I need help in reviewing this article. I have attached the article and the reference. I have to answer the questions below after reviewing the attached article. This assignment should be a total of a

For each tradition, the authors describe its purpose and key characteristics, outline commonly associated fieldwork activities, describe analytic approaches within the tradition, and then discuss strengths and challenges of the approach.

In clinical work, cotmselors approach clients with a set of core assumptions about the practice of counseling—or theoretical orientation—and apply this accordingly throughout the dtira- tion of counseling in consideration of various client, setting, and treatment factors. Similar to how counselors rely on a theoretical orientation to guide professional practice, counsel- ing researchers use research traditions to navigate qualitative research design decisions. Moreover, Kline (2008) asserted that selecting a research tradition congruent with one's re- search orientation and study purpose, and infusing it in all phases of qualitative inquiry, is a criterion for trustworthiness (i.e., coherence). Given its importance in framing the design and maximizing rigor of qualitative inquiry, the purpose of this article is to provide an overview of major qualitative research traditions and illustrate how they are infused into various qualitative research design components.

First, it is important to briefly discuss the concept of research paradigm. While the terms research paradigm and research tradition are used often interchangeably in the litera- ture, we conceptualize them as interdependent and essential components of the counseling researcher's orientation for qualitative inquiry. Hays and Singh (2011 ) noted that research paradigms are belief systems based on core philosophies of science (i.e., ontology, epistemology, axiology, rhetoric, and methodology), and research traditions are methodologi- cal approaches and design strategies that are influenced by paradigms. Collectively, they serve as a foundational guide or blueprint that highlights the counseling researcher's asstimp- tions, values, and activities related to the scientific pursuit for a particular research topic.

Common research paradigms include positivism, post- positivism, social constructivism, critical theory, feminism, and queer theory. Scholars operating under each paradigm attribute differential value to the nature of reality or truth of a phenomenon (ontology), knowledge construction (epistemol- ogy), infusion of researcher values in design and attention to the research relationship (axiology), role of researcher and participant voice in research process and data presentation (rhetoric), and considerations for scientific rigor (methodol- ogy).

As attention to qualitative approaches increased across a variety of disciplines, the notion that scientific inquiry should attend to the context in which individuals live and experience phenomena became more apparent because find- ings from positivistic approaches were often not applicable to marginalized and underresearched groups (Patton, 2002; Ponterotto, 2005).

Thus, qualitative research today tends to be predominated by four particular paradigms: social construc- tivism, critical theory, feminism, and queer theory. Because of space limitations, we recommend readers review Patton (2002), Ponterotto (2005), and Guba and Lincoln (2005) for excellent, detailed discussions of these paradigms.

•Qualitative Research Traditions In this section, we present six qualitative research traditions:

grounded theory, phenomenology, consensual qualitative research (CQR), ethnography, narratology, and participa- tory action research (PAR). Although there are 15 or more research traditions used in counseling and education (see Creswell, 2007; Hays & Singh, 2011 ; Patton, 2002), counsel- ing scholars have presented studies using these six qualitative traditions consistently or identified them as emerging in the profession.

For each tradition, we describe its purpose and key characteristics, outline commonly associated fieldwork activities, describe analytic approaches within the tradition, and then discuss strengths and challenges of the approach.

(Table 1 displays research design components of each research tradition.) We use a common research topic throughout the article—substance use among adolescents—to illustrate simi- larities and distinguishing features for the traditions.

Grounded Theory Grounded theory is one of the most influential research tra- ditions in education and the social sciences today (Patton, 2002).

The purpose of groimded theory is to generate data that are based or grounded in participant experiences and Dánica G.

Hays, Department of Counseling and Human Services, Oid Dominion University; Chris Wood, Department of Counsel- ing and School Psychology, Seattle University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dánica G.

Hays, Department of Counseling and Human Services, Old Dominion University, 110 Education Building, Norfolk, VA 23517 (e-mail:

[email protected]).

© 2011 by the American Counseling Association.

All rights reserved.

