O'Reilly Michelle, Kiyimba Nikki, Drewett Alison
College of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities University of Leicester & Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust Leicester UK.
Bethlehem Tertiary Institute, School of Social Practice Tauranga New Zealand.
Couns Psychother Res. 2021 Mar;21(1):66-76. doi: 10.1002/capr.12365. Epub 2020 Nov 6.
This paper offers an illustrative example to demonstrate one way of combining qualitative methods. The context for the study was a UK inpatient psychiatric hospital. Data set one was collected from weekly ward rounds where inpatient staff met with autistic patients to review medication, listen to patient concerns and make plans or adjustments in light of this. Data set two was reflective discursive interviews with patients and staff. The research objective was to critically consider the potential reasons for discrepancies in dissatisfaction reports from patients in the interviews, compared to relative compliance exhibited by patients in the ward rounds. Utilising a video-reflexive design and critical discursive psychology approach, both data sets were analysed together. It is possible to simultaneously analyse two different data sets, one naturally occurring and one researcher generated because of the epistemological congruence in the overall design. We have presented an argument for the benefits of mixing two qualitative methods, thereby extending the mixed-methods evidence base beyond the traditional discussions of quantitative and qualitative paradigms.
本文提供了一个示例，以展示一种结合定性方法的方式。该研究的背景是一家英国住院精神病医院。数据集一是通过每周的病房查房收集的，住院医护人员在查房时与自闭症患者会面，审查药物治疗情况，倾听患者的担忧，并据此制定计划或进行调整。数据集二是对患者和医护人员进行的反思性话语访谈。研究目的是批判性地思考与病房查房中患者表现出的相对依从性相比，访谈中患者不满报告存在差异的潜在原因。利用视频反思设计和批判性话语心理学方法，对两个数据集进行了综合分析。由于整体设计中的认识论一致性，有可能同时分析两个不同的数据集，一个是自然产生的，另一个是由研究人员生成的。我们提出了混合两种定性方法的好处的观点，从而将混合方法的证据基础扩展到超出定量和定性范式的传统讨论范围。
