BRYMAN 16,17,18,19

Authored by David McHugh

Bryman & Bell, Business Research Methods, 2nd edition, Chapter 16

The nature of qualitative research

‘…qualitative research subsumes several diverse research methods that differ from each other

considerably.’


Features of Qualitative Research

• An inductive view of the relationship between theory and research, whereby the former is generated out of the latter

• An epistemological position described as interpretivist, meaning that, in contrast to the adoption of a natural scientific model in quantitative research, the stress is on the understanding of the social world through an examination of the interpretation of that world by its participants; and

• An ontological position described as constructionist, which implies that social properties are outcomes of the interactions between individuals, rather than phenomena `out there' and separate from those involved in its construction


Main Research Methods Associated With Qualitative Research

• Ethnography/participant observation• Qualitative interviewing• Focus groups• Language-based approaches: conversation

analysis; discourse analysis• Collection and qualitative analysis of texts and

documents


The Main Steps in Qualitative Research

1. General research questions

2. Selecting relevant site(s) and subjects

3. Collection of relevant data

4. Interpretation of data

5. Conceptual and theoretical work

6. Writing up findings/conclusions

5a. Tighter specification of the research question(s)

5b. Collection of further data

Fig. 16.1


Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research

• External reliability - the degree to which a study can be replicated

• Internal reliability - whether, when there is more than one observer, members of the research team agree about what they see and hear

• Internal validity - whether there is a good match between researchers' observations and the theoretical ideas they develop

• External validity - the degree to which findings can be generalized across social settings

Based on: LeCompte and Goetz (1982)


What is Triangulation? Triangulation:

• entails using more than one method or source of data in the study of social phenomena.

• is an approach that uses `multiple observers, theoretical perspectives, sources of data, and methodologies‘ (Denzin)

• has tended to emphasise multiple methods of investigation and sources of data

• can operate within and across research strategies

• can to refer to a process of cross-checking findings deriving from both quantitative and qualitative research (triangulation of methods)

• may often allow access to different levels of reality

see Key concept 16.4


What is Respondent Validation?Respondent (or member) validation - a process whereby researchers provide the people on whom they have conducted research with an account of their findings.

Forms:• researchers provide each research participant with an account of what they have

said to the researcher in interviews and conversations or of observations of participants in observational studies.

• the researcher feeds back to a group or an organization their impressions and findings in relation to that group or organization.

Practical difficulties:• respondent validation may occasion defensive reactions and even censorship on

the part of research participants.• it is highly questionable whether research participants can validate a researcher's

analysis, since this entails inferences being made for an audience of social science peers.



The Critique of Qualitative Research

• Qualitative research is too subjective

• Difficult to replicate

• Problems of generalization

• Lack of transparency

Ethnography and participant observation

Participant Observation Studies

• Beynon (1975) for five years studied the Ford Motor Company’s Halewood assembly plant in Liverpool to describe the experience of people who worked on the assembly lines and the way they made sense of industrial politics; the process whereby people became shop stewards; the way they understood the job and the kinds of pressures they experienced.

• Delbridge’s (1998) study of the impact of new manufacturing techniques on worker experiences in a Japanese-owned consumer electronics plant, ‘Nippon CTV’ and a European-owned automotive components supplier, ‘Valleyco’.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Covert Role in Ethnography

Advantages:Reduces the problem of accessReduces the problem of reactivity

Disadvantages:The problem of taking notes The problem of not being able to use other methodsAnxiety Ethical problems

Practical Tip: Micro-ethnographyIf you are doing research for an undergraduate project or masters dissertation it is unlikely that you will be able to conduct a full-scale ethnography as it may involve you in spending a considerable period of time in an organizational setting. Nevertheless, it may be possible for you to carry out a form of micro-ethnography (Wolcott 1995). This would involve focusing on a particular aspect of an organizational culture, such as the way the organization has implemented TQM, and showing how the culture is reflected through this. A shorter period of time (from a couple of weeks to a few months) could be spent in the organisation, either on a full- or a part-time basis, to achieve this more closely defined cultural understanding.

