qualitative methods exam 2016 - ibp · pdf filefinal exam qualitative methods fall 2016 1...
TRANSCRIPT
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
1
Qualitative Methods Exam 2016
Final Exam – Assignment Two
Copenhagen Business School – International Business and Politics
Christian Mathias Brynjolf Bohn.
Mark Michael Tuborg Boesen.
Sarah Nørby Larsen
Dag-Yero Midtvåge Diallo.
12 December 2016
STU count: 33.943
Total pages: 15 (19 including front page and bibliography)
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
2
Assignment Two The US government has hired us to analyse the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their children in USA.
We have decided to base our qualitative research project on a case-study research design, and it includes
one main research question as well as multiple sub research questions. As a data-collection strategy, we
have decided on ethnography, which we subsequently compare to qualitative interviewing. To analyse the
collected data, we have chosen a grounded theory approach. In the end, we contrast it to the narrative
analysis method. Throughout the assignment, we are exclusively focusing on the research methodology.
A Clear Research Question When conducting quantitative as well as qualitative research, it is highly recommendable to develop research
questions in order to guide the research process. Generally, qualitative research tends to be more open-
ended than quantitative research, but since very open-ended research is risky and can lead to the collection
of too much data, Bryman (2016, 78) advices researchers to formulate research questions in either case.
Since we have already been given the overall research area (the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their
children in USA) as well as the focus areas of interest (migrant’s values, their experience of living in the USA,
and the children’s living situation), we will focus our attention on formulating the research questions.
According to Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016, 40), the key to success in a qualitative research project is the
researchers ability to not only formulate, but continuously reformulate and redefine the research questions.
Preferably, this takes place several times during the research process in order to reduce the width and
complexity of the study. Still, the research questions do have great value in the early phases of the study as
well by setting boundaries on the study, giving it a specific direction and increased coherence (Silverman
2013). However, that requires that the research questions are workable, which means not being too broad
or specific. According to Silverman (2013), at the same time they must also be answerable, interconnected,
and substantively relevant. Bryman (2016, 83) adds to this by stating that all research questions should be
clear, researchable, have some connection(s) with established theory and research, be linked to each other,
be able to make an original contribution to the topic, and be neither too broad nor too narrow. We will
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
3
therefore formulate our research questions with those criteria in mind. Since the aim of this assignment is to
focus on the research methodology – not to engage with the literature related to the theme – we will base
our research questions exclusively on the material provided in the exam.
Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016, 42) describes three kinds of research questions, the so-called what, how, and
why questions. While 'what' questions are descriptive and focus on describing situations and processes, the
'how' and 'why' questions focus on causes and consequences with the aim of answering or explaining
something in qualitative terms. We have therefore decided to include research questions of all kinds in our
study in order to cover the relevant aspects of the research area. Since the exam explicitly states that the
assignment must contain a clear research questions, we have formulated one main research question as well
as multiple sub research questions, while taking into account the points made by the different authors in the
text above:
Main research question:
What motivates illegal Mexican migrants with children to stay, work and live in USA?
Sub research questions:
What are the hopes and dreams of illegal Mexican migrants with children in USA?
What are their fears and concerns related to their concrete living and working situation?
How are the values and beliefs of illegal Mexican migrants with children shaped by their specific living
and working situation?
How do illegal Mexican migrants perceive the American society to be treating them, depending on
their concrete living and working situation?
How to they justify raising their children in a foreign country illegally?
Why are illegal Mexican migrants with children choosing to stay, work and live in USA, despite the
many challenges related to their status as illegal migrants?
Do the choices and actions of illegal Mexican migrants with children differ from those without
children?
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
4
An Evaluation of the Usefulness of the Case-study Research Design To evaluate the usefulness of the case-study as a research design, it is necessary to understand the role and
purpose of a research design. In the pre-production phase of a research project, the research design is used
to secure a strict structure, plan, and strategy (de Vaus 2001: 16). Similar links can be drawn to a work plan,
but the research design encompasses more than just that. As de Vaus states:” The function of a research
design is to ensure that the evidence obtained enables us to answer the initial question as unambiguously as
possible. (de Vaus 2001: 9)” Hence, a research design is a tool that helps to understand how a research
question is answered as convincingly as possible by outlining the clear purpose of the project before
conducting the research. For our research project, this means that the case-study research design should
guide the selection of a research strategy when analysing the life of illegal Mexican migrants.
