Menurut Willig
(1999: 52) meskipun fenomenologi transcendental dipahami sebagai sistem
pemikiran filsafat, rekomendasi metodologinya telah terbukti menarik minat
peneliti ilmu pengetahuan sosial umumnya dan psikologi khususnya. Hal ini
disebabkan fenomenologi memfokuskan diri pada isi kesadaran dan pengalaman
individu tentang dunia, seperti yang dinyatakan oleh Kvale (1996 b: 53) sebagai
berikut:
Fenomenologi
berminat menguraikan apa yang nampak maupun cara bagaimana sesuatu itu
menampakkan diri. Fenomenologi mempelajari perspektif subjek tentang dunianya;
berusaha menjelaskan secara detail isi dan kesadaran subjek, berusaha menangkap
keragaman kualitatif dari pengalaman-pengalaman mereka dan mengungkapkan
makna-makna yang esensiil pengalaman-pengalaman tersebut.
(“Even though transcendental phenomenology was conceived as a philosophical system of thought, its methodological recommendations have proved to be of interest to researchers in the social sciences in general and psychology in particular. This is because phenomenology focuses upon the content of consciousness and individual’s experience of the word as Kvale (1996 b:53) put it:
Phenomenology is interested in elucidating both that which appears and the manner in which it appears. It studies the subjects perspectives of their word; attempts to describe in detail the content and structure of the subjects consciouness, to grasp the qualitative diversity of their experiences and to explicate their essential meanings.
Selanjutnya dijelaskan: Penelitian fenomenologi empiris dalam psikologi telah dirintis dan diaplikasikan secara ekstentif di Universitas Duquesne di Amerika Serikat (lihat Van Kaam 1959, 1994; Georgi 1970, 1990; Georgi et al 1975). Topik-topik penelitian fenomenologi meliputi: “pemahaman perasaan” (Van Kaam 1959), “belajar” (Georgi 1975, 1985), “jadi korban” (Fisher dan Wertz, 1979), “amarah” (Stevick 1971), dan banyak fenomena yang lain dari pengalaman manusia. Kenyataanya pengalaman manusia dapat dianalisis secara fenomenologis. Inilah alasan lain mengapa fenomenologi merupakan pendekatan yang menarik bagi peneliti-peneliti psikologi. Akan tetapi terdapat perbedaan dalam fokus dan penekanan antara fenomenologi transcendental dan penggunaan metoda fenomenologi dalam psikologi. (“Empirical phenomenonlogical research in psychology was pioneered and applied extensively at Duquesne University in the USA (see Van Kaam 1959, 1994; Georgi 1970, 1994; Georgi et al. 1975). Topics of phenomenological investigation included “feeling understood” (Van Kaam 1959), “learning” (Georgi 1975, 1985), “being victimized” (Fisher and Wentz 1979), “angry” (Stevick 1971), and many other phenomena of human experience. In fact, any human experience can be subjected to phenomenological analysis. This is another reason why this approach appeals to psychological researchers. However, there are differences in focus and emphasis between transcendental phenomenology and the use of the phenomenological method in psychology (Willig, 1999:52-53).
Spinelli (1989) menunjukan bahwa psikologi fenomenologi lebih memperhatikan keberagaman dan variasi pengalaman manusia daripada mengidentifikasi esensi-esensi dalam pengertian Husserl. Tambahan pula penelitian-penelitian fenomenologi dalam psikologi, jika ada mengklaim bahwa tidak mungkin “menyingkirkan” seluruh prasangka dan bias dalam suatu perenungan tentang suatu fenomena. Agaknya, usaha memberi tanda kurung pada fenomena, hanya untuk memungkinkan peneliti melakukan pengujian secara kritis atas cara biasa untuk mengetahui sesuatu. Akhirnya sangat penting untuk melakukan pembedaan antara perenungan fenomenologi tentang suatu objek atau kejadian sebagaimana ia menampakan diri kepada peneliti, dan analisis fenomenologi atas laporan pengalaman khusus seperti yang disampaikan oleh peneliti terlibat. Perenungan fenomenologis menuntut (mensyaratkan) intropeksi oleh seseorang terhadap pengalamannya sendiri, sementara analisis terhadap laporan pengalaman terlibat merupakan upaya “masuk ke dalam” pengalaman orang lain atas dasar deskripsi mereka tentang pengalamannya. Dalam penelitian psikologi fenomenologis laporan pengalaman terlibat dijadikan fenomena yang dianalisis oleh peneliti. (“Spinelli (1989) pointed out that phenomenological psychology is more concerned with the diversity and variability of human experience than with the identification of essences in Husserl’s sense. In addition, few, if any, phenomenological researchers in psychology would claim that it is possible to suspend all presuppotions and biases in one’s contemplation of a phenomenon. Rather the attempt to bracket the phenomenon allows the researchers to engage in a critical examination of his or her customary ways of knowing (about) it (see reflexity. p. 10). Finally, it is important to differentiate between phenomenological contemplation of an object or event as it present it self to the researcher, and phenomenological analysis of an account of a particular experience as presented by a research participant. The former requires introspective attention to one’s own experience, where as the latter an attempt to “get inside” someone else’s experience on the basis of their description of it. In phenomenological psychological research, the research participotion’s account becomes the phenomenon with which the researcher engages”) (Willig, 1999: 53).