288 Journal ofCounseling& Development • Summer 2011 Volume 89 Qualitative Traditions and Research Design TABLE 1 Qualitative Research Traditions and Design Considerations Paradigmatic Assumptions Primariiy post- positivistic (Corbin & Strauss, 2008), with increased attention to sociai constructiv- ism (see Charmaz, 2006).

Truth is contextual.

approximated, and refined with additionai examination, arguing a need for theory consensus for shared knowiedge and greater appiicability.

Primarily constructivist.

IVIuitipie reaiities exist and data thoroughly reflect participant perspectives and are contextuaiiy reievant.

Combination of postpositivist and constructivist.

Researchers report in third person com- monaiities among participants, vaiue the researcher- participant mutuai influence on one an- other.

Research Goals To generate and vaiidate theory for a particuiar phenom- enon.

Research questions are constructed to identify processes and patterns to con- struct a modei.

To describe the mean- ing or essence of participant experience of a phenomenon.

Research questions solicit direct and conscious participant experiences.

To deveiop consensus among research- ers and participants regarding participant experience of a phenomenon and its general appiicabiiity.

Research questions evaiuate participant experience and broader theoreti- cai processes and constructs.

Methodology Data Analysis Grounded Theory Uses a variety of purposive sampiing methods and moves toward theoreticai sampiing as theory is defined and verified (i.e., saturation is achieved).

Sampie sizes may range from 20 to 60 individuals (Creswell, 2007).

Relies primariiy on interviewing and ob- servation methods.

immerse seif in transcripts: identify iarge domains (open codes) to create a codebook: use constant comparison to refine codebook:

identify reiation- ships among codes (axial coding): identify causai conditions, in- tervening conditions.

and consequences; use seiective coding to further refine theory: look for cen- trai idea, variation.

and saturation of the data:

and construct a visuai portrayal of the theory (see iHays & Singh, 2011).

Phenomenology Uses a variety of sampling methods.

with recommended sample sizes of 5-25 (Polkinghorne, 1989).

Primariiy interviews.

although supple- mented by observa- tions, documents, and visual media.

Bracket assumptions.

identify nonrepetitive and nonoverlap- ping statements in interview transcripts (horizontaiization).

and create tex- tural and structural descriptions of the experience.

Consensual Quaiitative Research Uses a variety of purposeful random sampiing methods.

with 8-15 individu- áis participating in one or two interviews (8-10 questions per interview).

Identify domains and core ideas and per- form cross-anaiysis (general, typical, variant, and rare categories).

Essential Trustwor- thiness Strategies Triangulation of data sources, prolonged engagement, per- sistent observation.

thick description.

Member checking.

triangulation of data sources, thick description.

Member checking.

triangulation of data sources, trianguia- tion of researchers.

use of auditor, stabil- ity checks.

Data Presentation Present axial and selective codes.

Present modei that depicts causai and intervening conditions and consequences.

Present a list or model of constructs that relate to texturai and structural descriptions.

Examine and report researcher bias and consensus process.

Data may be presented with quantitative data.

The report should at least outline general and typical categories and include quotes or core ideas to il- lustrate each domain.

A chart or other visual model of the relationships among categories across domains is aiso usefui, with at least 3 cases to establish a relationship.

Primarily constructivist.

To identify sociai pat- terns and norms for a cuiture-sharing group.

Research questions focus on individuáis, processes, events, and outcomes of a particuiar site.

Ethnography Uses a variety of purpo- Describe the compo- sive sampling meth- ods, with homoge- neous and maximum variation sampiing particularly usefui.

Sample size range in accordance with size of culture-sharing group.

nents of the group, identify cuitural pat- terns and compare to those of other cuiturai groups, and interpret the cuiture-sharing group.

Prolonged engage- ment, persistent observation, thick description.

Provide a cultural nar- rative that includes participants' situated meanings.