According to Bryman, there are five essential types of research designs: Experimental design, cross-sectional
design, longitudinal design, comparative design, and case study design (Bryman 2016: 50). Different research
designs carry different advantages and disadvantages that should be considered when choosing which one
to apply for a research project. For instance, the experimental design is very robust and trustworthy, but on
the other hand it is limited by its manipulation of the independent variables as the design involves intervening
in a specific situation. In the same way, the cross-sectional design is apt for uncovering variation between
cases, but lacks the detailed and intensive analysis of a single case. These types of research designs should
be perceived as ideal types, in that actual research designs rarely follow this stringent divide (Gerring 2004:
10). Often a research design can embrace several of these types and display more than one feature. A case-
study can for instance display both longitudinal and cross-sectional features. Since the case study is the
chosen research design for this paper, our primary focus will be engaged on this type of design.
There is much discussion on how to define the term “case study”. To name a few of the most prominent
scholars, Robert Yin defines it as a qualitative method in that it has a small sample size, N, and that the
research is ethnographic or otherwise related to field observations (Yin 1994: 137). Harry Eckstein argues
slightly different that a case study should be defined as a research of a single case. For the investigation of
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
5
this paper, the definition of Gerring is arguably the most suitable, as he describes it as:” an intensive study of
a single unit for the purpose of understanding a larger class of similar units" (Gerring 2004: 1). By this
definition, our case study can be conducted as an intensive study of a community of illegal Mexican migrants
for the purpose of understanding a larger class of illegal Mexican migrants in USA.
The case study research design possesses several advantages when answering a research question. It is an
excellent way of generating holistic knowledge in depth, and it provides a framework to present complex
issues in an accessible format (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016: 131). Applied to our case, this offers a way to
identify and categorize the values of the illegal Mexican migrants by conducting an intensive in-depth study
of them in their social setting, which is the exact purpose of this paper. In contrast, the weaknesses of the
case study are inherently linked to its external validity or generalizability (Bryman 2016: 390). In analysing a
specific setting or community, as explored later in this assignment, the findings cannot necessarily be
generalised to the wider population, as it is nearly impossible to find an identical social setting. This challenge
to the case study conflicts with the definition of Gerring earlier stated in this paper, and it is a recurring
discussion within the field of qualitative methods that should be paid careful attention to. To determine
whether our findings in a single community can be applied to the rest of the US with certainty, we would
have to conduct an abundance of additional case-studies and compare them to each other, which would be
a very costly process. As this approach bear more sign of a cross-sectional design than a case-study design, it
would further go against the original task ordered by the US government.
Having a clear outline of the purpose of a research design as well as the strengths and weaknesses of a case
study, this paper will now evaluate the usefulness of the case study as a research design on these premises.
As the research question in this paper sets out to understand a particular group of people and their values,
experience of living in USA, and their children’s living situation, the research design must be applicable in
uncovering these exact elements and deliver as unambiguous an answer as possible. Through an intensive
study of a single case, in our case a community illegal Mexican migrants, we can understand a larger class of
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
6
similar units, which is why we can answer the main focus areas of the US government in our analysis. Thus,
several arguments support the notion that the case study is a useful research design that can help the US
government. However, as previously mentioned the external validity of the case-study is still an important
element that might make the case-study a less useful research design.
Finally, it is important to note that the case-study is an ideal type of research design, and that the case study
in this assignment would most likely contain elements from longitudinal design as well, simply because the
data-collection strategy would be conducted over a longer period of time. However, since we have not been
given any information about resources and/or a specific time schedule for the research project, we will not
dive into the specifics regarding the length of the study.
A Data-collection Strategy Having decided on a case-study research design, we now need to determine which data-collection strategy
to employ. Multiple strategies exist, such as qualitative interviewing, focus groups and ethnography (Bryman
2016, 377-378). When choosing the strategy, it is important to keep in mind the objective of the research
project to ensure that the data collection strategy that most effectively answers the research questions is
the one chosen (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 82). The data collection is in many ways the most important
part of the entire research project, as poor data will lead to poor and weak conclusions (Bryman 2016, 10).
All three strategies have strengths and weaknesses that enhance or decrease the quality of the gathered
data. Qualitative interviewing allows the researcher to control the setting, the questions and the general
direction of the answers, however, the chance of observing behaviour and interaction is drastically limited
(Bryman 2016, 494). In focus groups, the researcher is able to ask questions in addition to observing the
individuals and their interaction with each other, but the individuals might feel pressured by peers or
superiors and therefore provide adjusted answers (Bryman 2016, 501). Finally, the ethnographic strategy is
a way of infiltrating a society, a group of people, or a specific environment by embedding oneself in their
settings. The idea is to get as close to the participants, in this case the illegal Mexican migrants, in their natural
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
7
social setting (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016, 150). The researcher thus plays an important role in this specific
type of study, as the level of involvement far exceeds a standard interview or questionnaire (Dargie 1998,
67). According to Dargie, the primary advantages of the ethnographic approach over the other two strategies
is the opportunity to experience events as they happen and conduct casual interviews with people in their
natural environments, which allows a deeper study of the participants and their lives (Dargie 1998, 66). That
is why we believe that the ethnographic data-collection strategy is the best fit to our particular project and
offers the best way of answering our research questions.
Since more than 80% of Mexicans are of Roman Catholic belief, we have decided to conduct our ethnographic
approach in a religious community (CIA 2016). In the city of Escondido in Southern California, the St. Mary
Parish Church conducts all masses and services in Spanish under Roman Catholicism (St. Mary Parish Church
2016). Therefore, this is where we will conduct the ethnographic research. Having now selected our case
community, we need to sample units within this case. There are two main approaches to this process:
probability sampling and purposive sampling. The former is a more quantitative way of ensuring a random
population of participants, where they all have the same probability of being chosen. The purposive sampling
is taking place as a non-probability sampling simultaneously on two levels: on content level and on participant
level (Bryman 2016, 408-409). When evaluating the data collected, these two levels must be included. To
ensure a triangulation process it is important to continuously evaluate the data from multiple sources, in
addition to gathering further data for a greater validity (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 88). Since the
purposive sampling offers the best way to ensure the correct and necessary participants in our study, that is
the sampling method we will use in our ethnographic approach.
Before conducting the actual ethnographic study, we need to determine the access level. This is essential,
since it determines to which degree a researcher is able to cover a given society or group, and thus planning
the access and understanding the complexity of the church society is crucial to what types of data can be
gathered (Van Maanen & Kolb 1985, 11). In our case, the aim is to get access to the lives of families visiting
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
8
the church. To reach that goal, the researcher can apply multiple tactics: The researcher can use friends or
contacts to help gain access. As an alternative, the researcher can try to get the support of someone within
the organization, called "sponsors", to vouch for the researcher. Lastly, the researcher can get access through
"top management" or senior people, called "gatekeepers". We recommend seeking out the support of a
gatekeeper in this particular case for numerous reasons: Arriving in the church without any pre-established
relation to the participants might raise suspicion to the nature of the study. Secondly, if a gatekeeper like the
minister is well known and respected within the society, the inclusion processes will shorten and reduce
suspicion, as he or she will have vouched for the intentions of the study. (Bryman 2016, 437). Even with the
help of a gatekeeper, it is highly unlikely that a researcher will obtain full access to the lives of the families,
as he inevitably remains an external figure (Bryman 2016, 248). However, the longer the researcher is
embedded in the church society and becomes a more familiar face, the higher the chances are of observing
natural occurring behaviour. Thus, the families will find the presence of the researcher less awkward, and it
is then up to the researcher to engage and take advantage of the trust she has built. (Dargie 1998, 68).
After establishing the access with the gatekeeper, the researcher must decide to which degree she should
embed herself. In this case, we decide to go in as a participating observer, which entails participating in core
activities, such as masses and gatherings, without being a full member. This offers the opportunity to get as
close to the participants as desired, without directly affecting their behaviour (Bryman 2016, 435).
Communities like the St. Mary Parish Church also host numerous events other than masses, during which the
researcher will be able to engage and build trust (St. Mary Parish Church 2016). Since the overall task is to
understand the life of the illegal families, it is particularly important that the researcher does not affect the
participants and their answers and behaviour. There is a potential risk of this happening, if the participants
become too aware of the research project and who the project is for (the US government). That is why it is
also important to consider either conducting overt or covert ethnography. As the title implies, a covert
researcher does not disclose her intentions, more so not the fact that she is a researcher. This is kept a secret
to ensure unfiltered observations in the field and perhaps being let even closer to the participants, where
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
9
non-adjusted behaviour can be observed (Bryman 2016, 427). However, there are certain limitations as to
what information can be extracted when operating covertly. For instance, when talking to people in and
around the church community, it becomes difficult to ask direct questions without revealing the intention of
the researcher, and taking field notes might be impossible at certain times. When operating overtly on the
other hand, this will not be a challenge. If the participants know the researcher and her intentions, she will
be able to record conversations and take notes in the church (Bryman 2016, 440). This is a huge advantage,
since well-structured field notes as well as ethnographic interview transcripts are extremely valuable, as the
longevity of the study can make it difficult to remember all sessions and events experienced (Mack et al.