ACCESS TACTICS• Use friends, contacts, colleagues, academics to help

you gain access • Try to get the support of someone within the

organization who will act as your champion • Usually you will need to get access through top

management or senior executives • Offer something in return (e.g. a report). This helps

to create a sense of being trustworthy • Provide a clear explanation of your aims and

methods and be prepared to deal with concerns, e.g. suggest a meeting

ONGOING ACCESS

• People will have suspicions about you, perhaps seeing you as an instrument of top management

• They will worry that what they say or do may get back to bosses or to colleagues

• They may go along with your research but in fact sabotage it, engaging in deceptions, misinformation, and not allowing access to `back regions'

Classifications of Participant Observer Roles

• Complete participant

• Participant-as-observer

• Observer-as-participant

• Complete observer

What is `Going Native'?

• Going native' refers to a plight that sometimes afflicts ethnographers when they lose their sense of being a researcher and become wrapped up in the world view of the people they are studying. The prolonged immersion of ethnographers in the lives of the people they study, coupled with the commitment to seeing the social world through their eyes, lie behind the risk and actuality of going native. Going native is a potential problem for several reasons but especially because the ethnographer can lose sight of their position as a researcher and find it difficult to develop a social scientific angle on the collection and analysis of data.

Other Forms of Sampling

• Time:– the ethnographer must make sure that people or

events are observed at different times of the day and different days of the week

• Context:– people's behaviour is influenced by contextual

factors so that it is important to ensure that such behaviour is observed in a variety of locations

Interviewing in qualitative research

Before the Interview I

• Find:– a quiet, private space in which to conduct an interview uninterrupted (e.g. a

suitable spare room that is not being used)

• Be careful of:– agreeing to interview someone in their own office– frequent telephone calls or interruptions – traffic, aircraft, machinery or background noise making recorded speech

inaudible

• Think about: – closing doors or windows– turning off noisy heaters, fans etc– the comfort and convenience of your interviewee

Before the Interview II• Spend some time:

– getting hold of a good tape recorder and microphone – checking the room prior to the interview– doing a speech recording to test acoustics and carefully positioning the

furniture– positioning the microphone as near to your interviewees as possible (and

make sure that they are unlikely to knock it!)

• Prepare yourself by: – not being afraid to explain what you need in order to conduct the interview– compromising when it comes to actually getting it– making yourself familiar with the setting in which the interviewee works, lives

or engages in the behaviour of interest to you – cultivating as many of the criteria of a quality interviewer suggested by Kvale

as possible (see Tips and skills p484)

After the Interview

Make notes about:

• how the interview went (was interviewee talkative, cooperative, nervous, well-dressed/scruffy, etc.?)

• where the interview took place

• any other feelings about the interview (did it open up new avenues of interest?)

• the setting (busy/quiet, many/few other people in the vicinity, new/old buildings, use of computers)


Formulating Questions for an Interview Guide

Fig. 18.1

Formulateinterviewquestions

Specificresearchquestions

Generalresearcharea

Interviewtopics

Review/reviseInterview questions

Pilot guide

Identify novelissues

Revise interviewquestions

Finalize guide


Criteria for Successful Interviewers I

1. Knowledgeable: thoroughly familiar with the focus of the interview; pilot interviews of the kind used in survey interviewing can be useful here.

2. Structuring: gives purpose for interview; rounds it off; asks whether interviewee has questions.

3. Clear: asks simple, easy, short questions; no jargon.

4. Gentle: lets people finish; gives them time to think; tolerates pauses.

5. Sensitive: listens attentively to what is said and how it is said; is empathetic in dealing with the interviewee.

6. Open: responds to what is important to interviewee and is flexible.

7. Steering: knows what he/she wants to find out.


Criteria for Successful Interviewers II

8. Critical: is prepared to challenge what is said, for example, dealing with inconsistencies in interviewees' replies.

9. Remembering: relates what is said to what has previously been said.

10. Interpreting: clarifies and extends meanings of interviewees' statements, but without imposing meaning on them.

11. Balanced: does not talk too much, which may make the interviewee passive, and does not talk too little, which may result in the interviewee feeling he or she is not talking along the right lines.

12. Ethically sensitive: is sensitive to the ethical dimension of interviewing, ensuring the interviewee appreciates what the research is about, its purposes, and that his or her answers will be treated confidentially.

1-10 – Kvale; 11-12 Bryman


Practical Tip: Interviewees and Distance

Sometimes you may need to contact interviewees who are a long way from you – perhaps even abroad. While interviewing in qualitative research is usually of the face-to-face kind, time and money restrictions may mean that you will need to interview such people in a less personal context. There are two possibilities. One is telephone interviewing. The cost of a telephone interview is much less than the cost involved in travelling long distances. Such interviewing is touched on in the context of the structured interview in chapter 8. Another possibility is the online interview in which the interview is conducted by e-mail.

