You commented on Devi's post:
<snips>
I do hope that Devi is right. His urging
>that the person whose construing has produced the grid should be able to
>recognise their construct system in the analysis does, perhaps, go a long
>way towards keeping the problem under control, if not eliminating it.
>
>Thinking of the use of grids outside a counselling context, e.g., (I pluck
>the example out of the air!) in a research project aiming to assess changes
>in construing as a result of a parent sensitivity training program, does
>Devi's point imply that we should regard it as bad practise not to check
>out the analysis with the participant? Fels like a good idea, but
>immediately I'm thinking - Go back to the lab and do the analysis, then
>another appointment, another home visit ... Good argument for doing it all
>on a lap-top, I suppose, so as to be able to look at the the anlysis with
>the research paticipant immediately.
> ...
You may wish to look at Linda Viney's mutual orientation model of data
collection. Please don't ask me for the citation; don't have it, just the
model engraved in my self-as-researcher construct system. Perhaps someone
reading this can supply it. In my limited experience, I found the stage of
revealing preliminary findings to participants and asking them to confirm or
disconfirm them invaluable, both in terms of "validity" issues, and in
terms of collecting very rich additional qualitative data. The amazing
power of the grid is apparent when working with a participant who sees their
constructions mapped out and is asked for feedback. My own experience says
that this is a learning dialogue which, given the context of your study,
might be of value to the parents.
I won't bore the group with any further comments on this issue, but post me
privately if you want more details of how I've worked it out in the past.
Laptop is a wonderful idea, and I look forward to ideas about pulling it
off.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%