2013, 99). In addition, there will be no risk for the researcher of having her cover blown and thereafter losing
the access entirely if she is already operating overtly. We have therefore decided to assume an overt role.
When considering ethics in qualitative methods, there are four principles to take into account: harm to
participants, lack of informed consent, invasion of privacy and deception (Bryman 2016, 125). These are
essential to the way researchers conduct and report research, since they lay the foundation for building trust
between the researcher and the research community (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 64). Breaking that trust
can have severe consequences for our research project as well. For example, if the families feel that the
researcher is intruding in the local community, it will have negative effects on not only the data collected in
the subsequent sessions, but also on the trust that invited the researcher in in the first place. In addition, if
participants feel violated, they might request that the researcher maculate all data concerning them. When
doing ethnographic research, the lack of informed consent and the invasion of privacy are especially
important, and they are therefore essential to consider in our case. By operating overtly, we are giving the
participants the choice to share information about their lives and to let the researcher in or not. However,
the researcher might gain knowledge during the study, which the participants did not intend to share. This
might happen because of the difficulty in ensuring that every participant in the community is aware and
informed about the researcher's role and her associated intentions (Watts 2011, 305).
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
10
Finally, as the migrants and their children are living in USA illegally, they might wish to remain anonymous in
the study, which is important for the researcher to respect throughout the entire research project. As Israel
and Hay (2004) observe, if researchers do not keep the names of their participants confidential as well as
what is being told, 'who would talk to them in the future?' (Israel and Hay 2004, 94). This become especially
relevant if the researcher observes or hears about an illegal activity, since this community after all is a
community of migrants illegally living in a foreign country.
These ethical considerations need to be included in the way the researcher operates in the community, how
she engages with the participants, and lastly how the research is written up in the post-field period. When
considering the pros and cons of the data-collection strategy as well as the ethical aspects, we still find the
ethnographic approach with an overt researcher to be the best strategy for this research project. The
enormous value of an honest relationship with the participants will give the researcher the ultimate freedom
she needs to move about within the community and gather the best possible data (Mack et al. 2013, 99).
A Discussion of an Alternative Data-collection Strategy An alternative data-collection strategy is qualitative interviewing, which is probably the most used method
in qualitative research (Bryman 2016, 466). The method encompasses conducting interviews in different
ways with either individuals or groups as participants. Researchers are typically working with three different
types of interviews: structured, semi-structured and unstructured interviews, and most commonly the two
latter in qualitative research (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 93). When conducting semi-structured
interviews, it is important to prepare an interview guide tailored to the research questions. By doing so, this
will help to ensure the quality and usability of the data collected and make it easier for the researcher to
control the interview (Bryman 2016, 469).
By applying qualitative interviewing to our case about illegal Mexican migrants, it would be easier to structure
our research, simply because interviewing in an organised setting offers a better opportunity to control the
interview and derive answers particularly relevant to our research questions (Guest et al 2013, 80). In
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
11
addition, it would require less time and resources to gather that same amount of material compared to an
ethnographic approach. Furthermore, it would be easier for the researcher to record the interviews as well
as trace back the data to the original source (Seidman 2013, 115).
Bryman also argues that qualitative interviewing has its own advantages and disadvantages compared to the
ethnographic method. Firstly, one of the advantages is issues resistant to observation, which encompasses
issues that are not amendable to observation. In our case, this would be an advantage as our research
question sets out to study values, which is an issue resistant to observation since values are hardly visible.
Secondly, interviewing is less intrusive to the participants’ lives, as it does not take up as much time as being
observed for a longer period. In our case, the participants would only be interrupted during the time of the
interview, which they themselves would have agreed to. Finally, the ethical considerations are easier to cope
with, as the participants will be aware of the intentions of the researcher at any time during the interview
(Bryman 2016, 492-494).
