Maybe you’ve heard this one before: At the end of a philosophy course, the instructor distributes the final exam to all of the students assembled in the classroom. This is an essay exam, and students find that it contains but one question that consists of a single word: “Why?” The students all complete their answers and submit these to the instructor, but one student’s response stands out above all the rest and gains the highest grade in the class. This A+ grade goes to a student who responded simply, “Why not?”

Why not?! This was such a riveting tale when I first heard it from my fifth-grade teacher, and I admired the moxie of the student who dared to submit this response. But, I was in fifth grade at the time, and this was before Snopes.com came along to bust all of our myths for us. Alas, in the real world of higher learning, we’re asked to go a bit further when faced with “why” questions of different sorts. In the rationale for research design section of your prospectus or chapter 1 that asks basically, “Why phenomenology?” therefore, I would not recommend stating simply, “Why not phenomenology?” Your dissertation chair is not likely to be impressed and will undoubtedly send your brave submission back with a comment like, “You’ve got to be kidding. Please expand.”

We often help our clients to fine-tune their methods to better meet their committees’ high expectations, and phenomenology is one of the most commonly used research designs among our clients who are using a qualitative research method. If you are also considering using a phenomenological design, it will be important for you to explain why it is that this design makes the most sense for your study given its problem and purpose. It is important to explain both (a) why phenomenology makes the most sense, and (b) why other research designs in the qualitative research paradigm are poorer fits for your study. This article will provide information to help you think over both of these aspects of your rationale statement as you plan out your dissertation strategy.

First Things First: Is a Qualitative Research Method the Right Choice?

Before you construct your rationale statement for use of phenomenology, you will first need to write up your rationale for using the broader research paradigm within which this design resides: a qualitative method. Typically required is a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of your chosen research method, which you then contrast with discussion of the applications of other methods to illustrate why your choice makes the most sense. When writing the rationale for use a qualitative research method, then, you will be asked to explain the strengths of qualitative methods and how these strengths mesh with your study’s general aims. Then, you will need to also discuss the applications of quantitative methods with a brief explanation of why this method was a lesser fit given what you’re trying to do with your study.

There are literally whole books written on the subject, but in short, qualitative methods are useful for answering research questions that are exploratory and open-ended, where rich and detailed responses from participants are required (Ritchie & Ormston, 2013). Conducting qualitative research and analysis allows you to explore the first-hand perspectives of your participants and learn about complex processes as perceived and/or interpreted by your participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Qualitative research is also very useful for exploring areas of research where not much is known. If a phenomenon has not been widely studied, it is unlikely that validated quantitative instruments (i.e., surveys) exist, which makes qualitative research a more useful option because of the flexibility of data collection.

In contrast, quantitative research involves statistical analysis to determine relationships or differences between variables that have been previously defined (aka, operationalized). Given that statistical analysis is central to use of your data to answer your research questions in a quantitative study, it is clear that your data need to be numerical and that your variables of interest need to be quantifiable (Bernard, 2013). What this distills down to is that if your overall aim is to determine how variables (e.g., job satisfaction, leadership style, demographic factors) relate to each other numerically, quantitative is the way to go. But, if what you really need to do in order to answer your research questions is sit down and listen to people talk in depth about their thoughts, feelings, and experiences, then qualitative research and analysis is the optimal choice.

Quick Quiz!*

Following is a list of sample research topics. For each one, state whether a quantitative or qualitative method would be the best fit.

• An exploration of small business owners’ perspectives on social media marketing
• An examination of the relationship between employee autonomy and productivity
• An investigation of Millennial versus Generation X teachers’ self-efficacy in classroom management
• An exploration of nurses’ perceptions of conditions that create risk of medication errors

Picking the Best Research Design: Is Phenomenology for You?

Once you have settled on a qualitative research method for your study, then it’s time to think about which of the research designs within the qualitative arena fit best with the aims of your study. In the same way that you construct a rationale for use of research method by comparing and contrasting the strengths and weaknesses of different methods, you will need to think over the different applications of research designs within the qualitative research paradigm to determine which is the best fit for your study. So, let’s start by talking about what phenomenology entails.

