The broad nature of qualitative
research (1)
Qualitative research is a research strategy that usually emphasizes words rather than quantification in the collection and analysis of data. As a research strategy it is broadly inductivist, constructionist, and interpretivist, but qualitative researchers do not always subscribe to all three of these features. (Bryman 2012:380)
The broad nature of qualitative
research (2)
qualitative methods entail and manifest the assumptions of the interpretive paradigm, the grounds of which lie in the need to grasp the meaning of social action in the context of the life-world and from the actors' perspective. (Vasilachs de Gialdino2009)
The broad nature of qualitative
research (3)
attempts to capture or study data which are detailed, rich and complex
concerned with meanings
uses flexible, non standardised methods
data mainly in form of words / ideas / themes / patterns / processes rather than numbers
sets data in context
The broad nature of qualitative
research (4) mainly ‘inductive’ rather than ‘deductive’ analytical
process
emergent categories and theoretical ideas in addition to / rather than a priori concepts
committed to retaining diversity and complexity in analysis
respect for uniqueness of individual cases as well as comparative themes and patterns
explanations at the level of meaning or in terms of intentions, norms, opportunities, barriers or micro-social processes rather than context free causal laws
Positivism
“The application of empiricist natural science to the study of society and the development of policy”. (O’Reilly 2012a)
Empiricist
Emulates (a view of) natural science
Seeks positive outcomes
Helps us understand what some researchers are trying to achieve in their work (Comte, Malinowski, and some quantitative research)
Interpretivism
“For interpretivists it is essential to see humans as actors in the social world rather than as simply reacting as objects in the natural world. Some interpretivists argue, furthermore, that human behaviour needs to be understood in the context of their particular society or culture” (O’Reilly 2012a)
The interpretive tradition
Max Weber and interpretive understanding (verstehen)
Alfred Shutz and Phenomenology (the actor’s point of
view, understanding how people make sense of their world using their senses)
Hermeneutics (understanding the condition under which text
was produced, also understanding groups within and across cultures, merging horizons )
Symbolic Interaction, social constructionism, and relativism
Realism
“A realist philosophy of social science argues that what exists in the world is not only human beings’ conceptualisations and interpretations of events, but also wider processes that the individual might not even be aware of” (O’Reilly 2012a)
Realism and reflexivity
Ontological and
epistemological
assumptions
Naïve realism
External independent
reality, directly
accessible
Subtle realism
Reality exists but
mediated and only
accessible through
human constructions
Radical idealism
No shared reality, only
alternative human
constructions – only ideas
are real
Relationship
between
researcher and
subject
Reality is unaffected
by the research/
researcher
Research/researcher
has an impact –
reflexivity is required
Reality inseparable from
the researcher
Relationship
between facts
and values
Research can be free
of values
Neutrality a guiding
ideal; assumptions
documented
Value-free research
impossible; subjectivity
celebrated
Nature of
knowledge
Foundational/absolute:
direct correspondence
with reality
Fallibilistic/ tentative:
provisional accounts
as faithful as possible
Sceptical/relative: no
‘privileged’ or accurate
accounts
Methods Rigour linked to type of
method, standardized
methods viewed as
more scientific
Rigour a question of
transparency and
reflexivity rather than
standardisation
Tacit process of intuition,
impossible to explicate: no
definitive findings, just
qualitative narratives
Critical approaches
Critical theory a natural science approach does not permit a critical or
positioned approach The goal of social science is, through dialogue or
argument, to free ourselves from oppression or dominations
This involves making judgments
Feminist standpoint See Rubin and Rubin (1995)
Participatory and action research Works together with research participants to change
the world
Practice theory
People make societies but not in circumstances of their own choosing.
This is affected by how they think and feel
And social structures are the outcomes of social interactions
(see O’Reilly 2012b)
Workshop
The nature of qualitative research – what it can and cannot deliver
List the main qualities of quantitative research
List for each why they are not appropriate for qualitative study
For discussion – what are the main things a qualitative study can and cannot deliver
Five Difficult Questions
1. What is the nature of the phenomena or entities, or social ‘reality’, which I wish to investigate? (Ontology)
2. What might represent knowledge or evidence of the entities or social ‘reality’ which I wish to investigate? (Epistemology)
3. What topic, or broad substantive area, is the research concerned with?
4. What is the intellectual puzzle? What do I wish to explain? What are my research questions?
5. What is the purpose of my research? What am I doing it for?
(Mason 1996, Chapter 2)
What is the nature of the phenomena or entities, or
social ‘reality’, which I wish to investigate?
