FMLab_Handout_Qualitative Research Design.pdf

Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage...

Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage ETHNOGRAPY / PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION What is ethnography/participant observation? Participant observation is best regarded as a data collection method rather than a data analysis method. There is no standard way of carrying out the analysis of field notes and the other data collected though grounded theory is a commonly used and systematic approach. Participant observation originated in the work of anthropologists working in non-Western cultures but is frequently employed in modern Western settings. Confusingly, participant observation refers to two distinct things: A very specific methodology, named participant observation, which involves the recording and analysing of the researcher’s observations when closely immersed in a group or culture. Its most significant feature is the close involvement of the researcher in the research setting through participation or engaging with a group or community over a protracted period of time. A general methodology or broad strategy, for collecting data in a field setting. This sometimes is called participant observation and it includes the more specific approach described above. So a formal definition of participant observation would also identify it as a broad strategy for collecting data in a field setting. It involves collecting a variety of different sorts of data pertinent to answering the research question. There is another term or concept, ethnography, which is essentially the study of cultures. For the purposes of this lecture, it is possible to regard both ethnography and participant observation as similar, if not identical, where we are referring to a complex simultaneous method of data collection in field settings. The overlap seems often to be almost complete as rarely is participant observation (the specific technique) used on its own without the involvement of other methods. Ethnography seems to have emerged as the preferred term in the 1970s (Bryman, 2004). Furthermore, the term ethnography also refers to the product of ethnographic research – the published account based on the research – and care needs to be taken to distinguish these two meanings. So, ethnography/participant observation is a blanket term covering a range of related methods. There are a number of dimensions along which ethnographic/participant observation studies vary. Among the more important of these dimensions are the following (Dereshiwsky, 1999; also based on Patton, 1986): The observer’s role in the setting 1|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage The observer’s involvement may vary from that of a complete outsider uninvolved in the group dynamics to full membership of the group. The group’s knowledge of observation process If the participants know that they are being studied then this is known as overt observation. Covert observation involves the participants not knowing that they are part of a study. Explication of the study’s purpose This can range from full explication to even misleading explanations. Length The observation may be a relatively short single session of just one hour or there may be multiple observations which continue for weeks or even years. Focus The focus of the researcher may be on a relatively narrow aspect of the situation or it may be more holistic in which rich data are collected through the observation of a number of aspects of the situation in depth. Participant observation literally implies that the researcher does not simply observe events in particular social or cultural contexts but also has ‘hands on’ experience. Although the extent to which the participant observer is a full participant in the community (living life completely as a member of the community) rather than as a guest in the community varies, the expectation is of a substantial term of engagement with the community. (There are other methods of observation which do not require such involvement. For example, a study of whether drivers of new cars jump traffic lights more frequently than drivers of older cars could probably be carried out using a simple checklist identifying the age of the car – e.g. from its number plate – and ratings of whether the driver crosses the lights legally or illegally.) Part of the ethos of participant observation is that the perspective of members of the group or community studied is regarded as a major focus. These perspectives will vary widely as different group members or members of the community will differ in terms of their roles, their activities and in many other ways. Thus, participant observation can be seen as diametrically opposite to surveillance which demands no participation and might be possible through purely technological resources such as CCTV cameras. There are, of course, also instances of researchers observing communities without those who are being observed being aware of the fact. This would be rare in modern research for ethical reasons. The term ‘immersion’ is frequently used to describe this process. ‘Immersion’ can involve living with the group being studied (as in the early anthropological studies of other cultures) but, equally, the immersion may be confined to the working day or some other more limited arrangement. The latter is more typical of participant observation in one’s own culture as practised by sociologists and other modern users of ethnographic approaches. A participant observer cannot be expected to be equivalent to any other member of that community since he or she often comes from a very different social background. However, the expectation is that participant observers come closer 2|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage to the experiences of regular members of the community than is typical in research. In this way, hopefully, the careful and conscientious observer obtains a reasonably full understanding of the way that the society functions. Traditionally, data are collected primarily in the form of field notes written-up by the observer as soon after the events as possible. This would normally take place in ‘private time’ away from the community. There is no reason why, in appropriate circumstances, the data collection should not use technological aids such as voice recordings of field observations, computers or even video, though these can be intrusive. Using computers for writing field notes is advantageous as these can be fed directly into computer-aided qualitative data analysis programs such as NVivo. As we have seen, there is every reason why the researcher should not be confined solely to the observations