QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Qualitative research is a generic term for investigative methodologies
described as ethnographic, naturalistic, anthropological, field, or participant
observer research. It emphasizes the importance of looking at variables in the natural
setting in which they are found. Interaction between variables is important.
Detailed data is gathered through open ended questions that provide direct
quotations. The interviewer is an integral part of the investigation (Jacob,
1988). This differs from quantitative research which attempts to gather data by
objective methods to provide information about relations, comparisons, and
predictions and attempts to remove the investigator from the investigation
(Smith, 1983).
Characteristics
Purpose: Understanding
- Seeks to understand people’s interpretations.
Reality:
Dynamic - Reality changes with changes in people’s perceptions.
Viewpoint:
Insider - Reality is what people perceive it to be.
Values: Value
bound - Values will have an impact and should be understood and taken into
account when conducting and reporting research.
Focus:
Holistic - A total or complete picture is sought.
Orientation:
Discovery - Theories and hypotheses are evolved from data as collected.
Data:
Subjective - Data are perceptions of the people in the environment.
Instrumentation: Human - The human person is the primary collection
instrument.
Conditions:
Naturalistic - Investigations are conducted under natural conditions.
Results: Valid
- The focus is on design and procedures to gain "real,"
"rich," and "deep" data.
Advantages
|
Produces
more in-depth, comprehensive information.
|
|
Uses
subjective information and participant observation to describe the context,
or natural setting, of the variables under consideration, as well as the
interactions of the different variables in the context. It seeks a wide
understanding of the entire situation.
|
Disadvantages
|
The
very subjectivity of the inquiry leads to difficulties in establishing the
reliability and validity of the approaches and information.
|
|
It
is very difficult to prevent or detect researcher induced bias.
|
|
Its
scope is limited due to the in-depth, comprehensive data gathering approaches
required.
|
Holistic Description
When conducting qualitative research, the
investigator seeks to gain a total or complete picture. According to Stainback
and Stainback (1988), a holistic description of events, procedures, and
philosophies occurring in natural settings is often needed to make accurate
situational decisions. This differs from quantitative research in which
selected, pre-defined variables are studied.
Corroboration
The purpose of corroboration is not to
confirm whether people’s perceptions are accurate or true reflections of a
situation but rather to ensure that the research findings accurately reflect
people’s perceptions, whatever they may be. The purpose of corroboration is to help researchers increase
their understanding of the probability that their findings will be seen as
credible or worthy of consideration by others (Stainback & Stainback,
1988).
Triangulation
One process involved in corroboration is triangulation. Denzin (1978) has identified several types of triangulation. One
type involves the convergence of multiple data sources. Another type is
methodological triangulation, which involves the convergence of data from
multiple data collection sources. A third triangulation procedure is
investigator triangulation, in which multiple researchers are involved in an investigation. Related to investigator
triangulation is researcher-participant corroboration, which has also been
referred to as cross-examination.
Other procedures can be used to improve
understanding and/or the credibility of a study. These include research or
inquiry audit, peer debriefing, and the seeking of negative cases in the field
that might disconfirm interpretations.
Participant
Observation
|
Systematically
seeks out and organizes data concerning what is being studied based on a
social science theory and methodology rather than focusing on achieving a
situationally defined goal.
|
|
Keeps
detailed records of what occurs, including those things characteristically
taken for granted.
|
|
Periodically
detaches self from the situation to review records from the neutral position
of a social scientist.
|
|
Constantly
monitors observations and records for evidence of personal bias or prejudice.
|
Five Types of Participant Observation
|
External
Participation constitutes
the lowest degree of involvement in observation. This type of observation can
be done by observing situations on television or videotape.
|
|
Passive
Participation means
the researcher is present at the scene of action but does not interact or
participate. The researcher finds an observation post and assumes the role of
a bystander or spectator.
|
|
Balanced
Participation means
that the researcher maintains a balance between being an insider and being an
outsider. The researcher observes and participates in some activities, but
does not participate fully in all activities.
|
|
Active
Participation means
that the researcher generally does what others in the setting do. While
beginning with observation to learn the rules, as they are learned the
researcher becomes actively engaged in the activities of the setting.
|
|
Total
Participation means
the researcher is a natural participant. This is the highest level of
involvement and usually comes about when the researcher studies something in
which he or she is already a natural participant.
|
Interviewing
|
The
researcher should control his reactions. The purpose of the interview is to
find out what views people hold; their views should be unbiased by evaluative
responses on the researcher’s part.
|
|
The
researcher should choose an interview environment and conditions in which the
participants feel comfortable, secure, and at ease enough to speak openly
about their point of view.
|
|
The
researcher should avoid presenting "yes" or "no"
questions which tend to stifle detail.
|
|
The
researcher should be flexible in his or her approach to the informants.
|
|
Group
interviews can be useful, particularly in initial interviews.
|
|
The
researcher should consider to what degree the interview questioning is
"recursive." As applied to interviewing, what has been said in an
interview is used to determine or define further questioning.
|
Case
Study
Case studies are detailed investigations of individuals,
groups, institutions or other social units. The researcher conducting a case
study attempts to analyze the variables relevant to the subject under study
(Polit and Hungler, 1983). The principle difference between case studies and
other research studies is that the focus of attention is the individual case
and not the whole population of cases. Most studies search for what is common
and pervasive. However, in the case study, the focus may not be on
generalization but on understanding the particulars of that case in its
complexity. A case study focuses on a bounded system, usually under natural
conditions, so that the system can be understood in its own habitat (Stake,
1988).