People, social actors Minds, psyches Rationality, emotions Understandings, beliefs Self, individuals Texts, stories, narratives Experiences Languages Interactions Processes Institutions, the ‘material’,
Underlying mechanisms Perspectives One reality Nature, genes, Haphazardness Rules, norms, morality Interactions Social constructions
(adapted from Mason 1996)
What might represent knowledge or evidence of
the entities or social ‘reality’ which I wish to
investigate? (question 2)
Epistemology is the study or a theory of how things can be known, a theory of knowledge.
It is intrinsically linked to ontology
Ask how the things you are interested in can be learned about or known
Ask what would count as evidence or knowledge of the things you are interested in
What topic, or broad substantive area, is the research
concerned with?
(question 3)
This is about how your question is framed in relation to your ontology and epistemology
Eg. A study of racist attitudes among school children
Suggests we think racism affects society, that attitudes are a reality, and they can be known
But are we interested in discourses, institutional rules, actions, or feelings?
(see Mason 1996)
Potential topic areas
You would like a good understanding of the topic
The topic is personal / sensitive / complex
You need detailed information about people’s views
and experiences
You need to explore meanings and processes
You want to know what is going on behind the official
view / what happens in practice
You want understanding and explanations rather than
numbers or statistical generalizations
You are trying to included ‘hard to reach’ groups
What is the intellectual puzzle? What do I wish to
explain? What are my research questions?
(Question 4)
This is about the broad question you wish to address
It will lead to numerous other, research, questions
Research questions form the backbone of research
Qualitative researchers tend to use guiding theoretical questions rather than hypotheses
Research questions are of different levels and will develop as you go along
Potential puzzles
illustrative/definitional/contextual: to explore and portray in detail the form and nature of a
phenomenon; the range of meanings, beliefs, experiences; the structure of groups or settings; what it is like to………
explanatory: to examine the reasons for patterns and associations –
why people believe or behave as they do …….
evaluative: to appraise a phenomenon – what it is like to deliver or
be at the receiving end of something
generative: to aid the development of initiatives, strategies, policies,
theories
What is the purpose of my research? What am I
doing it for?
(question 5)
This is about
academic knowledge
substantive knowledge
policy debates
and what contribution you can make
in what socio-political context
Workshop
Designing Qualitative Research Questions
Select an imaginary topic
How do you address the five difficult questions?
What is your intellectual puzzle?
The purpose of this exercise is to do the groundwork that leads to the development of Qualitative Research Questions
Aims and Objectives Aims: a broad statements
desired outcomes, general intentions of the research, What not how long-term project outcomes
Objectives: a list steps to take or specific tasks how aims are to be accomplished focused and feasible address the more immediate project outcomes make accurate use of concepts and be sensible and precisely
described are usually numbered so that each objective reads as an
'individual' statement to convey your intention
The study aimed to explore how children, as social actors, perceive and experience the internal, spatial characteristics of different hospital environments. Four objectives were identified: - To document the physical and social characteristics of the spaces provided for children within a range of different hospital settings. - To explore children’s own experience and use of these different internal spaces and the meanings they attribute to them. - To develop strategies that enable children’s needs to be considered alongside those of adults in the planning and utilisation of internal spaces in hospital. - To develop a set of child-centred research tools that will contribute to theoretical and methodological developments within childhood studies.
Curtis, Penny (2007). Space to care : children's perceptions of spatial aspects of hospitals: Full Research Report. ESRC End of Award Report, RES-000-23-0765. Swindon: ESRC
Example study: SPACE TO CARE
Lit review
Substantive review What is already known about this topic?
Scientific work should be cumulative
Policy review How is this topic viewed or shaped by policy?
Theoretical review How has this area been understood?
