Heuristic Inquiry

The heuristic approach to qualitative research was pioneered by American humanistic psychologist Clark Moustakas. Although it is an exploratory approach to research, it is really quite different from other approaches in that it is not concerned with discovering theories or testing hypotheses, but is concerned directly with human knowing and especially, with self-inquiry. The term heuristic derives from the Greek word heuriskein, which means to find or discover, and is used by Moustakas to describe the process of an inner search for knowledge, aimed at discovering the nature and meaning of an experience. It is an approach that offers a significant departure from mainstream research in that it explicitly acknowledges the involvement of the researcher to the extent that the lived experience of the researcher becomes the main focus of the research.

In this respect, heuristic inquiry (HI) anticipates the growing awareness of the participatory position in which researchers find themselves placed. Although rarely acknowledged, in general research is often autobiographical in the sense that the research topic and research question are usually motivated by personal interests and concerns, and the results and findings of the research can have personal impact on the researcher in both subtle and profound ways. In the capture of data, the researcher can accumulate and access a range of tacit knowing that results from the participatory nature of the process. What HI does is make this participatory process explicit, and moreover, it makes this the major focus of inquiry.

To some extent, HI has remained on the periphery of the qualitative approach, and it is easy to overlook [Page 390]its relevance to almost all research in the human and social sciences. It is a method that is being taken up gradually in such fields as education, psychology, psychotherapy, and counseling, as well as in theological and transpersonal studies.

There is clearly more involved in HI than researchers simply analyzing their own experience. Nor is it merely a variation on phenomenological inquiry. The strength of HI is in the way it sets out a systematic and transparent methodology for self-inquiry. Indeed, the heuristic approach is more systematic and rigorous than might usually be imagined, and as a consequence it is extremely demanding.

Moustakas stresses that HI is a way of knowing, involving a personal encounter; as he puts it, “there must have been actual autobiographical connections” (1990, p. 14). The self of the researcher is present throughout the process, the researcher experiences growing self-awareness and self-knowledge, promoted by self-search, self-dialogue, and self-discovery. In effect, it is the salience of the research topic and research question for the researcher that is being acknowledged. Indeed, what explicitly can be the focus of the approach is the transformative effect of HI on the researcher's own experience.