|
Portfolio
Task 2: Analyzing a personal narrative interview Introduction The process of
analyzing the personal narrative is
for Crossley crucially about an attempt to understand the ‘content’ and
‘complexity of meanings’ (2000:88) That said it is possibly more
important to
first comprehend that the world and the individuals that populate it
are
diverse and complex. Equally the reality that these individuals inhabit
is
furthermore transient and changeable. This Ontological view of reality;
for the
researcher; recognizes the position of multiple realities (interpretive
ontology. Sparkes. 1992) that, ‘…the world is not an objective thing
out there
but a function of personal interaction and perception’ (Merriam.
1988:17). There
are similarities here with post-modernity in that the quest for the
‘one truth’
is an illusion. Individuals construct multiple realities in a similar
fashion
to that of the modern consumer, as Lyotard offers; ‘One
listens
to reggae, watches Westerns, eats MacDonald’s for lunch and local
cuisine for
dinner, wears Paris perfume in Tokyo and retro clothing in Hong Kong.’
(1993) However the
relativist may not be as mobile between
the realities as the consumer is for the variety of choices. The point
to make
here is that any attempt to ‘pin down’ and ‘categorize’ an individual
in a
finite way fails to grasp the individuals future potential whether such
futures
are actually freely chosen is a matter for another debate at another
time. One final
assumption that needs to be considered is
that of the nature of the relationship between the researcher and those
being
researched. In this qualitative study the researcher takes an
epistemological
stand point and interacts with those being researched in an attempt to
close or
bridge the gap between the two. (Cresswell. 1998:76) Furthermore the
researcher; rather than shy a way from any bias; accepts the position
as adding
a richness and value to the study. Getting
back
to Crossley’s process how do we attempt to analyse such a multiple
reality? The short answer is we don’t.
Rather than
attempt, I’d say unsuccessfully, to manipulate multiple realities in
totality for
the purposes of analysis why not reduce the problem into manageable
parts. Lieblich
agrees offering, ‘…life stories may be processed analytically by
breaking the
text into relatively small units of content… (et al. 1998:12). In
addition to
this Smith and Sparkes also offer a raft of analysis types from
conversational,
discourse and narrative which [they] suggest should be added to the
‘stockpot’
of social research methods (2005:235). This seems to make a great deal
of sense
with differing analysis types eliciting certain but not mutually
exclusive data
in manageable chunks. This piece of work
will utilize Crossleys’ suggested
narrative psychological analysis (2000:89-96) which does appear similar
to
other descriptions of content analysis (Lieblich et al. 1998, Smith and
Sparkes.2005:228) given that it deals with central themes and
paradigmatic
categories rather than a structural analysis. However, as referred to
before no
one ‘technique’ should be considered a panacea to conduct analysis
(1998:235). Familiarization
with the script Crossley (1998:89)
puts forward a chronological order
to the analysis starting with the familiarization by the researcher
with the
texts. Smith takes this still further suggesting that, “…the investigator
engaging in an interpretive
relationship with the transcript…not just transparently available in
the
interview or transcript. Rather, it has to be achieved through a
sustained
engagement with the text and a process of interpretation.” (1996:18) This is an
extremely time consuming process that
requires almost ‘living with the texts’ in that they need to be carried
on the
person for a while akin to a favorite paperback that can be dipped into
whenever the need arises. Thus, the text can be read via; one hopes; a
variety
of moods maybe eliciting something different in the interpretation of
these
vignettes. Narrative
Tone McAdams (1995)
cited in Crossley (2000), points out that,
‘narrative tone’ is the most persuasive feature of a personal narrative
in
adulthood.’ Yet Crossley pays limited
attention to it and seems to have glossed over this element not doing
it
justice. Denzin adds, that ‘the researcher begins an analysis by
identifying an
objective set of experiences in the subject’s life.’ (1989:146).
