Family Therapy Training Research – An Updating Review

This paper provides an update of research into the training of family therapists. Issues from the overarching contexts of adult learning, professional training and current themes in the practice of family therapy are briefly outlined. The early organization of the training research field is seen as being programme orientated, lacking a multi-perspective approach (particularly that of the trainee) and not making use of qualitative research methods. The more recent empirical research is reviewed with these issues to the fore. The paper concludes by providing a new set of research questions, many of which can be addressed by qualitative methodologies and by calling for the research process to be an essential ingredient of training for family therapists aided by the development of the trainer/researcher role.     

Grounded Theory methods in child psychotherapy research

This article considers the place of qualitative research in psychoanalysis and child psychotherapy. It discusses why research methodology for many years occupied so small a place in these fields, and examines the cultural and social developments since the 1960s which have changed this situation, giving formal but also qualitative methods of research much greater significance. It reflects on the different pressures to develop explicit research methods which arise both from outside the psychoanalytic field, as a condition of its continued professional survival, and from within it, where its main aim is the development of fundamental psychoanalytic knowledge. It suggests that the conduct of mainly quantitative research into treatment outcomes is largely a response to these external pressures, whilst the main benefits to be gained from the development of qualitative research methods, such as Grounded Theory, are in facilitating the knowledge-generating capacities and achievements of child psychotherapists themselves. The paper describes Grounded Theory methods, and explains how they can be valuable in the recognition of hitherto unrecognised meanings and patterns as these are made visible in clinical practice. Finally, it briefly describes three examples of completed doctoral studies, all of which have added significantly to the knowledge-base of child psychotherapy, and which demonstrate how much can be accomplished using this method of research.     

Mixing qualitative and quantitative research in developmental science: uses and methodological choices

Multiple methods are vital to understanding development as a dynamic, transactional process. This article focuses on the ways in which quantitative and qualitative methodologies can be combined to enrich developmental science and the study of human development, focusing on the practical questions of "when" and "how." Research situations that may be especially suited to mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches are described. The authors also discuss potential choices for using mixed quantitative- qualitative approaches in study design, sampling, construction of measures or interview protocols, collaborations, and data analysis relevant to developmental science. Finally, they discuss some common pitfalls that occur in mixing these methods and include suggestions for surmounting them.     

Multiperspectival designs and processes in interpretative phenomenological analysis research

ABSTRACT

Researchers using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) within applied research typically use homogenous samples exploring shared perspectives on a single phenomenon of interest. This article explores the challenges and opportunities involved with developing rigorous and epistemologically coherent research designs for capturing more complex and systemic experiential phenomena, through the use of multiple perspectives to explore the same phenomenon. We outline a series of multiple perspective designs and analytic procedures that can be adapted and used across many diverse settings and populations. Whilst building upon existing approaches within qualitative methods and IPA, these designs and procedures are intended to scaffold clear routes to practical application, psychological intervention, the design of behaviour change interventions, and other recommendations for policy and practice. We discuss a variety of conceptual antecedents which situate these designs within phenomenology, pluralistic idiography, qualitative psychology, and wider debates within psychology and other social and behavioural sciences.     

Intelligence research at the interface between differential and cognitive psychology: Prospects and proposals

There seems to be widespread agreement among theoreticians and methodologists alike that new approaches to studying intelligence should somehow combine the differential and cognitive (information-processing) approaches that have been used in the past, and that the combination should somehow enable the investigator to isolate components of intelligence that are elementary (at some level of analysis). Researchers disagree, however, as to how the differential and cognitive approaches should be combined, and consequently, in how elementary components of intelligence should be isolated and in what they are. How does an investigator choose from among the multiple paths available for theory and research? In this article, I propose some guidelines that may help investigators make informed choices. The article is divided into three major parts. In the first, I propose guidelines for choosing from among various methodologies for studying intelligence, and then describe briefly at least some of the methods that meet (or come close to meeting) these guidelines. In the second part, I propose guidelines for the specification of subtheories (and eventually, full-fledged theories) of intelligence, and illustrate how these guidelines can be met. Finally, I describe the direction in which I believe our subtheories and methods should lead us.     

Reflexivity in quantitative research: A rationale and beginner's guide

Reflexivity is the act of examining one's own assumption, belief, and judgement systems, and thinking carefully and critically about how these influence the research process. The practice of reflexivity confronts and questions who we are as researchers and how this guides our work. It is central in debates on objectivity, subjectivity, and the very foundations of social science research and generated knowledge. Incorporating reflexivity in the research process is traditionally recognized as one of the most notable differences between qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Qualitative research centres and celebrates the participants' personal and unique lived experience. Therefore, qualitative researchers are readily encouraged to consider how their own unique positionalities inform the research process and this forms an important part of training within this paradigm. Quantitative methodologies in social and personality psychology, and more generally, on the other hand, have remained seemingly detached from this level of reflexivity and general reflective practice. In this commentary, we, three quantitative researchers who have grappled with the compatibility of reflexivity within our own research, argue that reflexivity has much to offer quantitative methodologists. The act of reflexivity prompts researchers to acknowledge and centre their own positionalities, encourages a more thoughtful engagement with every step of the research process, and thus, as we argue, contributes to the ongoing reappraisal of openness and transparency in psychology. In this paper, we make the case for integrating reflexivity across all research approaches, before providing a ‘beginner's guide’ for quantitative researchers wishing to engage reflexively with their own work, providing concrete recommendations, worked examples, and reflexive prompts.     

