Abstract
Recent interest in analytical pluralismâthe application of more than one qualitative analytical method to a single data setâhas demonstrated its potential to produce multiple, complex, and varied understandings of phenomena. However, tensions remain regarding the commensurability of findings produced from diverse theoretical frameworks, the practical application of multiple methods of analysis, and the capacity of pluralism to contribute to knowledge in psychology. This study addresses these issues through a critical interpretation of existing qualitative studies that utilized analytical pluralism. Using a meta-study design, we examined the use of theory, application of methods, and production of findings in studies that had adopted qualitative analytical pluralism. Following comprehensive database searches, ten articles were included in the analysis. Epistemological and ontological considerations, the influence of decisions made in the practical application of pluralism, and approaches to interpreting findings produced from multiple analyses are discussed, and implications for future research are considered.
Highlights
The aim of the Leeds Beckett Repository is to provide open access to our research, as required by funder policies and permitted by publishers and copyright law
This section of the study was guided by the questions: how was theory used within the articles; and how were ontological and epistemological concerns addressed? The pluralistic approach was frequently advocated on the basis that complex and varied understandings of phenomena were produced through the application of different analysis methods to data
Analytical pluralism was used by authors to extract as much meaning as possible from the data (Frost, 2009), and to construct holistic, multi-layered understandings, which were deeper than those which one method of analysis could offer alone (Simons, Lathlean, & Squire, 2008) and greater than the sum of their parts (Wickens, 2011)
Summary
The aim of the Leeds Beckett Repository is to provide open access to our research, as required by funder policies and permitted by publishers and copyright law. Tensions remain regarding the commensurability of findings produced from diverse theoretical frameworks, the practical application of multiple methods of analysis and the capacity of pluralism to contribute to knowledge in psychology. This study addresses these issues, through a critical interpretation of existing qualitative studies that utilised analytical pluralism. Epistemological and ontological considerations, the influence of decisions made in the practical application of pluralism and approaches to interpreting findings produced from multiple analyses are discussed, and implications for future research are considered. It offers researchers an alternative to the orthodox approach of adopting a specific, recognised mono-methodology; the uncritical adoption of which can lead to methodolatry (the reification and privileging of methods) and a reticence to adapt methods to suit the research context (Chamberlain, 2000; 2011; Chamberlain, Cain, Sheridan, & Dupuis, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