recorded in the field notes as sources of data. It is possible to incorporate the following and more: semi-structured interviews group discussions life histories of members of the community personal documents including photographs; relevant media coverage; other documentation. These are familiar methods in their own right but in the context of ethnography/participant observation they can be seen as a resource which can be compared with the researcher’s direct experiences. There is a sense in which participant observation can be regarded as too narrow a phrase to capture what is actually done in such studies and ethnography might be seen as the more appropriate broader term. Even quantification is not unknown in participant observationbased studies. The field notes which are made should be recorded in a relatively pure form – that is, the observations and the interpretations of the observations kept separate. In other words, the ‘experiences’ of the observer are the primary form of data in participant observation but these ‘experiences’ should be distinguished from more analytic statements in the field notes. This is a common requirement in qualitative research of all sorts. One way of doing this is to keep the ‘pure’ observations on one side of a notebook and analytic comments relevant to them on the other side – the two separated by a margin, for example. Participant observation can provide the researcher with an initial fairly detailed picture on which to base a major research initiative. Although there are other ways of doing this, the knowledge from participant observation may provide the researcher with a better understanding of what to include in their interview schedules, questionnaires or further observational studies. Thus participant observation can help ensure that the researcher is sufficiently knowledgeable to proceed with later stages of their research on an informed basis. 3|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage The role of the observer in this sort of field research varies in terms of the extent to which the observation and participation are manifest, see PTT: Total or complete participation. The researcher assumes entirely the role of a member of the group or organisation being studied without revealing their additional role as researcher to the other group members. For example, the researcher obtains work in a factory in order to understand aspects of the experience of work. Total or complete observation. In this, personal involvement in the community is minimised and the researcher remains detached. There is no doubt as to the observer’s role. So, for example, the researcher may spend time on a factory floor making observations or taking notes while at the same time making no efforts to engage with the workers there. Participant as an observer. The researcher’s identity as a researcher is made known to the group being studied. For example, the researcher spends time in a youth club and may engage in the activities of the club members who are aware of the observer’s status as both a club member and a researcher. Of course, with this status, the observer need not necessarily fully participate in the group’s activities. Observer as non-participant. This is not a form of participant observation since there is no direct engagement with the group in its day-to-day activities. Sometimes the term ‘ethology’ is used in psychology, for this, but this really refers to the study of animal behaviour. WHEN TO USE ETHNOGRAPHY/PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION Ethnography/participant observation is at its most useful: When one wishes to understand the operation of a naturally occurring group, community or culture. The assumption is that if the researcher engages with the group skillfully and at length, they will see the group acting in a natural way without being affected significantly by being involved in a research study. When broad observations are appropriate rather than narrowly focused ones. Thus, ethnography/participant observation is quite different from the fine-grained approaches which, for example, conversation analysis and discourse analysis deal with. It does not operate at the same level of detail. Ethnography/participant observation is about studying social interaction and cultures in as full and natural a way as possible. Ethnography/participant observation can be regarded as a method in its own right capable of generating a rich variety of data which are unobtainable in any other way. However, it is a resource-hungry approach compared with most other methods of qualitative research. As a 4|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage method, it has a lot to commend it to qualitative psychologists though the concentration of much qualitative psychology almost purely on language is probably a limitation on its usefulness. However, what else can compete with it as a way of studying groups in their social environment? While it is reasonable to suggest that participant observation/ethnology is not a frequently used method in psychological research, it has a somewhat wider role in psychology than research. You will find that observation is used in a variety of professional contexts in psychology such as in business, counselling and education, so taking the method seriously as a research tool would add to the general practical skills of any psychologist. 5|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage CASE STUDY Nature of a Case Study As a research method, the case study is used in many situations, to contribute to our knowledge of individual, group, organizational, social, political, and related phenomena. Not surprisingly, the case study has been a common research method in psychology, sociology, political science, anthropology, social work, business, education, nursing, and community planning. In brief, the case study method allows investigators to retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events-such as individual life cycles, small group behavior, organizational and managerial processes, neighborhood change, school performance, international relations, and the maturation of industries. A case study is an empirical inquiry that: investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident. In other words, you would use the case study method because you wanted to understand a reallife phenomenon in depth, but such understanding encompassed important contextual conditions- because they were highly pertinent to your phenomenon of study (e.g., Yin & Davis, 2007). This first part of the logic of design therefore helps to continue to distinguish case studies from the other research methods that have been discussed. An experiment, for instance, deliberately