Focus groups


Distinctions Between Focus Group and Group Interview Techniques

• Focus groups typically emphasize a specific theme or topic that is explored in depth, whereas group interviews often span very widely

• Group interviews, unlike focus groups, are often carried out to save time and money by carrying out interviews with a number of individuals simultaneously

• Focus group practitioners are interested in the ways individuals discuss issues as members of a group, rather than as individuals. Focus group researchers are interested in how people respond to each other's views and build up a view out of interactions taking place within the group


What Is the Focus Group Method?The focus group method is a form of group interview where: • there are several participants (in addition to the moderator/ facilitator) • there is an emphasis on questioning on a particular, fairly tightly defined topic • the accent is upon interaction within the group and the joint construction of

meaning

The focus group contains elements of two methods:• the group interview, in which several people discuss a number of topics, though in

a less tightly defined fashion than a focus group• the focused interview, which may involve individuals or groups and where

interviewees are selected because they `are known to have been involved in a particular situation' (Merton et al. 1956: 3) and are asked about that involvement



Issues in Conducting Focus Groups

• Need for tape recording and transcription• How many groups?• Size of groups• Level of moderator involvement• Selecting participants• Asking specific questions


How Many Groups?

More groups where:• it is unlikely that just one

group will suffice the needs of the researcher – there is always the

possibility that the responses are particular to that one group

• the kinds and range of views are likely to be affected by socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, class, etc

Less groups where:• too many groups will be a

waste of time – when the moderator

reaches the point where they are able to anticipate fairly accurately what the next group is going to say (as in theoretical saturation)

• more groups will increase the complexity of your analysis

see Research in focus 19.4


Selecting ParticipantsWho should participate in a focus group?

• those who will find the topic relevant • those who can represent:

– specific occupational or organizational groupings with an interest in the topic concerned

– a wide range of organizational members– stakeholders from different organizations– stratifying criteria within the organization such as age, gender,

occupation, profession, hierarchical position or length of service

The aim is to establish whether there is any systematic variation in the ways in which different groups discuss a matter, raising the question of whether:

• to select people who are unknown to each other • to use natural groupings


Asking Questions How far there should there be a set of questions that must be

addressed?:• there is probably no one best way:

– use just one or two very general questions to stimulate discussion, with the moderator intervening as necessary

or– inject more structure into the organization of the focus group sessions,

using more questions

• style of questioning and moderating is likely to be affected by various factors such as:– the nature of the research topic – levels of interest and/or knowledge among participants in the research


An Example of a Focus Group Topic Agenda I

1. Introduction (15 mins.)

– Introduce the research team and roles

– Aim and format of the focus group

– Conventions (confidentiality, speak one at a time, recordings, everybody’s views,

– Open debate, report of proceedings)

– Personal introduction of participants and their businesses.

2. Discussion Topics

i) Current trading climate (15 mins.)– (e.g. comparative order levels)

ii) Main challenges in the business environment (20

mins.)– (e.g. exchange rates, recruitment,

raising money)iii) Government policies and small

firms (20 mins.)– (e.g. the minimum wage, entry into

the Euro)iv) Topical issues (20 mins.)

– (e.g. business succession and exit strategies)

Fig. 19.1; Blackburn and Stokes 2000


An Example of a Focus Group Topic Agenda II

3. Summing Up

– Thanks for participation and report back

– Invite back to next event in 6 months

– Reimburse expenses

4. Lunch

– Sandwiches and drinks

– Close


Limitations of the Focus Group Method

• The researcher probably has less control over proceedings than with the individual interview

• The data are difficult to organize and analyse

• Recordings may be more time-consuming to transcribe than recordings of individual interviews

• There are possible problems of group effects, e.g.:– dealing with reticent speakers and those who hog the stage – emerging group views may suppress perfectly legitimate perspectives held by just one

individual (Asch, 1951; see Research on focus 19.7) – group members may think uncritically and develop almost irrational attachments to a

shared group view (Janis, 1982)

• Focus groups have a potential to cause discomfort among participants (Madriz, 2000) :– when intimate details of private lives need to be revealed – when participants may not be comfortable in each other's presence – when participants profoundly disagree with each other

Documents

BRYMAN 16,17,18,19