Meta-Study

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Meta-Study © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published version Ronkainen, Noora; Wiltshire, Gareth; Willis, Martin Ronkainen, N., Wiltshire, G., & Willis, M. (2022). Meta-Study. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15(1), 226-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984x.2021.1931941 2022 Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rirs20 International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rirs20 Meta-Study Noora Ronkainen, Gareth Wiltshire & Martin Willis To cite this article: Noora Ronkainen, Gareth Wiltshire & Martin Willis (2021): Meta-Study, International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, DOI: 10.1080/1750984X.2021.1931941 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2021.1931941 © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 27 May 2021. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 37 View related articles View Crossmark data Meta-Study Noora Ronkainen a , Gareth Wiltshire b and Martin Willis c a Department of Psychology, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland; b School of Sport Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; c School of Psychology, University of East London, London United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ABSTRACT Meta-study is a method for analysing the content and the process of knowledge production in a body of qualitative research. Conducting a meta-study involves four steps: (1) meta-dataanalysis which involves the study of empirical findings; (2) metamethod which examines the epistemological soundness and rigour of methods; (3) meta-theory which examines the structures, assumptions, and principles underpinning the primary research studies; and (4) meta-synthesis which brings the three steps together and considers the plausibility of existing accounts, what has been neglected, and what new avenues have been opened for advancing knowledge. Qualitative researchers in sport and exercise psychology (SEP) have recently started using metastudy to examine bodies of qualitative research in various areas including positive youth development, junior-to-senior transition, athletic identity and mental toughness development. Our review shows that meta-study has been a useful method for demonstrating how methodological developments have influenced how qualitative researchers apply methods and conceptualise the phenomena of interest. However, there have been diverse applications of meta-study and, in the absence of recent updates on the method, meta-study is in danger of remaining underdeveloped or becoming outdated. Based on the review, we outline guidelines for SEP scholars to employ metastudy rigorously. ARTICLE HISTORY Received 26 November 2020 Accepted 11 May 2021 KEYWORDS Epistemology; methodology; validity; synthesis; qualitative research Following the growth in the use of qualitative research methods in sport and exercise psychology (SEP) over the last 30 years (Poucher et al., 2020), the field is increasingly finding the need to take stock of knowledge on particular topics by bringing together the findings of multiple studies through some form of synthesis. Methods of synthesising the findings of separate studies are well developed for quantitative meta-analyses (Curran & Williams, 2020) and are used widely for qualitative research outside of sport and exercise (Williams & Shaw, 2016). All methods of synthesis to some degree are based on the idea that having an overview of many studies is better than just knowing © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. CONTACT Noora Ronkainen [email protected] INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SPORT AND EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2021.1931941 about one study –an assumption that not all qualitative researchers would agree on in the first place (Walsh & Downe, 2005). These tensions notwithstanding, qualitative researchers in SEP are often turning to research synthesis and are faced with a menu of available options that are grounded in various traditions. The purpose of this article is to outline and critically discuss one such approach; meta-study. This review seeks to provide an updated presentation of meta-study, to critically evaluate how the approach has been used in sport and exercise psychology (SEP), and to identify best practices in using it in our field. We begin by outlining the origin, history and scope of meta-study before providing a succinct characterisation of its essential components. We then offer insights into the current state of meta-study within the SEP field by giving an overview of the published meta-studies addressing SEP topics. To critically appraise the approach, we then suggest what some of the strengths and weaknesses might be and then note how the approach could be developed in future. Finally, the article concludes with guidelines for SEP researchers interested in conducting a metastudy. Origins of meta-Study The majority of contemporary meta-studies rely heavily on Paterson et al.’s(2001) key text, Meta-Study of Qualitative Health Research: A Practical Guide to Meta-Analysis and Meta-Synthesis. Within this text, meta-study is introduced as being an ‘advanced method’for ‘seasoned researchers’(p. ix) and an approach that involves ‘the analysis of theory, methods, and findings of qualitative research and the synthesis of those insights into new ways of thinking about phenomena’(p. 1). As a resource, the book provides researchers with the necessary conceptual underpinnings of the method as well as offering effective practical guidance through drawing heavily on the authors’previous attempts to synthesise qualitative research in chronic illness (e.g. Paterson et al., 1998; Thorne & Paterson, 1998). While one of the authors in particular –Sally Thorne –has continued to contribute to debates about methods of qualitative research synthesis (see Thorne, 2017; Thorne et al., 2004), there has been no second edition of the book and little development of the meta-study method (at least under this label) since its publication two decades ago. While Paterson et al. (2001) remains the ‘go-to’text for researchers wishing to undertake a meta-study of qualitative research, their work largely operationalises ideas that have a deeper history which may be of interest. For example, much is drawn from Noblit and Hare’s(1988) development of meta-ethnography as well as Ritzer’s(1991) work on meta-theorising in sociology. Indeed, another essential reading for researchers wishing to fully appreciate the origins of meta-studies in qualitative research is Zhao’s (1991) clear articulation of the meta-study ‘boom’which identifies the underlying structures common to meta-studies and a description of how it was being practised at the time. Importantly, there is a case to argue that all of these influences converge and capitalise on the ongoing appreciation in the second half of the twentieth century that the knowledge produced by science is to an extent socially constructed. Kuhn’s(1970) seminal work in the philosophy of science along with scholars contributing to the sociology of knowledge –such as Robert Merton (1973) and Ian Hacking (1999)–served to highlight that the process and historical situatedness of doing research cannot be ignored. 2N. RONKAINEN ET AL. Such ideas are incorporated into the assumptions of meta-studies. Put simply, if the findings of primary research are seen as constructions, then attempts to synthesise findings should pay greater attention to the socio-historical context of the research that produced those findings. For meta-study advocates, this includes accounting for the methods, concepts and theories used to construct research findings. Indeed, this is where meta-study can be seen as unique compared to other types of qualitative synthesis (e.g. realist review or meta-ethnography) in that a central interest is placed on analysing the processes of knowledge construction and how theories and methodologies have shaped the generated findings. In these terms, meta-study is based on a ‘constructivist’ underpinning and aims to provide a framework for analysing the problems of knowledge construction in social and health sciences. From these origins, the meta-study approach has grown in popularity and has been used across a range of disciplines where qualitative research is valued. According to Google Scholar, Paterson et al.’s(2001) text has over 1000 citations, suggesting that the method has gathered a substantial following. Indeed, meta-study is often recognised among one of the established methods of qualitative synthesis (Barnett-Page & Thomas, 2009; Campbell et al., 2011) and hence remains on the list of viable options for researchers to choose from. That said, meta-study could be seen by some as an increasingly marginal and specialist approach to synthesising qualitative research within contemporary trends – only one meta-study can be found in the Cochrane library of systemic reviews (Roe et al., 2007), for example. Sally Thorne’s(2017) recent critical commentary suggests that current trends in research synthesis are moving away from the characteristics of meta-study by moving towards a focus on rather ‘formulaic’and ‘standardised’procedural precision and a focus on reporting ‘hollow’and ‘superficial’findings without the contextual criticality that the original research deserves. Although some may wish to object to these critical characterisations of contemporary trends, it is certainly worth noting how key authors view the contrasts and distinctions between different approaches to research synthesis. Indeed, calling for something of a resistance to contemporary trends, what Thorne strongly advocates for is synthesis studies that, include the full spectrum of methodological orientations within the perspectival kaleidoscope, making informed interpretations about the disciplinary and theoretical traditions within which each primary researcher or research team was operating, and the influence those conditions may have had upon what they chose to articulate as their findings (Thorne, 2017, p. 10). This being said, a different view is put forward by Greenhalgh et al. (2018) which emphasises that it is more appropriate to see different approaches to synthesis as serving different and complementary purposes. Rather than existing in a hierarchy, some approaches serve the scientific community well by summarising data or findings, while others serve us well by deepening our understanding through providing interpretation and critique. Meta-study emphasises the latter of these two categories. Notwithstanding these debates about the position of meta-studies within the contemporary landscape of qualitative research synthesis, meta-study has demonstrated utility across a wide scope of research topics and disciplines. To offer a brief but helpful flavour of this work, a recent study used meta-study to synthesise research about INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SPORT AND EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY 3 women’s stories of living with breast cancer (Smit et al., 2019). The study produced core themes from the literature including ‘the burden of breast cancer’,‘existential ordeal’and ‘changes in self-image’and then put forward an explanatory framework for future research to use. In education, Thurlings and den Brok (2017) conducted a meta-study to investigate the professional development activities of teachers and showed that there is a good evidence base for claiming that teacher knowledge, teacher skills, and student learning are achieved through professional development activities. As another example, Graves (2019) used the approach to explore literature about people’s experiences of neighbourhood violence. The study revealed the multitude of factors that were significant in the decision-making process about residential re-location because of neighbourhood violence. While the scope of meta-studies appears to be broad in terms of the disciplines within which it is used and the topics that it is used to investigate, the approach does encourage researchers to bring their attention to particular areas of focus. This focus is the result of the three explicit phases of conducting a meta-study (as will be outlined later in greater detail) which begins with –perhaps most unsurprisingly –an attempt to combine findings from multiple studies in the hope of revealing a ‘birds-eye view’by pooling knowledge from otherwise isolated investigations. However, as Morgan (2003) pointed out, the next two phases are what distinguish meta-study from more traditional methods of qualitative synthesis. These phases of ‘meta-method’and ‘meta-theory’broaden the scope of the approach by asking the research team to say something about, respectively, how the methods used and the theoretical constructs deployed in the primary investigations actively shaped the reported findings. In this way, the scope of meta-studies extends beyond the synthesis of findings from separate studies and requires that methods and theories are brought into view. Components of meta-Study According to Paterson et al. (2001), meta-study involves analysis followed by synthesis. The analysis part consists of three components: meta-data-analysis, meta-method, and meta-theory. The three analysis components do not necessarily unfold sequentially; it is common for them to be conducted concurrently. The meta-synthesis stage must follow the analytic components, however, because it is derived from the results generated from them. Although it is beyond the scope of this article to give a detailed, step-bystep guide to conducting a meta-study the remainder of this section give an outline of its four components. Meta-data-analysis is the study of the findings of research in a particular area of inquiry. It involves, therefore, processing data which has already been processed by other researchers. In other words, it is an analysis of analyses reported in the publication of primary research. Meta-data-analysis should go beyond simply aggregating the findings of these studies, though. It requires critical interpretation of multiple accounts of a given phenomenon ‘in order to reveal the similarities and discrepancies among accounts’(Noblit & Hare, 1988; cited in Paterson et al., 2001,p.10).Inthisway, meta-data-analysis can be used to identify themes and divergences apparent in the literature on the topic of interest. Paterson et al. (2001)advocateanapproachthat includes both hermeneutic (involving representing the interpretations contained in 4N. RONKAINEN ET AL. the primary research) and dialectic (entailing a comparison of the interpretations of the primary researcher with other possible interpretations) processes. Nonetheless, any systematic interpretive approach that is used in the primary analysis of data could be appropriate for use in a meta-data-analysis. However, meta-study researchers should adopt a data analysis method or strategy that fits with their research question/ aims and design, whilst also keeping their paradigmatic assumptions in mind during meta-data-analysis. Meta-method involves studying the rigour and epistemological soundness of the method used in primary research studies. A key aspect of this includes determining the appropriateness of the specific methods for investigating the phenomenon of interest. Paterson et al. (2001) consider meta-method to involve noting both the details of the procedures (participant characteristics, sampling, data collection techniques) as well as broader considerations of how disciplinary assumptions, methodological traditions and researcher positionality shapes the research that is being produced. Since methodological decisions are an important factor in directing a particular field of study, meta-method can contribute to the development of theory and the creation of an explicit strategy for future research because it allows for a reinterpretation of how fundamental disciplinary assumptions shape the research we do and the conclusions we arrive at as a consequence of that research (Paterson et al., 2001). Meta-method techniques can also be applied to compare and contrast the findings of studies employing different methodological frameworks to explore the distinct implications of a range of approaches and epistemologies. Paterson et al. (2001) had themselves adapted Burns’s(1989) criteria for appraising quality of primary studies, but also suggested that there can be some criteria specific to the method being used. However, since qualitative research literature in this respect has significantly developed since the publication of these works, meta-study researchers are advised to consult more recent literature and be transparent in the choice of criteria used in evaluating methodological rigour. The third component –meta-theory –is the analysis of the structures, assumptions, and principles underpinning the primary