{Continued) Journal ofCounseling& Development • Summer 2011 • Volume 89 289 Hays & Wood TABLE 1 {Continued^ Qualitative Research Traditions and Design Considerations Paradigmatic Assumptions Constructivist (Gergen & Davis, 1985;Shotter& Gergen, 1989).

Primarily constructivist.

critical theory, and feminist.

Research Goals To further under- standing of human experience through narrative conceptions of phenomena or identity.

To empower partici- pants and transform settings and appiy findings to reai-worid probiems.

Research questions are solution-oriented for a specific problem within a specific context.

Metliodology Data Analysis Narratoiogy Uses a variety of purposive sampling methods.

Primariiy interview data can be suppie- mented by observa- tions, documents.

and visual media.

Emphasis on securing rich coiiection of the narrative. Re- searchers organize data in light of the storied meaning.

creating texturai and structural depiction of the experiences exemplified by the narrative.

Participatory Action Research Although a variety of purposive sampiing methods are suit- abie, comprehensive sampling is ideai.

Researchers criticaily refiect on their power and how power is used throughout the research process.

Essential Trustwor- thiness Strategies "Pragmatic validity" (Hoshmand, 2005:

truth value is contin- gent on both narrator and audience perceiv- ing utiiity, member checking, triangula- tion of data sources.

thici< description of narrative.

Member checl

persistent observa- tion, and refiexivity.

Data Presentation Research report can be story form or "framed themati- cally within a theory generating project" (Hoshmand, 2005, p.

184).

Present directiy ap- piicabie findings to l

Note. Data sources = participants.

perspectives with the ultimate goal of theory development.

Counseling researchers seek to describe and explain for a particular phenomenon the sequences, processes, conditions, and actions (i.e., a theoretical framework or model; Corbin & Strauss, 2008).

Grounded theorists use primarily an inductive approach, constructing and synthesizing categories to move fi'om simple to more complex understandings of a phenom- enon; however, there are variations in how much previous literature guides design throughout the research process (see Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Glaser, 1978).

Counseling researchers using grounded theory engage in fieldwork activities that allow them to remain close to the data and intentional in exploring, describing, predicting, and explaining phenomena for local (for a particular context/ setting) or grand (across multiple contexts/settings) theories.

Researchers initiate data collection with purposive samples and generate hypotheses for a construct that are tested through additional rounds of data collection using participants who can provide rich accounts for particular theoretical constructs (i.e., theoretical sampling). By engaging in simultaneous and increasingly theory-driven data collection and analysis—even in initial fieldwork—counseling researchers work toward uncovering a core category or central idea that can both unite constructs and account for variation of a phenomenon (Corbin & Strauss, 2008).

Through interviews and observations, counseling research- ers identify general domains provided mainly by participants (open codes) and develop an initial codebook that is revised using a constant comparison method. Constant comparison is a cyclical process of collecting and analyzing data in search of convergent and divergent categories, using coding structures from previous rounds of analysis to inform future data analysis. As additional data are collected to refine the codebook, axial codes, or open codes that are collapsed into larger categories based on relationships among them, are identified. Next, selective codes are created to capture patterns and sequences among axial codes. As coding proceeds from open coding to selective coding, counseling researchers look for causal conditions (factors influencing a phenomenon), intervening conditions (ways participants respond to causal conditions), and consequences (results of intervening condi- tions for participants).

Saturation of data, where there are no new data to build or reflate a particular theory, tj^ically occurs at the axial coding phase (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Hays & Singh, 2011).

An example ofthe use of grounded theory is the exploration of the recovery process for adolescents who abuse prescrip- tion medications. A counseling researcher would conduct interviews and observations of clients at a particular agency (or across counseling settings to develop a more transferable theory), soliciting information about their substance use; cognitive and affective states before, during, and after use; contextual factors that may relate to use; and counseling interventions in which they participated. Throughout data collection and analysis, a counseling researcher would develop and verify a theory to describe and explore a central idea or 290 Journal of Counseling & Development • Summer 2011 • Volume 89 Qualitative Traditions and Research Design phenomenon (substance use) and its variations for adolescents.