Lived Experiences

Interviewing for phenomenology and other designs is all about obtaining access to your participants’ inner perspectives, which provide the richness of data needed for qualitative analysis. There are countless topics on which you might interview people to learn of their perspectives, like views on workplace dynamics, perceptions of different instructional practices, or interpretations of power differentials in groups. Where phenomenology shines is in the exploration of your participants’ lived experiences (Moustakas, 1994). This should be the starting point in thinking about the appropriateness of phenomenology for your dissertation, and it might help to ask yourself: Do I need to understand people’s lived experiences to fully address my research questions? If so, you’re definitely on the right track.

Interpretation and Meaning-Making

Beyond this initial criterion, other aspects of phenomenology should be evaluated against your vision for your dissertation. In addition to the focus on lived experiences, a nicely conceived phenomenological study will also delve into the interpretive or meaning-making processes your participants have applied to their lived experiences. Using qualitative analysis of lived experiences to help understand the “essences” of your participants’ experiences (i.e., how they make sense of these experiences) is a key aim of phenomenology (Moustakas, 1994). A qualitative descriptive design might be a better fit if you need your participants to merely describe their experiences, but if it is important that you help to amplify the essential meanings your participants attach to their experiences, then phenomenology might be the right choice for your dissertation.

An underlying assumption of phenomenology is that the subjective experience of individuals is valid and important, and that understanding the meanings of experiences, as perceived by the individual who experiences them, is key to developing knowledge on certain topics. In phenomenology, we consciously work to privilege the voices and perspectives of our participants via bracketing our own viewpoints and biases in the qualitative analysis process. This privileging of participants’ viewpoints reflects a recognition that each of us is the “expert” on our own lives, and it can make phenomenology empowering as it provides access to the viewpoints of those who may be otherwise marginalized or unheard. An empowerment lens is not universally required for phenomenology, however, and use of the design to develop understanding of participants’ inner worlds and interpretations is appropriate for a variety of purposes.

Ruling Out Other Research Designs

Just as you make a case for your use of a qualitative research method by comparing and contrasting its strengths and weaknesses with those of quantitative methods, you will need to compare and contrast phenomenology with other research designs in the qualitative paradigm to create your rationale for use of this design. Other commonly used research designs include case study, descriptive, narrative analysis, and grounded theory. Let’s briefly touch upon each of these to help clarify how they differ from phenomenology. Conveying these differences clearly in the methods chapter of your dissertation demonstrates that you not only know why you chose phenomenology but also that you know why you did not choose other designs.

Case study. In our dissertation consulting experience, we find that in addition to phenomenology, the case study design is one of the most commonly used in dissertations employing qualitative research methods. This design is most useful when the phenomena of interest in your study are inherently complex and when you wish to understand the complexities of these phenomena as they occur in their natural contexts. These natural, everyday contexts should reflect some sort of “bounded group” or setting (Yin, 2014), which might be located in a particular site (e.g., a single hospital, a single elementary school) or across a variety of physical locations (e.g., an urban school district in the northeastern U.S., mid-level management in a globally operational distributing company). For a case study, it is important that you clearly define the bounds of your case to focus your inquiry. Because of the complexity of the phenomena of interest, it is good practice to include at least three sources of data (e.g., interviews, observations, documents) to capture this complexity and permit triangulation through your qualitative analysis process (Yin, 2014).

Case studies are often used to explore participants’ perspectives on various complex processes as they occur within arenas such as the workplace, classrooms, and healthcare settings. Unlike phenomenology, though, the case study design is not used to delve deeply into essential meanings participants attach to these processes. For example, let’s imagine that you are interested in using qualitative research and analysis to explore teachers’ thoughts on positive behavior support plan implementation in special education classrooms. This is a topic that you could approach using either a case study design or phenomenology, but there are key differences in how you would shape the focus to align with each research design.

