Table 1.

Coding manual.

Facilitator code	Explanation	Patient code	Explanation
Confirming patient thinking	This is very similar to agreeing. Facilitators confirm facts or simply agree with what patients are saying (this may be split into agreeing vs. confirming patient thinking as I think there may be grounds for doing so).	Being correct	Patients are keen to be correct about objects – if not, maybe this is construed by the patient as unfavourable or that they are stupid, silly, etc. It can make a difference to the amount of participation they have in a session and whether they enjoy it or not.
Questioning	Facilitators using questions to stimulate conversation based around the objects and also to find out more about the patient; their background and level of knowledge.	Questioning	Patients question the facilitators about the objects, ‘how old is it? Where does it come from?’ etc. They may also question facts that the facilitator gives them, sometimes rhetorically but in some instances because they doubt the information that has been given to them or want to know more about where the facilitator got the information from. “But how do you know?”
Giving information	Facilitator gives facts about objects and can often, quite literally, hand over object information sheets.	Giving information	Patient gives facts about his or her life.
Inviting touch	In order to get patients interacting and engaging with the objects, facilitators invite the patients to touch the objects. Often they encourage them to feel textures, gauge weight or understand its fragility.	Enjoying session	Patient may laugh or joke with facilitator. Indication that they are enjoying the session. They may also overtly acknowledge enjoyment.
Sharing power/passing over control	This is mainly seen when facilitators invite patients to select an object. By doing this at the start of the session in particular, it shows willingness from the facilitator to be led by the patient but also sets them on more equal ground. Patients are more likely to engage with things they select as they often remark “I'm interested in that one”.	Agreeing	Agreeing with the facilitator can be a simple acknowledgement of hearing to a firm acknowledgement followed by an observation, fact or question.
Hearing impaired	This is important in elderly and acute illness sessions. Hearing might be impaired because of medical problems, distractions in ward, quiet responses from facilitators.	Seeking validation	Patients who treat the object identification as a guessing game, and even those that aren't, seek validation that they are correct with guesses and facts. They look to the facilitator to confirm their thoughts. This code links to “confirming patient thinking”, “being correct” and “guessing game”. Facilitator as expert.
Selecting objects	Selected objects because of colour, size, shape (features) or they were curious about what it was. They also selected on basis of knowing (or thinking they knew) what it was. Excitedly jumps from one object to another.	Hearing impaired	Some instances occur where facilitators cannot hear. Must always be attentive to patient and ask to repeat if comment not heard (do no just agree).
Correcting statement(s)	Must do this if a fact is incorrect. While patients like to guess they are not always right. Do it in a “good guess but not quite right” way.	Triggering associations	Patients may suddenly remember an event, object, person from their past or something in everyday life. It may be triggered by sight, touch, hearing or smell. This code has links with remembering/reminiscing and making observations.
Acknowledging patient	This refers to the instances where the facilitator does not want to break the flow of info/knowledge coming from patient so simply acknowledges engagement in conversation “yes”, “mm”, “uh-huh” type comments.	Sharing knowledge	This is different to giving information because it is not about facts but rather about the patients’ personal understanding/interpretation of an object or a fact. They often talk about it from first-hand experience or can give an example; they feel comfortable in their own knowledge of it.
Disclosing feelings	The facilitator may disclose their feelings about objects but also about why they chose what they chose and why they omitted objects from the study. For example, facilitators thought medical objects would be inappropriate given the settings but many commented on wanting to see those collections.	Disclosing feelings	The patient could feel disgust at looking at an object, at finding out what it is. Equally, they may disclose any number of feelings; fear, happiness, shock, amazement, etc. The object has obviously engaged with their emotions/feelings and they disclose personal connections or inner most interpretations.
Introducing session/objects	The facilitator takes the opportunity at the start of the session to explain what will happen. They will also tell the patient, when a new object is selected, either by the facilitator or the patient, facts and figures about the object or begin by posing a question “what do you think it is?”	Guessing game	Some patients are keen to guess what the objects are and so it becomes almost competitive (perhaps this is reflexive of their personality?). This code is connected with “being correct”, “seeking validation” and “confirming patient thinking”.
Making observations	The facilitator may make observations about the object as a way of questioning the patient, for example “you can see the wear and tear on it, can't you?” He/she may also make observations about the patient … as a form of questioning.	Remembering/reminiscing	This links strongly with “triggering associations” (RETHINK). Remembering or reminiscing about things is often as a result of an object, or less directly, from a conversation induced by an object. Patients remember facts, events and most often very personal stories.
Referring to aides	The facilitator is not expected to be an expert in all things or in the objects for handling so they may refer to aides like information sheets. This project also used images of things when alive/in use to make observation/engagement/comprehension easier.	Making observations	By handing objects to patients and giving them time to look at each one, patients begin to make observations. This may be about their features, for example, weight, colour, patterns, dimensions. May also relate to other similar objects.
Demonstrating object use	The facilitator may take the object and illustrate how it could be use, which way up it would be, etc. This has links to referring to aides as sometimes objects are compared with photos or similar contemporary objects.	Selecting objects	Patient cannot make up mind/does not seem interested/ bothered, cannot see to select. Some patients ask or are invited to touch/handle objects again. This reaffirms their thoughts/feelings/understanding/curiosity.
		Distracting from session	There are numerous distractions within the settings of the study – all were in hospitals. Other patients, visitors, staff, illness, tiredness, music, lack of enthusiasm.
		Stopping due to illness	Coughing, etc. interferes with session – not quite distraction
		Worrying about handling	Some of the objects may be perceived as fragile and not fit for handling by the patient; some will not touch because they don't like the look of it. However, all objects have been selected for the purpose and the facilitator works to encourage touch and dispel any fears.
		Communicating opinions	This is different to sharing knowledge where the patient talks about something he/she has knowledge about. Here they give their opinion for example “you've got to do it! You never know”. The sentence will often have a ‘because’ in it as they explain their opinion. They also tend to start with “I think” or “I don't think”.