Additionally, the researcher would assess for causal conditions (e.g., family dynamics, substance use history, peer substance use, mental health concerns), intervening conditions (e.g., participant responses to counseling, changes in family and peer relationships), and consequences (e.g., substance use).

In sum, grounded theory as an approach has a high degree of structure that emphasizes collecting large amounts of data, typically in the form of interviews and observations (Hays & Singh, 2011). It also focuses on the interplay of researcher and data that influences theory development and verification (Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2008).

A major challenge, however, is the tension among grounded theorists related to what constitutes true grounded theory.

Contemporary theorists (Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2008) assert that prior lit- erature and researcher bias should be included in how a theory is developed and verified. Glaser (1978), however, argued that allowing researcher subjectivity and previous literature to influence theory development dilutes the groundedness of the approach. Other challenges with this approach include the time- and labor-intensive nature associated with collecting and analyzing large amounts of data as well as articulating the degree of transferability and the contexts to which theories can be applied (Hays & Singh, 2011).

Phenomenology Whereas grounded theory intends to saturate data to gener- ate theory, the sole purpose of phenomenology is to describe the depth and meaning of participants' lived experiences.

Specifically, phenomenologists seek to understand the indi- vidual and collective internal experience for a phenomenon of interest and how participants intentionally and consciously think about their experience (Wertz, 2005), valuing subjective experience and the connection between self and world (Hays & Singh, 2011).

Counseling researchers identify a phenomenon of inter- est and then refrain from adding their own judgment about a phenomenon (i.e., epoche), approaching it with a fi-esh perspective and bracketing their assumptions. They seek to understand the phenomenon through the eyes of those who have direct, immediate experience with it.

Through interview- ing, researchers attempt first to understand the Lebenswelt or life-world of a participant and then search for collective perspectives across participants (Wertz, 2005).

As they move back and forth through data, researchers seek the essence as well as variations of the experience or phenomenon being investigated (Moustakas, 1994).

Moustakas (1994) identified four key steps to phenom- enological data analysis. First, researchers bracket their experiences, as described above. Second, for each interview transcript in a process known as horizontalization, they iden- tify all nonrepetitive and nonoverlapping statements relevant to the experience under investigation (i.e., invariant meaning units).

Next, researchers relate and cluster invariant meaning units to describe the textures (meaning and depth) of the ex- perience, in what is referred to as textural description. Finally, similar to axial coding in grounded theory (Hays & Singh, 2011), researchers seek multiple meanings and tensions in the textural description and create a structural description.

Researchers may choose to develop a list or visual model to represent participants' experiences, creating a composite textural-structural description (Moustakas, 1994).

A phenomenological study that applies the adolescent sub- stance use research example is investigating the phenomenon of abusing alcohol. A counseling researcher could bracket his or her own assumptions of or experiences with alcohol use and then interview adolescents who have direct experience with alcohol abuse.

As interviews are conducted, a researcher would seek in-depth information with an overarching goal of identifying individual and shared experiences with alcohol abuse. Identified invariant meaning units might be physi- ological effects, various triggers, and affect throughout use.

A researcher would then collapse and thickly describe units in a meaningful manner (textural description) and seek variations in participant experiences for the units (structural description).

Finally, a researcher would present a detailed description of alcohol abuse across participants.

Phenomenology is a tradition congruent with counseling because assessing detailed information about client experi- ences is a natural part of professional practice. Additionally, it has strong philosophical underpinnings and is an ideal ap- proach for understanding individuals' common experiences of a phenomenon. There are two challenges with phenomenol- ogy. First, researchers need to carefiilly select participants who have direct experience with the phenomenon rather than simply those who have perspectives on the experience. Second, they may have difficulty bracketing experiences and deciding how and to what extent these assumptions are introduced to the study (Creswell, 2007).

Consensual Qualitative Research Consensual qualitative research (CQR) incorporates aspects of grounded theory, phenomenology, and other traditions.

