Step 1: All interview texts were read through in order to become familiar with the content. In many cases, several readings were required, which provided a preparation for the next step. Any ambiguities or contradictions were reduced or not interpreted but described as such. Step 2: The whole text material was divided into meaning units. For each change in the meaning of the text, a note was made in the margin. This was a practical step, as the meaning units cannot stand alone but are always part of a whole.
Step 3: The meaning of each unit was developed through imaginary variations. The meanings that had become visible in the meaning units were elucidated by means of language, descriptive in character and termed transformations. Everyday language was employed and theoretical formulations avoided. The transformations often meant an expansion rather than a reduction of the text and helped to identify the constituents of the phenomenon. Table 1 illustrates the analysis of steps 2 and 3.
Step 4: The constituents and imaginary variations were used to develop the general structure of the phenomenon. Its structure could be described due to the author’s understanding of the interrelationship between the meanings of the units. Finally, the constituents were described as well as their relationship to each other, thus constituting the phenomenon. There was a back and forth movement between the whole and the parts of the material and nothing was left out. This result gives examples from the various interviews; informants' statements are numbered from 1 to 5.
RESULTS