Monday, 3 March 2008
Do Clinicians make good researchers?
I attended an interesting session today in the University about Qualitative research. Within this we looked at the skills and techniques that can be used by the researcher to help them to gain a better understanderstanding of the phenomenon or an individual's experience of this phenomenon. It struck me that many, if not all, of these skills are skills that a clinician uses routinely with patients or clients, such as encouraging, leaving pauses between questions and answers, gentle probing and so on. Does it therefore follow that clinicians make natural and effective researchers when using a qualitative design? I wait with interest for any thoughts on this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for visiting our blog.
Number of visitors to our site
Visitors from 16/05/08 (trial widget)
Contact Us
2 comments:
In the course of doing qualitative data collection for my doctoral studies this is a question I have pondered myself. I was a bit overly confident, I suspect, that I could interview people in a 'person-centred' way, with my knowledge of open questions, reflections, active listening etc. Indeed, these did help - I am a good listener, and could recognise the need to nudge the interviewee back towards the focus of the interview. HOWEVER, I have also had cause to contemplate the difference between being a therapeutic listener and being a researcher listener. On re-reading my transcripts, I can see points where I have chipped in with a therapeutically orientated comment, if, for example, the interviewee was telling me about something difficult in her life. The consequence of this was to veer the interview into a counselling mode, which ended in tears (which we retrieved, and felt okay about). I think that I had an effect which went beyond the normal expectations of a research interview, and was certainly beyond what the particpant was lead to believe would happen in the interview, on the consent form.
So, yes, I think there is a tremendous overlap between the skills of an OT and the skills needed for qualitative research, but the researcher needs to keep in focus what the differences between the two roles are.
Janet Finch has written some interesting stuff on the ethics of being a female researcher interviewing women, in which situation it is often easy (and possibly slightly abusive) to dig deep very quickly.
Clinicians make great scientists - clinical scientists. I also think clinicians don't need to JUST consider using qualitative methods (not that I have anything against qualitative, but in occupational therapy it's often emphasised!).
The important thing is to know what is your research question? And then what is the best way of investigating this question...
And finally - how can I tell people about the findings so they translate from 'research' to 'therapy'.
I'm really committed to being a clinical scientist - to me it's imperative if I want to be able to justify to anyone that what I do has value.
Post a Comment