See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/370444682

Qualitative method, Narrative analysis

Method · May 2023

CITATIONS READS

0 2,964

1 author:

Therese Thuv
Nord University
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Therese Thuv on 02 May 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Therese Thuv
Nord University

HOW TO UNRAVEL THEIR STORIES. THE TRACING AND ANALYSIS OF

NARRATIVES

Research in social sciences offers various methods on searching knowledge or solution to a

phenomenon. These methods are tools to guide researchers on how to navigate in the
complexity of their own research and be able to search for answers to the given questions they
have. Conducting interviews is widely used in social sciences. When the data has been
collected, certain methods need to be applied in order to analyse the findings. One of the
much used methods for analysing qualitative research data the last few decades in social
sciences, is narrative analysis. After social scientists started to theorise narratives and
storytelling, thus finding the possibilities to trace social relations found in narratives,1
narrative analysis in qualitative research has become widely used.
Because of it being a useful tool in researching multiple phenomenon I intend to
investigate some facets of narrative analysis that are relevant, not only for my own research,
but for social scientists in general who engages specifically in face-to-face interviews. The
context for my choice of this topic is based in my own use of narrative analysis in a research
project on a sensitive subject matter where I have conducted semi-structured interviews. The
more insight I procure on this method, as well as how to collect their stories through
interviews, the more curious and intrigued I get by the diversity it holds. This paper will
therefore be an examination and reflection on use of interviews and the subsequent analysis,
in order to understand and interpret life stories that qualitative researchers in general might
come across, as well as it envelopes my own research and challenges in analysing my own
data material.
The backdrop for the choice of this topic is my work with an article where my
collected data material consists of semi-structured interviews with persons who have all
experienced great changes in their lives in relation to leaving a religious sect. The goal for the
semi-structured interviews in this study is for the informants to describe this transition from a
childhood, youth and adulthood in a social environment and with a world view connected to
that social and religious group, to abandoning it, losing it, and adapt to an entire new way of
life and a new way of understanding the reality. I’m using narrative analysis to communicate
their stories to others and, in the process of both interviewing the informants and analyse their

1
Brian Alleyne, Narrative Networks. Storied Approaches in a Digital Age. (London: Sage, 2015), 27-8.

1
Therese Thuv
Nord University

narratives, I have come across various implications to ruminate on. I will therefore use my
work with these interviews as an example throughout this paper, as a means to actualise the
topic in question. I will start out with highlighting some aspects of the process of gathering
data through qualitative interviews - the narratives - and to analyse the data. I will also make
some reflections on the role of the researcher as an interviewer. The final part of this paper
will consist of a more emphasis on some of the challenges that might occur when employing
narrative analysis, and how this is manifested in my case study.

Qualitative interviews as foundation for narrative analysis

The purpose of qualitative studies is to get in-depth-knowledge about certain contexts, to

achieve a comprehensive understanding of the research object, or to develop and establish
concepts and categories. Detail-rich interviews is a valuable source specifically when it’s
difficult to converge enough sources for statistical analysis. Before any analysis can be
conducted, gathering of data material must be carried out. However, in qualitative research
the initial steps in the analysis starts already during the data collection, with the researcher
taking notes in addition to the interviewees comments, making chains of thought and registers
own connotations and so forth.2 This implies that gathering of data and the work of analysis
aren’t two parts of the research that stands on their own, rather, it’s an symbiotic way of
working.
The base for a narrative analysis is case study research via interviews. Interviews can
be conducted in various ways: structured, semi-structured and unstructured being the first and
foremost used strategies in doing so. The stories the interviewees tells, their narratives, are the
base for the analysis. That indicates that we keep in mind the meaning of the word narrative,
which can be described as any account of a series of related events or experiences; a notion of
the fact that every story told and written in the history of mankind are made for some sort of
audience. Narrative, a story told by the informants, is the material needed to research a
person’s understanding of reality in terms of the one who knows it best: the narrator herself.
Informants tell us through their stories their emotional environment and the particular
pressure and strain that this world puts upon them.3 Used soberly, it can provide researchers
with detailed information beyond measurable factualities. Behaviors, motivations, thought

2
Ottar Hellevik, Sosiologis metode. S. 103. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1994.
3
Allison J. Pugh, ”What good are interviews for thinking about culture? Demystifying interpretive analysis.”
American Journal of Cultural Sociology 1, no. 1. (2013): 49.