divorces a phenomenon from its context, attending to only a few variables (typically, the context is "controlled" by the laboratory environment). A history, by comparison, does deal with the entangled situation between phenomenon and context but usually with noncontemporary events. Finally, surveys can try to deal with phenomenon and context, but their ability to investigate the context is extremely limited. The survey designer, for instance, constantly struggles to limit the number of variables to be analyzed (and hence the number of questions that can be asked) to fall safely within the number of respondents who can be surveyed. Second, because phenomenon and context are not always distinguishable in real-life situations, other technical characteristics, including data collection and data analysis strategies, now become the second part of our technical definition of case studies: The case study inquiry: copes with the technically distinctive situation in which there will be many more variables of interest than data points, and as one result. 6|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to converge in a triangulating fashion, and as another result. benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis. In essence, the twofold definition shows how case study research comprises an all-encompassing method-covering the logic of design, data collection techniques, and specific approaches to data analysis. In this sense, the case study is not limited to being a data collection tactic alone or even a design feature alone (Stoecker, 1991). COMPONENTS OF THE CASE STUDY METHOD AS A RESEARCH DESIGN Study questions. This first component deals with the form of the question-in terms of "who," "what," "where," "how," and "why"-provides an important clue regarding the most relevant research method to be used. The case study method is most likely to be appropriate for "how" and "why" questions, so your initial task is to clarify precisely the nature of your study questions in this regard. Study propositions. As for the second component, each proposition directs attention to something that should be examined within the scope of study. For instance, assume that your research, on the topic of interorganizational partnerships, began with the following question: How and why do organizations collaborate with one another to provide joint services (for example, a manufacturer and a retail outlet collaborating to sell certain computer products)? These "how" and "why" questions, capturing what you are really interested in answering, led you to the case study as the appropriate method in the first place. Nevertheless, these "how" and "why" questions do not point to what you should study. Unit of analysis. This third component is related to the fundamental problem of defining what the "case" is-a problem that has plagued many investigators at the outset of case studies (e.g., Ragin & Becker, 1992). For instance, in the classic case study, a "case" may be an individual. Jennifer Platt (1992) has noted how the early case studies in the Chicago school of sociology were life histories of such persons as juvenile delinquents or derelict men. You also can imagine case studies of clinical patients, of exemplary students, or of certain types of leaders. In each situation, an individual person is the case being studied, and the individual is the primary unit of analysis. Information about the relevant individual would be collected, and several such individuals or "cases" might be included in a multiple-case study. 7|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage Linking data to propositions and criteria for interpreting the findings. The fourth and fifth components have been increasingly better developed in doing case studies. These components foreshadow the data analysis steps in case study research. Your main concern during the design phase is to be aware of the main choices and how they might suit your case study. In this way, your research design can create a more solid foundation for the later analysis. All these analytic techniques represent ways of linking data to propositions: pattern matching, explanation building, time-series analysis, logic models, and cross-case synthesis. The actual analyses will require that you combine or calculate your case study data as a direct reflection of your initial study propositions. For instance, knowing that some or all of your propositions cover a temporal sequence would mean that you might eventually use some type of time-series analysis. Noting this strong likelihood during the design phase would call your attention to the need to be sure you had sufficient procedures to collect time markers as part of your data collection plans. 8|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage GROUNDED THEORY What is Grounded Theory? According to Bryman (2004), grounded theory is the most widely used way of analysing qualitative data. Grounded theory was groundbreaking in the sense of providing a relatively formal but vigorous approach to the analysis of qualitative data. It also involved ways of collecting data which had a mutuality and an interrelation with the analysis of the data. It was a development of the 1960s when among the discontent of academics was the gulf between empirical research and theory building as well as the general feeling that qualitative research lacked the rigour that academic disciplines require. It grew from the work of the sociologists Barney Glaser (1930–) and Anselm Strauss (1916–1996). While nowadays it is commonplace for qualitative researchers to take great pains to establish the validity of their analyses, such concerns were really the contribution of Glaser, Strauss and grounded theory. One might say that grounded theory is based on two major concepts. Both concepts were heretical in terms of the positivistic social science of the time. Constant comparison involves the simultaneous collection and analysis of the data. The data and the analysis are constantly being compared one with the other. This violates the positivist view that data are collected and then analysed, with the analysis having no influence on the data collection process. Theoretical sampling is the idea that the theory/categorisation which the researcher is working on should help determine what data is to be collected next. The following are some of the important characteristics of grounded theory: Systematic. The process by which theory is developed is through the careful application of the general principles and methods of grounded theory. Guidelines. Grounded theory is essentially a system of guidelines which guide data collection, data analysis and theory building. The emerging research and theory