Maintaining The Validity Of
Qualitative Research
|
Be
a listener.
The subject(s) of qualitative research should provide the majority of the
research input. It is the researcher’s task to properly interpret the
responses of the subject(s).
|
|
Record
accurately.
All records should be maintained in the form of detailed notes or electronic
recordings. These records should also be developed during rather than after
the data gathering session.
|
|
Initiate
writing early.
It is suggested that the researcher make a rough draft of the study before
ever going into the field to collect data. This allows a record to be made
when needed. The researcher is more prepared now to focus the data gathering
phase on that information that will meet the specific identified needs of the
project.
|
|
Include
the primary data in the final report. The inclusion of primary data in
the final report allows the reader to see exactly the basis upon which the
researcher’s conclusions were made. In short, it is better to include too
much detail than too little.
|
|
Include
all data in the final report. The researcher should not leave
out pieces of information from the final report because she/he cannot
interpret that data. In these cases, the reader should be allowed to develop
his/her conclusions.
|
|
Be
candid. The
researcher should not spend too much time attempting to keep her/his own
feelings and personal reactions out of the study. If there is relevance in
the researcher’s feelings to the matter at hand, these feelings should be
revealed.
|
|
Seek
feedback. The
researcher should allow others to critique the research manuscript following
the developmental process. Professional colleagues and research subjects
should be included in this process to ensure that information is reported
accurately and completely.
|
|
Attempt
to achieve balance. The
researcher should attempt to achieve a balance between perceived importance
and actual importance. Often, the information reveals a difference in
anticipated and real areas of study significance.
|
|
Write
accurately. Incorrect
grammar, misspelled words, statement inconsistency, etc. jeopardize the
validity of an otherwise good study.
|
Wolcott, H.R. (1990). Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing
debate.
Assessment of Trustworthiness
Researchers need alternative models appropriate
to qualitative designs to ensure rigor without sacrificing the relevance of
qualitative research. Guba’s model describes four general criteria for
evaluation of research and then defines each from both a quantitative and
qualitative perspective.
Criterion
|
Qualitative
Approach
|
Quantitative
Approach
|
Truth
value
|
Credibility
|
Internal
Validity
|
Applicability
|
Transferability
|
External
Validity
|
Consistency
|
Dependability
|
Reliability
|
Neutrality
|
Confirmability
|
Objectivity
|
Strategies With Which to Establish
Trustworthiness
Strategy
|
Criteria
|
Credibility
|
Prolonged
and varied field experience
|
|
Time
sampling
|
|
Reflexivity
(field journal)
|
|
Triangulation
|
|
Member
checking
|
|
Peer
examination
|
|
Interview
technique
|
|
Establishing
authority of researcher
|
|
Structural
coherence
|
|
Referential
adequacy
|
Transferability
|
Nominated
sample
|
|
Comparison
of sample to demographic data
|
|
Time
sample
|
|
Dense
description
|
Dependability
|
Dependability
audit
|
|
Dense
description of research methods
|
|
Stepwise
replication
|
|
Triangulation
|
|
Peer
examination
|
|
Code-recode
procedure
|
Confirmability
|
Confirmability
audit
|
|
Triangulation
|
|
Reflexivity
|
Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative
research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214-222.
Characteristics of Qualitative and Quantitative
Research
Point
of Comparisons
|
Qualitative
Research
|
Quantitative
Research
|
Focus
of research
|
Quality
(nature, essence)
|
Quantity
(how much, how many)
|
Philosophical
roots
|
Phenomenology,
symbolic interaction
|
Positivism,
logical empiricism
|
Associated
phrases
|
Fieldwork,
ethnographic, naturalistic, grounded, subjective
|
Experimental,
empirical, statistical
|
Goal
of investigation
|
Understanding,
description, discovery, hypothesis generating
|
Prediction,
control, description, confirmation, hypothesis testing
|
Design
characteristics
|
Flexible,
evolving, emergent
|
Predetermined,
structured
|
Setting
|
Natural,
familiar
|
Unfamiliar,
artificial
|
Sample
|
Small,
non-random, theoretical
|
Large,
random, representative
|
Data
collection
|
Researcher
as primary instrument, interviews, observations
|
Inanimate
instruments (scales, tests, surveys, questionnaires, computers)
|
Mode
of analysis
|
Inductive
(by researcher)
|
Deductive
(by statistical methods)
|
Findings
|
Comprehensive,
holistic, expansive
|
Precise,
narrow, reductionist
|
No comments:
Post a Comment