2
Therese Thuv
Nord University

concepts and emotions that aren’t expressed explicitly by the informants can be uncovered by
analysing the informants’ narratives, thus making this method widely used. Various concepts
and theories in the social sciences have been analysed using this specific method, much
because of its diversified and thorough lens in which the data material is seen through.
Narratives are potent and influential in the sense that its easier for the human mind to both
interpret, remember and make decisions based on meaningful stories and explanations instead
of independent strings of information.
Writing this makes me think of my own relation to narratives, realising that my whole
life so far and the meaning I make out of it, manifests itself in forms of stories, all woven
together into my life-narrative. It’s all linked together. If I was to be interviewed as an
informant in my own case-study that this essay uses as an example, it will be an impossible
task to answer the questions isolated – my experiences envelops multiple facets of my life, in
different phases of my life, and incidents, actions, thoughts and feelings not directly linked to
the research questions /interview questions will naturally enough not be mentioned, but they
can still be highly relevant for the research project nevertheless.

The interviewer – Investigator, Interpreter or Reporter?

The ideal qualitative research interviewer is unbiased, objective, empathic, perceptive, a good
listener, makes the interview object relaxed and comfortable, is knowledgeable about the
subject in question, asks the right questions at the right time, notices not only the words but
also the body language, and the tone with which the candidate colours the words. Balancing
the professional approach with personal interest, creating and upholding a friendly approach
and at the same time keeping a professional distance to the informants so that the interviews
will be as successful as possible in order to answer the research questions is also desirable
traits. As most ideals, this is hard to live up to even for the most skilled interviewer.
Unexperienced researchers can therefore be at peril of dismissing this method in fear of not
being able to reach both the explicit and implicit requirements of a successful research
interviewer. This is relatable, since my own self-critical voice repeats David Silverman’s
question to his Ph.D. students: “Do you really think you can do better than an expert
counsellor or even Oprah Winfrey?”4 Luckily, Silverman does not suggest that researchers
should avoid interviews. As he states, there are ways to both improve the reliability of

4
David Silverman, “How was it for you? The Interview Society and the irresistible rise of the (poorly analyzed)
interview.” Qualitative Research 17, no. 2 (2017): 145.

3
Therese Thuv
Nord University

interview transcripts and how analysis of such data can be made more credible.5 However, in
this reference Silverman highlights working with the data material after they are collected. In
this context I wish to underline that a researcher can do many preparations in advance to
ensure a good result before conducting the interviews.
One of the most vital exercises in that regard is for the researcher to understand the
background as well as the social and cultural context of the research subjects. The challenge is
to examine and understand how human actions are related to the social context in which they
present themselves and to observe how and where they occur through growth.6 Conducting a
good interview as well as the following analysis of the data is close to impossible without a
thorough research prior to the interviews. Not to mention the ethics in respecting the
interviewees by giving their stories the right amount of effort, interest and academic inquiry.
A well prepared researcher will get a better idea of what the interviewees mean in their
narration, especially in research where there prove to be many hidden layers. Such a context-
rich research can only be unveiled by an in-depth understanding of the milieu, surroundings
and history. A key to a more powerful analysis is when the researcher moves further from
what is being said, to how it is said.7 In doing so, the researcher moves from being an
investigator and reporter to an interpreter. In effect, all three roles are useful, but merged
together they will give the researcher the means to find, to a certain degree understand and
decipher the hidden layers and formulate them to the chosen audience. I find that Allison
Pugh describes the researchers multi-faceted role quite eloquently in saying, “I suggest, then,
that the researcher is less like a sketch artist, or even someone who silently works in the
background to produce the most appropriate lineup, but rather a thinking, reflecting person
whose own experience and skills matter.”8
My own project as previously mentioned can serve as a good example of the
importance of thorough self- preparation in advance of making the interview guide,
conducting the interviews and the subsequent fruitful analysis of the collected data. My
informants are six former members of a sect with a highly controlled social environment with
an alternate world view, where I aim to map their transition from that distinct way of life, to a
life and world view more in accordance with the society in general. If I as a researcher were to

5
Silverman, “How was it for you?”, 145.
6
Torill Moen, “Reflections on the Narrative Research Approach,” International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
5, no. 4 (2006): 59.
7
Pugh, ”What good are interviews,” 55.
8
Pugh, ”What good are interviews,” 53.