Furthermore,
for Bogdan & Biklen (1992), displaying the data adds clarity and
focus to
future analysis. It was therefore necessary to bolster Crossley’s
analysis which
allowed for both the identification of experiences and the clear
display of
data. It was felt that a
more graphical representation
would facilitate the grasp of the more holistic picture especially
during the
early stages of the analysis, coupled with an increase in the
descriptive
attributes (progressive, stable and regressive) that would allow for
more
detailed picture. Whilst the
narrative tone was being sought it soon
became clear that a singular overall tone was too reductionist and
greater
insight could be available through the fragmenting of the overall tone
into 3
distinct ‘threads’ – cricket, relationships and education. Fig1 The overall
narrative tone shows a graphical
representation of the combination of life threads; cricket, education
and relationships.
A border line referred to as a line of satisfaction separates the
pessimistic
(negative) from the optimistic (positive) episodes in the participants’
collection of vignettes. The linear
representation has been discarded in favor of a more area based diagram
allowing for the notion of ‘how much‘ optimism or pessimism which is
felt
better represents a particular ‘period’ in time rather than a specific
‘point’
in time for the participant. Moreover rather than peaks and troughs
that relate
to singular points in the life of the individual it is the area between
that
seems to show what could be considered as episodes of prolonged
optimism or
pessimism. The graphic shows that the overall narrative had much more
optimism
than pessimism but does not attempt to gloss over the importance or
interest of
specific high or low points. Whilst it is acknowledged that the tale
was full
of optimism; shown in Fig1; this is too reductionist and fails to tease
out
many realities hidden within the varying threads. Figs 2-4 attempt to
represent
the narrative tone of the individual threads and also point to
particular areas
of interest that may warrant closer investigation. Fig 2 The cricket
narrative tone graphically shows
the steady progressive climb from childhood to early manhood with a
highly optimistic
episode at the peak of his playing career at Fig
3 The
relationship narrative tone shows many interesting episodes from moving
away
from family to New Zealand, Durham and questioning NZ which appear
pessimistic through
to the more optimistic episodes of getting married and finally moving
back to
the UK. Interestingly as dramatic as this first appears the narrative
tone of
this life thread is optimistic, moreover with utilization of the trend
line such
optimism does appear here to be progressive . Fig
4 Finally;
the education narrative tone; represents the leaving of education for
cricket
followed by a episode of stability then a progressively optimistic
climb
through real estate exams, a degree and ultimately enrolling on a
Masters. The
addition of a trend line confirms the progressive optimistic narrative
tone. Presenting the
information in this way whilst on the
surface may appear reductionist does provide a general overview that
allows for
blocks of complex information to be understood and manipulated.
Hollaway and
Jefferson concur positing this sort of summary is used to ‘…begin to
convey
some kind of whole’ (2000:70) Imagery & Themes Having analyzed
the narrative tone Crossley now turns
to the imagery and themes created within the narrative, suggesting that
topic
areas be explored for the individual imagery that can in turn shed
light onto who
we are. This is a little difficult having only one interview although
that is
not to say that there is not real value in using this approach across
individuals or repeat analysis overtime but a singular interview limits
the
data sets to be compared and contrasted. This identification of imagery
drifts
into the discipline of semiotics or the ‘study of signs.’ For instance, 'What differentiates a polite
from an impolite greeting, a fashionable from an unfashionable
garment?'
