Significance of Qualitative Methods in Clinical Psychology - Term Paper Example

Significance of qualitative methods in clinical psychology: Clinical psychology refers to purposefully incorporating scientific clinical knowledge for relieving certain dysfunctional or behavioral problems in order to ensure smooth personal growth. To achieve this goal, the need of genuine and practically effectual research methods is unequivocal. Keeping in view the standards of scientific methods which are essential in clinical psychology, psychological researchers extensively use qualitative methods to conduct research in major areas of psychology. Qualitative psychological research includes methods that are a combination of direct interviews with distressed patients, first-hand observation and also participant observation. Qualitative researchers more than often have a common intention to enrich their interpretations or critiques of symbols and subjective experiences or social structures through these methods. (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). According to Guba and Lincoln (p. 106), there is an identified set of four conditions that are essential for a naturalistic inquiry when talking in terms of clinical psychology and it is these conditions which underline the criteria for trustworthiness between a psychological researcher and a patient. Now this goes without saying that trustworthiness is a critically important issue in psychological research and the criteria for assessing trustworthiness in naturalistic inquiry especially, profoundly relies on qualitative research. The primarily important condition among the rest relates to the methods applied in the research. These are the qualitative methods which heavily depend on human senses and these are considered the most appropriate and beneficent methods for carrying out investigation of multiple realities, worldwide. This is so because such methods are highly adaptable to mutually shaping influences and value patterns that gradually arise in the clinical research. This allows open discussion among the participants and the researcher allowing them to elaborate their understandings in addition to creating a setting that enables the researcher to appreciate and grasp the verbal responses of the participants. The whole point of qualitative methods generally is to gather information through loosely-structured interviews, critical analysis of the participants’ responses as well as the scientific literature and transient observations. Defining qualitative research, Cook and Reichardt (p. 7) stated: Qualitative research methods include ethnography, case study, in depth interviews, and participant observation. Ethnography is a qualitative research method that attempts to solidly describe a variety of aspects and norms of a cultural group to enhance understanding of the people being studied. Undeniably, effective communication between the psychological researcher and the participants is impossible without properly understanding their cultural backgrounds and qualitative research in the form of ethnography presents an incredible solution for this issue. Ethnographic research is a very broad field and is similar to other qualitative research methods because the researcher him/herself becomes part of the cultural scene and therefore, practically becomes an instrument of research. Another characteristic of ethnography is the cyclic nature of data collection and analysis. As one type of data provides new information, this information may stimulate the researcher to look at another type of data or to elicit confirmation of an interpretation from another person who is part of the culture being studied. This running cycle of collecting information hold utmost importance as a research tool in clinical psychology. (Byrne, 2001). A more elaborate explanation of the nature and purpose of qualitative research methods is given by Sofaer (1999). According to her, such research methods are valuable in providing fine descriptions of complex phenomena and unexpected events, illuminating the experience and interpretation of and giving voice to those whose experiences are barely ever noticed, examining varying discoveries to develop theories and generating hypotheses, with the help of which final decisions can be accessed. Qualitative methods have lots to offer to clinical psychological research especially, as such research copes with continuous ongoing change and develops a fully defined and integrated theory base and research agenda. However, attainment of the best results demands that the researchers employ the best traditions and techniques of qualitative methods and they must recognize that special training and experience are required for the purposeful application of these methods. “The best qualitative research is systematic and rigorous, and it seeks to reduce bias and error and to identify evidence that disconfirms initial or emergent hypotheses.” (Sofaer, p. 1). This becomes evident from the above discussion that when the participants involved in a research are given a chance to safely share their views and experiences, understanding develops in place of biases and unexplained confusions. This is an irrefutable fact that understanding is the key element for the development of knowledge and that is ensured when maturely recruiting qualitative methods as an essential research tool in clinical psychology. This also implies that the development of knowledge involves a gradual reduction in uncertainty that plagues cooperation between people involved in a research. To cap the matters, confidence appears in the psychological researchers that almost all of the important questions have been addressed and explicitly framed in more defined terms. This suggests that in almost all the cases, qualitative research happens to be the foremost step that needs to be taken to reach to the final discoveries that are largely assembled and quantitative in nature. Thus, it is identified that a mature and purposeful research is mostly qualitative in nature in the beginning. The correct way of employing qualitative methods in a clinical research is another important question. As discussed before, such methods include in-depth interviews between the participant and the researcher as an essential feature. This has to be kept in mind that this step mirrors the developmental framework, means knowledge has to be developed through these interviews and the way of presenting questions should be very elaborative and simplified, too. Frequently, the researcher asks what appear to be relevant to the individuals to describe in their own way their experiences and responses concerning any situation or issue. Gradually, the nature of the questions shifts toward rather specific side and questions become more probing in their initial wording or in accompanying expressions delivered by the researcher. All these strategies are hugely important in the context of clinical psychology, where data and information has to be gathered through real collaboration with the participants. The phenomenal importance of this particular research tool is rightly explained by Patton (2002). According to him, there is a discipline as well as an art involved in asking truly open-ended questions, which means genuine awareness of whether you are asking an open-ended question, can be viewed as one of the core disciplines of the qualitative researcher. Another reason to use qualitative methods as a research tool includes addressing the issue of theory construction. Of course, theories are constructed on the foundation of sound knowledge that combines raw data and information from multiple sources. This knowledge in turn, like already discussed, is derived through the art of questioning and helps in hypothesis generation which begins with the analysis