4
Therese Thuv
Nord University

interview these individuals and analyse their narratives with no contextual knowledge, the
outcome will be useless. It could perhaps be used only as a case study to see how
incompetence and ignorance are mirrored in research on social phenomena, and the effects of
that, and how informants react towards a researcher’s lack of knowledge and essentially, a
lack of personal interest.
In my case, a knowledge of the origins and teachings of the sect in mention is a
minimum of background information. Former academic studies related to my own research
question are highly relevant. Networking with former members so as to get additional insight
in the matter, and to establish contact with interviewees that are willing to, and able to, tell
their stories. Not to mention the benefits of reading theory linked to religion and religious life,
as well as religious studies in general. With a similar background and experiences as my
informants one could think that I have enough information about the matter in hand, using my
personal recollections as a base for the research. May as be, but I soon discovered that even
though my background is of advantage in many aspects conducting a study like this, I still had
much research to do beforehand the interviews. It became startingly clear that conducting
qualitative research with an ensuing narrative analysis acquires much preparations even
though my knowledge on the chosen subject are well known to me.
This leads up to the positionality as an interviewer, which is a methodological question
in itself and I will not investigate that topic in depth, but since the researcher in the role as an
interviewer has a substantial role in collecting data and executing a narrative analysis, it must
be addressed to some degree. Using my own research as an example once more; I have the
same religious background as my informants, and many similar experiences with their
experiences in the process of leaving/being ostracised from the congregation. In this specific
case I consider it to be beneficial for my study in the terms of my knowledge of the
terminology used, it helps me to know what questions are most efficient to use in the
interviews, and it creates a more relaxed environment in the sense that the interviewees have a
common ground with the interviewer. It’s quite common that former members of this
religious sect in question are met with misinformation, and/or not being understood, and/or
not able to explain their experiences in a coherent way. When the interviewer have the same
background, these fears can to some extent dissolve themselves and the dynamics between
interviewer-interviewee can function better than if the interviewer have a theoretical
knowledge alone. Hence my positionality needs to be clarified and justified, and also
discussed if it can be a form of “hybrid” solution.

5
Therese Thuv
Nord University

From my point of view, looking back at the setting when I conducted the interviews, I
can see myself in this hybrid-position. I am first and foremost a researcher, recruiting them as
informants with the advised academic approaches in the recruiting, with formalities as
anonymisation and privacy policies in check so as the informants are feeling safe in that
regard. But in the setting of the interviews I became more familiar with the interviewees, a
natural outcome based on our mutual grounds. Then I became not only a researcher, but also
an individual with the same experiences as them, and consequently also with more or less
similar traumas; my positionality was altered from the academical approach and more
directed towards being in a relation of a friend, someone to talk to and exchange experiences
with, although I was careful not to mention more about my own experiences more than
absolutely necessary for the task in hand. Balancing this position as combined researcher and
an individual with similar background and bonding on a deeper level with the interviewees
was initially a challenge, but ended up as an unaffected and supple experience.

Challenges in narrative analysis

Narrative analysis has, as mentioned, shown itself to be a powerful tool in qualitative

research. It involves a close reading of texts in order to interpret and make meaning of the
information they reveal. The qualitative research strategy allows the interviewees to tell their
experiences in their own words, from their own perspective and with their own emotional
emphasis, a recollection of stories that are either self-experienced, or re-told. The goal is to
have the informants to reconstruct their own life histories and for the researcher to receive the
narratives and give meaning to the already given meaning.9 In addition, a narrative analytic
approach to sources as speeches, legislation etc. can be used in the sense that all texts are
constructed for an audience. With this approach, narrative analysis as a methodological tool is
widely useful.
Still, a retrospective narrative will always be in danger from being “tainted”. Meaning,
influenced by many factors outside of the narrator’s own consciousness and/or by events in
life that has happened in times after, the narrator might have been influenced by quite the
opposite forces that makes the memories change, or by forces that enhance the narrator’s
feelings and experiences on the given subject.10 One might state that a person’s account of
experiences is closely linked to how memory works; the construction of memories and

9
Moen, “Reflections,” 56.
10
Jill Sinclair Bell, «Narrative Inquiry: More Than Just Telling Stories,” TESOL Quarterly 36, no. 2 (Summer 2002):
208.

