Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Osallistava tulkitseva fenomenologinen analyysi× | Refleksiivinen temaattinen analyysi× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Laadulliset menetelmät | Laadulliset menetelmät |
| Menetelmäperhe | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 2000s–2010s | 2006 (seminal paper); explicitly named 'reflexive' from ~2019 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Jonathan A. Smith (IPA foundation); adapted by participatory researchers in disability, health, and education studies | Virginia Braun & Victoria Clarke |
| Tyyppi≠ | Qualitative research design | Qualitative research method |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. Sage. ISBN: 978-1412908344 | Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | Participatory IPA, P-IPA, participatory phenomenological inquiry, collaborative IPA | RTA, reflexive TA, Braun and Clarke thematic analysis, qualitative thematic analysis |
| Liittyvät≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Participatory Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (Participatory IPA) merges the interpretive, meaning-focused rigour of IPA with participatory research principles, engaging participants as active co-researchers in the design, data collection, and analytic phases. The approach is especially valued in studies involving marginalised or vulnerable groups — such as people with cognitive impairments, chronic illness, or lived experience of social exclusion — where standard interview protocols may silence rather than amplify participant voice. | Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA) is a widely used qualitative method for identifying, analysing, and interpreting patterns of shared meaning — called themes — across a dataset. Developed by Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke, it is theoretically flexible, works across epistemological positions, and foregrounds the researcher's active, interpretive role rather than treating themes as features that simply emerge from data. It differs from older 'codebook' approaches by treating the analyst's subjectivity as a resource rather than a source of bias to be suppressed. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|