Leads to sensitising concepts rather than hypotheses
A word on inductivism
A deductive approach to research is one where a hypothesis is derived from existing theory and the empirical world is explored, and data collected, in order to test the truth or falsity of the hypothesis.
A simplistically inductive approach to research is one where the researcher begins with as open a mind and as few preconceptions as possible, allowing theory to emerge from the data.
A more sophisticated inductivism views theory as precursor, medium and outcome of ethnographic study and writing.
Key Idea
Qualitative research is usually iterative-inductive
This is a practice of doing research, informed by a sophisticated inductivism, in which data collection, analysis, and writing are not discrete phases but inextricably linked.
Inductivism and The role of theory
Theory before research?
Theory after research?
Sensitising concepts (Charmaz 2006)
Foreshadowed problems (Malinowski 1922)
Guiding theoretical problems (O’Reilly 2012a) These are inspired by (perhaps lay) theoretical
ideas about the world, and are not rigid or fixed, but can be adapted or discarded as research progresses.
A note on Grounded theory
Interview styles
Semi-structured interviews (enable some guidance, some standard questions, use a topic guide,
can be better for some types of people or topic)
Unstructured (you are unlikely to be completely unstructured, but you may just
have an event or time period or career you want people to describe in detail, you are still likely to want prompts)
Narrative (these understand accounts as story-telling, narratives are seen as
a way of making sense of past events and explaining them to others)
Life history (these relate the topic to the life or biography of the participant)
What sorts of data? Interviews
How people feel, express themselves
Their understandings and meanings
Their interpretations
Taps into aspects you might not have thought of
Enables some discussion of context (vignettes)
Gives people a voice
Participant Observation
A word on ethnography
Ethnography is a practice that evolves in design as the study progresses; involves direct and sustained contact with human beings, in the context of their daily lives, over a prolonged period of time; draws on a family of methods, usually including participant observation and conversation; respects the complexity of the social world; and therefore tells rich, sensitive, and credible stories. (O’Reilly 2012a)
Participant Observation is the main method of ethnography and involves taking part as a member of a community while making mental and then written, theoretically-informed observations.
What sort of data? Participant
Observation
The difference between what people do and what they say they do
The opportunity to ask questions in context
Taps into complexity (ambiguity, and ambivalence)
Enables you to build rapport and trust
Enables you to go back and check
Taps into what people cannot easily express
Can explore how understandings are shaped by communities
Can examine how norms are practiced
Focus groups and group interviews
Market Research Focus Group
typically involve 4 to 12 participants
People selected for relation to topic
Usually strangers
Moderators retain control
Conducted in a series
Institutional setting
Participants may be paid
Qualitative Focus group
any number, depending on the situation, small is more manageable
Naturally-occurring group
Usually not strangers
learn from interaction
Often one-off or may repeat with same people
Familiar setting
collaborative, ethical, and based on trust and rapport.
What sorts of data? Groups
Useful at exploratory stage Lots of information quickly Explores interaction People can feel safer or more comfortable Can make space for people who otherwise feel
overpowered But – some people may feel threatened Can observe how meaning is made in groups Can observe power play Acknowledges the creative nature of social life
Documents and Texts
Types of data
Diaries, letters, photos, other personal documents
Official documents
Mass media texts and documents
Virtual
Interpretive analysis
Creative methods
Arts-based methods Drawing Painting Making something Web diagrams Taking photographs Going for walks or even dance
Aim is usually to use them as prompts, to encourage response Morrow, V. (2001). Using qualitative methods to elicit young
people’s perspectives on their environments: some ideas for community health initiatives. Health Education Research, 16 (3): 255-268.http://her.oxfordjournals.org/content/16/3/255.abstract
What sorts of data? Creative and
Texts
Data as writing (usually refers to visual data, that you
produce, perhaps collaboratively, to support your case)
Found data (that you analyse, probably interpretively,
but maybe using discourse analysis or semiotics)
Creative uses (where data are produced
collaboratively to create meaning or used as prompts to encourage talk about meanings and feelings)
Collecting data on social structures
How to access norms, rules, procedures, wider context
Key informant interviews
Web sites
Documents
Policies
General gathering (desk-based work)
Designing the sample (1)
qualitative research aims to map phenomena,
provide detailed illustration and examples,
identify processes, offer explanations, NOT
generate numbers or statistics
qualitative samples are usually
based on purposive logic
intended to be ‘information rich’
small to facilitate in-depth exploration
Designing the sample (2) :
Probability samples
units chosen randomly
all units have known chance of selection
sample is assumed to display characteristics in similar proportions to population as a whole
generalisation based on statistical probability
not appropriate for qualitative research
Designing the sample (3):
Convenience samples (ad hoc)
units chosen for ease of access
relationship to wider population is unknown / unspecified
should have justifiable rationale - not the default option for qualitative research
reasons for using ad hoc sampling
in observational studies when need to take opportunities as they present themselves
for hard to reach, ‘invisible’ populations (eg tax evaders, sex workers – use known groups or snowball sampling)
if purpose of exercise is participatory / democratic consultation (anyone who wants to can have a say)
if there are statutory requirements about consultees
Selections should always be made on the basis of their relevance for the study
A note on the intrinsic case study
Some situations, groups, institutions, people are studied because they are intrinsically interesting.
