Systematic Literature Reviews: Meta-ethnography

Meta-ethnography as a form of knowledge synthesis for social sciences

By Ilana Chirombo (i.chirombo@ru.ac.za)

As described on the homepage of this subject guide, systematic reviews are often applied to biomedical, science and even commerce fields, there are ways to use a review method in social science studies. This is a brief introduction to one approach to do so, namely meta-ethnography.

Why meta-ethnography?

A mistake is often made of directly translating review methods of quantitative studies to qualitative ones. The reliance on review methods such as check-lists, standards, hierarchies of evidence, etc cause much of the nuance in qualitative data to get lost. A qualitative systematic review is best done with qualitative methods, rather than trying to adapt quantitative systematic review methods or systems (Jones, 2004). Popay, Rogers and Williams (1998: 346), say that “the hallmark of good qualitative methodology is its flexibility rather than its standardisation” (in Jones, 2004: 96).

In light of this, Noblit and Hare’s review method of meta-ethnography, originally published in 1988, offers a solution to conducting a review over multiple ethnographies. Noblit and Hare’s book is available in the library:

http://opac.seals.ac.za/search/?searchtype=X&SORT=D&searcharg=noblit+and+hare&searchscope=26

Brief introduction to the phases of conducting a meta-ethnography:

A meta-ethnographic endeavour, as set out by Noblit and Hare, is made up of seven phases.

PHASE 1 Getting started:

• Settling on a research interest / topic that is worth studying in the eyes of the researcher. 
• The researcher then needs to read interpretive studies and ask “How can I inform my intellectual interest by examining some sets of studies?” (2010: 338).

PHASE 2 Deciding what is relevant to the initial interest:

• Setting up the parameters for material chosen for the meta-ethnography – a crucial step.
• The researcher needs to justify every choice at every step, such as why a certain number of studies, be it large or small, is being studied together.
• Part of this decision-making process is understanding who the intended audience is for the synthesis.
• In searching for material it is important to be as thorough as possible, ultimately avoiding  generalisations from the different studies which risks producing superficial results, because the complexity of doing a meta-ethnographic review begins with the contextual nature of individual ethnographies.

PHASE 3 Reading the studies:

• Reading the studies is an ongoing and intricate part of the meta-ethnographic process, not only in the beginning and moving on to analysis.
•  This repeated reading of texts to uncover metaphors is essential to extract what is of concern to one’s chosen lens.

PHASE 4 Determining how the studies are related:

• This determination of the relationships between the studies is central to the meta-ethnographic process.
• Noblit and Hare suggest compiling a list of pertinent metaphors, concepts, ideas and phrases, as well as their relationships to each other, and juxtapose them.
• By the end of this phase initial assumptions about their relationships can be made.

PHASE 5 Translating the studies into one another:

• On one hand translations are analogies – asking questions such what are the similarities between the studies, and how do they differ?
• On the other hand they are more complex than simply an analogy. Noblit and Hare specify that “translations [tie together] unique syntheses, because they protect the particular, respect holism, and enable comparison” (2010: 339).
• A good translation plays a dual function, both within each study and between the various studies.
• The main metaphors and concepts within one account are maintained in relation to other metaphors and concepts in that same account. Similarly, it compares metaphors and concepts in one study, with that of another study.

PHASE 6 Synthesizing translations:

• Noblit and Hare’s define synthesis as referring “to making a whole into something more than the parts alone imply” (2010: 339).
• The translations are one level of a synthesis.
• If there are many, varied studies in the meta-ethnographic synthesis, and therefore many translations, these can be further compared to provide a second level of synthesis, by looking for themes, metaphors and concepts within and between the translations.               

PHASE 7 Expressing the synthesis:

• A popular means of disseminating studies such as research syntheses is writing for an academic audience.
• Other means to share the information could be “Videos, plays, art, and music all seem to be reasonable depending on the audience and the form they respect” (Noblit and Hare, 2010: 339). Taking the audience of the research into consideration and assessing the audience, helps the researcher to communicate intelligibly and appropriately.
• Noblit and Hare point out that this is “not to pander to the audience … [but rather] for the purpose of enabling an audience to stretch and see the phenomena in terms of others’ interpretations and perspectives” (2010: 340).
• In order to achieve this we need as much understanding of the audience’s culture as we do the culture of the studies used in the synthesis, thereby signifying both their commonality and their uniqueness (ibid).

 

Where to from here?

The above summary of the practical steps set out for a meta-ethnographic knowledge synthesis are merely a short introduction. There are many more philosophical and methodological concerns and decisions that come in to play. Below are links to some youtube videos further exploring meta-ethnography:

Introduction to meta-ethnography – Ruth Garside

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMcteRM4RGA

What is meta ethnography? Ruth France

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPYL3oAwb4Q

Meta-ethnography then and now – G. Noblit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3BB0IschGk

 

An online literature search on meta-ethnography in your particular research area will yield papers and studies highlighting the researchers’ practical experiences of conducting meta-ethnographic research.