(“Even though transcendental phenomenology was conceived as a philosophical system of thought, its methodological recommendations have proved to be of interest to researchers in the social sciences in general and psychology in particular. This is because phenomenology focuses upon the content of consciousness and individual’s experience of the word as Kvale (1996 b:53) put it:
Phenomenology is interested in elucidating both that which appears and the manner in which it appears. It studies the subjects perspectives of their word; attempts to describe in detail the content and structure of the subjects consciouness, to grasp the qualitative diversity of their experiences and to explicate their essential meanings.
Selanjutnya dijelaskan: Penelitian fenomenologi empiris dalam psikologi telah dirintis dan diaplikasikan secara ekstentif di Universitas Duquesne di Amerika Serikat (lihat Van Kaam 1959, 1994; Georgi 1970, 1990; Georgi et al 1975). Topik-topik penelitian fenomenologi meliputi: “pemahaman perasaan” (Van Kaam 1959), “belajar” (Georgi 1975, 1985), “jadi korban” (Fisher dan Wertz, 1979), “amarah” (Stevick 1971), dan banyak fenomena yang lain dari pengalaman manusia. Kenyataanya pengalaman manusia dapat dianalisis secara fenomenologis. Inilah alasan lain mengapa fenomenologi merupakan pendekatan yang menarik bagi peneliti-peneliti psikologi. Akan tetapi terdapat perbedaan dalam fokus dan penekanan antara fenomenologi transcendental dan penggunaan metoda fenomenologi dalam psikologi. (“Empirical phenomenonlogical research in psychology was pioneered and applied extensively at Duquesne University in the USA (see Van Kaam 1959, 1994; Georgi 1970, 1994; Georgi et al. 1975). Topics of phenomenological investigation included “feeling understood” (Van Kaam 1959), “learning” (Georgi 1975, 1985), “being victimized” (Fisher and Wentz 1979), “angry” (Stevick 1971), and many other phenomena of human experience. In fact, any human experience can be subjected to phenomenological analysis. This is another reason why this approach appeals to psychological researchers. However, there are differences in focus and emphasis between transcendental phenomenology and the use of the phenomenological method in psychology (Willig, 1999:52-53).
Spinelli (1989) menunjukan bahwa psikologi fenomenologi lebih memperhatikan keberagaman dan variasi pengalaman manusia daripada mengidentifikasi esensi-esensi dalam pengertian Husserl. Tambahan pula penelitian-penelitian fenomenologi dalam psikologi, jika ada mengklaim bahwa tidak mungkin “menyingkirkan” seluruh prasangka dan bias dalam suatu perenungan tentang suatu fenomena. Agaknya, usaha memberi tanda kurung pada fenomena, hanya untuk memungkinkan peneliti melakukan pengujian secara kritis atas cara biasa untuk mengetahui sesuatu. Akhirnya sangat penting untuk melakukan pembedaan antara perenungan fenomenologi tentang suatu objek atau kejadian sebagaimana ia menampakan diri kepada peneliti, dan analisis fenomenologi atas laporan pengalaman khusus seperti yang disampaikan oleh peneliti terlibat. Perenungan fenomenologis menuntut (mensyaratkan) intropeksi oleh seseorang terhadap pengalamannya sendiri, sementara analisis terhadap laporan pengalaman terlibat merupakan upaya “masuk ke dalam” pengalaman orang lain atas dasar deskripsi mereka tentang pengalamannya. Dalam penelitian psikologi fenomenologis laporan pengalaman terlibat dijadikan fenomena yang dianalisis oleh peneliti. (“Spinelli (1989) pointed out that phenomenological psychology is more concerned with the diversity and variability of human experience than with the identification of essences in Husserl’s sense. In addition, few, if any, phenomenological researchers in psychology would claim that it is possible to suspend all presuppotions and biases in one’s contemplation of a phenomenon. Rather the attempt to bracket the phenomenon allows the researchers to engage in a critical examination of his or her customary ways of knowing (about) it (see reflexity. p. 10). Finally, it is important to differentiate between phenomenological contemplation of an object or event as it present it self to the researcher, and phenomenological analysis of an account of a particular experience as presented by a research participant. The former requires introspective attention to one’s own experience, where as the latter an attempt to “get inside” someone else’s experience on the basis of their description of it. In phenomenological psychological research, the research participotion’s account becomes the phenomenon with which the researcher engages”) (Willig, 1999: 53).