Abstract
Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) studies are fast becoming a very popular methodological choice among qualitative nursing researchers. Although qualitative research aims to shine a light on meanings that are less observable, it also seeks to understand the complexities of our ‘real world’ (Robson, 2002). This may explain the current interest in IPA and its idiographic, person-centred focus that aims to offer an understanding of how a person (or small group of people), in a particular context, makes sense of a given phenomenon or experience of personal significance.
The author of the reviewed study should be commended for choosing a very sensitive subject. It is as sensitive for the young male participants as it is for their healthcare professionals: addressing (or failing to address) their sexual health. The author highlights the difficulty in accessing this group of young men for research purposes, making it a perfect methodological fit for this group as IPA is most notable for drawing on the accounts of a small number of people: groups of up to six have been suggested as ideal (Reid et al., 2005). The author also highlights the challenges associated with being a young female researcher investigating this sensitive subject from an unfamiliar ‘non-male’ perspective.
Although IPA has been criticised for being overly ambiguous and lacking standardisation (Giorgi, 2010), and for being mostly descriptive and not sufficiently interpretative (Brocki and Wearden, 2006), the author has provided good evidence of a robust approach to participant recruitment, semi-structured interviewing and interpretation. The author should be commended for using NVivo for her analysis and attempting to bring order to her analysis and sense making. The richness of the data provided by the participants in this paper demonstrates that the author was able to maintain some degree of structure and standardisation whilst creating conversations with a purpose. Although IPA is fundamentally a subjective research approach, the author used a second researcher/analyst to substantiate her interpretation and theming. It is often the case in subjective approaches (such as IPA) that two analysts working with the same data do not come up with the same interpretations.
A great strength (or weakness, as some would argue) of this paper is how the author engaged in the ‘double hermeneutic’, making sense of the participants’ sense making of their sexual behaviours. The author and her ‘world view’ assumed a central role in the analysis and interpretation of the participants’ experiences and her paradigm to read between the lines, providing the interpretation and meaning. Although the author acknowledges her own experiences as an adult, her background and religious influences, I believe a little more attention and discussion in relation to how the author’s ‘world view’ or ‘paradigm’ shaped the analysis would have strengthened this paper, in particular, how they influenced the interpretation and identification of theme and subthemes such as: ‘moral codes’, ‘reputation’, ‘dominance’ and ‘double standards’. It should be acknowledged that reflecting a ‘little of one’s self’ in a sensitive subject study such as this is both mature and gallant.
I think the author provides a good example of a flexible and adaptable qualitative approach that can have structure and can be somewhat standardised while still seeking to understand people’s experiences. Although IPA has many limitations (and critics), this paper provides an interesting and detailed subjective insight into the lived experiences of how young men address their sexual health.