Husserl and Heidegger’s PhenomenologyPhenomenology refers both to philosophical framework and to epistemological orientation. As epistemology, phenomenology has had major implications for the social sciences, providing the fundamental tenets and methods for qualitative research. Originator of the phenomenological approach, Husserl proposed that human consciousness undergirds experience, but that both must be transcended, acknowledged, and set aside in order to reach the truth of any given phenomenon. Husserl therefore favored the use of descriptive methods, which aim for objectivity as much as possible. Husserl’s student Martin Heidegger rejected the notion that it was even possible at all to ascertain some objective understanding (Reiners, 2012). Instead, Heidegger celebrated what individual ascriptions of meaning had to offer when interpreting phenomena. Whereas Husserl’s epistemology is concerned with how and why people feel, think, or believe what they do, Heidegger’s ontological and hermeneutical methods are more concerned with discerning the nature of consciousness itself and the conclusions that can be drawn from lived experience. Husserl’s work went on to inform descriptive research methods used in the social sciences, whereas Heidegger’s work gave rise to interpretive research methods. Research methods like interviews can be used with either a descriptive or an interpretive approach to phenomenological psychology.

Descriptive (Husserl-based) Phenomenological Methods

Descriptive phenomenological research methods emerged from Husserl. The main tenets of descriptive phenomenological methods are to allow the participants to share their descriptions and thereby construct the lived experience independently of the researcher’s own background, perspective, or biases. Conclusions can be drawn from a set of data collected from methods such as interviewing. One goal of descriptive phenomenological research is the construction of meaning based on the phenomena of lived experiences. Phenomenological researchers like Giorgi (2007) developed systematic...

Unstructured interviews, during which participants relay their narratives using the language or even non-verbal communications of their choice, are one of the cornerstones of descriptive phenomenological research. Descriptive phenomenology can also use other data collection methods such as diaries, collections of oral histories. Researchers bracket their biases as much as possible using descriptive phenomenological methods, by refraining from asking too many guided questions or basing their research on a hypothesis. In some cases, the researcher may seek patterns in the data, which can then be qualified, clarified, or verified by further engagement with the participants: a method promoted by Colaizzi (Reiners, 2012). Other descriptive phenomenologists advocate the use of “expert judges” to ensure research validity (Reiners, 2012, p. 2). However, the Giorgi method of descriptive phenomenological research negates the importance of any sort of validation during the data collection process, instead relying solely on the raw and unfiltered data.
Interpretive (Heidegger-based) Phenomenological Methods

Heidegger’s phenomenology gives rise to research methods that focus “on the human being’s existence in their world as an individual and within their social context,” (Horrigan-Kelly, Millar & Dowling, 2016, p. 5). The individual’s lived experience, their feelings, thoughts, impressions, and sense of self, are all taken into consideration along with contextual variables such as race, class, or gender. Some methods of analysis based on Heidegger’s interpretive phenomenology are described as “hermeneutic circle” because the researcher continually reviews the data and generates new questions (Reiners, 2012). The researcher assumes more of a participant-observer role, in that there is no pretense to shed biases, backgrounds, beliefs, or theoretical frameworks. Rather, the researcher is firmly situated within the phenomena being studied. Specific methods used can…