Hill and her colleagues (Hill et al., 2005; Hill, Thompson, & Williams, 1997) developed CQR to feature participant per- spectives for an experience while including several methods to increase applicability. Consensus is the distinguishing feature of CQR; consensus involves consistency of data across partici- pants and judges (researchers) and the use of a collaborative process and shared power within a research team as well as between the research team and participants. Hill et al. (2005) identified four key components of CQR: open-ended questions in semistructured interviews; judges to arrive at consensus throughout the data analysis process; at least one auditor to evaluate all data analysis stages; and the use of domains, core ideas, and cross-analyses as data analysis steps.

In CQR, counseling researchers develop either set or rotat- ing research teams to conduct semistructured interviews with Journal ofCounseling& Development • Summer 2011 • Volume 89 291 Hays & Wood participants deemed knowledgeable about a phenomenon or experience (Hill et al., 2005). Research team members inde- pendently segment interview data into categories or domains and identify core ideas (i.e., data descriptions or summaries within domains); members then reach consensus on the do- mains and core ideas. The third step involves cross-analysis, whereby team members independently, and then with con- sensus, identify frequencies of domains or categories across participants. Frequency labels include the following: general (all or all but one case), typical (more than half of the cases up to the cutoff for general), variant (at least two cases up to the cutoff of fypical), and rare (used for sample sizes greater than 15,2-3 cases). Finally, an auditor checks the raw data to detennine the accuracy of domains, core ideas, and frequency counts and provides feedback at every data analysis stage (Hill et al., 2005).

For the example regarding adolescent substance use, a study using CQR might involve exploring the effectiveness of group counseling for adolescents with a variety of substance use concerns. A counseling research team may be interested in developing a treatment manual to use for future groups and perceive the adolescents in a particular group, then, as coresearchers or experts in effective treatment. Through semistructured interviews, members of a set research team of four solicit information about participants' perspectives on the group as well as reported successes and challenges related to substance use since attending group counseling.

Domains might include relapse incidences, group cohesion, group counseling challenges, counseling techniques, and the counseling relationship; a core idea for counseling techniques (domain) would include a summary of techniques participants identify as helpfiil (i.e., ñeshed-out domain). Cross-analysis might reveal a general category of homework review (i.e., core category of counseling techniques). An auditor would review data files and meeting notes after team members reached consensus at each step of data analysis. Finally, researchers would present general and typical categories related to group counseling for adolescents with substance use problems.

CQR offers an approach that values collaboration and data consistency because counseling researchers identify participant experience to inform theory and allow for greater applicabil- ity. An advantage of CQR is that it provides the researcher a thorough description of phenomenon and allows for theory development (so it is ideal when a study calls for investigat- ing theory and furthering understanding of phenomenon).

Researchers emphasize shared power throughout the research process to help assist with researcher bias and build stronger research relationships. For those who do not prefer frequency analysis of qualitative data, CQR may create some epistemo- logical tensions during data analysis (Hays & Singh, 2011).

Ethnography Ethnography is cited as qualitative inquiry's earliest tradition.

It involves examining social, behavioral, and linguistic norms and patterns of a culture-sharing group (Creswell, 2007) or cultural expressions of process and experience (Hays & Singh, 2011).

With its roots in anthropology, early ethnographic re- search offered firsthand accounts of a culture-sharing group, obtained through prolonged engagement and presented in monographs. As other disciplines integrated the tradition, ethnographies transitioned to examine "slice of life" daily activities and social relations within urban areas as well as group socialization processes (Hays & Singh, 2011).

The major activities in ethnography involve intensive field- work for a particular case (i.e., whole culture-sharing group), and these groups are quite diverse and can range from a small group of school counselors or clients to a whole geographic region. After identifying the cultural group and gaining entry through gatekeepers and stakeholders, researchers become immersed in the group. Counseling researchers conducting ethnographic research engage in fieldwork that includes participant observation and prolonged engagement to gather information about the cultural identities and shared patterns among participants (Creswell, 2007; Patton, 2002).