6
Therese Thuv
Nord University

perceived memory. A person might deconstruct and reconstruct experiences continuously

from various reasons. Nevertheless, a person’s recollections and how these manifests
themselves in a narrative is not up to the researcher to question, whether it’s the probability,
validity or reliability of the story. The story is the narrator’s way of displaying how she makes
sense of the world, her experiences and her position in life, her way of understanding change.
We can’t measure the authenticity in the story, we can only trace their narratives in light of
our research questions and make use of methods of analysing the material.
In this regard Allison Pugh presents four different kinds of information that in-depth
interviews give access to, which require different kinds of analysis: the honorable, the
schematic, the visceral and meta-feelings.11 I will not describe each kinds in detail, other than
pointing out the wide range of information these categories shows us what can be distilled
from narratives and the way they are being told. Shortly explained does these four categories
of data collection give information about what the informants counts as honorable and
admirable, the schemas that influence the way they talk about their the world they exist in,
their essential and underlying morals, and how they feel about their own feelings.12 To render
these layers the researcher must be aware of multiple factors throughout the whole process,
for as Pugh points out, all these four kinds of interviewing data involves both culture and
emotions.13 This underlines my previous remarks on the great importance for the researcher to
be well prepared in advance. Such a wide range as “culture” and “emotions” encompasses
demands a strong sense of thoroughness in the researcher before, during and after the
interviews. In addition, the researcher also needs to meet the challenge it is to make choices of
what to look for, what to emphasise, and how to execute both the gathering and analysis of the
narratives, of the simple reason that it is impossible to incorporate every method and imply all
considerations and evaluations. Herein lies the overarching part of a researchers role in
interviews: how to listen. Listening isn’t merely a passive exercise, quite the contrary. To
listen, in the context of narrative inquiry, is active and constructive with the aim to weave
together data and theory and create a meaning true to the informant’s narrative and to the
research in hand.14

11
Pugh, “What good are interviews,” 50-2.
12
Pugh, “What good are interviews” 51.
13
Pugh, “What good are interviews” 51-2.
14
Sigrún Guðmundursdóttir, “Forskningsintervjuets narrative karakter.” in Sentrale aspekter ved kvalitativ
forskning, ed. Torill Moen and Sigrún Guðmundursdóttir (Trondheim: Tapir Akdemisk Forlag, 2011): 78.

7
Therese Thuv
Nord University

Another challenge is how I as a researcher choose to understand the meaning behind

the words. The word “choose” is deliberate, in the sense that in a position as a researcher
working with narrative analysis, I always have a starting point, a reason for my inquiry, a
research question that I aim to get answered. It can be easy to (unconsciously or not) start out
with a wish or an expectation of confirming the question posed, to in a way boost the self-
confidence by having the data material support my thesis rather than debunk it, and thus
becoming a “bias toward verification.”15 In addition, the researcher’s background and
standpoint plays a part. It’s impossible (a strong term but as I see it, correctly used in this
setting) to keep a completely objective and un-biased when keeping up to date with e.g. the
Ukraine war or domestic policies like the health care for the elderly and challenges in the
school system; even though we might not be directly affected by these issues, it’s difficult not
to be opinionated or even emotional about it to some degree. The same can be applied on a
researcher’s point of view from the very start of forming research questions/thesis to assessing
and analysing data. Being completely objective is a wanted feature as a researcher, but you
can’t fully divide the Researcher from the Person. An academic approach with the ethics,
science and theories in place can never outconquer the personality of the researcher. Every
personality is shaped and molded by culture, life experiences and personal convictions and
inclinations. In that perspective, participants can never be entirely free of the researcher’s
interpretation of their lives.16 This challenge is well known to researchers. Hence, being aware
of this relational engagement between researcher and interviewees can be a strength in terms
of breathing life into the narratives through a co-creation of the informant’s experiences.17
As a final note, my own emotional reactions to what the interviewees say, or how they
say it, is also a factor to keep in mind especially when the researcher has common grounds
with the informants on a topic that may be emotionally stressful.

Various challenges manifested in my case study

Using my own case study as an example, the retrospective constructive narrative is the base
data material for my analysis. The interviewees tell me their stories from their childhood and

15
Bent Flyvbjerg, «Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research,” Qualitative Inquiry 12, no. 2 (April
2006): 234.
16
Bell, “Narrative Inquiry,” 210.
17
Aishath Nasheeda, Haslinda Binti Abdullah, Steven Eric Krauss, and Nobaya Binti Ahmed, “Transforming
Transcripts Into Stories: A Multimethod Approach to Narrative Analysis,” International Journal of Qualitative
Analysis 18 (2019): 1.

8
Therese Thuv
Nord University

up to the present, looking back on past events or situations and choosing words to describe
and make meaning to them. In line with the theme for the research in hand, somewhere along
that timeline, they all experienced a breach that changed their understanding of life and the
world view as such. Their narratives are told in a context where their life has changed
profoundly, and the way they present their recollections and experiences are influenced by
how they live their lives in the present. Will their accounts of how they experienced the past
be how they actually perceived and understood them at the time? In what degree are their
recollections shaped and re-lived through the lenses of their present understanding? These
questions are important for me as a researcher to keep in mind because of the nature of the
participant’s experiences, which are all, in various degrees, recollections of traumatic
occurrences and life changing events. Tracing their narratives and the various ways in which
they tell their stories is undeniably both the most important part, and the difficult part, of my
project. As stated, a researcher can’t measure the authenticity of their story. What my
interviewees told me are their stories of experiences and how they construct a meaning of
their past and present, and what they have went through.
The informants in my case study have a similar background and experienced a change
in their life that involved multi-layered alterations in their lives, a paradigm shift which I’ve
chosen to describe as a transition. Transition is synonymous with change, shift, development,
in contrast to other terms originally used in the outlines of the study; trauma, ostracism and
estrangement. After interviewing my informants I realised that, in spite of traumatic and
painful experiences, their stories showed something positive through it all. The co-
construction of their life stories between my informants and me as a researcher with similar
background as them, offered a richer result of their narratives than what I initially had
expected. Through the interviews themselves, and the following transcription and analysis, it
became more and more apparent that they were telling me how they understood change, how
their experiences in many ways drove them forward rather than holding them back. Their
stories told me about struggles and traumas, and difficulties they experience today as a
consequence of their experiences, but I had to adjust my primary thought about the case
study; this isn’t a just a study of religious trauma, this is a study of human change, transition,
from something old to something new and how it manifests itself in individuals with a certain
background. I had to be aware of how they constructed their stories and how they presented
them to me, where were their emphasis. I had to apply my knowledge of the “culture” in the
context of the topic for the interview – a life in the religious sect. That part came naturally,

9
Therese Thuv
Nord University

since I have been under the influence of the same culture. The challenge was to balance my
position, regulate and consider how much I should add to the interaction with the informants.
Being a sensitive topic, highly emotional for all the involved, I also had to be aware of
triggers, how to make them feel relaxed, and be aware of not just what was said, but how, and
body language. Two of my informants displayed anger and frustration in certain parts of the
interview, to questions that triggered memories and feelings towards the religion and their
experiences. This was portrayed in the transcription of the interviews, but the way things were
said, including body language, facial expressions and voice intensity was something I needed
to preserve as an observation for the analysis in order to make a truthful meaning out of the
stories told.
In this context of the study, the meaning behind the words; how they are said and
presented, proves more valuable than a strict chronological presentation. My interview guide
was constructed so as for the interviewees to give a more or less chronological story of their
life, but in the capacity of being a semi-structured interview the parameters weren’t that strict.
And it soon became clear that for the interviewees, close to all of them became more genuine
in their accounts, more engaged and lively when they were freed from the life-recollection
from childhood and the years up to the present. A chronological account of their lives is a
story they have told several times before, however briefly, over and over again every time
they’ve wanted to make new relations after being ostracised, to physicians, psychologists and
psychiatrists, old friends and co-workers, every time they’ve felt like outsiders and others
wanting to understand why. When they could tell me their stories freely, without structural
constraint and in a safe environment, the foundation were made for my expanded
understanding their narratives, and consequently also my own life narrative to some extent.
They focused on change, development, freedom through hardship, the educational part of
their experiences, the positivity and wholesome view of their own lives and hope – a fragile,
but beautiful hope within them that life has much good in store for them, a transition from one
stage of life to a new and even better one.
In accordance with that experience, it was (and still is) a challenge to narrow down the
findings in my analysis, keeping in mind the mentioned four different kinds of information
that in-depth interviews give access to, according to A. Pugh, which require different kinds of
analysis: the honorable, the schematic, the visceral and meta-feelings.18 Which method will

