The value of artefacts in stimulated-recall interviews

Sarah Burden, Annie Topping, Catherine O'Halloran

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim: To assess the use of artefacts in semi-structured, stimulated-recall interviews in a study exploring mentors’ decisions regarding students’ competence in practice.

Background: Few empirical studies have examined how mentors reach a decision when assessing students’ performance in practice. Concerns have repeatedly been voiced that students may lack essential skills at the point of registration or that mentors may have failed or been reticent to judge students’ performance as unsatisfactory.

Data sources Student practice assessment documents (PADs) were used in stimulated-recall (SR) interviews with mentors to explore decision making.

Review methods: A review of the literature identified that artefacts can play a role in triggering a more comprehensive retrospective examination of decision making, thus helping to capture the essence of a mentor’s decision over time and in context.

Discussion: Use of an artefact to stimulate recall can elicit evidence of thought processes, which may be difficult to obtain in a normal, semi-structured interview. PADs proved to be a valuable way to generate naturalistic decision making. In addition, discussion of artefacts created by participants can promote participant-driven enquiry, thereby reducing researcher bias.

Conclusion: Identifying an approach that captures post hoc decision making based on sustained engagement and interaction between students and their mentors was a challenge. Artefacts can be used to address the difficulties associated with retrospective introspection about a unique decision.

Implications for practice/research: There is the potential to increase the use of artefacts in healthcare research. SR can also help novice mentors develop their skills in making decisions regarding assessments of students.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)26-33
Number of pages8
JournalNurse researcher
Volume23
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 14 Sep 2015

Fingerprint

Mentors
Artifacts
Interviews
Students
Decision Making
Information Storage and Retrieval
Health Services Research
Mental Competency
Research Personnel
Research

Cite this

Burden, Sarah ; Topping, Annie ; O'Halloran, Catherine. / The value of artefacts in stimulated-recall interviews. In: Nurse researcher. 2015 ; Vol. 23, No. 1. pp. 26-33.
@article{db6099e093d6412cbf528f16df636f87,
title = "The value of artefacts in stimulated-recall interviews",
abstract = "Aim: To assess the use of artefacts in semi-structured, stimulated-recall interviews in a study exploring mentors’ decisions regarding students’ competence in practice.Background: Few empirical studies have examined how mentors reach a decision when assessing students’ performance in practice. Concerns have repeatedly been voiced that students may lack essential skills at the point of registration or that mentors may have failed or been reticent to judge students’ performance as unsatisfactory.Data sources Student practice assessment documents (PADs) were used in stimulated-recall (SR) interviews with mentors to explore decision making.Review methods: A review of the literature identified that artefacts can play a role in triggering a more comprehensive retrospective examination of decision making, thus helping to capture the essence of a mentor’s decision over time and in context.Discussion: Use of an artefact to stimulate recall can elicit evidence of thought processes, which may be difficult to obtain in a normal, semi-structured interview. PADs proved to be a valuable way to generate naturalistic decision making. In addition, discussion of artefacts created by participants can promote participant-driven enquiry, thereby reducing researcher bias.Conclusion: Identifying an approach that captures post hoc decision making based on sustained engagement and interaction between students and their mentors was a challenge. Artefacts can be used to address the difficulties associated with retrospective introspection about a unique decision.Implications for practice/research: There is the potential to increase the use of artefacts in healthcare research. SR can also help novice mentors develop their skills in making decisions regarding assessments of students.",
keywords = "artefact, stimulated recall interviews, decision making, mixed methods, students, mentors",
author = "Sarah Burden and Annie Topping and Catherine O'Halloran",
year = "2015",
month = "9",
day = "14",
doi = "10.7748/nr.23.1.26.e1324",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "26--33",
journal = "Nurse researcher",
issn = "1351-5578",
publisher = "RCN Publishing Company",
number = "1",

}

Burden, S, Topping, A & O'Halloran, C 2015, 'The value of artefacts in stimulated-recall interviews', Nurse researcher, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 26-33. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.23.1.26.e1324

The value of artefacts in stimulated-recall interviews. / Burden, Sarah; Topping, Annie; O'Halloran, Catherine.

In: Nurse researcher, Vol. 23, No. 1, 14.09.2015, p. 26-33.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The value of artefacts in stimulated-recall interviews

AU - Burden, Sarah

AU - Topping, Annie

AU - O'Halloran, Catherine

PY - 2015/9/14

Y1 - 2015/9/14

N2 - Aim: To assess the use of artefacts in semi-structured, stimulated-recall interviews in a study exploring mentors’ decisions regarding students’ competence in practice.Background: Few empirical studies have examined how mentors reach a decision when assessing students’ performance in practice. Concerns have repeatedly been voiced that students may lack essential skills at the point of registration or that mentors may have failed or been reticent to judge students’ performance as unsatisfactory.Data sources Student practice assessment documents (PADs) were used in stimulated-recall (SR) interviews with mentors to explore decision making.Review methods: A review of the literature identified that artefacts can play a role in triggering a more comprehensive retrospective examination of decision making, thus helping to capture the essence of a mentor’s decision over time and in context.Discussion: Use of an artefact to stimulate recall can elicit evidence of thought processes, which may be difficult to obtain in a normal, semi-structured interview. PADs proved to be a valuable way to generate naturalistic decision making. In addition, discussion of artefacts created by participants can promote participant-driven enquiry, thereby reducing researcher bias.Conclusion: Identifying an approach that captures post hoc decision making based on sustained engagement and interaction between students and their mentors was a challenge. Artefacts can be used to address the difficulties associated with retrospective introspection about a unique decision.Implications for practice/research: There is the potential to increase the use of artefacts in healthcare research. SR can also help novice mentors develop their skills in making decisions regarding assessments of students.

AB - Aim: To assess the use of artefacts in semi-structured, stimulated-recall interviews in a study exploring mentors’ decisions regarding students’ competence in practice.Background: Few empirical studies have examined how mentors reach a decision when assessing students’ performance in practice. Concerns have repeatedly been voiced that students may lack essential skills at the point of registration or that mentors may have failed or been reticent to judge students’ performance as unsatisfactory.Data sources Student practice assessment documents (PADs) were used in stimulated-recall (SR) interviews with mentors to explore decision making.Review methods: A review of the literature identified that artefacts can play a role in triggering a more comprehensive retrospective examination of decision making, thus helping to capture the essence of a mentor’s decision over time and in context.Discussion: Use of an artefact to stimulate recall can elicit evidence of thought processes, which may be difficult to obtain in a normal, semi-structured interview. PADs proved to be a valuable way to generate naturalistic decision making. In addition, discussion of artefacts created by participants can promote participant-driven enquiry, thereby reducing researcher bias.Conclusion: Identifying an approach that captures post hoc decision making based on sustained engagement and interaction between students and their mentors was a challenge. Artefacts can be used to address the difficulties associated with retrospective introspection about a unique decision.Implications for practice/research: There is the potential to increase the use of artefacts in healthcare research. SR can also help novice mentors develop their skills in making decisions regarding assessments of students.

KW - artefact

KW - stimulated recall interviews

KW - decision making

KW - mixed methods

KW - students

KW - mentors

UR - http://journals.rcni.com/toc/nr/23/1

U2 - 10.7748/nr.23.1.26.e1324

DO - 10.7748/nr.23.1.26.e1324

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 26

EP - 33

JO - Nurse researcher

JF - Nurse researcher

SN - 1351-5578

IS - 1

ER -