On the other hand, what really differentiates qualitative interviewing from the ethnographic method is that
people in the former are brought out of their natural social settings and into the settings defined by the
researcher (Guest et al. 2013, 93). This comprises one of the biggest disadvantages of qualitative
interviewing, as we are not able to see through the eyes of the participants and as the participants are more
aware of themselves being objects for research. In our case, this would imply that the participants would be
more aware of how they act and what information they share with the researcher (Bryman 2016, 494-497).
In addition, Guest introduces another disadvantage of qualitative interviewing, which is that “Spending time
working, playing, or living with people will produce data that would require dozens of interviews or focus
groups to uncover” (Guest et al 3013, 82). Due to those advantages and disadvantages of the alternative data
collection strategy just discussed, we still believe that our ethnographic data collection strategy is more
optimal, as the method ensures in-depth data collected directly from the environment of the participants.
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
12
A Method for Analysing the Collected Data After having conducted our ethnographic data-collection strategy, we now find ourselves with a large
database of unstructured textual material consisting of field notes and interview transcripts from our
observations and casual interviews. Next step is therefore to decide on a method for analysing all the
collected data. However, in contrast to quantitative data analysis, there are very few well-established and
widely accepted rules about how to carry out the analysis of qualitative data (Bryman 2016, 570).
Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016) identifies two general types of qualitative content analysis: Categorization
and interpretation. While the former focuses on categorizing the data with the aim of providing a "holistic
and factual description of the phenomena under study," the second method focuses on "intensive
interpretation with the aim of understanding the meaning of the issues under study" (Eriksson and Kovalainen
2016, 121). Both methods are fitting for a case-study research design, but Eriksson and Kovalainen points out
that categorization is especially useful in extensive case studies, while intensive case studies as well as
ethnographies put more emphasis on interpretation. Since our study is a case of the latter, the interpretation
approach holds the greater value. However, interpretation as an approach is not very specific, which is why
we have sought out other and more detailed methods as well.
According to Bryman (2016), despite the lack of clear-cut rules about how qualitative data analysis should be
carried out some general strategies do exist, among these analytic induction, grounded theory, thematic
analysis, and narrative analysis. He describes these as frameworks to guide the analysis of data and notes
that especially analytic induction and grounded theory are examples of ways in which qualitative and
quantitative data analysis differ. The reason is that these are inherently iterative, meaning that the analysis
begins after only some of the data have been collected, and then that analysis then affects the further
collection of data. These two methods can therefore be strategies for guiding the collection of data as well.
The method we have chosen in order to conduct a qualitative content analysis is that of grounded theory.
Strauss and Corbin (1998) defines the method as "theory that was derived from data, systematically gathered
and analysed through the research process. In this method, data collection, analysis, and eventual theory
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
13
stand in close relationship to one another" (Strauss and Corbin 1998, 12). In practice, the approach stresses
the importance of allowing theoretical ideas to emerge out of one's data, a so-called inductive method in
contrast to a deductive method that focuses on confirming predefined theories in the data. This is an inherent
advantage of the grounded theory approach, since it makes sure that the emergent concepts are closely
related to the collected data and relevant to the research area, which is why we see the method having great
value for this particular study as well.
Grounded theory as an approach to analysing qualitative data has changed a great deal since the
development of the approach in The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
(Glaser and Strauss 1967). However, it would be impossible for this assignment to cover all the changes
during the years, and we will therefore focus on clarifying the central processes of the method. These take
place through coding, which entails reviewing the field notes and interview transcripts and giving them labels
that seem to be of theoretical significance or of particular interest to the social world of the migrants being
studied (Bryman 2016, 573). In our case, this process has a specific focus of identifying and coding component
parts relevant to the previously formulated research questions about the life of illegal Mexican migrants and
their children. By systematically examining, comparing and categorizing the data continuously, the grounded
theory approach offers a way to derive concepts and theories about the migrant’s values, their experience
of living in the USA, and their children’s living situation. Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016) describes the
objective of this process as identifying relevant concepts in order to proceed to theoretical statements. By
comparing and contrasting the identified concepts and thereafter defining the categories, it is possible to
specify substantive theory about the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their children. This exemplifies the
strength of the method in terms of providing explanations for the previously formulated research questions.