If you shaped this to a case study design for your dissertation, you might focus on teachers’ perceptions of the benefits and barriers to positive behavior support plan implementation. To explore the complexity of this phenomenon, it would help to support triangulation if you gathered three data sources: interviews with teachers, classroom observations, and documents such as support plans for review. But, if you shaped this topic to align with a phenomenological approach, you would conduct in-depth interviews with teachers to learn about their lived experiences with implementing positive behavior support plans. As phenomenology places the participants’ viewpoints and interpretations as forefront in the study, you would not triangulate your qualitative analysis findings as in a case study, making additional data sources unnecessary.

Descriptive. A qualitative descriptive design is a handy little approach to have in your methodological toolbelt. In our experience providing dissertation assistance, this is often the research design of choice when phenomenology almost fits but isn’t quite perfect for the study. The descriptive design is a more straightforward approach that is appropriate when you are interested in exploring your participants’ descriptions of certain perspectives or experiences (Sandelowski, 2000). But, in contrast with phenomenology, a descriptive approach does not involve in-depth analysis and interpretation of participants’ lived experiences. The distinction is pretty fine, indeed, and so let’s consider an example to help clarify how these two approaches diverge.

At its basic level, phenomenology is descriptive in that you are asking your participants to describe their lived experiences and the meanings they associate with these. But, when interpretation or meaning-making are not important to the topic (or if they just don’t make sense for the topic), or when going into depth with participants about their lived experiences is not necessary or appropriate, then go with the basic descriptive approach. Imagine that you are interested in exploring participants’ thoughts on scuba diving. Depending on the overall aims of your study, this might align with a descriptive or phenomenological design.

If you were conducting your dissertation research to help catalog first-time scuba divers’ perspectives on the effectiveness of formal training in preparing them for their first dives, then a basic descriptive approach would be appropriate. You would interview participants to obtain their descriptions of their formal training and how well this prepared them for that first dive. There is an evaluative component to this inquiry, but you would not need an in-depth discussion and interpretation of the meanings associated with these experiences to answer your research questions; therefore, phenomenology would not align with this research focus. However, if you were aiming to use qualitative research and analysis to elucidate how first-time scuba divers’ experiences influenced their interpretations of themselves as part of the larger ecosystem, this would align nicely with a phenomenological approach. This is clearly a much more interpretive exploration of your participants’ inner lives and meaning-making processes.

Narrative analysis. Another design within the qualitative research paradigm is narrative analysis or narrative inquiry. This approach is similar to phenomenology in that it focuses in an in-depth way on participants’ experiences, and participants’ interpretations are certainly welcome within narrative data. The key difference is that narrative analysis should be used when you need to understand the “big picture” of the participants’ life stories to fully answer your research questions. Phenomenology relies upon participants’ discussions of their lived experiences, but narrative analysis goes beyond this focus on experiences to include qualitative analysis of the storied structure of participants’ experiences over a specific course of time or events (Wang & Geale, 2015). For this reason, narrative analysis studies typically require a much greater volume of data, which is collected over multiple interview sessions.

Let’s consider another hypothetical topic to help clarify the key differences between phenomenology and narrative analysis. Imagine that you are interested in conducting qualitative research on women’s experiences of empowerment, which is a topic that would lend itself well to an interpretive approach that is rooted in participants’ own personal experiences. This would definitely be a great fit for a phenomenological approach. But, if you wanted to understand in particular how women in the Baby Boomer generation have experienced empowerment over the decades since the women’s rights movements in the 1960s and 1970s, you would be better able to address this topic by asking your participants to share their extended stories of these experiences. In addition to yielding an understanding of women’s experiences and interpretations of empowerment (as in the phenomenological treatment of the topic), the narrative qualitative analysis would integrate these findings into a sequence that illuminates how women’s experiences and perceptions of empowerment changed or evolved over the decades as the societal backdrop shifted.

