Lindberg Elisabeth, Österberg Sofia A, Hörberg Ulrica
Faculty of Caring Science, Work Life and Social Welfare, University of Borås, Borås, Sweden;
Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden.
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2016 Feb 26;11:30482. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v11.30482. eCollection 2016.
Phenomena in caring science are often complex and laden with meanings. Empirical research with the aim of capturing lived experiences is one way of revealing the complexity. Sometimes, however, results from empirical research need to be further discussed. One way is to further abstract the result and/or philosophically examine it. This has previously been performed and presented in scientific journals and doctoral theses, contributing to a greater understanding of phenomena in caring science. Although the intentions in many of these publications are laudable, the lack of methodological descriptions as well as a theoretical and systematic foundation can contribute to an ambiguity concerning how the results have emerged during the analysis. The aim of this paper is to describe the methodological support for the further abstraction of and/or philosophical examination of empirical findings. When trying to systematize the support procedures, we have used a reflective lifeworld research (RLR) approach. Based on the assumptions in RLR, this article will present methodological support for a theoretical examination that can include two stages. In the first stage, data from several (two or more) empirical results on an essential level are synthesized into a general structure. Sometimes the analysis ends with the general structure, but sometimes there is a need to proceed further. The second stage can then be a philosophical examination, in which the general structure is discussed in relation to a philosophical text, theory, or concept. It is important that the theories are brought in as the final stage after the completion of the analysis. Core dimensions of the described methodological support are, in accordance with RLR, openness, bridling, and reflection. The methodological support cannot be understood as fixed stages, but rather as a guiding light in the search for further meanings.
护理科学中的现象往往复杂且蕴含丰富意义。旨在捕捉生活体验的实证研究是揭示这种复杂性的一种方式。然而,有时实证研究的结果需要进一步探讨。一种方法是进一步提炼结果和/或从哲学角度审视它。此前已经有人这样做并发表在科学期刊和博士论文中,这有助于更深入地理解护理科学中的现象。尽管这些出版物中的许多意图值得称赞,但缺乏方法描述以及理论和系统基础可能会导致对分析过程中结果如何得出产生模糊认识。本文的目的是描述对实证研究结果进行进一步提炼和/或哲学审视的方法支持。在尝试将支持程序系统化时,我们采用了反思性生活世界研究(RLR)方法。基于RLR的假设,本文将介绍一种理论审视的方法支持,该方法支持可包括两个阶段。在第一阶段,将来自几个(两个或更多)关于基本层面的实证结果的数据综合成一个总体结构。有时分析到此总体结构为止,但有时需要进一步推进。第二阶段可以是哲学审视,在这一阶段,将总体结构与一篇哲学文本、理论或概念相关联进行讨论。重要的是,理论应在分析完成后的最后阶段引入。根据RLR,所描述的方法支持的核心维度是开放性、约束性和反思性。这种方法支持不能被理解为固定的阶段,而应被视为寻找进一步意义的指导。