Assessing ‘good’ qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis

This paper considers how work psychologists define ‘good’ qualitative research in the work psychology domain. In addressing the assessment of quality in work psychology research, we draw on 22 in‐depth interviews with work psychologists about their current practices and expectations around qualitative research. Using narrative analysis, the various plots and narratives that constitute how interviewees understand good qualitative research are identified. The implications of the use of these narratives for both how quality is understood and the use of qualitative research in this area are addressed. Drawing on Weick's concept of sensemaking as a theoretical framework, it is argued that the narratives identified enable the construction of a hegemonic understanding of what is good methodological practice within the work psychology discipline. The implications of this for the work psychology field and the methodological practices of work psychologists are considered.     

Policy research between the accumulation and implementation of knowledge

An important issue in the development of the field of applied research methodology is the increasing diversity of research questions, methodologies, and types of utilization. This is reflected in the fact that policy research is directed toward the analysis of social problems as well as designing and implementing policy strategies. In this context, different types of knowledge are produced in policy research (e.g., problem diagnosis, evaluation research, futures research). Moreover, policy research employs both qualitative and quantitative scientific approaches, as well as different implementation strategies of knowledge utilization. This article provides an overview of the most important developments in this area in The Netherlands during the past decade. This paper is a translation of “Beleidsonderzoek in het Spanningsveld tussen Kennisvergaring en Kennistoe passing: Ontwerpen van Toegepast Onderzoek,” by J. Hutjes. InSociologisch en Antropologisch Jaarboek, C. J. M. Corver, and M. Elchardus (Eds.), pp. 133–167, 1989.     

Social science research in the 1990s: The contribution of constructivism

Social science research in this decade has not made the progress we expected of it. Our findings still diverge, generalization from these findings remains restricted, and the many questions vital to achieving a better society continue to be unanswered. In the next decade, social science research may be able to benefit from constructivism. In this article I explore some of the constructivist assumptions about people. These include their subjectivity and purpose, the central role of meaning for them, and how that meaning can be both unique and shared. I also examine some constructivist assumptions about social science. These assumptions enable us as social scientists to understand better the constructivist nature of ourselves as researchers, our research participants, and our research interactions. These assumptions also have implications for the types of data collection methods we choose to use, as well as for data analysis. An example of each is provided. The application of these assumptions seems likely to result in social science research which continues to be diverse and permits only restricted generalization, but is more relevant to the needs of our society.     

Dilemmas in qualitative health research

Abstract

As the use of qualitative methods in health research proliferates, it becomes increasingly necessary to consider how the value of a piece of qualitative research should be assessed. This article discusses the problem posed by the novelty and diversity of qualitative approaches within health psychology and considers the question of what criteria are appropriate for assessing the validity of a qualitative analysis. In keeping with the ethos of much qualitative research, some open-ended, flexible principles are suggested as a guide to the quality of a qualitative study: sensitivity to context; commitment and rigour; transparency and coherence; impact and importance. Examples are given of the very different ways in which various forms of qualitative research can meet these criteria.     

What are the Questions in Psychology of Women? A Feminist Approach to Research

In conclusion, I'll briefly reiterate my major points in the hope that recency effects will overcome my error in trying to say a bit too much in one paper. I've said that psychology of women has already added much to psychology in its recognition and emphasis on the role of values in science. We can add even more with our openness to communal forms of methodology, particularly when they are used in concert with agenie forms of methodology; a combination of wet and hard science it worthy of pursuit. I then discussed three important sources of questions: (1) our own experience in combination with qualitative and observational methodologies, (2) the importance of public policy consequences of our questions, and (3) attention to situational aspects in concert with personological approaches, but in contrast to solely intrapsychic approaches. Finally, I discussed androgyny and sex difference research as examples of good and bad approaches to research in psychology of women. What are the questions in psychology of women? We all need to consider this issue and open ourselves to new research processes at the same time.     

Unraveling Change in Therapy: Three Different Process Research Methodologies

In response to repeated calls for process research on couple and family therapy, three different process research methodologies - grounded theory, change events analysis, and experimental manipulation - are presented and evaluated. A process research conceptual framework outlining some of the important issues in process research is presented. To illustrate each methodology, three completed process studies are briefly described, and a sample of results is provided. The strengths and weaknesses of each methodology are discussed, along with their role in generating and testing clinically relevant change theories. It is argued that each of these methodologies can provide researchers with important tools for unraveling the processes of change in couple and family therapy and should be used more frequently.     

