Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches
Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/capr.12360
复制
发表时间：
2020-10-18
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Clarke, Victoria
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Braun, Virginia;Clarke, Victoria
主题分析方法，包括我们开发的反思方法，广泛应用于咨询和心理治疗研究，其他寻求跨案例开发“模式”（主题、类别）的方法也是如此。如果没有对各种跨案例分析方法和更广泛的定性研究（咨询培训中很少提供的东西）的概念基础有透彻的了解，就很难理解这些方法有何不同，它们在哪里重叠，以及哪些可能适合特定的研究项目。我们本文的目的是通过讨论反射性主题分析（TA）与其他四种跨案例方法之间概念和程序上的差异和相似之处，支持咨询和心理治疗领域的研究人员为他们的研究选择合适的跨案例方法，并证明他们的选择是合理的。其中三种也广泛应用于咨询和心理治疗研究——定性内容分析、解释性现象学分析和扎根理论。第四种话语分析虽然应用较少，但它重要地体现了批判性定性研究传统。我们通过强调 TA 内部的多样性来背景化我们的比较方法。 TA 最好被认为是一系列方法——从优先考虑编码准确性和可靠性的类型到像我们这样强调数据解释不可避免的主观性的反射方法。尽管反思性 TA 为我们讨论其他跨案例方法提供了比较点，但我们的目的并不是将反思性 TA 宣传为“最佳”。相反，我们鼓励在咨询和心理治疗研究中明智地选择和使用分析方法和方法。
Thematic analysis methods, including the reflexive approach we have developed, are widely used in counselling and psychotherapy research, as are other approaches that seek to develop 'patterns' (themes, categories) across cases. Without a thorough grounding in the conceptual foundations of a wide variety of across-case analytic approaches, and qualitative research more broadly-something rarely offered in counselling training-it can be difficult to understand how these differ, where they overlap, and which might be appropriate for a particular research project. Our aim in this paper is to support researchers in counselling and psychotherapy to select an appropriate across-case approach for their research, and to justify their choice, by discussing conceptual and procedural differences and similarities between reflexive thematic analysis (TA) and four other across-case approaches. Three of these are also widely used in counselling and psychotherapy research-qualitative content analysis, interpretative phenomenological analysis and grounded theory. The fourth-discourse analysis-is less widely used but importantly exemplifies the critical qualitative research tradition. We contextualise our comparative approach by highlighting the diversitywithinTA. TA is best thought of as a spectrum of methods-from types that prioritise coding accuracy and reliability to reflexive approaches like ours that emphasise the inescapable subjectivity of data interpretation. Although reflexive TA provides the point of comparison for our discussion of other across-case approaches, our aim is not to promote reflexive TA as 'best'. Rather, we encourage the knowing selection and use of analytic methods and methodologies in counselling and psychotherapy research.