Boyd C O
NLN Publ. 1993 Aug(19-2535):66-93.
Although new and still emerging for us, qualitative research approaches have been receiving considerable attention for some time in other disciplines. Along with philosophical debates, there are debates about whether there needs to be a debate. On a philosophical level, there is irreconcilable conflict between the quantitative and qualitative paradigms. It is important to recognize this conflict, avoiding illogical compromise. Yet, proponents of each paradigm need to applaud both the existence of the other and the hybrid paradigms that inevitably are born of conflict. An apt beginning would be broader definitions of what constitutes science and research in nursing, eliminating the sense-organ bias that is so contrary to our philosophy for practice. This alone would provide qualitative nurse researchers with the sanction they need to progress in their exploration of various approaches to creating a science and a body of knowledge in, for, and about nursing practice. In the chapters to follow, readers will be introduced to several qualitative research approaches. Each approach represents an interpretation of the qualitative paradigm in nursing research, grounded in the general perspective of phenomenological philosophy. This perspective focuses on phenomena as they appear and recognizes that reality is subjective and a matter of appearances for us in our social world. Subjectivity means that the world becomes real through our contact with it and acquires meaning through our interpretations of that contact. Truth, then, is a composite of realities, and access to truth is a problem of access to human subjectivity. This perspective guides the qualitative researcher in nursing to the subject matter of lived experiences, which are the original contacts with a world, and of the processes and content of interpretation--the meaning attributions that constitute realities and perspectives for a future of possibilities in the world. Other consequences of a phenomenological perspective in research include deliberate attention to the researcher's involvement in the study, engagement of multiple modes of awareness, and creative expression of findings. The product of efforts to establish a phenomenological baseline, a thorough and accurate description of nursing phenomena (a task that remains forever incomplete), will be clarified nursing concepts. If we encourage our qualitative nurse researchers, we can look forward to enhanced relevance in theoretical and empirical comments about nursing from studies guided by a mature nursing identity.
尽管定性研究方法对我们来说是新的且仍在不断涌现,但在其他学科中,它已经受到了相当长一段时间的关注。除了哲学层面的争论,还有关于是否需要进行争论的争论。在哲学层面上,定量和定性范式之间存在不可调和的冲突。认识到这种冲突很重要,要避免不合逻辑的妥协。然而,每种范式的支持者都需要认可另一种范式的存在以及不可避免地由冲突产生的混合范式。一个恰当的开端是对护理领域中科学和研究的构成进行更广泛的定义,消除与我们的实践理念相悖的感官偏见。仅此一点就能为定性护理研究人员提供他们在探索各种方法以创建护理实践的科学和知识体系时所需的认可。在接下来的章节中,读者将了解几种定性研究方法。每种方法都代表了护理研究中对定性范式的一种解释,其基于现象学哲学的总体视角。这种视角关注现象的呈现方式,并认识到现实是主观的,是我们在社会世界中所看到的表象。主观性意味着世界通过我们与它的接触而变得真实,并通过我们对这种接触的解释而获得意义。那么,真理就是各种现实的综合,而获取真理是一个涉及人类主观性的问题。这种视角引导护理领域的定性研究人员关注生活经历的主题,这些经历是与世界的最初接触,以及解释的过程和内容——构成世界未来可能性的现实和视角的意义赋予。现象学视角在研究中的其他影响包括刻意关注研究人员在研究中的参与、多种意识模式的运用以及研究结果的创造性表达。建立现象学基线(即对护理现象进行全面准确的描述,这一任务永远无法完成)所做努力产生的成果将是明确的护理概念。如果我们鼓励我们的定性护理研究人员,我们可以期待从以成熟的护理身份为指导的研究中,在护理的理论和实证评论方面提高相关性。