呼吁在定性研究中进行理论启发式分析:构建医疗保健领域和相关领域不同真相的方法

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Nursing Inquiry Pub Date : 2024-04-19 DOI:10.1111/nin.12642
Stinne Glasdam, Hongxuan Xu, Ragnhild J. A. Gulestø
{"title":"呼吁在定性研究中进行理论启发式分析:构建医疗保健领域和相关领域不同真相的方法","authors":"Stinne Glasdam, Hongxuan Xu, Ragnhild J. A. Gulestø","doi":"10.1111/nin.12642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the last 50 years, there has been significant development of qualitative research and related methods in healthcare. Theoretical frameworks support researchers in selecting appropriate research approaches, procedures and analytical tools. However, the implications of the choice of theory are sparsely elucidated. Based on a text excerpt from a public debate article, the study aimed to show how different theory‐inspired analytical perspectives produced varied understandings of the same text. The study presented three subanalyses inspired by Bourdieu's sociological theory, Lazarus and Folkman's psychological theory and utilitarian ethics, respectively. The analyses showed that by using different theoretical analytical perspectives in inductive processes, an immediate interpretation of the text was not obvious. It became possible to spot the underlying meta‐theoretical assumptions, as the interpretations were not taken for granted or indisputable. Our analyses suggest that different theoretical lenses lead to different interpretations of the same empirical material, recognising the existence of multiple truths or realities. Thus, utilising a theoretical perspective in inductive analyses can enhance transparency and rigour because the analytical optics are made explicit to the reader. This allows the reader to follow the analysis processes and comprehend from which theoretical starting point a truth arises.","PeriodicalId":49727,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Inquiry","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A call for theory‐inspired analysis in qualitative research: Ways to construct different truths in and about healthcare\",\"authors\":\"Stinne Glasdam, Hongxuan Xu, Ragnhild J. A. Gulestø\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/nin.12642\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over the last 50 years, there has been significant development of qualitative research and related methods in healthcare. Theoretical frameworks support researchers in selecting appropriate research approaches, procedures and analytical tools. However, the implications of the choice of theory are sparsely elucidated. Based on a text excerpt from a public debate article, the study aimed to show how different theory‐inspired analytical perspectives produced varied understandings of the same text. The study presented three subanalyses inspired by Bourdieu's sociological theory, Lazarus and Folkman's psychological theory and utilitarian ethics, respectively. The analyses showed that by using different theoretical analytical perspectives in inductive processes, an immediate interpretation of the text was not obvious. It became possible to spot the underlying meta‐theoretical assumptions, as the interpretations were not taken for granted or indisputable. Our analyses suggest that different theoretical lenses lead to different interpretations of the same empirical material, recognising the existence of multiple truths or realities. Thus, utilising a theoretical perspective in inductive analyses can enhance transparency and rigour because the analytical optics are made explicit to the reader. This allows the reader to follow the analysis processes and comprehend from which theoretical starting point a truth arises.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49727,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nursing Inquiry\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nursing Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.12642\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.12642","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的 50 年里,医疗保健领域的定性研究和相关方法有了长足的发展。理论框架为研究人员选择适当的研究方法、程序和分析工具提供了支持。然而,理论选择的意义却鲜有阐明。本研究以一篇公开辩论文章的文本节选为基础,旨在说明不同理论启发下的分析视角如何对同一文本产生不同的理解。研究分别从布迪厄的社会学理论、拉扎勒斯和福克曼的心理学理论以及功利主义伦理学角度出发,进行了三项子分析。分析表明,在归纳过程中使用不同的理论分析视角,对文本的直接解释并不明显。由于解释并非理所当然或无可争议,因此有可能发现潜在的元理论假设。我们的分析表明,不同的理论视角会对相同的经验材料做出不同的解释,承认多种真理或现实的存在。因此,在归纳分析中使用理论视角可以提高透明度和严谨性,因为分析视角对读者是明确的。这样,读者就能跟踪分析过程,理解真理是从哪个理论出发点产生的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A call for theory‐inspired analysis in qualitative research: Ways to construct different truths in and about healthcare
Over the last 50 years, there has been significant development of qualitative research and related methods in healthcare. Theoretical frameworks support researchers in selecting appropriate research approaches, procedures and analytical tools. However, the implications of the choice of theory are sparsely elucidated. Based on a text excerpt from a public debate article, the study aimed to show how different theory‐inspired analytical perspectives produced varied understandings of the same text. The study presented three subanalyses inspired by Bourdieu's sociological theory, Lazarus and Folkman's psychological theory and utilitarian ethics, respectively. The analyses showed that by using different theoretical analytical perspectives in inductive processes, an immediate interpretation of the text was not obvious. It became possible to spot the underlying meta‐theoretical assumptions, as the interpretations were not taken for granted or indisputable. Our analyses suggest that different theoretical lenses lead to different interpretations of the same empirical material, recognising the existence of multiple truths or realities. Thus, utilising a theoretical perspective in inductive analyses can enhance transparency and rigour because the analytical optics are made explicit to the reader. This allows the reader to follow the analysis processes and comprehend from which theoretical starting point a truth arises.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nursing Inquiry
Nursing Inquiry 医学-护理
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
61
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Inquiry aims to stimulate examination of nursing''s current and emerging practices, conditions and contexts within an expanding international community of ideas. The journal aspires to excite thinking and stimulate action toward a preferred future for health and healthcare by encouraging critical reflection and lively debate on matters affecting and influenced by nursing from a range of disciplinary angles, scientific perspectives, analytic approaches, social locations and philosophical positions.
×
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