Grounded theory. Although grounded theory is less often used in dissertation research than options like phenomenology or case study, it will help to understand the applications of this design as you weigh your various options. Researchers use grounded theory when they are conducting their studies for the specific purpose of developing or modifying theory. You are most likely thinking, “Ummm, no thanks,” and you are definitely not alone in this response! Grounded theory requires an advanced skill level in qualitative research and analysis, and it also requires a commitment to theoretical sampling, which is more complicated and time-consuming that your standard purposive sampling process for qualitative dissertations. Both phenomenology and grounded theory involve identification of emergent themes in interview-based data, but grounded theory goes a step further and includes construction of a theoretical model as the final result of this qualitative analysis.

Quick Quiz!*

Following are pairs of similar purpose statements with the method and design omitted. For each pair, pick out the one that best fits a qualitative research method with a phenomenological design.

• (a) The purpose of this study is to explore older adults’ lived experiences of retirement, with particular attention to interpretations of their non-employed status.

  (b) The purpose of this study is to explore older adults’ descriptions of their perceptions of retirement.

• (a) The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of formal leadership mentoring on novice managers’ leadership effectiveness.

  (b) The purpose of this study is to explore novice managers’ lived experiences of formal leadership mentoring with an aim of understanding how mentoring relationships influenced their meaning-making related to leadership effectiveness.

• (a) The purpose of this study is to explore Latina women’s stories of advancement from first-line management to senior leadership positions in healthcare settings in the United States.

  (b) The purpose of this study is to explore Latina women’s lived experiences of senior leadership attainment in healthcare settings in the United States.

Practical Considerations: Data Collection and Analysis

Although going through the thought exercises above is essential in determining a clear rationale for your choice of a qualitative research method and phenomenological design, it will help to think about practical considerations of this choice while still in the planning stages of your dissertation. To facilitate collection of adequate data for qualitative analysis in phenomenology, you should plan to conduct in-depth interviews that last at least 60 minutes. Plan for lengthy interviews with your participants, as learning about their lived experiences and the meanings they attach to these requires time and reflection. You can conduct interviews in person or via remote means, such as phone, skype, etc., but the interactive process is necessary to draw out the richness of data that phenomenology requires. Do you have the time and interest for this?

Interviewing for research purposes requires a particular approach to elicit rich data while avoiding biasing the participants’ responses through inadvertent signs of approval or disapproval. If you tend to be a “talker,” you will need to hold yourself back from that natural tendency so that you allow your participants to reflect upon and share their perspectives in as much detail as they like. Interviewing isn’t about having a conversation; it’s about giving your participants “the floor” with only minor input from you to spur them along. This process can be learned, but the quality of your data hinges upon proper interviewing technique. Are you up to the task?

Finally, qualitative analysis is a complex and time-consuming process. You will need to have large chunks of time that you can devote to the process because you really need to immerse yourself in your participants’ lifeworlds to hear their voices clearly. Having a working familiarity with NVivo or other qualitative analysis software is highly recommended as well, although it’s important to note that qualitative analysis software does not do the analysis for you. This software simply makes the organizational processes of qualitative analysis more convenient; as our qualitative analysis experts will tell you, however, the actual analysis is a distinctly human process. If you are seeking the richness and texture that only qualitative research findings can impart, then I’m sure you will find these rewards to be well worth the effort!

*Quick Quiz Answers: 1. Qualitative; 2. Quantitative; 3. Quantitative; 4. Qualitative; 5. (a); 6. (b); 7. (b)

References

• Bernard, H. R. (2013). Social research methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
• Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
• Ritchie, J., & Ormston, R. (2013). The applications of qualitative research to social research. In J. Ritchie, J. Lewis, C. M. Nicholls, & R. Ormston (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (pp. 27-45). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334-340. doi:10.1002/1098-240X(28200008)23:4<334::AID-NUR9>3.0;2-G
• Wang, C. C., & Geale, S. K. (2015). The power of story: Narrative inquiry as a methodology in nursing research. International Journal of Nursing Sciences, 2(2), 195-198. doi:10.1016/j.ijnss.2015.04.014
• Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.