research studies. This involves the scrutiny of features including ‘the philosophical, cognitive, and theoretical perspectives underlying research design strategies; the sources and assumptions inherent in emerging theory; and the consideration of the relationships between emerging theory and the larger contexts in which it has been generated’(Paterson et al., 2001, p. 13). Meta-theorizing can contribute towards novel or enhanced understandings about the application of theory in a substantive area, including creating strategies for evaluating and critiquing existing theories and providing stimulus for the generation of new theories. Finally, meta-synthesis draws together the ideas which have been deconstructed during engagement with the three analytic meta-study components. The aim at this stage should be to produce a new interpretation of a phenomenon, which is derived from analysing the data, method, and theory by which the phenomenon has been studied by others. Thus, the meta-study furnishes the opportunity to articulate theories that account for empirical complexities and contradictions within a field of study. It also provides the basis for insights into the implications of a variety of theoretical, methodological, and structural decisions of past, present, and future research on the phenomenon. INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SPORT AND EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY 5 Current state of knowledge in Sport and Exercise Psychology (SEP) To explore how SEP researchers have used meta-study, we conducted a review of metastudies in the field. Since our main aim was to appraise the ways meta-studies are used in SEP, explore current debates, and identify ways to improve practice, we followed a narrative review approach (Ferrari, 2015) and not a systematic review approach. We located the relevant studies using database searches (Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, PsycInfo) using keywords ‘meta-study’,‘sport psychology’and ‘exercise psychology’and reviewed citations and reference lists of already identified studies. Our inclusion criteria were: peerreviewed review articles published in English that use the meta-study method and address a topic in SEP. While the meta-study was first introduced at the turn of the millennium, in SEP the method has only more recently started to attract attention. The first meta-study in SEP was conducted by Tamminen and Holt (2010) who analysed qualitative studies to explore adolescent sport participants’stressor appraisals and coping in sport. After that, more meta-studies appeared in 2016 and focused on mental toughness development (Anthony et al., 2016) and athletic identity (Ronkainen et al., 2016a,2016b), to be then followed by more studies in the next few years (Drew et al., 2019; Holt et al., 2017; McHugh et al., 2019; Ryba et al., 2020). The emergence of meta-studies in SEP is likely linked to the expansion and diversification of the qualitative research landscape in the discipline and debates around paradigms, methodologies, and quality of qualitative research (e.g. Culver et al., 2012; Smith & McGannon, 2018; Sparkes & Smith, 2009). The meta-study, which involves the analysis of assumptions underlying theories and methods, has been ideally suited to scrutinise these features of qualitative research that have been a focus of debate. In Table 1, we have provided four examples of meta-studies and their key findings in meta-theory, meta-method and meta-data-analysis. In the next sections, we analyse how researchers in SEP have approached the three analysis components of the meta-study: meta-data-analysis, meta-method, and metatheory. Meta-data-analysis considerations Researchers in SEP have typically prioritised either the theoretical and methodological, or the empirical findings in their meta-studies. Studies with the primary research objective on theorising based on the meta-data-analysis (e.g. Anthony et al., 2016; McHugh et al., 2019; Tamminen & Holt, 2010) have developed new integrated models of the studied phenomena. For example, the main aim of Tamminen and Holt’s(2010) research was to develop an integrated theoretical perspective on adolescent athletes’sport stressor appraisals and coping. In the meta-data-analysis, they inductively coded the findings of the primary studies and organised them into themes (e.g. stressor appraisals are contextual and dynamic; coping is contextual and dynamic) and sub-categories (e.g. coping resources, reflection and learning) to synthesise them into a new model. As another example, Anthony et al. (2016) focused on developing a framework of mental toughness development from extant qualitative literature. In the meta-data-analysis, they used an adapted version of Noblit and Hare’s(1988) meta-ethnography, which involves determining the relationships between the reviewed studies and translating 6N. RONKAINEN ET AL. Table 1. Examples of Meta-Studies in SEP. Year Authors Topic Aims of the study Key findings: Meta-theory Key findings: Meta-method Key findings: Meta-data-analysis 2020 Massey & Williams Childhood trauma survivors’ sporting experiences Examining the philosophical, theoretical, historical, and methodological trends and their impact on knowledge production and how this knowledge can inform future research. Most studies did not explicitly connect their theoretical frameworks to philosophical assumptions 7/16 studies provided enough detail to assess methodological coherence. Concerns for the lack of rationale for chosen procedures and researcher reflexivity Four themes: a sense of belonging, environmental considerations, psychological escape, embodied experience. Sport is not a panacea for those who have experienced trauma. 