Сравнение на методи

	Интерпретативна автоетнография	Интерпретативна феноменология
Област	Качествени методи	Качествени методи
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Година на възникване	1990s–2000s	1927 (Heidegger); systematised for human sciences by van Manen in 1990
Създател	Carolyn Ellis, Arthur Bochner (evocative strand); Leon Anderson (analytic/interpretive strand)	Martin Heidegger (philosophical foundation); Max van Manen (methodological systematisation)
Тип	Qualitative self-study design	Qualitative interpretive research design
Основополагащ източник	Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(1), Art. 10.	van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. State University of New York Press. ISBN: 978-0791404645
Други названия	interpretive autoethnography, evocative autoethnography, analytic autoethnography, IAE	hermeneutic phenomenology, van Manen phenomenology, Heideggerian phenomenology, interpretive phenomenological inquiry
Свързани	6	5
Резюме	Interpretive autoethnography is a qualitative research design in which the researcher uses systematic analysis of their own lived experience as the primary data source, moving beyond evocative personal narrative to connect personal meaning with broader cultural, social, or theoretical frameworks. Drawing on Leon Anderson's analytic strand and building on Ellis and Bochner's foundational work, it treats the researcher's self-account as both evidence and interpretive lens, subjecting personal stories to disciplined ethnographic and theoretical scrutiny to generate insights that extend beyond the individual case.	Interpretive phenomenology is a qualitative research design that investigates the meaning people attribute to their lived experiences by combining phenomenological description with hermeneutic interpretation. Rooted in Heidegger's ontology and systematised for social and human sciences by Max van Manen, it moves beyond description to ask what an experience means within a person's broader lifeworld, cultural context, and situated understanding. The researcher's own interpretive horizon is treated as an analytical resource rather than a bias to eliminate.