As the researchers immerse themselves in the group, they identify broad categories and patterns that define the case, collapsing data throughout data collection to "tell a story" of the group. Wolcott (1994) identified three key aspects of ethnographic analysis: (a) description, or the use of a chrono- logical or other systematic "order" to describe a cultural group by describing the processes, events, activities, and individuals within the case; (b) analysis, or the written and visual sorting process to identify cultural patterns within the case as well as in comparison to others; and (c) interpretation of a culture- sharing group. During these steps, counseling researchers examine situated meanings, or ways individuals make meaning of events within their group, as well as compare data from various chronological stages of data collection and various settings for the group (Creswell, 2007).

A study using the ethnographic tradition might be examin- ing adolescent substance use for a particular neighborhood.

Counseling researchers may build relationships over time with key stakeholders in the neighborhood (e.g., adolescents), and through sampling methods such as opportunistic and snowball sampling (see Patton, 2002), they may observe and interview individuals for shared patterns and experiences. The final report would present a description of the behaviors, attitudes, contextual factors, and situated meanings of adolescents who use substances within a particular neighborhood.

In addition to ethnography's extensive focus on culture, social patterns, and collaborative relationships with par- ticipants, it may also be a good approach to conceptualize, build hypotheses, and test outcome data for groups typically marginalized in society (Hays & Singh, 2011).

To complete a rigorous ethnography, however, counseling researchers should use an anthropological lens to view data and have an under- standing of systems and be mindfiil of the extensive nature of data collection and its impact on time and other resources.

292 Journal ofCounselingSc Development • Summer 2011 • Volume 89 Qualitative Traditions and Research Design Additionally, given the extensive nature of data collection, there is a possibility that counseling researchers could "go native" (become overly enmeshed in the system—^perhaps a special concern for counselors trained to maintain appropriate boundaries with the "other").

Thus, counseling researchers are to be continually aware of their impact on the system they are studying (Creswell, 2007).

Narratology The goal of qualitative research using a narratological tradition is to tinderstand the human experience through interpreting narrative forms of qualitative research data. Other qualitative research traditions may use narrative data but not approach the research from a narrative perspective.

In narratology, the mean- ing comes fi-om the story: Form as the structure of the narrative is central to the meaning. Hoshmand (2005) posited that nar- ratology is a mode of qualitative inquiry informed by narrative theory as opposed to other qualitative methodologies that may explore narrative data but not fi-om a narrative perspective.

Thus, narratology is both an endeavor to extrapolate meaning from a "story" (as with personal or collective narratives; Clandinin & Connelly, 2000) and an attempt to imderstand and present qualitative data on human experience through presentation as a cohesive, explanatory narrative (Polkinghome, 2005).

Several additional considerations characterize narratology, including the view of time, action, and transactional views of narrative. A narratological mode of qualitative inquiry uses temporal order and/or expresses causal cotmections in its structural form. Social, political, historical, and cultural contexts of narratives are important because they relate to motives and plots in expressing overall meaning of the data (Hoshmand, 2005).

Furthermore, narrative analysis provides a method for examining meaning from within the context of the story as well as in the "how" of the story and the "to whom." Cortazzi (1993) wrote, "Since narration is all about perfor- mance—the staging of a presentation of self—what matters is not whether it has been told before but whether it has been heard before" (p. 40). One final characteristic of narratology as an approach in counseling research is that it mirrors a major element of counseling: the relaying of a client's experience in the form of story to convey meaning.

In addition to using a variety of sampling methods, narra- tologists use multiple sources of qualitative data.

These include observations, document/visual data, participant interviews (Polkinghome, 2005), and letters and family stories, as well as additional sources of "field text" (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000).

In narratology, qualitative data are analyzed in terms of how they contribute to the meaning and exposition of the narrative.

