ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办:中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理科学进展 ›› 2019, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (11): 1826-1841.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.01826

• 研究方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

解释现象学分析在中国的运用:系统评价及指南

侯力琪1, 唐信峰2(), 何丽3, 贾晓明4   

  1. 1 香港理工大学应用社会科学系, 香港
    2 香港大学社会工作及社会行政学系, 香港
    3 北京联合大学师范学院, 北京 100011
    4 北京理工大学人文与社会科学学院, 北京 100081
  • 收稿日期:2018-12-04 出版日期:2019-10-31 发布日期:2019-09-23

Interpretative phenomenological analysis in China: A systematic review and guideline

HOU Liqi1, TANG Xinfeng2(), HE Li3, JIA Xiaoming4   

  1. 1 Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China
    2 Department of Social Work and Social Administration, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
    3 Teachers’ College, Beijing Union University, Beijing 100011, China;
    4 School of Humanities and Social Science, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
  • Received:2018-12-04 Online:2019-10-31 Published:2019-09-23

摘要:

作为一种质性研究方法, 解释现象学分析在心理学及社会科学的其他领域中逐渐兴起。目前在中国, 运用解释现象学分析的研究质量参差不齐, 对这些研究进行系统评价, 可以为将来的研究提供指导。通过对中英文数据库的检索及筛选, 最终纳入49篇期刊文章。根据Smith (2011)为解释现象学分析提出的4个标准对这些文章进行评价, 结果显示, 26篇研究明确提及了解释现象学的理论原则, 33篇文章的资料收集及分析过程清晰透明, 大部分研究(n = 40)条理清晰、言之成理, 但只有约1/4的研究(n = 13)提供了足够强的证据来支持其提取出来的主题。只有4篇全部达到质量标准, 11篇基本达到标准, 大部分文章没有达到标准。最后, 本研究尝试提出一份解释现象学分析的使用指南, 供将来的研究参考。

关键词: 解释现象学分析, 系统评价, 质性研究

Abstract:

As a qualitative method, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) has been increasingly employed in psychology and other social sciences disciplines. In China, the quality of research using IPA was doubtful, and thus a systematic review of the current studies was warranted. Through a comprehensive search in Chinese and English database and screening, 49 articles were included. According to Smith’s criterion, 26 studies explicitly referred to IPA theoretical principles; 33 studies had clear and transparent data collection and analysis process. Most of the studies (n = 40) were coherent and plausible, however, only a small proportion of the studies (n = 13) provided strong evidence to support the themes. In the forty-nine included studies, only 4 articles were rated as “good”, 11 articles were “acceptable”, and the remaining 34 articles were “unacceptable”. Based on previous research and recommendations, this study attempted to present a guideline to conduct and write a good IPA study.

Key words: interpretative phenomenological analysis, systematic review, qualitative research

中图分类号: