untitled

Rogerian science perspective. Interpreting the

findings within a Rogerian perspective ad-

vances Rogerian science, practice, and research.

POTENTIAL ROGERIAN
RESEARCH DESIGNS

Cowling (1986) was among the first to suggest a
number of research designs that may be appropri-
ate for Rogerian research, including philosophical,
historical, and phenomenological ones. There is
strong support for the appropriateness of phenom-
enological methods in Rogerian science. Reeder
(1986) provided a convincing argument demon-
strating the congruence between Husserlian phe-
nomenology and the Rogerian science of unitary
human beings:

[G]iven the congruency between Husserlian phenom-
enology and the Rogerian conceptual system, a
sound, convincing rationale is established for the use
of this philosophy of science as an alternative for basic
theoretical studies in Rogerian nursing science....
Nursing research in general requires a broader range
of human experience than sensory experience
(whether intuitive or perceptive) in the development
and testing of conceptual systems for gaining better
access to multifaceted phenomena....Husserlian
phenomenology as a rigorous science provides just
such an experience. (p. 62)
Experimental and quasi-experimental designs
are problematic because of assumptions concern-
ing causality; however, these designs may be appro-
priate for testing propositions concerning
differences in the change process in relation to “in-
troduced environmental change” (Cowling, 1986,
p. 73). The researcher must be careful to interpret
the findings in a way that is consistent with Rogers’
notions of unpredictability, integrality, and nonlin-
earity. Emerging interpretive evaluation methods,
such as Guba and Lincoln’s (1989) Fourth
Generation Evaluation, offer an alternative means
for testing for differences in the change process
within and/or between groups more consistent
with the Science of Unitary Human Beings.
Cowling (1986) contended that in the early
stages of theory development, designs that generate
descriptive and explanatory knowledge are relevant
to the Science of Unitary Human Beings. For ex-
ample, correlational designs may provide evidence
of patterned changes among indices of the human
field. Advanced and complex designs with multiple

indicators of change that may be tested using linear

structural relations (LISREL) statistical analysis

may also be a means to uncover knowledge about

the pattern of change rather than just knowledge of

parts of a change process (Phillips, 1990a). Barrett

(1996) suggests that canonical correlation may be

useful in examining relationships and patterns

across domains and may also be useful for testing

theories pertaining to the nature and direction of

change. Another potentially promising area yet to

be explored is participatory action and cooperative

inquiry (Reason, 1994), because of their congru-

ence with Rogers’ notions of knowing participation

in change, continuous mutual process, and inte-

grality. Cowling (1998) proposed that a case-

oriented approach is useful in Rogerian research,

because case inquiry allows the researcher to attend

to the whole and strives to comprehend his or her

essence.

SELECTING A FOCUS

OF ROGERIAN INQUIRY

In selecting a focus of inquiry, concepts that are

congruent with the Science of Unitary Human

Beings are most relevant. The focus of inquiry

flows from the postulates, principles, and concepts

relevant to the conceptual system. Noninvasive vol-

untary patterning modalities, such as guided im-

agery, therapeutic touch, humor, sound, dialogue,

affirmations, music, massage, journaling, written

emotional expression, exercise, nutrition, reminis-

cence, aroma, light, color, artwork, meditation, sto-

rytelling, literature, poetry, movement, and dance,

provide a rich source for Rogerian science-based

research. Creativity, mystical experiences, tran-

scendence, sleeping-beyond-waking experiences,

time experience, and paranormal experiences as

they relate to human health and well-being are also

of interest in this science. Feelings and experiences

are a manifestation of human/environmental field

patterning and are a manifestation of the whole

(Rogers, 1970); thus, feelings and experiences rele-

vant to health and well-being are an unlimited

source for potential Rogerian research. Discrete

particularistic biophysical phenomena are usually

not an appropriate focus for inquiry because

Rogerian science focuses on irreducible wholes.

Diseases or medical diagnoses are not the focus

of Rogerian inquiry. Disease conditions are con-

ceptualized as labels and as manifestations of

178 SECTION III Nursing Theory in Nursing Practice, Education, Research, and Administration