The Method of Qualitative Research (1)

1. The Method of Qualitative Research (1) WANG Huaping Philosophy Department, Shandong University

2. 3 3 What Is Qualitative Research 1 3 Participant Observation 2 Interviews Contents

3. Deciding on a methodological approach • Ontology: What is the nature of the phenomena that you want to investigate? • Epistemology: What might represent knowledge or evidence of the objects that you want to investigate? • Research area: What topic is the research concerned with? • Research Question: What do you wish to explain or explore?

4. Ontology • What is the nature of things in the world? • For example, are you investigating: • Bodies, subjects, objects • Rationality, emotion, thought • Feeling, memory, senses • Motivations, ideas, perceptions • Attitudes, beliefs, views • Texts, discourses • Cultures, society, groups • Interactions, social relations • Some ontologies are better matched to qualitative research methodology than others (e.g., social processes, interpretations, social relations, experiences etc.)

5. Qualitative Research • Qualitative Researchers study “things” (people and their thoughts) in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. • Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical materials - case study, personal experience, introspective, life story, interview, observational, historical, interactional, and visual texts-that describe routine and problematic moments and meanings in individuals lives.

6. Qualitative Research • ‘Qualitative Research…involves finding out what people think, and how they feel - or at any rate, what they say they think and how they say they feel. This kind of information is subjective. It involves feelings and impressions, rather than numbers’ • Bellenger, Bernhardt and Goldstucker, Qualitative Research in Marketing, American Marketing Association

7. Characters of Qualitative Research • Naturalistic • It must be carried out in a natural context, in order to investigate people’s “world of life” and the routine operation of social organizations. • Interpretive understanding of meanings • It aims to understand the personal experience. • Focusing on the investigation of relation • It is the interaction between objects and researchers that make QR possible. Researcher should reflect on his role, identity, tendency and be alert to the influence on the researched processes and results imposed upon by these factors.

8. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods Quantitative • Employs statistics or other mathematical operations to analyze data • Concepts are assigned numerical values • Collects a small amount of data from a large number of people • Allows generalization to wider population Qualitative • Makes less use of mathematical techniques. • Focus on interpretation by researcher • Systematically arranging and presenting information to search for meaning in data collected • “Words, not numbers” • Usually involves a philosophical stance that human knowledge is, to some extent, contextualized or local. • But some form of counting is almost always involved in qualitative analysis.

9. Strengths of Qualitative Research • Research done in natural settings • Emphasis on informant interpretations and meanings • Seek deep understanding of informants world • “Thick Description” (Clifford Geertz) • Humanizing research process by raising the role of the researched • High levels of flexibility in research process

10. Weaknesses of Qualitative Research • Problems of reliability - The difficulty of replicating findings • “Subjectivity” of nature of data collection and analysis • Observations may be selectively reported making it impossible to gauge the extent to which they are typical • Risk of collecting meaningless and useless information from participants. • Problems of objectivity vs detachment (particularly in participant observation but also applies to other methods) • Problems of ethics: Entering the personal world of the participant • Very time consuming

11. Participant Observation By participant observation we mean the method in which the observer participates in the daily life of the people under study, either openly in the role of researcher or covertly in some disguised role, observing things that happen, listening to what is said, and questioning people, over some length of time. (Becker and Geer 1957: 28)

12. Origins and Links • Origins in ethnography • Linked with epistemological orientations of ethnomethodology and grounded theory (these methods entail naturalistic investigations of culturally contexted social processes). • Pseudo-objective stance of the researcher has largely been abandoned in favour of more personal and subjective accounts of the participant observation experience (see Tedlock, 2000) • Traditionally this method has been paired with interviews and document analysis, and more recently with digital photography

13. When to use participant observation • Participant observation is especially appropriate for scholarly problems when: • Little is known about the phenomenon (a newly formed movement/religion) • There are important differences between the views of insiders as opposed to outsiders (e.g. labour unions and management) • The phenomenon is somehow obscured from the view of outsiders (mental illness, family life, private interactions) • The phenomenon is purposefully hidden from public view (crime and deviance, secretive groups)

14. Strengths of participant observation • Natural/unobtrusive. • Requires little more than self • Can produce rich insights into complex realities • Context specific and flexible • Holistic. Can incorporate relationships between factors (people, settings, documents). • Provides insight into actors’ meanings as they see them • Offers advantage of serendipity (See Dennis 1993).

