This study uses a qualitative and descriptive approach. Seven para-athletes, representing Paraprolim of both genders, with physical and intellectual disabilities and swimming abilities, were evaluated.
We interviewed the athletes at the Almirante Adalberto Nunes Physical Education Center (CEFAN), where they train to avoid interfering with their intense routine. The interview utilized the focus group technique, considered as the meeting of people selected to discuss and comment on a specific topic (focus on the subject), aiming at a faithful analysis of the athletes’ speech without capturing images (video) of the athletes. Themselves, thus providing participants with peace of mind when discussing the proposed topics through the coordination of a central researcher who; in turn, assumes the role of facilitator of the discussion process in which the psychosocial aspects that emerge are prioritized, emphasizing influences of opinions on a given topic.
The focus group strategy is a qualitative technique that can be used alone or in conjunction with other qualitative or quantitative methods. It seeks to deepen knowledge of the interviewees’ needs. The advantages of working with the focus group are the relaxed atmosphere of the discussions, the confidence of participants in expressing their opinions, active participation, obtaining information that is not limited to the evaluators’ previous conception, and the high quality of the information obtained.
On the other hand, it has disadvantages, such as difficulties in obtaining participants who must meet particular criteria and invalidating the findings due to the interference of some of the participants. This technique allows for diverse opinions and the participants’ confidence in expressing their ideas and concepts. The speech expressed by the participants is not just descriptive or exploratory; it is a speech with a sense of debate, a discussion where it is possible to observe each participant’s points of view and concepts.
The research participants used numerical codes to guarantee the confidentiality of their identities and the ethical principles of research. This research studied the quality of life, self-esteem, and motivation of Paralympic athletes based on a semi-structured interview script consisting of 12 questions: 04 about the athlete’s trajectory, 04 about motivation, 01 about self-esteem, and 03 about quality of life in sport.
2.4. Theoretical, Methodological Framework for Data Analysis
We used ethnomethodology and content analysis to analyze the interviews. When deciding to investigate the quality of life and self-esteem in Paralympic athletes, the researcher needs to know the daily lives of these athletes and the way they perceive and give meaning to their life experiences built daily; to do this is necessary to understand how athletes perceive themselves, the form of their actions, the strategy they develop to train at high performance, face their adversities in their routine, or even the everyday situations that life presents to them.
When investigating a phenomenon, the researcher starts from the experiences lived by the research subjects, obtains descriptions from these subjects regarding their knowledge, and holds in their hands significant speeches that can be understood and revealed in their essence.
Within the context proposed for analysis and discussion of the results, it is essential to highlight ethnomethodology, current sociology that emerged in California in the 1960s that goes beyond the singular conception of the social construction in which data are collected and processed. For ethnomethodology, the quantitative approach that is only concerned with the input and output of data without observing the process in which they are constructed needs to reflect how reality is built adequately. Therefore, it represents a rupture, both in the research perspective and in the intellectual stance of the researcher. The hypothesis assumes that we are all sociologists in a practical state so that ordinary people understand and describe reality and that each social group can understand, comment on, and analyze itself. Ethnomethodology privileges micro social approaches to phenomena, giving greater importance to understanding than explanation. Social actors’ descriptions of the facts surrounding them are valued, and these descriptions become the essential object of ethnomethodological research [
10,
11].
The language that interests ethnomethodologists differs from the educated language of erudite linguists or that of structured discourses but that of everyday life, used by ordinary citizens in their practical everyday actions. Ethnomethodologists use the same linguistic resources as ordinary men, standard language in their research, and descriptions and interpretations of social reality [
10]. One of the bases for the study of practical reasoning consists of how members of a society use words and everyday narratives to determine the position of their experiences and activities. Therefore, the ethnomethodologist is interested in how actors use elocution or speech to construct a set of coordinated and intelligible actions.
Another characteristic from this perspective derives from indexicality, which always suggests a local and contextual meaning unique to each interactional act. Therefore, sociology can never hope to obtain generalizations through its analyses that can explain the social facts dispersed in different historical and cultural contexts. In this way, the researcher must uphold the indexical expressions of his analyses. Still, on the contrary, he must pay attention to them to absorb the most excellent possible explanatory content through their meanings.
As we have seen, ethnomethodology is based on the study of everyday practical reasoning, seeking from this set of evidence to reconstruct a simple explanation of the observed reality, that is, with the connotation of partiality and relative scientific humility, admitting that explanations they serve to account for the interactional meanings of a given group, in a given historical and cultural context.
Therefore, this technique produces a large amount of data, and one way of working with such a quantity is to use transcriptions with raw data. It aims to show how participants managed the interaction in an orderly way. For this approach, the analyst seeks to interpret a turn (one person’s speech from beginning to end), examining the response of another participant in the following turn, as the key to spatial organization lies in the relationships between adjacent turns.
This article highlights five key terms regarding the operationalization of field research, considering them the most important for research in Information Science. Recognizing that ethnomethodology does not allude to the method but to the field of investigation, the key terms that focus on and explain the highlighted concepts are practice or achievement, indexicality, reflexivity, notion of member, and reportability [
10].
Practice or achievement is the subject’s ability to produce and signify actions. It starts from the assumption that social reality is seen as a practice constructed in the daily lives of social actors.
Indexicality refers to the circumstances surrounding a word or a situation. It starts from the premise that social life is constituted through language. In everyday relationships, people talk, ask questions, and respond; this means that, like language, social actions need to be indexed. In the specific case of research on reading, indexicality guides us towards understanding the research context since the statements collected in the interviews are insufficient and can only be considered with the researcher understanding the social context in which they are uttered.