Riessman ( 1993) described narrative analysis as the process of organizing transcribed texts into three elements:

orientation, complicating action, and resolution/coda. Orientation is dia- logue that discusses or establishes the context of the narrative (e.g., the time or age in the person's life). Complicating action is the central tension or plot of the story. The resolution/ coda is the conclusion of the story. Through attention to form, structure, and language, a researcher can sort discourse in a way that illustrates the story. Word choice and nonverbal commtmication, including pauses, volume, and pacing, not only help to convey the details of the experience but are points of data used to help determine where an element of dialogue belongs in reference to the story (Riessman, 1993).

Also, Clandinin and Cotmelly (2000) described four direc- tions for focus in narrative inquiry: inward, outward, backward, and forward. Inward xeiexs to the intrapersonal experience of the storyteller, the feelings, moral dispositions, motivation, aesthetic reactions, and so on.

Ow/warJ describes the environ- ment and context of the narrative.

Backward and forward refer to the time orientation of the narrative (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000).

Focusing on these directions in analyzing data can help create a multidimensional net to capture the story.

An example of a study using narratology might be examin- ing an adolescent participant's experience of recovery from drug addiction. Data courses could include a semistructured interview as well as the participant's journal, blogs, artwork, and any other personal expressions related to the person's experience. Interviews with significant individuals in the participant's life might also illustrate a complete contextual understanding of the narrative. In reviewing the data and embedded narrative, the counseling researcher would at- tend to the relationship between context and story structure.

In data analysis, the counseling researcher would examine intrapersonal and contextual information, tension within the story, and the narrative's conclusion.

Just as the counseling profession comes to know clients through their stories, so can most areas of coimseling research be informed through narrative inquiry. Narratology offers similar strengths to other aforementioned qualitative research approaches. One additional challenge is regarding the denoue- ment of a narrative. Unlike grounded theory, in which satura- tion can signal an end to data collection, researchers must be especially careful in extrapolating the plot and end of a story.

The attention to form poses an important consideration for qualitative researchers (Lincoln, 1997), and researchers using narrative approaches are challenged to accurately reflect the story form of their investigation.

Participatory Action Research The final research tradition we present is participatory action research (PAR). The general goals of PAR are emancipation and transformation; these goals and respective PAR activities yield readily applied findings to real-world problems.

Similar to CQR, counseling researchers critically reflect in PAR on how power plays a role in the research process; however, it extends its focus to how power in research process and outcome can be a change agent. Researchers use PAR to generate culturally relevant models or theories that guide the development of specific interventions and practices (Nastasi, Moore, &Varjas, 2004). Nastasi et al.

identified six elements Journal of Counseling & Development • Summer 2011 • Volume 89 293 Hays & Wood of PAR: reflecting on existing theory, research, and practice; learning the culture; forming partnerships; identifying goals and problems; engaging in formative research; and developing a culturally specific theory or model.

Throughout the research process, researchers collaborate with participants directly af- fected by the research.

Before initiating a PAR study, counseling researchers are required to engage in critical reflection, in which they examine how power could be influential for systemic and social change for specific research processes and outcomes. Data collection methods such as semistructured interviews, artifacts and archi- val data, focus group interviews, and participant observation are used. Counseling researchers select methods that are practically relevant and emphasize collaboration (Hays & Singh, 2011).

Data analysis within the PAR tradition focuses on action and change, remains relevant to the stakeholders within a setting, and emphasizes outcome and process.

Self-reflection and collaboration with participants are integral components of data analysis.

Data analysis typically involves dialogue and reflection sessions, in which participants can discuss experi- ences they are having in the research process and speak with one another and the researchers about the actions they plan to take (McTaggart, 1997).

A PAR study example might be investigating the experiences of substance-abusing homeless adolescents residing in shelters.

A coimseling researcher would reflect on personal attitudes and experiences with homelessness and substance abuse (before and during the study) because the researcher would also review important literature and professional practices associated with interventions and advocacy for the research topic under inves- tigation. Through ongoing interviews and observations with participants, a counseling researcher or research team would col- laborate with adolescents and engage in shared decision making throughout data collection, analysis, and how findings are shared to create change.