15. Limitations of participant observation • Access. Limited options open to the researcher about which roles to adopt or settings in which to participate • Commitment. Demanding method and significant personal resources. • Danger (potentially) • Reliability • Observer effects • Representativeness of data. Difficulty of generalizing from data • Ethical issues

16. Easy or Difficult? This method (participant observation) is one that those new to social research believe they can undertake with ease. On first glance it appears to be just about looking, listening, generally experiencing and writing it all down. However, it is more plausible to argue that participant observation is the most personally demanding and analytically difficult method of social research to undertake (May 2001: 153).

17. Strategies to overcome limitations • Use multiple observers or teams • Search for negative cases • Spend an extended time in the field • Use insider checking • Use outsider checking • Repeat observations under varying conditions • Be meticulous in recording observations (Alder and Alder 1994)

18. Participant Roles • Complete participant • Enter the field under pretence or deception • Engages fully in the activities of the group or organization under investigation • Advantages are that it can produce more accurate/authentic information and an understanding not otherwise available • Problem of recording observations • [Visual] Gold (1958)

19. Types of Participant Observation • Participant as observer • Enter the field setting with an openly acknowledged investigative purpose. • Develop relationships with subjects • Problem of ‘going native’ but dismissed by some (e.g. May 2001) • May encounter hostility – particularly in early stages of research • Problem of disengagement from field • [Visual] • Observer as participant • Strictly speaking this would not be regarded as participant observation • No lasting contact with people • Focus on observation, not on interaction with people • Problem is that it does not utilize the strengths of the time in the field to deepen understanding

20. Participant Roles • Complete observer • Also a non-participant role • Role completely removes the researcher from observed interactions • Epitomized by laboratory experiments • [Visual]

21. Stages in Participant Observation • Before actual field contacts and observations begin, a general definition of research problem is identified. • Select field setting. • Make initial contact and establish access. • Collect descriptive data on setting and participants. • Field work progressing. Informants selected, approached etc. Early theoretical formulations tested. • General categories for data analysis are developed. Refining observations. • Complex set of propositions developed and tested. • Conclusion of study. Role disengagement. Writing of report.

22. Recoding Observations • The participants: Who are the participants? How many are there? How can they be characterized (gender, occupations etc.) Where are they situated in relationship to each other? Are there any key groupings or relationships? • The tasks: What are the functions of the various groups of people? How are they relating in this setting? What are they doing during the key events or observations? Are these functions formally defined? Do individuals and groups have a variety of purposes for being there? Are there conflicting goals of various groups or individuals? What are these conflicting goals? • The setting: Each setting has unique features. What are these? Equipment? Resources? Facilities? Use your senses. • The behaviour and the outputs: How do people actually behave during the event? Describe this behaviour in descriptive terms. What are the specific movements made and activities that are carried out? • Timing: The timing of the behaviour is described by the time it occurred, the time it takes, and the frequency. • Unique causes or consequences: What unique occurrences affected the people, tasks, setting, behaviours, output and timing?

23. Video recording • A “privileged gaze” (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994). • Purposes (Paterson, Bottorff & Hewat, 2005): • Allows decontextualised sequencing of minute behaviours, concurrent behaviours, nonverbal behaviours and conversational analysis that are difficult to observe in real time • To document the research process and check for observer effects • To direct methodological decisions • To enhance the validity of the researcher’s interpretation of observations • Compared to participant observation where video-recordings are not used, relationships less important for the collection of data, but more important for getting consent to participate

24. Interviews • Defining Interviews • Types of Interviews • Advantages and disadvantages • Design questions • Sampling issues • Types of interview questions • Interview skills