18
Pugh, 50-2.

10
Therese Thuv
Nord University

prove to be most fruitful in order to stay true to both the research question as well as the
participants is a challenge in itself, knowing the diversity in ways of analysing the material.
This case study using narrative analysis has shown a beauty in individuals that they
might not even see for themselves. But seen together, alongside others with similar
experiences, co-created stories with me as a researcher gives an insight into how religious
trauma can affect individuals, but also human’s ability to power through adversity and
welcome change. For me, this was an educational process. Undoubtfully on a personal level
but in this context, a monumental educational experience as a researcher. From a young
scholar’s point of view, I have experienced the accuracy that B. Flyvbjerg states concerning
the value of qualitative approach and a narrative analysis; working with their stories and
letting their narratives have a life on their own after they’ve being told have been a significant
addition to my learning curve.19
This paper has aimed to show what I have experienced myself in the starting point of
qualitative research. The constructed narratives and the analysis made by the researcher
mirrors the researcher as well as the informants. Narrative analysis poses challenges and have
been critisised for not giving enough data to give a general explanation on phenomenon, but
it’s value as a method weights up for its challenges and shortcomings. The responsibility of
tracing and unraveling the stories of individuals is filled with fall pits and ethical questions
which may seem like obstacles difficult to overcome. It demands a great deal of the researcher
both before, during and after gathering data; theoretically, in interaction with the informants,
and navigating through the various methods of narrative analysis. Also, questions of accuracy,
validity and reliability of the narratives must be understood differently, since “truth” and
“truth-making” is subjective in this kind of data. Nevertheless, I have tried to point out that
the challenges have the possibilities to enhance and strengthen both the research and the
abilities of the researcher, to unravel the narratives and use them in fruitful research.

19
Flyvbjerg, “Five Misunderstandings,” 223.

11
 Therese Thuv
Nord University

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alleyne, Brian. Narrative Networks. Storied Approaches in a Digital Age. London: Sage,
2015.

Bell, Jill Sinclair. “Narrative Inquiry: More Than Just Telling Stories.” TESOL Quarterly 36,
no. 2 (Summer 2002): 207-12.

Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research,” Qualitative Inquiry

12, no. 2 (April 2006): 219-45.

Guðmundursdóttir, Sigrún. “Forskningsintervjuets narrative karakter.” In Sentrale aspekter

ved kvalitativ forskning, edited by Torill Moen and Sigrún Guðmundursdóttir, 71-86.
Trondheim: Tapir Akdemisk Forlag, 2011.

Hellevik, Ottar. Sosiologisk metode. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1994.

Moen, Torill. “Reflections on the Narrative Research Approach.” International Journal of

Qualitative Methods, 5, no. 4. (2006) p. 59

Nasheeda, Aishat, Haslinda Binti Abdullah, Steven Eric Krauss, and Nobaya Binti Ahmed.
“Transforming Transcripts Into Stories: A Multimethod Approach to Narrative Analysis.”
International Journal of Qualitative Analysis 18, (2019): 1-9.

Pugh, Allison J. ”What good are interviews for thinking about culture? Demystifying
interpretive analysis.”2013. American Journal of Cultural Sociology 1, no. 1. (2013): 42-
68.

Silverman, David. “How was it for you? The Interview Society and the irresistible rise of the
(poorly analyzed) interview.” Qualitative Research 17, no. 2 (2017): 144-58.

12

View publication stats