Achieving excellence in interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): Four markers of high quality
Abstract
Existing guidance on evaluating the quality of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) research has provided criteria to assess work as good, acceptable or unacceptable. Given that IPA has become a well-established member of the qualitative methods repertoire, we think it is valuable now to focus in much more detail on the particular qualities that are the hallmark of high quality IPA research. Here we present four such qualities which are discussed in detail and illustrated through the use of exemplars from excellent IPA work. The qualities are: constructing a compelling, unfolding narrative; developing a vigorous experiential and/or existential account; close analytic reading of participants' words; attending to convergence and divergence. Finally, the four qualities are briefly considered in relation to the theoretical underpinnings of IPA.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
IPA's distinctive hallmark is its commitment to an idiographic analysis.
“IPA ' s distinctive hallmark is its commitment to an idiographic analysis (Nizza et al., 2021).”
From Quality Criteria: General and Specific Guidelines for Qualitative Approaches in Psychology Research. A Concise Guide for Novice Researchers and Reviewers (2024) · cites this paper as Nizza et al., 2021
There are four main quality indicators that reflect IPA's commitment to the idiographic and hermeneutic traditions that underpin it as a method of analysis.
“There are four main quality indicators that re fl ect IPA ' s commitment to the idiographic and hermeneutic traditions that underpin it as a method of analysis (Nizza et al., 2021).”
From Quality Criteria: General and Specific Guidelines for Qualitative Approaches in Psychology Research. A Concise Guide for Novice Researchers and Reviewers (2024) · cites this paper as Nizza et al., 2021
Three guidelines were used to ensure that the methods employed were appropriate and coherent to the research questions: four principles for good qualitative research [44], Smith's assessment tool for quality in IPA studies [45], and four quality indicators for IPA research [46].
“Three guidelines were used to ensure that the methods employed were appropriate and coherent to the research questions: four principles for good qualitative research [44], Smith’s assessment tool for quality in IPA studies [45], and four quality indicators for IPA research [46].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 12 · Cited by 399
- Authors
- Nizza, I. E., Farr, J., & Smith, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Birkbeck, University of London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Smith, Jonathan A.
- Venue
- Qualitative Research in Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-04-20
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 369-386
- ISSN
- 1478-0887 (ISSN-L)
- 1478-0895
- OpenAlex
- W3152630398
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 120 · 2025: 111 · 2024: 83 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 7
- FWCI
- 73.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Qualitative Research in Psychology (publishedVersion)
- BIROn (Birkbeck, University of London) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy
- Keywords
- interpretative phenomenological analysis, research quality, quality standards, narrative construction, convergence and divergence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
