نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 گروه روشها و برنامهریزی آموزشی و درسی، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار سنجش آموزش، گروه روشها و برنامهریزی آموزشی و درسی، دانشکده روان شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
3 دانشجوی دکتری برنامه ریزی درسی، گروه روشها و برنامهریزی آموزشی و درسی، دانشکده روان شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Objective
The present study aims to develop a comprehensive conceptual and practical framework to evaluate the quality of phenomenological research. While previous frameworks have mostly focused on general philosophical principles or superficial technical criteria, this study seeks to bridge the gap between philosophy and practice by providing both foundational and advanced indicators that are operationalizable and measurable. The framework particularly addresses the needs of both novice and experienced researchers by distinguishing between general (fundamental) and specific (advanced) criteria across all stages of phenomenological inquiry.
Method
Using a meta-synthesis method, the study systematically reviewed and analyzed existing literature on phenomenological methodology, encompassing classical philosophical texts, contemporary methodological critiques, and empirical studies that applied phenomenological approaches. Data were extracted from 73 key sources spanning Husserlian, Heideggerian, and Merleau-Pontian traditions as well as interpretative and descriptive phenomenology.
Findings
The data analysis led to the identification of 117 indicators for assessing the quality of phenomenological research and their categorization into eight macro-characteristics across eight domains: objectives, research questions, methodological appropriateness, sampling and data collection, data analysis, narrative reporting, interpretive accuracy, and contextual engagement. These characteristics were classified into two levels—general and specific—aligned with the philosophical foundations of phenomenology while remaining applicable and measurable. Triangulation of findings was performed through peer debriefing and member checking to enhance credibility. The framework reveals that high-quality phenomenological research requires more than adherence to procedural steps; it demands a deep understanding of the interplay between methodology, lived experience, and socio-cultural context. In the objectives dimension, specific criteria such as “uncovering the fundamental structure of lived experience” and “suspending presuppositions to achieve pure perception” align with Husserlian reduction and Van Manen’s (2017) emphasis on uncovering the essence of phenomena. In contrast, general criteria such as “exploring the foundational conditions of human awareness” resonate with broader philosophical commitments.
For research questions, specific criteria include “searching for the pre-reflective meaning of experience” and “capturing the phenomenon as it emerges in its context.” In contrast, general criteria stress the cultural and ontological alignment of questions. The framework also emphasizes methodological congruence, advocating for a strong existential connection between research problems and lived experience, and cautioning against eclecticism without philosophical coherence. Regarding sampling and data collection, the framework goes beyond mere purposive sampling by stressing participants’ ability for deep reflective narration and the importance of diversity, trust-building, and ethical engagement. Techniques like three-stage interviews and live, reflexive analysis during data collection were highlighted as innovative practices.
In data analysis, the framework supports immersion in the participant’s lifeworld, identification of meaning units, and reconstructing the psychological structure of the phenomenon while maintaining fidelity to experience. It innovatively operationalizes interpretive processes such as identifying invariant structures and intentionality. For validation, the study underscores that credibility stems from uncovering the true meaning and essence of experience, not just meeting checklists. Reflexive and critical self-awareness, member validation, philosophical-methodological control, and auditability are integrated as both general and specific criteria. Interpretive rigor is strengthened by maintaining a balance between depth of description and interpretation, remaining open to emergent categories, and engaging in reflective, multi-layered analysis that preserves the authenticity of experience while constructing meaning. Finally, engagement with the field is conceptualized not merely as data collection but as a collaborative, ethical, and interpretive process in which the researcher’s prolonged, empathetic presence enables access to deeper layers of meaning.
Conclusion
This study provides a nuanced and structured framework that operationalizes both classical and contemporary phenomenological principles into actionable, measurable criteria. It addresses major criticisms of prior models by integrating philosophical depth, methodological transparency, cultural sensitivity, and practical usability. The framework serves as a robust guide for improving the quality and evaluability of phenomenological research across disciplines such as education, psychology, and health sciences. Its two-tiered design makes it particularly suitable for guiding both novice researchers in meeting minimum quality standards and experienced researchers seeking philosophical and interpretive depth. This study contributes to the ongoing discourse on rigor and trustworthiness in qualitative research by offering a conceptual tool that remains faithful to phenomenological foundations while addressing the challenges of modern interdisciplinary contexts. Future research is recommended to test and refine the framework through empirical application in diverse settings and to explore its adaptability across phenomenological traditions.
This study transcends technical perspectives by evaluating phenomenological quality through the "integration of method, meaning, and ethics." The researcher becomes not merely an analyst but a "co-inhabitant of meaning." The proposed framework merges general and specific themes to offer operational indicators faithful to phenomenology's philosophical foundations. Authentic quality requires delving into experiential depths and critical reflexivity. The framework innovates by blending classical traditions with contemporary practical demands, redefining quality as "ethical-interpretive presence" in the field of meaning. Practical recommendations include using the framework in methodological training, developing evaluation tools, and expanding into interdisciplinary domains like psychology and nursing for further validation.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)