71
feelings and thoughts connected with ” certain phenomena, “what conditions
evoke” certain phenomena Moustakas, 135. Individual structural description was constructed from textural description and
imaginative variation Moustakas, 1994, 121. Since in this process the interpretation was stronger than the previous step, this step would then be called
as
individual interpretations
in chapter IV.
5. Individual Textural-Structural Descriptions Stories and Interpretations
After that, individual textural-structural description was constructed. It was dragged from each participant‟s textural and structural description Moustakas,
1994. Each individual textural-structural description consists of story and
interpretation. Thus I also used the term story and interpretation to reder to textural-structural description.
6. Composite Textural Description Stories and Composite Structural
Description Interpretations
Composite textural description is the depiction of the group experience as a whole Moustakas, 1994, 138. Composite textural description was composed by
studying invariant meaningsthemes of each participant. Composite structural description is “a way of understanding
how
the co- researchers as a group experience
what
they experience” Moustakas, 1994, 142. In order to be able to construct composite structural description, composite
textural description was combined with imaginative variation. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
72
7. Synthesis of Textural and Structural Description Meaning
Synthesis of structural and textural description process was similar to the process of composing individual structural-textural description. The difference
was on the wholeness character of synthesis compared to individual structural- textural description. Synthesis of textural and structural description was what
would be called as
meaning
in Chapter IV. The meaning consisted of themes which were dragged from previous steps.
The presentation of each sub subchapter in Chapter IV was elaborated thematically. Thematical presentation is one of presentation ways which is
proposed by van Manen 1990. The writing style which includes listing is adopted from Rhodes writing style in his research 1987 Moustakas, 1994.
E. TRUSTWORTHINESS
In order to maintain trustworthiness, I conducted source criticism. Source criticism consists of the following criteria: 1 criticism of authenticity, 2 criticism
of bias, 3 criticism of distance, and 4 criticism of dependence Alvesson Sköldberg, 2000.
Criticism of authenticity was conducted by asking this question: “Is the
observation genuine or fictitious?” Alvesson Sköldberg, 2000, 79. The question was especially asked when I found illogical holes in the participants‟
stories. I tried to fill the holes by asking more questions to the participants regarding the stories they told.
Criticism of bias was conducted by asking this question: “Which is the
researchers possible bias, and how can this have distorted her interpretation?” Alvesson Sköldberg, 2000, 79. In order to make sure I myself as the
