De Montfort University, UK.
Birmingham City University, UK.
Health (London). 2020 Jan;24(1):79-93. doi: 10.1177/1363459318786539. Epub 2018 Jul 6.
Despite a growing literature on the value of relational data in studies of social phenomena, individuals still commonly constitute the basic unit of analysis in qualitative research. Methodological aspects of interviewing couples, particularly interviewing partners , and of conducting dyadic analysis have received scant attention. This article describes the experience of conducting separate interviews with both partners in 22 heterosexual couples (n = 44) in a study of the impact of the gynaecological condition endometriosis. In order to advance current methodological thinking regarding interviewing couples, we describe the dyadic, relational approach employed in designing the study and our specific method of dyadic analysis. We argue that utilising separate interviews with dyadic analysis rather than conducting joint interviews, while not without its ethical, practical and analytical challenges, offers considerable methodological benefits. Such an approach allows a unique relational insight into the impact of chronic illness on couples and how they navigate chronic illness by illuminating both shared and individual interpretations, experiences, understandings and meanings.
尽管关于关系数据在社会现象研究中的价值的文献越来越多，但在定性研究中，个体仍然通常构成分析的基本单位。关于访谈夫妇、特别是访谈伴侣的方法学方面，以及关于进行对偶分析的方法学方面，都很少受到关注。本文描述了在一项关于妇科疾病子宫内膜异位症影响的研究中，对 22 对异性恋夫妇（n=44）中的每对夫妇分别进行访谈的经历。为了推进关于访谈夫妇的当前方法学思考，我们描述了设计研究中采用的对偶、关系方法以及我们的具体对偶分析方法。我们认为，利用对偶分析进行单独访谈而不是进行联合访谈，虽然并非没有伦理、实际和分析方面的挑战，但具有相当大的方法学益处。这种方法允许对慢性疾病对夫妇的影响以及他们通过阐明共同和个体的解释、经验、理解和意义来应对慢性疾病的独特关系洞察力。
