PSYCH 664 Week 5 Qualitative Analysis Example

What the Calls Meant to Residents and Students: Interviews, Thematic Analysis and Rigor in the Phone-Call Pilot

[Student Name]

University of Phoenix

PSYCH/664: Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology

Week 5 Assignment

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The senior community, interview participants and quotations are composites written for a model paper; methodological sources come from the references listed.

Numbers showed that residents who received calls became somewhat less lonely. They did not show why, or what the calls meant to the people involved. This paper adds a qualitative analysis of interviews with residents and student callers from the pilot.

Why Add a Qualitative Strand

Quantitative results answered whether loneliness changed on average. Qualitative interviews can explain how the calls worked, for whom they did not work and what aspects mattered most, which can improve the program before the full study. Combining both kinds of evidence is a mixed methods approach.

Sampling

I used purposeful sampling to capture a range of experiences: residents whose loneliness scores dropped substantially, changed little or rose, men and women and residents in independent and assisted living. Twelve of twenty residents who received calls agreed to interviews. I also invited all fourteen student callers; eight agreed.

How Many Interviews?

Guest et al. (2006) conducted an experiment with interview data from sixty women in two West African countries to examine how many interviews are needed to reach data saturation, when further interviews stop turning up much that is new. They found that most codes appeared within the first six interviews and that the codebook was largely stable after twelve, though they cautioned that the result applied to fairly homogeneous samples with focused questions and that more interviews may be needed for diverse samples or broader aims.

Our residents are fairly homogeneous in setting and the interview questions were focused, so twelve resident interviews seemed reasonable. I tracked new codes after each interview; the last three interviews added only one new code.

The Interviews

A semistructured guide asked residents what the calls were like, what they talked about, what they looked forward to or disliked and whether anything changed in their lives. Students were asked similar questions about their experience. Interviews lasted twenty to forty-five minutes, were audio recorded with permission and transcribed. Because I coordinate activities and know residents, a research assistant from the college conducted resident interviews to reduce pressure to give positive answers.

Thematic Analysis

Braun and Clarke (2006) set out a flexible method for thematic analysis in psychology, describing six phases. The analyst starts by immersing in transcripts until their contents feel familiar. Next, interesting features are labeled with initial codes across the whole data set. Codes are then gathered into candidate themes, which are checked against the coded extracts and the full data set and refined. Each theme is then clearly defined and named, and finally the analysis is written up with vivid extracts that illustrate an argument. They stressed that themes do not simply emerge; the analyst builds them, and each should name a shared meaning rather than a subject area.

I and a second coder, a faculty member in psychology, independently coded four transcripts, compared codes, discussed differences and developed a shared codebook, then coded the rest, meeting twice to review candidate themes.

Four Themes

Someone to look forward to. Residents described the weekly call as an anchor in their week. One said, "Thursday at two, I'm by the phone. It's the first thing I think about when I wake up Thursday."

Being heard rather than helped. Residents valued that students listened rather than giving advice. A former teacher said, "Everybody here wants to fix you, get you to bingo. She just wanted to know what I thought about things."

An unexpected two-way exchange. Both residents and students described learning from each other. Students talked about getting advice on careers and relationships; one student said a resident had helped her decide on a major. Residents described feeling useful again.

Calls as a bridge to the community. Several residents said the calls gave them confidence or a reason to attend activities, such as one who joined a book discussion after talking about books with her caller.

Residents did not describe the calls as a service they received; they described a friendship that ran in both directions.

A Negative Case

One resident, a retired engineer, found the calls intrusive and said he had agreed to participate only to be polite. His loneliness score rose slightly. His experience suggests that the program should let residents choose call frequency and stop easily, and that screening for interest, not only loneliness, matters.

A Worked Coding Example

A short extract shows how coding moved toward themes. A resident said, "I put on lipstick before she calls. Silly, I know, nobody sees me. But it feels like company coming." Initial codes were preparing for the call, dressing up, call as a visit and self-consciousness. Across transcripts, preparing for the call appeared in nine resident interviews, often alongside talk about the days leading up to it. Grouped with codes such as counting the days and planning topics, these became the candidate theme someone to look forward to. The theme was refined when we noticed that anticipation mattered as much as the calls themselves, which is why its name stresses looking forward rather than the conversation.

What the Student Interviews Added

The student callers saw the program from the other end of the line. Several described being nervous for the first two calls and unsure what to say, then finding that residents led the conversation once they felt someone was genuinely curious. Two students said they began calling their own grandparents more often. One student described a hard call after a resident's friend died and said the training had not prepared her for grief, a gap the full study will close by adding a short session on responding to loss and a clear route for referring worried callers to staff.

Rigor and Reflexivity

Credibility was supported by two coders, a negative case, quotations for each theme and checking themes with three residents, who agreed they captured their experience. As activities coordinator, I hoped the program would work; using an outside interviewer and a second coder helped limit my influence.

Reporting Standards

Tong et al. (2007) developed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research, a thirty-two-item checklist for interview and focus group studies covering the interviewers and their stance toward participants, the design choices and the analysis and findings. O'Brien et al. (2014) developed the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research, twenty-one items covering a broad range of qualitative approaches. Using these checklists, I described the interviewer, my relationship with participants, sampling, data collection, coding and theme development and how quotations were chosen.

Linking With Quantitative Results

The themes help explain the quantitative findings: residents valued being heard and anticipation of the calls, consistent with the moderate reduction in loneliness, and the bridge-to-community theme suggests why some residents attended more activities, though attendance did not differ on average.

Conclusion

Interviews revealed what weekly calls meant to residents and students: anticipation, being heard, a two-way exchange and a bridge to community, alongside a resident who found them intrusive. Systematic thematic analysis, attention to saturation and transparent reporting make these findings credible and useful for refining the program.

References

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903

O'Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89(9), 1245-1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388

Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042