Qualitative Research in Psychiatry: A Beginner’s Guide

INTRODUCTION

A psychiatrist in the course of his work needs to explore all aspects of a psychological phenomenon in order to diagnose an illness or plan a strategy for its management. This includes exploring all aspects of the thoughts, emotions and behavior of patients. Descriptive methods of record keeping and studies have traditionally been the cornerstone of research into the study of human behavior but of late, quantitative research have gained dominance. Quantitative research methods, being objective, having clear understanding of the processes involved in the research were considered to have a higher validity and reliability. This along with measurable components like quantity, frequency and associations between various components justified by the “p” value, favored publication of quantitative research papers in journals.

Nevertheless, the past few years have witnessed a growing interest in qualitative research as a parallel method in medical research.¹ This is also observed in the recent rise of publications using qualitative methods. Even though in international purview, qualitative research is well established, in India it is yet to find its true place. One may often wonder what qualitative research entails and its know-how. We aim to familiarize the readers with the basics of qualitative research through the following paragraphs.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Qualitative research was first used by anthropologists and sociologists early in 20th century as a method of enquiry when they explored about cultures and groups. They reported by observing and talking to people about their lives. The 1960s saw a change brought about by emergent approaches to qualitative studies like the grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). With increasing recognition of qualitative contributions to medical research, a special issue of “the Psychologist” appeared in 1995 which was dedicated to qualitative studies. Since then, the importance of this form of research has been rising steadily more so with the improvement in the approaches and methodologies of researches.

WHAT IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH?

Qualitative research methods are usually employed early on in a research project when we know little about a phenomenon. For instance, when we want to explore the challenges faced by patients with mental disorders teaching at schools, we have less information to start with. In order to understand the condition in its entirety, we need to interview persons from among the patients, their colleagues or their family members who can give information on our study question. These interviews form a source of data (written or oral), different from the numerical data provided by quantitative studies. Qualitative studies involve seeking answers to the “what,” “when” and “how” of a phenomenon. The language data so collected by interviews are further subjected to qualitative data analysis methods. This gives a better understanding to the phenomena and frame concepts about it.

The goal of qualitative research has been defined as “the development of concepts which help us to understand social phenomena in natural (rather than experimental) settings, giving due emphasis to the meanings, experiences, and views of all the participants. The findings of a qualitative study can be a prelude to further quantitative approaches such as forming questionnaires.

HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM QUANTITATIVE METHODS?

All research, whether quantitative or qualitative, must involve an explicit, disciplined, systematic approach, using appropriate methods that answers the research question.

Yet, a frequent question is asked about the difference between these two methods. The first disclaimer is they both are not competitors rather they ideally should complement each other. The basic difference lies in their approaches to a phenomenon under study. This includes what they aim to achieve, their methods of data collection, the way these data are analyzed, the presentation of the results and the overall outcome of the study.^2,3

To illustrate these differences, we can consider a study on stress among 10th grade high school students. A qualitative study would try to explore the different conditions leading to stress among these students and how they manage them. The study will attempt to increase our understanding of stress in these students by examining various aspects like why this is caused, what is the impact and how do these students perceive and manage it. On the contrary, a quantitative study would include an assessment of biological parameters, psychological scales and other data to find ways to measure the stress. Whereas the qualitative approach can be holistic, the quantitative approach can be reductionist in its approach.

The methods of date collection also differ in the two. Qualitative studies collect information through interviews, observations or records. These are usually “language” data. The data so collected are in the natural or “real world” settings of the participant. Differing from this, the data collection in quantitative studies are done by using measurable parameters, scales and questionnaires and these are in “numerical” form. The data is collected in structured settings. Whereas a qualitative enquiry explores for the “why” and “what” of a phenomenon, the quantitative methods look for the “frequency” of the event by asking questions like “how often” and “how many.” Through its methods, qualitative research comes up with new ideas and hypotheses regarding a phenomenon. In contrast, quantitative researchers have a hypothesis to begin with and a clear view regarding different aspects of the research before data are collected.

A qualitative research question usually seeks to study a phenomenon in a special subgroup of a population such as ethnic groups or specific patient groups. This does not inherently aim at generalizability. In contrast, by eliminating all but measurable variables, quantitative approaches attempt to generalize the findings. Besides these, the role of the researcher also differs in both forms of study. He remains detached in quantitative research as an objective observer whereas he participates in the qualitative research, influencing the process. Thus, quantitative and qualitative methods are two different modes of inquiry where one can complement the another. A study incorporating both the methods can be more comprehensive, unbiased and allows for more accurate research.

