Chapter Seven

1. Chapter Seven Field Study Approaches

2. Field Studies • Natural Settings • Direct observations, “real” behaviour • Test is whether they “ring true” to the reader and the person observed • Qualitative research, an emphasis often on an accurate description

3. Participant Observation Studies • Intense, usually long term, examination of a social group--it might be a particular culture, community, or group • Method used in ethnographic & ethnonursing studies • The researcher is involved in the daily lives of the group studied

4. Participant Observation • Holistic, qualitative, understand the whole group • immersion in the setting • everyday lives of participants • conclusions emerge from the setting (try to avoid preconceptions, let the observations guide you)

5. Participant Observation: Steps • Gaining entry • Establishing rapport • Recording field notes • descriptions & interpretations of individuals, interactions, & events • exact time & location of observation should be recorded • emphasis should be placed on reflecting exactly what & how people say things

6. Field Notes • Use 2 columns to distinguish between description & interpretation • A wide column for description of observations • A narrow column for interpretation of them • Two kinds of interpretation • the subjects’ interpretation of observations • the observer’s interpretation of the same event

7. Field Notes • Analyzing the observations • master field file (original complete file of raw data) • background, history file (subfile that contains info from the master file as well as from other sources) • analytic files (subfile related to a specific topic or relationship explored in the study) • key character files(Individual files on key players in the group studied) • Writing the final report

8. In-Depth Interviews • Participant’s views are recorded and used to give them “voice” in the final report; liberal use of quotations in final report • interviews tend to be flexible, go with the flow, probe in-depth • Rose Weitz: Living with the stigma of AIDS

9. Ethnographic Interviews • Three key elements are present: • explicit purpose • ethnographic explanations (those the researcher tries out on the respondent to see if they make sense) • ethnographic questions (descriptive questions, structural questions, contrast questions)

10. Focus Group Interviews • 6-12 people typically plus facilitator • dates back to the 40s: assessing effectiveness of morale boosting radio shows • 70s onward the market researchers use tool • 80s onward the academics start doing focus groups again

11. Focus Groups • Standard sampling techniques used to get group • Recorded manually or may be taped and transcribed • Useful to record names of participants so that discussion can be tracked during the analysis • Analyzed using content analysis

12. Focus Groups • Transcript of discussion is the data • strengths: • open-ended question posed to a group but no particular probing for meaning • spontaneously deal with issues • usually reasonably cheap ($50 to participate) • Weaknesses:

13. Nursing Research Example of Focus Group • Smoking Among Disadvantaged Women: Causes and Cessation (Stewart, M.., Gillis, A., & Brosky, G., et al. (1996).

14. Field Experiments • Researcher intervention occurs in a natural setting • e.g.- greeting stranger as measure of reaction to a form of non-conformity • proxemics • behavior is observed in natural settings & hence not contaminated by the artificiality in lab experiments

15. Naturalistic Observational Studies • Naturalistic observations (a better term) • no intervention, simply record behaviour • seat belt use • holding door behaviour • elevator behaviour

16. Dressing for winter parking violations gender & smoking professor/student participation: gender seat belt compliance speeding Antigonish healthy food purchase ABM behavior termination of conversations drinking patterns smoking behavior teens stop sign tipping Naturaliatic Observations Examples

17. Steps in Doing Study • restricting observations • review of literature • developing hypotheses • defining terms • tally sheet/master table/individual tables • writing report

18. Analyzing Qualitative Data • Researcher must immerse self in the data • Read & re-read the transcripts • Computer can perform manual cutting, pasting, & sorting of data • NUD*IST and Ethnograph are two popular software program

19. Field Studies • weak on generalizations • strong on validity (real behavior) • causal inferencing a challenge • multivariate a problem • probing strong with participant observation, in-depth interviews, and focus groups • probing weak with covert observational

20. Disadvantages of Computer Analysis • Analysis must be done a certain way because the software dictates it • Inappropriate use & unnecessary coding of data simply because the computer is available to do it • Cost & maintenance of hard & software • Researcher must still develop initial organizing system

21. Advantages of Computer Analysis of Qualitative Data • Multiple copies of files, cut & paste, move data & edit • Can file data in one location • Locate & sort data by cases promptly • Can locate a piece of text related to certain data without reading through transcripts • Forces researcher to read each line of text to consider possible codes & nodes for coding

22. Content Analysis • Analytical technique associated with qualitative studies • One is attempting to assess the “content” of the message • Makes inferences by systematically analyzing written or verbal communication

23. Basic Decisions in Content Analysis • Decide on the unit of analysis • Coefficient of reliability (measure of agreement between coders) • Coef of R = # of units in identical category total # of units coded • Develop a tally sheet

24. Advantages of Field Studies • Provide a holistic understanding of the phenomenon • Provides in-depth descriptions, can probe deeply, flexiblity in data collection • High validity in measures because you are recording actual observations • Direct costs inexpensive but time commitment is high

25. Limitations of Field Studies • Inability to tell if emerging patterns are representative or peculiar to the group studied • impossible to replicate • making verifiable causal inferences is difficult because only 1 case is examined