EVALUATION
When evaluating phenomenological research Finlay suggests that the evaluation of the research method should be its ability to describe the experience in four ways- vividness, accuracy, richness and elegance. This way of evaluation is only evaluating if the phenomenological research was done correctly, not if it was the right research method (Finlay 2014).
These four criteria mean that for a phenomenological research to be considered a success it must present its theme in a vivid way that allows the reader to empathise with the description of the experience. It needs to be accurate, a proper summation of the themes presented by the participants, richness referred to the ease in which a reader can transform themselves into the findings and elegance refers to the correct level of clarity given, not over indulged or overly descript (Finlay 2014).
​
Ashworth discusses the possibility that participant’s validation is the true test of evaluating a phenomenological research. The argument against this is that participants may have an interest in protecting their ‘social image’ and externally disagree with the findings as it may conflicting to popular opinion. The other reason why participant’s validation may not be an accurate form of evaluation is that because participants are very engaged throughout the whole process they feel bias to agree with the findings whatever the result (Ashworth 1993).
When evaluating this method as compared to other methods phenomenological research is not without its benefits. Phenomenological research allows the participants full disclosure to describe a particular event. This kind of freedom can give greater detail and insight into an experience. It can allow the reader to feel a part of the experience and its summary of themes also ensures that we have an understanding, from a research perspective, of the who, what, when, where and why and given experience (Occupy 2014).
​
​
​
​
The downside is that all descriptions can be subject to participant bias, cultural differences and the fact that no two people often share the same experience. It is the sum of all parts that is displayed as a result, which can often miss the distinguishing details that this research method has the ability to embrace. It can also be time consuming and the description of the experience can change over time depending on the participant’s recollection and current mood. Based on these factors the phenomenological research is suitable to small groups who was party to a recent experience and the results, whilst presenting main themes, should also include all outliers so as to include all details (Occupy 2014).