DEVELOPMENTAL CRISIS IN EARLY ADULTHOOD: A ...

Question 3 asked whether the model omitted or contradicted an aspect of the
person’s experience of crisis:
3. Do you think that the model contradicts or omits any key aspects of your
experience of crisis? Yes / No. If yes, please elaborate
To this question, 5 individuals responded yes and 9 individuals responded no.
Those 5 who responded yes to this question were further asked what had been omitted
or contradicted. Three wrote that while all four phases were present in their crisis,
they did not precede in the linear order that the model describes, but rather overlapped
and cycled back on one another. For example:
“For me Phases 3 & 4 have not been sequential; they overlap and their duration is
unclear. I could argue that I'm still in Phase 3, though certainly there are elements of
Phase 4 in evidence in my life. To my mind the 4 Phases of the model can be further
split into 2 key stages by grouping Phases 1 & 2, and 3 & 4.” (Rob, feedback email)
“I think the model overly simplifies my experience…My case was far more complex
than this. Furthermore the phases did not happen sequentially. There was significant
merging and some repetition of phases. For me therefore the model lacks some
flexibility.” (Lynne, feedback email)
This fits with the point made in Chapters 6 and 9 that the phases of the model are by
no means absolute, and may haze into one another and cycle around on one another in
some cases, but also may point to the fact that the model has simplified the trajectory
of crisis in order to promote coherence and parsimony. As described in Chapter 4, a
qualitative project must balance coherence/diversity and simplicity/complexity in
presenting findings, and this balance perhaps could have been better in this project to
more strongly emphasise diversity. It may well be that in continued research into
crisis, I find a way to develop and portray the crisis model that better honours the
nonlinear and cyclical nature of crisis more than the current phase model. The
feedback from this participant validation exercise has given further motivation to
develop the model in this less linear direction.
One other participant described in response to Question 3 how the model did
not fully capture the transformational aspect of crisis, which is a valid criticism, as
certain data on transformation are not included in the model of Chapter 9. The issue
of transformation metaphors and descriptions has had less attention than the basic
dynamics of crisis and could be given more intensive attention in further research.
Another participant said that the model did not capture the spiritual dimension of her
200