This may even be because the researcher has exclusive or privileged access.
EG. A study of decision-making practices in the British Government, or a study of citizenship education in an outstanding school
(see Stake 2003)
Designing the sample (4)
Purposive samples
units chosen to be ‘information rich’
linked to the wider population in terms of conceptual significance heterogeneous / maximum variation sampling
(broad cross-section)
comparative understanding
homogeneous sampling (specific sub-group/s)
in-depth understanding
atypical sampling - extreme case / deviant / vanguard
understanding from outliers
Designing the sample (5)
Theoretical samples
units chosen to help build and ‘test’ grounded theory
iterative process of selecting sample
collecting and analysing data
devising concepts
drawing further samples ……… to refine concepts and identify links between them
from ‘open’ (broad) to ‘discriminate’ (strategic) selection
Sampling units
people (individuals, groups)
organisations
settings (locations, places)
events (routine, special)
time frames, periods
documents
Eg. children of certain ages, people with specific disabilities
Political institutions, charities
Religious festivals, staff meetings
Day, evening, after work
Adverts, displays, news
Designing a qualitative sample
review aims / research question
devise appropriate sampling rationale
ad hoc, purposive, theoretical
heterogeneous / homogeneous / atypical (purposive)
identify target population(s)
set selection criteria
relevant socio-demographic characteristics
relationship to the research issue
Primary and secondary criteria
long list of selection criteria can lead to unmanageable sample design and size
simplify list by sorting into primary (most important) criteria secondary (less important) criteria
explore ways in which secondary criteria might be nested under primary criteria / primary might proxy for secondary (eg a range of occupations should also include a range of income levels)
Setting quotas
how many cases for each criterion
symbolic not statistical ‘representation’
quotas based on requisite range and
diversity not distribution in wider population
Sample size – how many is enough?
no standard rules on sample size
size determined by and result of diversity of target population
number of selection criteria
not probability theory or confidence levels
some guidelines in-depth interview samples often below 50, would
question rationale if more than 70
focus group samples often below 12 groups, would question rationale if more than 20 groups
Reasons for small samples in qualitative
research
feasibility
cost
time
handling data collection and analysis
‘saturation’
mapping range not incidence
already got key concepts / themes etc
diminishing returns
Making generalizations
The language of sampling suggests we wish to represent a wider group or phenomenon
But this may not be the case, except we usually aim to learn even from an intrinsic case
Generalizations are often made by sleight of hand. It is better to be clear about your aims and to write them into your design
Types of generalization
Jonesville-in-the-USA
Banal generalization
Transferability
Theoretical or conceptual generalizing
Intentional modest generalizing
Workshop
Design a sample for one aspect of your project.
