↓ Skip to main content

Methodological considerations related to nurse researchers using their own experience of a phenomenon within phenomenology

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Advanced Nursing, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
36 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
137 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Methodological considerations related to nurse researchers using their own experience of a phenomenon within phenomenology
Published in
Journal of Advanced Nursing, November 2016
DOI 10.1111/jan.13198
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This paper summarises phenomenology and discusses how nurses can use their own experiences as data and maintain rigour within the method. It explores how data from researchers experiencing the phenomenon of interest could be used to explicate assumptions and pre-understandings and may also be used as data. Whilst the ethnographic concept of insider research has gained popularity, the notion of researcher as participant in phenomenology is relatively new. The lived experience of a phenomenon is unique to each person and utilisation of the nurse researcher's experiences of the phenomenon should be considered for inclusion as data. Discussion paper. Articles from 2001-2015 in the CINAHL and PubMed databases were identified using keywords such as 'insider research', 'phenomenology', 'bracketing' and 'qualitative research'. Additionally, reference lists from articles used were examined to identify additional literature. Phenomenology is a valuable research method. Usability, credibility, trustworthiness and auditability of data collected must be considered to ensure rigour and maintain orientation to the phenomenon under investigation. Nurse researchers may be interviewed as participants if these four principles are considered and methods used are made explicit. Utilising appropriate research methods is as important as getting clinical practice correct to advance knowledge and benefit those under our care. We recommend using the researchers' experience as a data source to gain a complete picture of the phenomenon under investigation. Using the approach proposed here, nurses can ensure they are incorporating all data sources available while maintaining research rigour. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 137 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 18%
Student > Master 18 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 11%
Researcher 10 7%
Other 6 4%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 40 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 47 34%
Social Sciences 17 12%
Arts and Humanities 6 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 42 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2019.
All research outputs
#2,138,828
of 32,430,365 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Advanced Nursing
#721
of 7,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,490
of 440,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Advanced Nursing
#32
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,430,365 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,524 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.