以「雙重詮釋」概念，理解質性研究之多元面貌

Understanding the multifaceted perspectives and methods of qualitative research using the concept of ＂Double Hermeneutics＂

10.6288/TJPH201635105029

賴文恩(Wen-An Lai)；李秉學(Ping-Hsueh Lee)

質性研究 ； 雙重詮釋 ； 測不準定理 ； qualitative research ； Double Hermeneutics ； uncertainty principle

台灣公共衛生雜誌

35卷4期（2016 / 08 / 01）

351 - 358

繁體中文

目前，公共衛生領域，有愈來愈多學者，採質性研究探索實務與理論問題，然而，國內較少討論質性研究科學哲學理論背景的文章。質性研究是引自社會學界之研究方法，自二十世紀初期以來，就以多元面貌出現：其理論基礎，包括後實證主義、扎根理論、建構詮釋學、批判主義、女性主義、後現代主義等；資料收集方式包括深度訪談、觀察法、民族誌法、行動研究、文獻實物分析等；不同學術背景，也有包羅萬象的研究內容。因此，對於何謂質性研究，並沒有一個明確的定義，對於背後的科學哲學理念，也沒有一致的共識，以致於不同背景的初學者，對於不同取向與方法之異同、對錯及應用時機，常常有所混淆，對於如何整合質性研究與量性研究，也不易了解。本文作者以一個寓言故事開始，嘗試以紀登斯「雙重詮釋」的概念，描繪創意、多元、互為主體的社會現象，理解質性研究的內涵、多元的面貌與共通的特徵，並說明在科學哲學的層次上，如何可能整合質性研究與量性研究的理論基礎。

Nowadays, many researchers adopt qualitative methods to investigate practical or theoretical issues in public health; however, few articles introduced the philosophical and methodological considerations when applying qualitative approaches. Since the beginning of the 20^(th) century, qualitative research originated within the community of sociology and other related academic disciplines with multifaceted perspectives and methods. Different qualitative researchers investigate diverse sociological phenomenon or issues with various study designs in accordance with their academic backgrounds. Their studies are based on different theoretical perspectives such as post-positivism, grounded theory, constructive hermeneutics, critical theory, feminism, or postmodernism. They collect data with different methods including in-depth interviews, participant observation, ethnography, or action research. Because of the diversity of their philosophical backgrounds, there is still no clear definition of qualitative research. Novice researchers frequently lose their way in the terminology jungle of different schools of qualitative research. They also encounter difficulty in understanding how to integrate qualitative and quantitative research methods. In this article, which begins with a fable, the authors try to clarify the philosophical essence of qualitative research using the concept of ＂double hermeneutics＂ and explore the possibility of integrating qualitative and quantitative research methodologies.

1. Drislane R, Parkinson G. Qualitative research. In online dictionary of the social sciences. Available at: http://bitbucket.icaap.org/dict.pl. Accessed July 15, 2016.
2. Crabtree, BF(ed.),Miller, WL(ed.)(1992).Doing Qualitative Research.London, UK:Sage.
3. Creswell, JW(2003).Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
4. Creswell, JW(2014).A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research (Sage Mixed Methods Research).Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
5. Denzin, NK(ed.),Lincoln, YS(ed.)(2005).The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
6. Giddens, A(1993).New Rules of Sociological Method.Standford:Standford University Press.
7. Merriam, SB(2009).Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
8. Morse, JM(ed.)(1992).Qualitative Health Research.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
9. Patton, MQ(2014).Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice.London, UK:Sage.
10. 王榮德(1996)。流行病學方法論─猜測與否證的研究。台北=Taipei:健康文化事業股份有限公司=Health World Co.。
11. 胡幼慧編(1996)。質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北=Taipei:巨流圖書公司=Chuliu Publisher。
12. 陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。台北=Taipei:五南圖書出版公司=Wu-Nan Book Inc。
13. 葉啟政編(1991)。當代西方思想先河：十九世紀的思想家。台北=Taipei:正中書局=Cheng Chung。
14. 謝臥龍編(2004)。質性研究。台北=Taipei:心理出版社=Psychological Publishing Co.。

1. 陳心怡,唐宜楨,何堯凱(2021)。從醫療人員觀點來看兒童醫療決策參與權利。醫學與健康期刊，10(2)，61-72。