2019 Drew et al. Junior-to-senior transition Critiquing methodological and theoretical issues in the literature; synthesising key factors influencing athletes’ junior-to-senior transition Two main theoretical models have been used. Cultural considerations have been often missing Participants were mainly from EuroAmerican contexts. Most studies relied on interviews. Lack of data from female participants. Identification of (1) individual (2) external and (3) cultural factors affecting transition, and intervention strategies to support athletes. 2017 Holt et al. Sport-based positive youth development (PYD) Creating a model of PYD based on (1) reviewing and evaluating qualitative studies and (2) analysing and synthesising the findings from identified studies 26/45 studies did not specify a conceptual framework. Only 14 studies explicated the philosophical perspective Studies used of multiple data collection methods. Samples were often not adequately described. ‘Named’methodologies were rarely used. Validity issues not addressed only in eight studies Three categories were inductively developed: PYD climate, life skills programme focus, and PYD outcomes 2016a Ronkainen et al. Athletic identity Examining the processes and findings of studies on athletic identity 37/45 studies identified a theoretical framework. The theorising of identity has shifted from role-based conceptions to cultural and contextualist approaches. Most common data collection method was interviewing. A broad range of data analysis methods was used. There was a lack of transparency in how methodological decisions were made Findings were analysed in relation to each theoretical perspective. Athletic identity could be a source of meaning and selfesteem, but problematic in moments of disruption and retirement. INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SPORT AND EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY 7 Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child development: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 793– 828). Wiley. Burns, N. (1989). Standards for qualitative research. Nursing Science Quarterly,2(1), 44–52. https:// doi.org/10.1177/089431848900200112 Campbell, R., Pound, P., Morgan, M., Daker-White, G., Britten, N., Pill, R., Yardley, L., Pope, C., & Donovan, J. (2011). Evaluating meta-ethnography: Systematic analysis and synthesis of qualitative research. Health Technology Assessment,15(43), https://doi.org/10.3310/hta15430 CASP. (2018). Critical appraisal skills Programme checklists. Retrieved 12th February, 2020, from https://casp-uk.net/#!casp-tools-checklists/c18f8 Clarke, N. J., Willis, M. E., Barnes, J. S., Caddick, N., Cromby, J., McDermott, H., & Wiltshire, G. (2015). Analytical pluralism in qualitative research: A meta-study. Qualitative Research in Psychology,12 (2), 182–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.948980 Culver, D. M., Gilbert, W., & Sparkes, A. (2012). Qualitative research in sport psychology journals: The next decade 2000-2009 and beyond. The Sport Psychologist,26(2), 261–281. https://doi.org/10. 1123/tsp.26.2.261 Curran, T., & Williams, T. (2020). Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. In D. Hackfort, & R. J. Schinke (Eds.), . The Routledge international encyclopedia of sport and exercise psychology volume 1: Theoretical and methodological concepts (pp. 275–290). Routledge. Drew, K., Morris, R., Tod, D., & Eubank, M. (2019). A meta-study of qualitative research on the juniorto-senior transition in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,45, 101556. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.psychsport.2019.101556 Ferrari, R. (2015). Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing,24(4), 230–235. https:// doi.org/10.1179/2047480615Z.000000000329 Graves, E. (2019). Moving to improve?: A qualitative meta-analysis of neighborhood violence and residential decision-making among housing voucher holders. Journal of Planning Literature,34 (1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412218795267 Greenhalgh, T., Thorne, S., & Malterud, K. (2018). Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? European Journal of Clinical Investigation,48(6), Article e12931. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12931 Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Harvard University Press. Holt, N. L., Neely, K. C., Slater, L. G., Camiré, M., Côté, J., Fraser-Thomas, J., …Tamminen, K. A. (2017). A grounded theory of positive youth development through sport based on results from a qualitative meta-study. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology,10(1), 1–49. https://doi. org/10.1080/1750984X.2016.1180704 Kelly, M., Ellaway, R. H., Reid, H., Ganshorn, H., Yardley, S., Bennett, D., & Dornan, T. (2018). Considering axiological integrity: A methodological analysis of qualitative evidence syntheses, and its implications for health professions education. Advances in Health Sciences Education,23 (4), 833–851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-018-9829-y Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press. Massey, W. V., & Williams, T. L. (2020). Sporting activities for individuals who experienced trauma during their youth: A meta-study. Qualitative Health Research,30(1), 73–87. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1049732319849563 McGannon, K. R., Smith, B., Kendellen, K., & Gonsalves, C. A. (2019). Qualitative research in six sport and exercise psychology journals between 2010 and 2017: An updated and expanded review of trends and interpretations. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19, 359–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2019.1655779 McHugh, T. L. F., Deal, C. J., Blye, C. J., Dimler, A. J., Halpenny, E. A., Sivak, A., & Holt, N. L. (2019). A meta-study of qualitative research examining sport and recreation experiences of indigenous youth. Qualitative Health Research,29(1), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732318759668 Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago press. 14 N. RONKAINEN ET AL. Morgan, M. (2003). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. London: SAGE. International Journal of Nursing Studies,40(2), 217. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0020-7489(02)00059-7 Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Sage. Paterson, B. L., Thorne, S. E., Canam, C., & Jillings, C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Sage. Paterson, B., Thorne, S., & Dewis, M. (1998). Adapting to and managing diabetes. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,30(1), 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.1998.tb01237.x Poucher, Z. A., Tamminen, K. A., Caron, J. G., & Sweet, S. N. (2020). Thinking through and designing qualitative research studies: A focused mapping review of 30 years of qualitative research in sport psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology,13(1), 163–186. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/1750984X.2019.1656276 Reyes, G., Banda, R. M., & Caldas, B. (2020). “We’re All in this boat together”: latina/chicana embodied pedagogies of care. Journal of Latinos and Education,1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431. 2020.1791120 Ritzer, G. (1991). Meta-theorizing in sociology. Lexington Books. Roe, B., Milne, J., Ostaszkiewicz, J., & Wallace, S. (2007). Systematic reviews of bladder training and voiding programmes in adults: A synopsis of findings on theory and methods using metastudy techniques. Journal of Advanced Nursing,57(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006. 04098.x Ronkainen, N. J., Kavoura, A., & Ryba, T. V. (2016a). A meta-study of athletic identity research in sport psychology: Current status and future directions. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology,9(1), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2015.1096414 Ronkainen, N. J., Kavoura, A., & Ryba, T. V. (2016b). Narrative and discursive perspectives on athletic identity: Past, present, and future. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,27, 128–137. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.08.010 Ronkainen, N. J., & Wiltshire, G. (2021). Rethinking validity in qualitative sport and exercise psychology research: A realist perspective. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,19(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2019.1637363 Ryba, T. V., Wiltshire, G., North, J., & Ronkainen, N. J. (2020). Developing mixed methods research in sport and exercise psychology: Potential contributions of a critical realist perspective. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X. 2020.1827002 Smit, A., Coetzee, B. J. S., Roomaney, R., Bradshaw, M., & Swartz, L. (2019). Women’s stories of living with breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence. Social Science & Medicine,222, 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.01.020 Smith, B., & McGannon, K. R. (2018). Developing rigor in qualitative research: Problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology,11(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2017.1317357 Sparkes, A. C., & Smith, B. (2009). Judging the quality of qualitative inquiry: Criteriology and relativism in action. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,10(5), 491–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. psychsport.2009.02.006 Tamminen, K. A., & Holt, N. L. (2010). A meta-study of qualitative research examining stressor appraisals and coping among adolescents in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences,28(14), 1563–1580. https:// doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2010.512642 Thorne, S. (2017). Metasynthetic madness: What kind of monster have we created? Qualitative Health Research,27(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316679370 Thorne, S., Jensen, L., Kearney, M. H., Noblit, G., & Sandelowski, M. (2004). Qualitative metasynthesis: Reflections on methodological orientation and ideological agenda. Qualitative Health Research, 14(10), 1342–1365. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732304269888 Thorne, S., & Paterson, B. (1998). Shifting images of chronic illness. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,30 (2), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.1998.tb01275.x INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SPORT AND EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY 15 Thurlings, M., & den Brok, P. (2017). Learning outcomes of teacher professional development activities: A meta-study. Educational Review,69(5), 554–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2017. 1281226 Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2005). Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing,50(2), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.x Williams, T. L., & Shaw, R. L. (2016). Synthesizing qualitative research: Meta-synthesis in sport and exercise. In B. Smith, & A. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise (pp. 296–310). Routledge. Zhao, S. (1991). Meta-theory, meta-method, meta-data-analysis: What, why, and how? Sociological Perspectives,34(3), 377–390. https://doi.org/10.2307/1389517 16 N. RONKAINEN ET AL.