Generally, researchers view coding as a progression through a series of stages. Bryman (2016) presents two
distinct approaches to this progressive elaboration of concepts and theories developed by Strauss and Corbin
(1990) and Charmaz (2006) respectively. The former distinguishes between open coding, axial coding, and
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
14
selective coding, while the latter prefers to distinguish between initial coding, focused or selective coding,
and theoretical coding. While the individual steps of the two approaches differ, both of them entails a "basic
understanding of the coding process as involving a movement from generating codes that stay close to the
data to more selective and theoretically elaborate ways of conceptualizing the phenomenon of interest"
(Bryman 2016, 575). We have chosen to explain the usefulness of the Strauss and Corbin approach (1990):
Open coding: During this process, the collected data about the illegal Mexican migrants and their children is
broken down, examined, compared and categorized. This coding phase yields concepts relevant to our
research questions, and those are then turned into categories.
Axiel coding: By making connections between the previously defined categories, our collected data are put
back together in new ways. In this phase codes are linked to context, consequences, patterns of interaction,
and to causes in our collected data.
Selective coding: The core category, which is the central issue or focus in relation to the illegal Mexican
migrants, is identified and systematically related to the other categories. These relationships are then
validated, and further categories are refined and developed.
After having gone through the different steps, the result of using the grounded theory approach will be
various concepts and categories systematically related to form a theoretical framework that explains the
relevant social phenomenon (Strauss and Corbin 1998, 22). In our case, this will sum up to an in-depth
understanding of the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their children in USA. However, the method also
has its weaknesses. Firstly, the approach is rather vague on the difference between concepts and categories,
which reduces its analytical value to the researcher. For example, while Strauss and Corbin (1998) refer to
concepts emerging from the analysis, Charmaz (2000) writes about emerging categories. Secondly, the
presence of multiple versions of grounded theory makes it difficult for the researcher to define it is as a
distinct method for analysing qualitative data as well as apply it in practice (Bryman 2016, 580). Thirdly, the
coding approach to qualitative data analysis entails the risk of losing the context. By coding and plucking out
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
15
chunks of text from the data, the social setting can be lost in the process. Lastly, Coffey and Atkinson (1996)
argues that the categorization of data into discrete chunks results in fragmentation, so that the narrative
flow of what people say is lost. According to Bryman (2016, 583), sensitivity to this last issue is exactly what
has caused a growing interest in narrative analysis as an alternative strategy for conducting qualitative data
analysis. That is why we have chosen to evaluate exactly that approach in the next section.
A Discussion of an Alternative Strategy for Analysing the Data As an alternative to grounded theory, narrative analysis offers a way for the researcher to organize and
interpret events, happenings and actions described in the field notes and interview transcripts in a way so
that they construct one or more narratives to be interpreted and discussed (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016,
221). In other words, with narrative analysis the focus of attention shifts from 'what happened?' to 'how do
people make sense of what happened?' (Bryman 2016, 589). This shift takes into account the fact that people
perceive their lives in terms of continuity and process, in contrast to grounded theory that, according to its
critics, neglect the perspective of those being studied, in our case the illegal Mexican migrants and their
children. Among others, Mishler (1986, 77) therefore argues for so-called 'elicited personal narratives', which
provides a way for the researcher to view people's answers as stories that are potential raw material for
narrative analysis. This makes the method relevant for accounts relating to episodes and to the
interconnections between them. Riessman (1993) describes how she became concerned about the
fragmentation of data that results from coding data – one of the weaknesses of grounded theory previously
described – and therefore decided to apply narrative analysis to her data. By doing so, she effectively applied
a narrative approach to materials collected in a conventional way for conventional purposes with the purpose
of uncovering the stories of her participants (Bryman 2016, 590). Other researchers deliberately ask their
participants to recount stories already in the data-collection phase. This reveals two distinct ways of thinking
about narrative analysis: An approach to analyse qualitative data as well as an approach to do this but also
increase the telling of stories from participants.
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
16
In order to derive meaning from narratives, Coffey and Atkinson (1996) argue that they should be analysed
in terms of the functions they serve for the teller. They describe the aim of this process as to elicit
participants' reconstructed accounts of connections between events and between events and contexts.
Conducting a narrative analysis of qualitative data therefore entails seeking out the forms and functions of
competing as well as complementing narratives among the participants. By piecing together the narratives
that illegal Mexican migrants with children tell themselves and each other, narrative analysis can give a
deeper understanding of how they perceive their life and those of their children in USA. This can potentially
be of great value for the US government, since these stories explain their own views on living illegally in a
foreign country. In addition, this approach holds the potential to reveal hopes and dreams or concerns and
fears of the illegal migrants that the fragmentation of data in the grounded theory approach would miss,
simply because the latter does not take into account those mentioned stories that the migrants employ to
account for events related to different aspects of their life.