(Culler 1985, 93); the investigation of such practices involves trying
to make
explicit what is usually only implicit. The
researcher can attempt to make meaning for particular uses of language
or the
juxtaposition of ideas that could illuminate the study. Bogdan &
Biklen
further posit, "Meaning" is the primary concern to the qualitative
approach (1992). The suggestion for
Crossley is that a specific set of
chronological topic areas (see appendices 1-4) is covered – Life
chapters, Key
events, Significant people, Future Script,
Current problem and Personal ideology. Whilst there is
scope for the
precise content of the topic covered nevertheless the actual
processional
journey did feel a little rigid at times. So much so in fact the latter
topic
areas gleaned little information as compared to the initial topics (see
appendix 1 and 4). This could have been in part due to actual length of
interview being too long or just not a stimulating set of questions for
the
participant. The information
collected in the tabulated format
(Crossley. 2000;89-96) was rather difficult to manage at times with the
content
seemingly giving way to a more messy and loose interpretation of
episodes. This
can be seen with the Phase 1: Childhood – primary and secondary
schooling (see
appendix 1) were the imagery is difficult to interpret. Contrast this
with
Phase 2: (see appendix 1) which elicits
a much more clear picture of what may be going on between the
‘positive’ New
Zealand (NZ) and the ‘negative’ (UK). The language stands out and on
closer
inspection it is apparent that other more semiotic information is
available.
The participant associates a positive stance with ‘team’ and a negative
stance
with ‘individuality.’ Note the language associated with NZ; ‘family’,
‘team’,
‘together’, ‘success’, ‘we won’ and ‘no premaddonas.’ Now contrast this
with
the language used for the UK; ‘individual’, ‘personal’, ‘themselves’,
‘own’,
‘me stuffed’, ‘selfish’ and the use of ‘I.’ This is the value of
Crossley’s
personal narrative analysis as it enables the clear presentation of a
number of
elements that can then be group or sequenced and then themed. Those who
would
suggest that this form of analysis reduces the narrative to lowest
common
denominator are correct but that fails to appreciate that this form of
analysis
should be part of a raft of measures utilizing many differing forms of
analysis
eliciting alternative realities. Conclusion Having conducted
Crossleys analysis with amendments
it is clear to me that this analysis has merit. For instance it is
clear and
relatively concise as a tool to aid the conduct of analysis. However,
although
reference was made to the necessity of ‘narrative tone’ it was felt
that not
enough emphasis was given to this particular area. As such additions
were
offered that allowed for greater depth in the potential for analysis
(i.e.
progressive, stable and regressive). The sequencing of topics in a sort
of
chronology serves to order the mind of the participant but I have to
say much
of the information elicited by the participant did not follow this
pattern. In
fact the apparent adhoc nature of this memory retrieval did mimic the
relationship our memory has with smell, in that, a particular memory or
episode
triggers another. Although it is acknowledge that such a chronology
serves as
much purpose for the researcher as the participant. Furthermore
nations of ‘tone’ as clarity or
display (Bogdan & Biklen.1992) seemed under-represented in textual
form and
would benefit the researcher in a more graphical form enabling at a
glance the
holistic view of episodes and narratives, something that is more
difficult and
time consuming with texts. Any analysis by
itself will reduce the narrative down
to particular elements, in this case imagery and then themes, but as
previously
stated this should not be seen in isolation and is not mutually
exclusive as an
analysis. Moreover such an analysis should form one part of a tool kit
of differing
types of analyses that can be used by the researcher to elicit various
realities that illuminates the life of those we research.
References Bogdan, R.
C., & Biklen,
S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theory and
methods. Cresswell.
(1998) Qualitative
inquiry and research design; London Sage. Coffey, A
and Atkinson, P.
(1996) Making sense of qualitative data. Crossley,
M. (2000)
Introducing narrative psychology. Buckingham;OU Press Culler, J.
(1989) Hartman
and Derrida. In Rajnath (Ed.) Deconstruction. A Critique. Denzin, N.
K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Holloway,
W and Jefferson,
T. (2000) Doing qualitative research differently. Lieblich
et al. (1998)
Narrative research: McAdams,
D. P. (1993). The Stories We Live By:
Personal Myths and
the Making of Self. Merriam,
S. (1988). Case
study research in education: A qualitative approach. Smith, B
and Sparkes, A. (2005)
Analyzing talk in a qualitative inquiry: Exploring possibilities,
problems and
tensions. Quest, 57, 2,
213-242 |