手法を比較

	Digital Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis	解釈的現象学
分野	質的手法	質的手法
系統	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
提唱年	IPA founded ~1996; digital variant established practice ~2010–2020	1927 (Heidegger); systematised for human sciences by van Manen in 1990
提唱者	Jonathan A. Smith (IPA); adapted to digital contexts by qualitative internet researchers from ~2010s onward	Martin Heidegger (philosophical foundation); Max van Manen (methodological systematisation)
種類	Qualitative research design and analytic approach	Qualitative interpretive research design
原典	Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. Sage. ISBN: 978-1412908344	van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. State University of New York Press. ISBN: 978-0791404645
別名	Digital IPA, online IPA, digital-mediated IPA, internet-based interpretive phenomenological analysis	hermeneutic phenomenology, van Manen phenomenology, Heideggerian phenomenology, interpretive phenomenological inquiry
関連	5	5
概要	Digital Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (Digital IPA) applies the rigorous IPA framework — originally developed by Jonathan Smith to explore how individuals make sense of significant lived experiences — within digital data-collection environments. Participants are recruited and interviewed online (via video call, synchronous text chat, email, or digital diary), and the resulting transcripts and digital texts are analysed through the same close-reading, emergent-coding, and cross-case patterning procedures that define standard IPA. The digital setting both expands access to geographically dispersed or hard-to-reach participants and introduces distinct methodological considerations around rapport, embodied cues, and data authenticity.	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.