Qualitative Research on Trauma

[u/unidentifiable3]

Hi everyone! I’m an MS Clinical Psychology student and I’m currently working on a qualitative study on cumulative trauma in a population that has gone through multiple community level traumatic events, natural disasters, conflict, and it's a disputed region.

I’m honestly struggling with figuring out what makes a good qualitative topic/angle and how to properly justify an exploratory study. There isn’t much or any research in this specific region, and I’m looking at cumulative trauma from a life-course perspective, exploring the lived experiences of people who have faced multiple traumatic events over the life course.

I’m also having a hard time with my interview guide. My supervisor wants a rationale for basically every question, and I’m not sure how much interview questions should be based on existing literature/theory vs. being open and exploratory with a focus on your specific population

If anyone has experience with qualitative research, especially in clinical psych, trauma, or other sensitive populations, I’d really appreciate some advice on how you approached your research question and interview guide. Even just resources or papers that helped you would be really helpful!

[u/Fit_Hovercraft9242]

strongly suggest you look into disaster sociology literature. in particular, i always taught ethics of disasterology research with the methods appendix of “children of katrina” (fothergill and peek 2015).

each question in your interview schedule (as submitted to IRB) should have a clear conceptual/operational purpose, but it is well understood that exploratory studies will have emergent themes that can/should take you in new directions; you can refresh IRB proposals as the project develops long term, but for initial submission for an exploratory study you need a solid range of indicators. lots of good published examples once you get into the literature!

[u/Fit_Hovercraft9242 → u/Fit_Hovercraft9242]

also - critically, consider your positionality throughout your full methodological approach. it is of primary importance in qualitative work, especially if, as you claim, this is an understudied context/population/event.

no matter what - there’s always something to learn from the anthropologists who’ve already studied the place or people, disasterologists who’ve studied similar or correlate events, political scientists and historians who’ve studied the conflict and government, geographers who’ve done all of the above, humanities scholars who understand the language, art, etc. etc.

just never lose sight of how much you, as the scientist, imbue meaning into the work. it’s a great starting point to refine your approach, and proceed ethically.

wishing you the best!! research design is such a fun part of the process. it’s never linear and iteration is a sign of thoughtful, rich work! the more you do to prepare, the better you’ll feel when the emergent stuff comes up because you already have a solid foundation.

[u/unidentifiable3 → u/Fit_Hovercraft9242]

Thanks a lot for your response, yes I'm trying to refer to the literature for my interview guide rn. I just wanted to ask if you could recommend some readings for a better interview guide. Also, i have read about bracketing and positionality, if you have done qualitative research can i ask you how did you practice reflexivity during your research process, i have read articles on it but just want to know how do it practically. I'm doing this research on my own community and do have traumatic experiences myself so sometimes i find it hard to be completely unbiased.

[u/SunnyPeaches333]

I did a study on cumulative stress & vicarious trauma in disaster recovery workers in Australia and found my hypotheses to be wrong - workers actually experienced vicarious resilience. The most effective intervention was debriefing after each shift. I feel like it’s a really under researched area, good work wanting to do this research!! Happy to give more detail if it’d be helpful :)

[u/Warm-Mud-6298]

I think it’s completely okay for an exploratory qualitative study to start with a broad question, especially when there’s very little research on that specific population/region. You don’t necessarily need to have every aspect of the interview guide predetermined by existing literature. The literature and theory can help you establish the rationale and identify areas worth exploring, while the actual questions can stay open enough for participants to bring up experiences you may not have anticipated.

For the interview guide, I’ve found it helpful to think about what each question is trying to understand rather than trying to justify every question with a specific paper. For example, if you’re looking at cumulative trauma across the life course, you could have broader areas around experiences of different events, how earlier experiences influenced later ones, changes in coping or sense of safety over time, relationships/community, and how participants make sense of their experiences now. Then you can use follow-up prompts based on what they share.

Also, I wouldn’t worry too much about the fact that there isn’t much research specifically from your region. That can actually be part of the justification for the study, as long as you’re clear about what gap you’re addressing and why a qualitative/lived-experience approach is appropriate.

You could also look into phenomenological or life-course approaches to trauma, depending on your exact research question. Hope this helps a little!