This will entail considering appropriate methods
Consider a hierarchy of criteria
Give quotas and justifications Let’s examine our case study by Penny Curtis
(handout)
Also see KoR project handout
Topic guides
These guide the interview for the interviewer, but might also be helpful for the interviewee
The first step is to note all the topics you wish to cover, and their elements
Consider a hierarchy of questions
Vignettes and Photos can be useful for elicitation
Types of question (see Bryman 2012)
Introducing questions
Follow-up questions
General statements
Probes
Specifying
Indirect
Flow statements
Silences
Ending
Participant information sheets
These are crucial for informed consent
You may need to produce slightly different versions
They should be professional
They will shape your interviews, so be sure they are enticing
Include: aims, general question Extent and nature of
participation Inclusion/exclusion
criteria (who the participants are)
Any risks or dangers Benefits Clarify privacy and
confidentiality Contact details and
affiliations
Visual aids
Consider using other things in an interview Photos the participants have taken/displayed
previously Photos you take along Photos you ask them to take in advance, with the
topic in mind Objects in the home Ask them to draw maps, or even play with lego Include in the design some photos that inspire or
explain the topic, but be careful not to lead or foreclose
Quality questions (1)
CONTRIBUTION - Is the study contributing to wider knowledge and understanding or has it had some utility within the original context?
Understanding How far has knowledge and understanding been
extended by the research? In what ways?
Worthwhileness / status of participants How far has the status of the participants been
enhanced?
Transferability How clear is the basis for drawing wider inference
(discussed more later)
Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., and Dillon, L. 2003, Quality in Qualitative Evaluation: A Framework for Assessing Research Evidence, GCSRO.
Available at: www.policyhub.gov.uk/publications
Quality questions (2)
CREDIBILITY
Are findings are believable (face validity)?
How well does the study capture and portray the world it is trying to describe?
How well backed up are the claims made by the research / what is the evidential base?
How plausible are the findings? How well do claims fit within existing knowledge?
If not initially plausible, how strongly persuasive is the argument?
Quality questions (3)
RIGOUR
Transparency How clearly have the assumptions / theoretical
perspectives / values of the researcher(s) been conveyed
How clearly have the ethical implications of the research been addressed?
How well have decisions about / approaches to design, conduct and analysis been documented? How detailed is the account?
How clear is the rationale for key decisions?
Quality questions (4)
RIGOUR
Is the Research design appropriate and thorough?
How appropriate is the overall strategy for the study?
Has a convincing rationale for qualitative research been given?
How well can qualitative methods address the research aims / research question(s)?
Quality questions (5)
RIGOUR
How convincing / defensible is the sample design?
Why has a particular sampling rationale been adopted?
Why have particular sampling units been chosen (people, groups, organisations, locations, documents, accounts etc)?
Why has a particular sample size been chosen?
Are conclusions justifiable given sample?
Quality questions (6)
RIGOUR
How appropriate are the methods chosen? How well can the methods chosen address the
research aims?
How appropriate are the methods for the kind of people / documents included in the study?
How thorough was the data generation / collection? How far have depth, richness and nuance been
captured?
Quality questions (7)
RIGOUR
How thoroughly and systematically have data been analysed?
How well do analytical themes / concepts/ building blocks fit the data?
How well has the basis of categories and classifications been described and illustrated?
How well has the variation around these themes been identified and retained?
Drawing wider inference from qualitative
data – extrapolation?
Is it possible? NO, if we mean statistical generalisation
NO, if we believe that meanings and behaviours are context-bound
YES, if extrapolation is offered as a working hypothesis that findings may help us understand wider / other contexts
Is it desirable? depends on the researcher’s epistemological position
How can it be done? assertional rather than probabilistic logic
careful comparison and unassailable analysis rather than statistical representativeness or sampling theory
Drawing wider inference from qualitative
data
representational extrapolation – these views/experiences exist, we are not saying how frequently they will be found and we acknowledge that parts of the ‘map’ may be missing
empirical extrapolation – views, accounts of behaviour, processes, explanations applied by the reader to other settings based on typicality of case (transferability)
based on detailed case by case transfer
analytical or theoretical extrapolation
To conclude
We have addressed: the nature of qualitative research – what it can
and cannot deliver, developing qualitative strategies and designing
research questions, the main methods and techniques, drawing a qualitative sample, designing topic guides for use in interview or
focus group based studies, and judging the ‘quality’ of qualitative research.