Search results
1 – 2 of 2Undertaking qualitative research exploring experiences of trauma can be challenging for all members of a research team. The aim of this article is to document the key challenges…
Abstract
Purpose
Undertaking qualitative research exploring experiences of trauma can be challenging for all members of a research team. The aim of this article is to document the key challenges faced by researchers and to provide an overview of the key guidelines and processes that have been developed.
Design/methodology/approach
Drawing on a range of empirical and published reflective accounts over the past 20 years, this article documents the key challenges researchers undertaking qualitative research face. These accounts are synthesized for the reader and an overview of research guidelines provided.
Findings
Qualitative researchers and members of the research team (including research assistants, transcriptionists and research supervisors) undertaking trauma research face many challenges including physical and emotional manifestations. Despite the development of a range of guidelines and protocols, formalized processes are still lacking. Researchers need to be supported to consider the impact of the research on themselves and others within the research team and include these assessments in their ethics and funding applications.
Research limitations/implications
Researching trauma (like many other topics) can be challenging for researchers and it is important that we ensure researchers are not harmed in the research process. Adopting guidelines like those presented in this paper and encouraging formalized processes for researcher risk assessments are paramount.
Originality/value
Discussions about risk to researchers when undertaking qualitative research have existed for many years but they have not always resulted in acknowledgement of development of supportive processes. By bringing together empirical research and reflective accounts from a range of disciplines the issues researchers face can become more visible.
Details
Keywords
Virginia Dickson-Swift, Christopher Fox, Karen Marshall, Nicky Welch and Jon Willis
Factors for successful workplace health promotion (WHP) are well described in the literature, but often sourced from evaluations of wellness programmes. Less well understood are…
Abstract
Purpose
Factors for successful workplace health promotion (WHP) are well described in the literature, but often sourced from evaluations of wellness programmes. Less well understood are the features of an organisation that contribute to employee health which are not part of a health promotion programme. The purpose of this paper is to inform policy on best practice principles and provide real life examples of health promotion in regional Victorian workplaces.
Design/methodology/approach
Individual case studies were conducted on three organisations, each with a health and wellbeing programme in place. In total, 42 employers and employees participated in a face to face interview. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and the qualitative data were thematically coded.
Findings
Employers and senior management had a greater focus on occupational health and safety than employees, who felt that mental/emotional health and happiness were the areas most benefited by a health promoting workplace. An organisational culture which supported the psychosocial needs of the employees emerged as a significant factor in employee's overall wellbeing. Respectful personal relationships, flexible work, supportive management and good communication were some of the key factors identified as creating a health promoting working environment.
Practical implications
Currently in Australia, the main focus of WHP programmes is physical health. Government workplace health policy and funding must expand to include psychosocial factors. Employers will require assistance to understand the benefits to their business of creating environments which support employee's mental and emotional health.
Originality/value
This study took a qualitative approach to an area dominated by quantitative biomedical programme evaluations. It revealed new information about what employees really feel is impacting their health at work.
Details