of initial observations. This process is then subjected to nonstop refinement throughout the data collection and analysis process along with a simultaneous comparison of all social incidents observed during the research. "As events are constantly compared with previous events, new topological dimension, as well as new relationships, may be discovered.” (Goetz and LeCompte, p. 58). A repertoire of concepts derived from these theories help ensuring the fact that all the key questions are addressed in the course of studies in widely different settings. Qualitative methods have been increasingly used by clinical researchers to describe a variety of complex settings and difficult interactions. These include interactions among patients, families, and clinicians and among professional groups and organizations, in social communities and in everyday life. Strauss and Glaser are among some of those distinguished persons whose classic studies refer to the use of qualitative methods to illuminate relationships among professionals and between professionals and patients. Glaser's work (1965) on the issue of whether or not to tell patients they are dying, Strauss's work highlighting the virtually continuous process of negotiation in the specification of roles and relationships in health care settings (1978), and Corbin and Strauss's recent work on the life experience of family members who care for people with chronic illnesses in home settings (1988), are just a few examples. (cited in Sofaer, p.3). Their works underline the mounting importance and significance of qualitative methods and the role they can play when used as research tools. The field of clinical psychology has a rich history of experimental research across a number of domains: assessment, diagnosis, psychotherapy, psychopathology and many others. In fact, an emphasis on the generation of clinically relevant knowledge through rigorous research has been a hallmark of clinical psychology from its beginning as a distinguished field. (Roberts and Ilardi, p. 4). Many of the earliest clinical psychologists came to the field with a background in the natural sciences, combining their scientific tendencies with an interest in generating practical knowledge as a means of addressing a range of clinical problems. Such fortuitous merging of science and clinical practice led to the evolution of important qualitative methodologies. The fundamentally important research methods and principles detailed by Roberts and Ilardi underline the advancement of clinical psychology. They identify how qualitative research can construct a useful scientific approach, if undertaken systematically and with proper training, of course. The need of practical applications of different qualitative methods and optimal ways to resolve challenges of sampling, data collection techniques and analyses are also emphasized by Krahn and Putnam. According to them (cited in Harper et al. 2008), of all qualitative approaches, Discourse Analysis is probably one of the most complex to learn. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) basically refers to a type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted. With such dissident research, critical discourse analysts take explicit position, and thus want to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality. (Van Dijk, 1993). Critical research on discourse needs to satisfy a number of requirements in order to effectively realize its aims in clinical psychology. For example, it should heavily focus on social stresses and political problems and satisfactorily explain discourse structures in terms of social interactions and social structure. CDA should be interpretative and explanatory in order to maximize the results obtained through qualitative research. CDA also focuses on how discourse structures manipulate mental representations of people. At the global level of discourse, topics may influence what people see as the most important information of text or talk, and thus correspond to the top levels of their mental models. (Duin et al. 1988). This identifies a very general picture of how discourse is involved in dominance and in the production and reproduction of social inequality. It is the aim of CDA to examine such relationships in more detail. According to Harper (cited in Willig and Rogers, p. 434), there is a range of questions addressed by qualitative research methods because each method has a distinct theoretical tradition, analytic focus and epistemological framework. Some major kinds of qualitative methods included in clinical psychology are grounded theory, institutional ethnography, conversation analysis, attributional coding schemes, narrative analysis, discourse analysis and Q-methodology. Trainee therapists can be encouraged to practice identifying discourse and positions adopted by themselves and their clients in therapy. This kind of approach can be beneficial in broadening the framework explored in psychotherapy supervision. (Heenan, cited in Harper, 2001). According to Harper, qualitative researchers have increasingly begun to investigate professional practice where the focus of the study is the professionals themselves and they are realizing that qualitative methods can better address questions related to the description of different phenomena. This means that if we want to know how it actually feels like to experience a particular psychological problem, we may have to employ a qualitative strategy. Summing up, this essay is an attempt to outline the persisting importance and use of qualitative research in clinical psychology. In the field of clinical psychological research, the emphasis on qualitative methods almost always ensures a big feat. If such an approach is not applied to a research, some results are ensured which encompass uncertainty not only about answers, but also about what the right questions might be, about how they should be framed to get meaningful answers; and about where and to whom questions should be addressed. On the other hand, if qualitative approach is considered an integrative tool in clinical psychology, then understanding builds up as the research goes on. Works cited: Byrne, Michelle. “Ethnography as a qualitative research method.” Jul. 2001. 31 Aug. 2010. < http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FSL/is_1_74/ai_76653445/> Cook, T.D. and Reichordt, C.S. Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research. Beverly Hills: Sage. 1979. Print. Duin, A.H., Roen, D.H. and Graves, M.F. “Excellence or malpractice: the effects of headlines on readers’ recall and biases.” National Reading Conference Yearbook. 1988. Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine. 1967. Print. Goetz, J.P. and LeCompte, M.D. "Ethnographic research and the problem of data reduction: What do I do with the five drawers of field notes?" Vol. 12. 1981. Guba, E.G. and Linclon, Y.S. Do inquiry paradigms imply inquiry methadologies? Qualitative Approaches to Education; The Silent Scientific Resolution. New York: Praeger. 1988. Print. Harper, David. “Clinical Psychology.” 2001. 31 Aug. 2010. Harper, D.J., O’Conner, J., Self, P. and Stevens, P. “Learning to do Discourse Analysis: Accounts of supervisees and a supervisor.” 2008. 31 Aug. 2010. . Patton, M. Quinn. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd Edition. Sage Publications, Inc. 2002. Print. Roberts, M.C. and Ilardi, S.S. Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology. Illustrated. Wiley-Blackwell Publishers. 2003. Print. Sofaer, Shoshanna. “Qualitative Methods: What Are They and Why Use Them?” Dec 1999. 31 Aug. 2010. Van Dijk, A.T. “Critical Discourse analysis.” 1993. 31 Aug. 2010. Willig, Carla and Rogers, S. Wendy. The SAGE handbook of qualitataive research in psychology. Illustrated. SAGE Publishers. 2008. Print. Read More