Following the guidelines of Smith and Osborn (2003, p 67), the interpretative character of IPA was adapted to this study's interviews and subsequent analysis. More specifically, during the transcription process the author interacted closely with the text while utilising his own resources (Brocki and Wearden, 2006, p 96). Hence, the emergent discussion themes were not the result of a simple categorisation of data. Instead, the interview texts were analysed in depth, followed by the author's insights and ‘an academic perspective familiar with research, models and theories’ (Pycroft et al, 2015, p 427). This process involved noting similarities in the content of the participants’ statements and categorising them through the coding process of IPA, as presented earlier in this study.

After organising the participants’ responses in groups, certain discussion themes were identified, which were then clustered into higher-order and sub-themes. Thus, instead of simply depicting how the participants replied to the asked questions, the author took a step further and focused on the sense of meaning that participants gave to their experiences, engaged with their statements and assessed their responses through the lens of his own experiences. As a result, the ‘double hermeneutic’ process of IPA was applied and a deep understanding of the participants’ personal lived experiences was ultimately built.

Throughout the held interviews, participants focused on the conditions in several detention centres, all located in the wider area of N. Greece, where unaccompanied children had been placed upon arrival in the country, waiting to be referred to suitable accommodation. The superordinate themes that emerged were structured around the participants’ responses as regards the inappropriate conditions that detained UAM were subjected to at the time. More specifically, focus was placed on hygiene matters, the overall problematic detention context, the total absence of proper services, as well as the abusive treatment that unaccompanied children endured in detention. Under each superordinate discussion theme, the information that was provided by participants allowed for the creation of subordinate themes according to the IPA guidelines, as shown in Table 6.1.

At this point, the research analysis will be structured in separate subchapters, based on each superordinate discussion theme respectively.