Interpretive Description (and how it differs from Qualitative Description) with Ashley Hyde, RN, PhD
Hello Qualitative Mind,
I’m honoured to welcome my friend and colleague, Ashley Hyde, RN PhD, to the blog today to speak to us about her experience using interpretive description in her research and the ways in which interpretive description differs from qualitative description (a common question). If you need a refresher on qualitative description and what it is before diving into Ashley’s post below, we wrote a blog post on this topic back in April of 2020 - you can read it here.
Let’s welcome Ashley to the Quali Q community today!
Like many graduate students or novice researchers, I (Ashley) started the research process with an idea of what I wanted to explore. My research topic (understanding the experience of choice) was grounded in my experiences as a clinician and a desire to improve care for patients and their caregivers-so off I went to find my method.
I wanted to understand how family caregivers caring for their older relatives experienced choice when accessing supportive living services (which sounds like a mouthful, I know!).
Clearly, given my focus on experiences and the concept of choice, my study was amenable to exploration through a number of different approaches. However, it was my clinical grounding and desire to find solutions to what I perceived as a clinical problem that led me to Interpretive Description.
Interpretive description was first described in detail by Dr. Sally Thorne (& team) in 1997 and was borne out of a desire to describe qualitative inquiry that was being conducted that was not necessarily congruent with more traditional approaches but was still useful, particularly in clinical disciplines like nursing. If you’ve looked into using interpretive description and are thinking parts of it sound familiar, you’re not wrong! Elements of methodological borrowing can be seen in the ways interpretive description encourages constant comparative analysis (grounded theory); appreciates multiple ways of data collection, including participation observation (ethnography); and acknowledges multiple realities contributing to the subjective human experience (phenomenology).
So, where does the uniqueness of interpretive description lie? How is this method distinct from qualitative description? These were questions that I continued to grapple with as I approached my doctoral defence. To me, the uniqueness or defining feature rests in its emphasis on the generation of clinically relevant knowledge. Further, within the analysis process, the researcher must go beyond reporting the findings, to interpret what their findings mean in relation to each other, and the study context. In essence, Thorne encourages users of interpretive description to, “lead their eventual reader toward a kind of knowing that was not possible prior to your study” (Thorne, 2016, p. 181).
“Thorne encourages users of interpretive description to, “lead their eventual reader toward a kind of knowing that was not possible prior to your study” (Thorne, 2016, p.181). ”
Yes, I would agree that on the surface, interpretive description appears to be a relatively generic approach to qualitative inquiry that, perhaps, is not far from its cousin, qualitative description. It is not overtly critical in nature, nor does it readily address issues of power and inequality. It doesn’t aim to generate theory, nor does it particularly encourage exploration of theory prior to starting your research. However, what it does offer is flexibility to explore clinically relevant topics, free from a predetermined theoretical mandate or worldview, and ensure the construction of data that is ultimately relevant to clinical practice and patient care.
What do you think; do you agree with Ashley’s comment on the ways that interpretive description differs from qualitative description? We’d love to hear your thoughts! Leave us a comment or send us an email to info@qualiq.ca and let us know your thoughts on today’s post.
Talk soon,
Maira
References:
Thorne, S. E. (2016). Interpretive description : qualitative research for applied practice (Second edition.). Routledge.