A Critical Comparison of Focused Ethnography and Interpretive Phenomenology in Nursing Research.

IF 2.2 Q1 NURSING
Global Qualitative Nursing Research Pub Date : 2024-03-14 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23333936241238097
Uchechi Clara Opara, Pammla Petrucka
{"title":"A Critical Comparison of Focused Ethnography and Interpretive Phenomenology in Nursing Research.","authors":"Uchechi Clara Opara, Pammla Petrucka","doi":"10.1177/23333936241238097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Choosing an appropriate qualitative methodology in nursing research is a researcher's first step before beginning a study. Such a step is critical as the selected qualitative methodology should be congruent with the research questions, study assumptions, data gathering and analysis to promote the utility of such research in enhancing nursing knowledge. In this paper, we compare focused ethnography by Roper and Shapira and interpretive phenomenology by Benner. Though these methodologies are naturalistic and appear similar, both have different methodological underpinnings. The historical, ontological, epistemological, and axiological philosophy guiding each methodology are described. In addition, the methodological underpinnings of both methodologies and a justification for use in nursing research are provided. This paper will assist future researchers who aim to employ these methodologies in nursing research.</p>","PeriodicalId":45940,"journal":{"name":"Global Qualitative Nursing Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10943724/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Qualitative Nursing Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23333936241238097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Choosing an appropriate qualitative methodology in nursing research is a researcher's first step before beginning a study. Such a step is critical as the selected qualitative methodology should be congruent with the research questions, study assumptions, data gathering and analysis to promote the utility of such research in enhancing nursing knowledge. In this paper, we compare focused ethnography by Roper and Shapira and interpretive phenomenology by Benner. Though these methodologies are naturalistic and appear similar, both have different methodological underpinnings. The historical, ontological, epistemological, and axiological philosophy guiding each methodology are described. In addition, the methodological underpinnings of both methodologies and a justification for use in nursing research are provided. This paper will assist future researchers who aim to employ these methodologies in nursing research.

护理研究中的重点人种学与解释现象学的批判性比较。
在护理研究中选择合适的定性方法是研究人员开始研究前的第一步。这一步至关重要,因为所选的定性方法应与研究问题、研究假设、数据收集和分析相一致,以提高此类研究在增进护理知识方面的效用。在本文中,我们比较了罗珀和夏皮拉的重点人种学和本纳的解释现象学。虽然这两种方法都是自然主义的,看似相似,但二者却有着不同的方法论基础。本文介绍了指导每种方法论的历史、本体论、认识论和公理哲学。此外,还介绍了这两种方法的方法论基础以及在护理研究中使用的理由。本文将对未来希望在护理研究中采用这些方法的研究人员有所帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.90%
发文量
41
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Qualitative Nursing Research (GQNR) is a ground breaking, international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on qualitative research in fields relevant to nursing and other health professionals world-wide. The journal specializes in topics related to nursing practice, responses to health and illness, health promotion, and health care delivery. GQNR will publish research articles using qualitative methods and qualitatively-driven mixed-method designs as well as meta-syntheses and articles focused on methodological development. Special sections include Ethics, Methodological Development, Advancing Theory/Metasynthesis, Establishing Evidence, and Application to Practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信