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, proceduresand 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 theoryand 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.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