25. Defining Interviews • A conversation with a purpose (Kahn and Cannell 1957:149) • Silverman (1993) talks about us living in an ‘interview society’ • Estimated that 90 per cent of all social science investigations use interviews in one way or another (Briggs 1986)

26. Types of Interviews - Structured • Many are formally structured. • Associated with questionnaire research (oral questionnaire); also used in some job interviews • Each person asked the same question in the same way so that any differences between answers are held to be real ones and not the result of the interview situation itself. • No deviation from question order or wording of questions. • No adjusting for level of language. • No clarifications or answering of questions about the interview

27. Types of Interviews: Semi-structured • Questions are normally specified, but the interviewer is freer to probe beyond the answers. • Questions may be reordered during the interview. • Level of language may be adjusted. • Interviewer may add or delete probes. • Allows people to answer more on their own terms, but still provides a structure for comparability. • Sometimes called semi-standardised. • Most typically used in qualitative studies (Rossman and Rallis 1998: 124)

28. Types of Interviews: Unstructured • Includes life-history, biographical and oral history interviews • Sometimes called informal, non-standardised • Provides qualitative depth in allowing subject to talk about topic within their own frame of reference

29. Issues • “Increasingly, qualitative researchers are realizing that interviews are not neutral tools of data gathering but active interactions between two (or more) people leading to negotiated contextually based results” (Fontana and Frey 2003: 62). • Impact of identities of researcher and participants should be considered

30. Advantages of interviews • One of the most flexible/responsive methods available as different types of interviews can be engaged for different research problems. • Ability to explore additional research questions / issues if they arise (semi-structured / unstructured only) • Ability to gain rich and descriptive data; ideally suited to examining topics in which different levels of meaning need to be explored. • Most participants will accept an interview readily. They are likely to be familiar with interviews. • Ability to follow up research participants for clarification or further exploration.

31. Disadvantages of interviews • Bias and subjectivity which, in turn, affects validity and reliability of data • Generalisation problem • Process of data collection, transcribing and analysis from each participant time-consuming; thus, sample size generally not large • In reporting results, tendency of researchers to focus on quotes which are dramatic, unusual or interesting, rather than typical

32. Design Questions • The recommended duration for an in-depth interview is one hour and a half, but may be varied according to the situation and respondent (Burgess 1984, p.120). • A write-up of observations may be completed following each of the interviews (Burgess 1984, p.119). • Increased rapport is likely to be facilitated through follow-up visits which also will improve the quality of data produced (Whyte 1984, p.114; Lee 1993, p.113).

33. What Counts as Data? • Utterances only? • Non-verbal aspects of the interaction? • Written notes / tape-recordings? • My own memories and unwritten interpretations of the interview? • Diagrams, pictures, drawings, charts and photographs produced during the interview? • NB: Absolute objectivity is a myth!!! Researchers continually make judgements about what to write down or record, what they have observed, heard and experienced and what they think it means (Mason, 2002).

34. Types of Interview Questions • Introducing questions • E.g. “Can you tell me about…”? Etc. • Probing questions • E.g. “That’s interesting. What else can you tell me about…”? • Specifying questions • E.g. “Can you give me an example of…”? • Direct questions • E.g. “Earlier you said… How does that relate to…”? • These may need to come later in the interview; may be slightly confrontational or ask for clarification of discrepant information

35. Types of Interview Questions • Indirect questions (useful when trying to avoid social desirability bias) • E.g. “What should someone else in that situation do…”? • Structuring questions • E.g. “I would now like to introduce a new topic…” • Silence – just a nod or a pause • Interpreting questions • Rephrasing an answer, more speculative questions • E.g. “So does that mean…”?; “Are you saying…”?; “Would I be right in interpreting that as…?”

36. Interview Skills • The good interviewer needs to be attentive. • The good interviewer is sensitive to the feelings of the informant. • The good interviewer is able to tolerate silence. • The good interviewer is adept at using prompts. • The good interviewer is adept at using probes. • The good interviewer is adept at using checks. • The good interviewer is non-judgemental. (Denscombe 1999:135)

37. Thanks!