RELEVANCE OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FOR PSYCHIATRY^4–7

The practice of psychiatry exposes the physician to various facets of mental disorders. Besides the psychological aspects, social and anthropological aspects also influence the course of illness. Given its unique characteristics and advantages of qualitative research, it is well suited to answer many questions that intrigue a researcher in psychiatry. Examples of research areas are given below:

• Developing questionnaires. Questionnaire design begins by conducting a primary qualitative study to understand what kind of variables can influence the subject.
• Establishing diagnostic criteria. Preliminary qualitative studies lead to wider and deeper understanding of a disorder under study. Subsequent qualitative methods can help to establish diagnostic criteria for the condition.
• Examining social and anthropological dimensions influencing an illness. The process of care seeking and compliance to treatment is affected by traditional and community beliefs about the illness, socioeconomic conditions and available resources. This can be identified and addressed by studies on care seeking behavior or other such studies that consider peoples’ attitude and beliefs.
• By understanding how patients and their carers interact with the healthcare system and how the care providers deliver care, policy changes by the government can be brought about.⁸

The impact of qualitative research in psychiatry can be manifold, from modifying the management strategies to reinforcing the healthcare system at the community level to providing suggestions for policy changes.

KNOW-HOW OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

RIGOR

With the researcher involvement being so high in all processes of the study, the risk of investigator bias is high. Triangulation, extreme case sampling and the use of topic guide for interviews are some methods that introduce rigor. Respondent validation, that is checking the themes back with the respondent for incongruency, and multiple coding by two or more researchers further enhance the rigor of the study.^14,15

IMPLICATIONS FOR PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH

Qualitative research is ideally suited for research into psychological and social domains. Mental disorders are influenced by an interplay of psychological, social and anthropological elements. A qualitative approach of studying metal health conditions can thus have a wide-ranging repercussion, ranging from improving treatment methods, improving care delivery and affecting policy changes.

REFERENCES

1. Crawford MJ, Ghosh P, Keen R. Use of qualitative research methods in general medicine and psychiatry: publication trends in medical journals 1990–2000. Int J Soc Psychiatry 2003;49(4):308–311. DOI: 10.1177/0020764003494007.

2. Srivastava AB, Kobiessy FH, Gold MS. Qualitative vs quantitative methods in psychiatric research: updated. Methods Mol Biol 2019;2011:23–37. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-9554-7_2.

3. Conde Gutiérrez F. Encounters and disencounters between qualitative and quantitative perspective in history of medicine. Rev Esp Salud Publica 2002;76(5):395–408.

4. Bassett R. Time to catch up…qualitative research in child and adolescent psychiatry. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2010;19(1):2.

5. Forsner T, Hansson J, Brommels M, et al. Implementing clinical guidelines in psychiatry: a qualitative study of perceived facilitators and barriers. BMC Psychiatry 2010;10:8. DOI: 10.1186/1471-244X-10-8.

6. Goering P, Boydell KM, Pignatiello A. The relevance of qualitative research for clinical programs in psychiatry. Can J Psychiatry 2008;53(3):145–151. DOI: 10.1177/070674370805300304.

7. Streiner DL. Qualitative research in psychiatry. Can J Psychiatry 2008;53(3):135–136. DOI: 10.1177/070674370805300301.

8. van der Watt ASJ, van de Water T, Nortje G, et al. The perceived effectiveness of traditional and faith healing in the treatment of mental illness: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2018;53(6):555–566. DOI: 10.1007/s00127-018-1519-9.

9. Bleiker J, Morgan-Trimmer S, Knapp K, et al. Navigating the maze: qualitative research methodologies and their philosophical foundations. Radiography (Lond) 2019;25(Suppl 1):S4–S8. DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2019.06.008.

10. Flick U. Qualitative research in social psychiatry—methods and applications. Psychiatr Prax 1995;22(3):91–96.

11. Ratnapalan S. Qualitative approaches: variations of grounded theory methodology. Can Fam Physician 2019;65(9):667–668.

12. Chapman AL, Hadfield M, Chapman CJ. Qualitative research in healthcare: an introduction to grounded theory using thematic analysis. J R Coll Physicians Edinb 2015;45(3):201–205. DOI: 10.4997/JRCPE.2015.305.

13. Carr EM, Zhang GD, Ming JHY, et al. Qualitative research: an overview of emerging approaches for data collection. Australas Psychiatry 2019;27(3):307–309. DOI: 10.1177/1039856219828164.

14. Mays N, Pope C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ 1995;311(6997):109–112. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.311.6997.109.

15. Collingridge DS, Gantt EE. The quality of qualitative research. Am J Med Qual 2019;34(5):439–445. DOI: 10.1177/1062860619873187.