Just rewrite this part IPA was employed to analyse the transcripts (Smith, 2003; Willig, 2001). Each transcript was read several times to encourage familiarity. Thoughts, reflections, and preliminary codes were noted in the left margin of the first transcript. The transcript was read through again and preliminary themes were recorded in the right margin. These themes represented the beginning of the conceptualisation process, and this process was iterative in that it involved an interaction between the text and the reader. Next, the preliminary themes were clustered into groups of themes according to common features in terms of meaning. These themes were validated by checking with the transcript. The themes were next illustrated with supporting quotes from the transcript to ensure they were adequately represented and grounded in the data. Any theme that was not sufficiently grounded was removed. This was repeated for each transcript. The themes for each transcript were compared and combined into master themes to provide a composite portrayal of experience. The master themes were checked and re-checked against the interview transcripts to ensure they adequately represented the undergraduates’ experience. Commonalities amongst the preliminary themes were represented as sub-themes, which were judged to reflect lower order aspects of the master themes. Explain the phenomenological, hermeneutic and idiographic aspects of Ipa, add something Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was selected as the research approach for this investigation. Phenomenological in nature due to its “[concern] with exploring experience in its own terms”, IPA allows qualitative researchers to investigate how others make meaning of significant life experiences (Smith et al., 2009, p. 1). Smith et al. (2009) describes Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis as idiographic, due to its “commit[ment] to the detailed examination of the particular case” (p. 3). In addition, IPA employs a double hermeneutic, meaning “the participants are trying to make sense of their world; the researcher is trying to make sense of the participants trying to make sense of their world” (Smith et al., 2009, p. 53).