Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA): A Step-by-Step Guide
Reviewed by Prof. Dr. Alexander Holtermann · Updated 16 October 2026 · 6 min read
IPA explores how individuals make sense of significant life experiences. It combines phenomenology, hermeneutics and idiography and works with small samples.
Key takeaways
- Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA), developed by Jonathan Smith, examines in detail how people make sense of major experiences in their lives.
- It rests on three pillars: phenomenology (experience on its own terms), hermeneutics (interpretation, including the double hermeneutic) and idiography (commitment to the particular case).
- IPA uses small, fairly homogeneous, purposive samples; in student projects, three to six participants are common.
- The analysis moves case by case from exploratory notes to experiential statements and personal experiential themes, then across cases to group experiential themes.
- The 2022 second edition by Smith, Flowers and Larkin introduced new terminology; use it consistently and cite the edition you follow.
What is IPA?
Interpretative phenomenological analysis is a qualitative approach for exploring how particular people, in a particular context, make sense of a particular experience. Jonathan Smith developed it in health psychology in the mid-1990s; the standard textbook is *Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research* by Smith, Flowers and Larkin, published in a second edition in 2022.
IPA is suited to experiences that are significant for participants: illness, transitions, identity changes, important decisions. Research questions are open and experiential, for example “How do first-generation students experience their first year at university?” rather than “What barriers do first-generation students face?”.
Running example: instead of 12 broad interviews, an IPA version of your belonging study would involve five first-generation students in their first year at the same university, interviewed in depth (60 to 90 minutes) about what it was like to arrive and find (or not find) their place.
The theoretical foundations: phenomenology, hermeneutics, idiography
IPA is not only a technique but a methodology with a clear philosophical background. Examiners expect you to explain it briefly in your methodology chapter.
| Pillar | Meaning | Consequence for your analysis |
|---|---|---|
| Phenomenology | Focus on lived experience as it appears to the person (drawing on Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Sartre) | Your questions and codes stay close to experience, not to abstract causes |
| Hermeneutics | Theory of interpretation; the double hermeneutic: you try to make sense of participants making sense of their experience | Analysis is openly interpretive; you move between parts and whole (hermeneutic circle) |
| Idiography | Commitment to the particular: each case is analysed in detail before general claims are made | Case-by-case analysis; small samples; individual voices remain visible in the findings |
Sampling and data collection
IPA uses purposive, fairly homogeneous samples: participants who share the experience in question and for whom the research question is meaningful. Sample sizes are deliberately small, because each case is analysed in depth. Smith and colleagues regard small samples as appropriate for student projects; three to six participants are common for master’s dissertations, larger numbers for doctoral work. More participants do not make an IPA study better if depth is lost.
The typical data source is the semi-structured interview with open, non-leading questions that invite detailed accounts: “Can you tell me about a moment when you felt you did not belong?” followed by prompts such as “How did that feel?” or “What did that mean to you?”. Diaries and other first-person accounts are also possible.
- Homogeneity: for example, first-year, first-generation students at one university, all living away from home
- Interviews of 60 to 90 minutes, verbatim transcription
- Interview guide as a loose schedule; follow the participant’s concerns
- Pilot interview to test whether questions elicit experiential accounts
The steps of IPA (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2022)
The 2022 edition describes the analysis as a set of steps that are applied flexibly. The most important terminology change: what used to be called “emergent themes” are now experiential statements; “superordinate themes” for a single case are now personal experiential themes (PETs); and themes across the sample are group experiential themes (GETs).
| Step | What you do |
|---|---|
| 1 Reading and re-reading | Immerse yourself in the first case; note your initial impressions to bracket them |
| 2 Exploratory notes | Comment on the transcript line by line: descriptive, linguistic and conceptual notes |
| 3 Constructing experiential statements | Turn notes into concise statements that capture the experience and your interpretation |
| 4 Searching for connections across experiential statements | Cluster statements by meaning, for example by abstraction, contrast or function |
| 5 Naming and organising personal experiential themes (PETs) | Give each cluster a title and create a table of PETs for this case |
| 6 Continuing with the next cases | Repeat steps 1 to 5 for each case, treating each on its own terms |
| 7 Developing group experiential themes (GETs) | Look for convergence and divergence across cases and build a table of GETs |
Writing up an IPA study
The findings are presented by group experiential themes, each with subthemes, and must keep the individual cases visible: show how the theme looks for different participants, including divergence. Quotes are used generously but always with interpretive commentary that demonstrates the double hermeneutic. A table showing which participants contribute to which GET is customary.
In the discussion, you relate your themes to existing literature and theory, which often only becomes relevant after the analysis. Reflexivity is essential: describe your own relation to the topic and how you dealt with it.
IPA has specific conventions, and some departments (particularly in psychology) have clear expectations about sample size, terminology and quality criteria. Follow your university’s guidelines and agree the approach with your supervisor; you can upload the guidelines to Professor Digital.
IPA compared with thematic analysis
IPA and reflexive thematic analysis are often confused because both develop themes. The differences lie in focus, sample and procedure.
- Choose IPA if the individual experience and its meaning are at the centre of your question
- Choose TA if you want patterns across a larger or more diverse sample, or if your question is not primarily experiential
- Our free tool at /codieren can help you keep exploratory notes as memos and organise experiential statements into themes
| Aspect | IPA | Reflexive thematic analysis |
|---|---|---|
| Theoretical basis | Fixed: phenomenology, hermeneutics, idiography | Flexible; you specify it |
| Research questions | Lived experience and sense-making | Broad range, including experiences, views, practices, representations |
| Sample | Small and homogeneous (often 3–10) | Varies, often larger (10–30) |
| Analysis | Case by case, then across cases | Across the dataset from the start |
| Result | Group experiential themes with individual variation | Patterns of shared meaning across the dataset |
Frequently asked questions
What is interpretative phenomenological analysis?
A qualitative approach developed by Jonathan Smith that explores in detail how individuals make sense of significant experiences, based on phenomenology, hermeneutics and idiography.
How many participants do I need for IPA?
IPA uses small, homogeneous samples. Three to six participants are common in master’s projects; doctoral studies often use more. Depth matters more than numbers.
What is the double hermeneutic in IPA?
The researcher tries to make sense of the participant trying to make sense of their experience. Both levels of interpretation are part of the analysis.
What are PETs and GETs in IPA?
Personal experiential themes (PETs) are themes for a single case; group experiential themes (GETs) capture convergence and divergence across cases. The terms were introduced in the 2022 edition by Smith, Flowers and Larkin.
What is the difference between IPA and thematic analysis?
IPA has a fixed phenomenological foundation, uses small homogeneous samples and analyses case by case. Thematic analysis is theoretically flexible and looks for patterns across the whole dataset.
Sources and further reading
- Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2022). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research (2nd ed.). Sage.
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage.
Your university’s examination regulations and style guide always take precedence.
Related articles
- Thematic analysisThematic analysis finds patterns of shared meaning (themes) in qualitative data. Braun and Clarke describe six recursive phases from familiarisation to report.
- Semi-structured interviewsA semi-structured interview follows an interview guide of open questions but lets you change order, follow up and probe. Typical: 8–15 interviews of 45–60 min.
- Analyzing interview dataTo analyze interviews, transcribe and anonymise them, choose a method, code systematically, develop themes or categories and check them against the data.
- Narrative analysisNarrative analysis studies how people tell stories about their lives: what they tell (thematic), how they tell it (structural) and for whom and why (dialogic).
- Sample sizeFor a survey with 95% confidence and a ±5% margin of error you need about 385 responses. For group comparisons, a power analysis sets the size.