Indexicality in the researched group occurs when readers share memories of time lived in the family, at school, on the street, through names and expressions that awaken affective memory, imagination, and creativity, when they talk about a time not experienced by the researcher. The natural, ordinary language through which people express themselves in their daily lives is profoundly indicative; it gives clues because, for each social actor, the meaning of their everyday language depends on the context in which they live. It manifests itself [
10].
Reflexivity designates practices that simultaneously describe and constitute the social framework and cannot be confused with reflection. Reflexivity shows the construction of social action as we talk, the meaning, order, and rationality of what we are doing now. Through this line of reasoning, we understood that the speeches of the research subjects present characteristics that describe their social world, which is why they need to be explored in interviews. We can also see that when they talk about reading, they describe it and, at the same time, construct reality, make their paths, and also remade by them due to the action-reflection process, in which the subject’s marks on the and with the world they reveal themselves.
The notion of member established by ethnomethodology concerns a person who, having incorporated the ethnomethods, the methods that people uses to understand and construct the reality that surrounds them of a considered social group, ‘naturally’ exhibits the social competence that adds you to this group and allows you to be recognized and accepted. It conceives that a person is a group member not because he belongs to a group in a face-to-face relationship but because he dominates the language of this group. The notion of member refers to a person endowed with know-how, a set of methods and procedures, which make them capable of inventing adaptation mechanisms to make sense of the world around them.
Accountability is the characteristic that allows communication to flow between social subjects, making rational, practical activities shareable, aiming at intersubjectivity and the constitution of the social action of knowledge. Its basic premises are: the way an individual interprets facts and acts towards other individuals or things depends on the meaning (or meanings) he attributes to these different individuals and things and; meaning, however, is the result of (or is constructed from) the processes of social interaction. When reading stories and experiences, the first approach to the principle of accountability occurs through descriptions and reports of their stories and experiences, which reveal specific realities of their lives. The world provided by accountability represents a local universe centered mainly around a limited group of people, where the objectification of the social world takes place as a product of the practical activities of these interacting actors. Given the above, the ethnomethodological points complement each other.
The five key concepts that guide Garfinkel’s [
10] thinking are a reference for ethnomethodological thinking. The set of these concepts enables the practice of Garfinkel’s ‘profane sociology’, which emphasizes understanding the construction of everyday life and valuing the naturalistic organization of a social group through its practices.
The focus group is an instrument for data collection in which the researcher can listen to several subjects simultaneously and observe the interactions characteristic of the group process. It aims to obtain various information, feelings, experiences, and representations from small groups about a given topic.
According to Bardin [
12], the theme is the unity of meaning that naturally emerges from an analyzed text, respecting the criteria for the theory that guides this reading. Therefore, the content analysis of the theme consists of discovering the cores of meaning that comprise a communication whose presence or frequency means something for the intended analytical objective.
We transcribed the interview speeches to a computer, where the speeches were skimmed. First, impressions were taken, maintaining the participants’ original speech and subsequently analyzed, observed in the content analysis. According to Bardin’s [
12] proposal that determines it as a set of techniques for studying the communications carried out, aiming to obtain, through systematic procedures. These indicators allow the inference of knowledge regarding the production of the messages received, which organizes them into three phases: 1) pre-analysis, 2) exploration of the material, and 3) treatment of results, inference, and interpretation.
a) The pre-analysis, the organization phase, aims to operationalize and systematize the initial ideas to lead to a precise research development scheme. The hypotheses and initial objectives of the research are revisited and reformulated in light of the material collected, and indicators are created that guide the final interpretation. This phase consists of three tasks: skimming reading, the constitution of the corpus, and reformulation of hypotheses and objectives. Floating reading takes exhaustive contact with the material to learn its content. The floating term appears as an analogy to the psychoanalyst’s attitude, as little by little, the reading becomes more precise, depending on hypotheses and theories that support the material. Organization of the material so that it can meet some validity standards: exhaustiveness, representativeness (that reliably represents the universe studied), homogeneity (it must precisely comply with the themes), and relevance (the contents must be appropriate to the objectives of the work). Reformulation of hypotheses and objectives: the recording unit (word or phrase), the context unit (the delimitation of the context of understanding of the recording unit), the clippings, the form of categorization, and the most theoretical concepts are determined by general guidelines that will guide the analysis. At this stage, the interview data was collected to provide transparent and objective questions in search of simple answers; considering that the current study aims to evaluate some athletes who have intellectual difficulties in understanding the dialogue, we selected the critical points for the conversation were selected, then subdivided into athlete’s trajectory, quality of life, motivation, self-esteem, and quality of life.
b) Dealing with exploring the material and systematically analyzing the text according to the previously formed categories. They were: The meeting with the project consists of participants’ reports on how they became aware of the sport and the opportunity; the difficulty of being a para-athlete daily; the prejudice they may have suffered: the Paraprolim project and everything it represents for each of them; the motivation and demotivation involved in the routine; self-esteem and body perception before and after swimming. Moreover, a relationship exists between the positive and negative pressures of being a Para-athlete.
c) In the treatment of results, inference, and interpretation, the raw results, that is, the categories that were used as units of analysis are subjected to simple or complex statistical analyses depending on the case, highlighting the information obtained so that it can be inferred and predicted. Some benefits were then identified regarding the objective of this study, with the use of the focus group and content analysis as a clinical-qualitative methodological strategy that can significantly contribute to other studies.