Not only does the narrative analysis approach offer a way of analysing the narrative flow of what the migrants
say, it also provides a better understanding of the social setting, in other words the context, in which the
migrants are observed. This is something the grounded theory approach risk losing by plucking out chunks of
text and categorizing them, while the narrative analysis approach offer a way of looking at the whole.
However, it is important to note that this does not render the grounded theory method redundant, since
identifying a core category as well as various concepts will still help in formulating relevant theory in order
to understand the life of illegal migrants. In addition, because grounded theory systematically identifies
relevant categories related to the core category during the different steps, we still believe this approach to
hold superior value if we were to choose only one approach. Having outlined an alternative strategy and
compared these two methods of analysing qualitative data, we believe that they complement each other in
a great way, which is why we recommend employing both of them during the data analysis phase in order to
help the US government understand the life of illegal Mexican migrants as fully as possible.
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
17
Bibliography
Bryman, Alan (2016). Social Research Method (Fifth edition), New York: Oxford University Press
Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved on 9/12/16 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-
world-factbook/geos/mx.html
Charmaz, Kathy (2000). ‘Grounded Theory: Objectivist and Constructivist Methods’, in N. K. Denzin and Y. S.
Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (Second edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage
Publications Ltd.
Charmaz, Kathy (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis.
London: Sage Publications Ltd
Coffey, Amanda and Atkinson, Paul (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research
Strategies. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Ltd
Dargie, C. (1998) "Observation in Political Research: A Qualitative Approach”Politicsvol 18 no 1
Eckstein. Harry (1992) “Case Studies and Theory in Political Science.” In Regarding Politics: Essays on
Political Theory, Stability, and Change. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Eriksson, Päivi and Kovalainen, Anne (2016). Qualitative Methods in Business Research (Second edition).
London: Sage Publications Ltd
Gerring, J. (2004) “What is a Case Study and What Is It Good For?” American Political Science Review vol.
98, No. 2 (May) pp 341-354
Glaser, Barney and Strauss, Anselm (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative
Research. Chicago: Aldine
Israel, Mark and Hay, Iain (2004). Research Ethics for Social Scientists. London: Sage Publications Ltd
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
18
Krogstad, J.M., Passel, S.P., & Cohn, D. (2016). “5 facts about illegal immigration in the U.S.” Retrieved on
9/12/16 from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/03/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-
u-s/
Lincoln, Yvonna and Guba, Egon (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications Ltd
Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K.M., Guest, G., Namey, E. (2013): Qualitative Research Methods: A
Data Collector’s Field Guide. North Carolina: Family Health International
Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved on 8/12/16 from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/
Mishler, Elliot (1986). Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard
University Press.
Morgan, David L.'Focus groups' In: Annual Review of Sociology, 1 January 1996, Vol.22
Riessman, Catherine (1993). Narrative Analysis. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications Ltd
Seidman, Irving (2013). Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the
Social Sciences (Fourth edtion). Teachers College Press
Silverman, David (2013). Doing Qualitative Research (Fourth Edition). London: Sage Publications Ltd
St. Mary Parish Church Escondido 2016. Retrieved on 9/12/16 from http://www.stmaryp.org/mass-times/
Strauss, Anselm and Corbin, Juliet (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and
Techniques. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications Ltd
Strauss, Anselm and Corbin, Juliet (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Ltd
Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016
19
Van Maanen, J., and D. Kolb. 1985. The Professional Apprentice: Observations on field-work roles in two
organizational settings. In Research in the sociology of organizations, Edited by S. Bachrach and S. Mitchell,
vol. 4, pp. 1-33. Greenwich, CT: JAI
de Vaus, David (2001) ”Research Design in Social Research”, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1-16
Watts, J.H. (2011) "Ethical and Practical Challenges of Participant Observation in Sensitive Health
Research”International Journal of Social Research Methodology vol 14, no 4 (July)
Yin, Robert (1989). Case Study Research: London: Sage Publications Ltd
Yin, Robert (1994). Improving Educational Management through Research and Consultancy, p. 135-156:
London: Sage Publications Ltd