First-person access to decision-making using micro-phenomenological self-inquiry.

Summary

Micro-phenomenology is a technique for improving first-person reports of experience, typically conducted with a second-person interviewer. A self-inquiry format, using a guiding document without an interviewer, offers time and cost advantages but its reliability for untrained subjects was unknown. This study attempted to replicate a previous experiment that tested whether micro-phenomenology increases report reliability. The replication failed. Possible explanations include a methodological weakness in the original study, ineffectiveness of the self-inquiry format used here, or that micro-phenomenological self-inquiry requires training. The authors conclude that the self-inquiry format is insufficient for conducting micro-phenomenological studies and that training is necessary.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Micro-phenomenology is a method for improving first-person reports of experience. Usually, micro-phenomenology is conducted using a second-person interviewer who guides someone investigating an experience. This has the advantage that the interviews can be done with untrained subjects. However, it is possible to perform micro-phenomenological self-inquiry, a form of self-interview technique, without a second-person interviewer. This has several advantages, such as being more time and cost effective. Questionable, however, is the possibility for untrained subjects to enquire into their own experience using micro-phenomenology. The present study aims to test the reliability of micro-phenomenological self-inquiry with untrained subjects using a guiding document. We replicated an experimental design that has previously been employed to test whether micro-phenomenology increases the reliability of reports. The experiment did not replicate. Reasons for this may be: (1) a methodological weakness of the previous study; (2) that the way the self-inquiry format employed as part of the present study was ineffective; or (3) that micro-phenomenological self-inquiry requires training. These specific possibilities and the idea of testing the reliability of micro-phenomenological reports in general are discussed. We conclude that the self-inquiry format is not sufficient for conducing micro-phenomenological studies and that training is required.