Enhancing transparency of the research process to increase accuracy of findings: A guide for relationship researchers

The purpose of this paper is to extend to the field of relationship science, recent discussions and suggested changes in open research practises. We demonstrate different ways that greater transparency of the research process in our field will accelerate scientific progress by increasing accuracy of reported research findings. Importantly, we make concrete recommendations for how relationship researchers can transition to greater disclosure of research practices in a manner that is sensitive to the unique design features of methodologies employed by relationship scientists. We discuss how to implement these recommendations for four different research designs regularly used in relationship research and practical limitations regarding implementing our recommendations and provide potential solutions to these problems.     

Embodied Methodologies,Participation, and the Art of Research

In this article, I make the case for scholarship potential at the overlap of art and research. Using the case of the psychological study of adolescence, I show that in order to produce findings of meaning from a critical psychological perspective, it is imperative to consider methodology and epistemology. With a focus on artistic embodied methodologies within participatory action research projects on adolescence, I explore how creative approaches can be an analytic process for knowledge production in the critical social sciences. I argue that the artistic approaches employed using embodied methodologies can be considered as a way to make meaning and that especially within participatory research, these approaches can strengthen validity. In response to the epistemological violence (Teo, 2010) of some conventional social psychological studies, participatory artistic embodied methodologies contribute to building liberatory knowledge and rigorous science.     

How Far Have we Come? An Integrative Review of the Current Literature on Sense of Community and Well-being

Sense of community and well-being are considered core tenets in the field of community psychology, acting as focal points for theory, research, and action. This integrative review synthesizes the empirical literature on sense of community and well-being with respect to four research questions focused on the relationships between these variables, the methodologies used to study those relationships, and how future research might expand upon the current literature. A search of the available literature produced 30 articles that met the search criteria, based primarily on conceptualizations and measurement of both sense of community and hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. This review suggests a general consensus across the literature of a positive relationship between sense of community and well-being among both youth and adults in a variety of settings, and discusses the strengths and limitations of this area of research, pointing to the need for more nuanced, ecologically valid research that incorporates more qualitative and critical methodologies. We hope that this review can promote a more thorough understanding of how sense of community and individual well-being relate to each other, and that ongoing research in this area can be a catalyst for action research and interventions that are applied to pressing contemporary issues as well as strengths-based approaches focused on how to foster and support the well-being of individuals within their community contexts.     

The research couple: a psychoanalytic perspective on dilemmas in the qualitative research interview

The relational, collaborative values of the qualitative research paradigm frequently require us to consider sharing the ongoing analysis of data with our research participants for comment and feedback. However, qualitative researchers may experience some tension between balancing participants' narrative accounts with their own analytic perspective and use of psychological theory. In using a psychoanalytic framework to explore this predicament, this paper adopts the notion of the ‘research couple', analogous to the psychotherapeutic ‘analytic couple', to consider possible oedipal dynamics within the qualitative research interview. The paper explores some of the emotional and ethical tensions in analysing and presenting research results and briefly discusses some implications for research training.     

Translational behavior analysis: from laboratory science in stimulus control to intervention with persons with neurodevelopmental disabilities

Throughout its history, laboratory research in the experimental analysis of behavior has been successful in elucidating and clarifying basic learning principles and processes in both humans and nonhumans. In parallel, applied behavior analysis has shown how fundamental behavior-analytic principles and procedures can be employed to promote desirable forms of behavior and to prevent or ameliorate undesirable forms in clinical, educational, and other settings. Less obviously, there has also emerged a small but identifiable bridging field that can potentially connect and inform both basic and applied behavior analysis. Although such translational behavior analysis uses laboratory methodologies, research targets are selected largely for their value in ultimate application to improve the human condition. I will discuss the distinction of translational behavior analysis from basic and applied behavior analysis and consider the potential contribution that translational research can make in the development of the science of behavior.     

Three steps to open science for qualitative research in psychology

Principles and applications of open science (also referred to as open research or open scholarship) in psychology have emerged in response to growing concerns about the replicability, transparency, reproducibility, and robustness of psychological research alongside global moves to open science in many fields. Our objective in this paper is to inform ways of collectively constructing open science practices and systems that are appropriate to, and get the best out of, the full range of qualitative and mixed-method approaches used in psychology. We achieve this by describing three areas of open research practice (contributorship, pre-registration, and open data) and explore how and why qualitative researchers might consider engaging with these in ways that are compatible with a qualitative research paradigm. We argue it is crucial that open research practices do not (even inadvertently) exclude qualitative research, and that qualitative researchers reflect on how we can meaningfully engage with open science in psychology.