A potential outcome could be presenting find- ings to counselors, adminisfrators, and policy makers to improve counseling and other services for homeless adolescents.

PAR is a useful qualitative research methodology for counsel- ing, as counselors are paying greater attention to social justice issues and promoting social change in their communities and in their chents' lives. The emphasis on shared power and decision making throughout the PAR research process may allow for stronger research partnerships and ultimately more trustworthy data.

A key challenge of PAR is that counseling researchers may encounter significant resistance to change, or conflicting views of what change is needed, from gatekeepers, key informants, and stakeholders in a setting. Ftirthermore, counseling researchers need to ensure that individuals involved in the research process adequately represent persons who are affected by its findings.

•Conclusion Research traditions in qualitative inquiry are theoretical frame- works or research orientations that counseling researchers weave into all phases of the research process.

We presented six prominent traditions in counseling research and highlighted their characteristics as well as their data collection, analysis, and other aspects of research processes, outcomes, and report- ing procedures. Additionally, we highlighted each tradition's strengths and challenges. Our hope is that this parsimonious overview of these six traditions will help inform readers of this journal as research from these perspectives becomes more common within the field of counseling.

•References Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructed grounded theory.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Clandinin, D., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research:

Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cortazzi, M.

(1993).

Narrative analysis.

London, England:

Falmer Press.

Creswell, J. W.

(2007).

Qualitative inquiry and research design:

Choos- ing among five approaches (2nd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Glaser, B.

(1978).

Theoretical sensitivity.

Mill Valley, CA:

Sociology Press.

Gergen, K. J., & Davis, K. E. (1985).

The social construction of the person. New York, NY: Springer.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y.

S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In Y. S. Lincoln & E.

G. Guba (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 191-215). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hays, D.

G., & Singh, A.

(2011). Qualitative inquiry in clinical and educational settings. New York, NY: Guilford.

Hill, C. E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E. N., Hess, S.

A., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research:

An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 196-205.

doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196 Hill, C. E., Thompson, B. J., & Williams, E. N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. The Counseling Psychologist. 25, 517-572.

Hoshmand, L. T.

(2005).

Narratology, culttiral psychology, and covin- sdingreseaich. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 178-186.

doi:

10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.178 Kline, W. B. (2008). Developing and submitting credible qualita- tive manuscripts. Counselor Education and Supervision, 47, 210-217.

Lincoln, Y. S. (1997).

Self, subject, audience, text: Living at the edge, writing in the margin. In W G. Tiemey & Y.

S. Lincoln (Eds.), Representation and the text:

Re-framing the narrative voice (pp.

37-55).

Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

McTaggart, R. (1997). Guiding principles for participatory action research. In R. McTaggart (Ed.), Participatory action research:

International contexts and consequences (pp.

1-24).

Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thou- sand Oaks, CA: Sage.

294 Journal ofCounseling& Development • Summer 2011 • Volume 89 Qualitative Traditions and Research Design Nastasi, B. K., Moore, R. B., & Varjas, K. M. (2004). School-based mental health services: Creating comprehensive and culturally specific programs. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Polkinghome, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R.

S.

Valle & S.

Hailing (Eds.), Existential-phenomenologicalper- spectives inpsychology (pp.

41-60).

New York, NY:

Plenum Press.

Polkinghome, D.

E. (2005). Language and meaning:

Data collection in qwlitaüveTeseaich.Joumal of Counseling Psychology, 52,137-145.

Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in coiinseling psy- chology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophies of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 126-136.

doi:

10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.126 Riessman, C.

K.

(1993).

Narrative analysis.

Newbury Park, CA:

Sage.

Shotter, J., & Geigen, K.

J.

(f 989).

Texts of identity.

London, England: Sage.

Wertz, F.

J. (2005). Phenomenological research methods in cotmsel- ingpsychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 167-177.

doi:

10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.167 Wolcott, H. F. (1994).

Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Journal of Counseling & Development • Summer 2011 • Volume 89 295 Copyright of Journal of Counseling & Development is the property of American Counseling Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.