来阐明一个鲜为人知的感兴趣主题的替代方法，一项研究中可以使用两种定性方法。对“方法混淆”的担忧可能会阻碍这种替代方法的使用。然而，偶尔也有可靠的定性研究人员主张在一项研究中使用多种研究方法，例如在三角互证法中使用诠释现象学和扎根理论。然而，如果朝着这个方向进行，在思考使用定性研究方法时应考虑几个思维上的进展。
介绍了在一项研究中决定使用扎根理论和诠释现象学的经历。针对在一项研究中使用这些方法给出了注意事项、实际考量因素和替代方案，并讨论了“三角互证”定性方法的其他一些可能方式的影响。
如果充分考虑了一些关键因素，不同的研究方法可以创造性地、成功地用于一项研究中。这些关键因素不仅决定了这些方法是否与研究问题和疑问相契合，而且还决定了它们彼此之间是否契合，同时还要保持每种方法的完整性。