are closely tied to social reality as far as that is represented in the data. Inductive processes are more important than deductive processes. This is very different from conventional theory building in psychology in which hypotheses are deduced from theory and these hypotheses are subjected to empirical testing. Such an approach to theory building is commonly communicated to psychology students in introductory mainstream psychology textbooks. Theory building is a continuous process. Grounded theory develops theory through a continuous process rather than by critical tests of hypotheses as in conventional theory building. It is impossible to separate grounded theory research into a small number of discrete stages since theory development begins early – even at the data collection stage – and continues to the stage of writing-up. 9|Page Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage NARRATIVE RESEARCH What is Narrative Research? The term ‘storied self’ appears in discussions of narrative. This refers to the way in which we create our ‘self’ using narratives and stories to account for what has happened or what is happening to us: Narrative psychology is concerned with the structure, content, and function of the stories that we tell each other and ourselves in social interaction. It accepts that we live in a storied world and that we interpret the actions of others and ourselves through the stories we exchange. Through narratives we not only shape the world and ourselves but they are shaped for us through narrative. (Murray, 2003, p. 95) People who have undergone some sort of trauma provide instances of how they often try to make sense of the events that they are going through by creating stories or narratives. A narrative is essentially a written or spoken account of connected events with an underlying time dimension. It is a story and takes the form of a story. This definition, however, fails to indicate just how much our narratives have to do with social interaction and matters such as identity. A narrative is closer to being a substantial chunk of one’s life (a life history) than it is about what happened, say, when we went out last night. To tell a friend on the telephone that you went to the movies last night and had an ice cream does not amount to a meaningful narrative for the purposes of narrative analysis. According to Sarbin: The story has a beginning, middle and an ending. The story is held together by recognizable patterns of events called plots. Central to the plot structure are human predicaments and attempted resolutions. (Sarbin, 1986, p. 3) We will regard narrative analysis as a system of analysing narratives using the basic concepts of narrative psychology. However, researchers from other disciplines (and sometimes within psychology) would have a very different view of what narrative analysis is. We will see something of this range during the course of this chapter. The construction of narrative seems to be a human propensity which helps people deal with a confused and disorderly world by bringing a state of orderliness. Narrative in relation to illness is common since illness brings about this very sort of disorder by disrupting the orderliness of regular everyday life. There are many narratives concerning illness to be found – so much so that some see it as evidence of the need to construct narratives or tell stories about their illness. Anatole Broyard (1992), who died of cancer, wrote that ‘story telling seems to be a natural reaction to illness. People bleed stories... ’ However, narratives do not flow unchangingly like blood according to Murray (2000) but are shaped, structured and given form according to circumstances. The task of the narrative researcher is to understand the nature of this. 10 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage NARRATIVE ANALYSIS Narrative analysis’ is a title used to refer to a wide variety of different styles of work. So it may be seen as a sort of umbrella term rather than one which identifies a particular style of research with pinpoint accuracy. The newcomer to narrative analysis may sometimes get confused about what is and what is not narrative analysis. More experienced researchers might simply be used to the portmanteau nature of its use. Horton-Salway (2001) argues that there are three broad types of analysis of narrative – namely the realist, cognitivist and interactionist approaches. These stretch from what a quantitative researcher might assume (realism) to the discourse analytic position (interactivism). Each of these is a ‘valid’ way of exploring narrative but some require skills in other qualitative methods. Murray (2000) extends the discussion of this problem by suggesting that there are different levels of analysis of narrative. His specific focus is on health psychology but his points have wider applicability than that. According to Murray, there are at least four different levels of the analysis referred to as narrative analysis. His different levels are not entirely different from Horton-Salway’s suggestion, of course. These, it should be stressed, are levels of analysis and not different types of reality. What is a narrative? According to Murray (2003), narrative functions to provide order where there is disorder. In other words, the narrator is attempting to bring organisation to something which is essentially disorganised and, consequently, lacking meaning. Disruptions to life due to personal, financial, health or other problems provide challenges to everyday routine and narratives help to restore order and meaning. Consequently, narrative psychology has adherents in the fields of clinical and health psychology where such stressors are commonplace among clients. McAdams (2008) suggests that there are six agreed principles which can be drawn from narrative psychology concerning personal narratives (as opposed to, say, the narratives in books). Personal narratives are sometimes referred to as self-narratives in the narrative psychology literature. The putative agreed principles are: Principle 1: The self is storied. Principle 2: Narratives integrate lives and provide a coherent account of the individual ‘scenes’ in the narrative. Principle 3: Narratives are told in social relationships. Principle 4: Narratives change over time. Principle 5: Narratives are cultural texts and reflect the culture and the culture’s ways of talking narratively. 11 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage Principle 6: Some narratives are better than others in that narratives are intrinsically intertwined with morality and that some personal narratives reflect psychologically more healthy selves. These principles are largely self-evident, of course, represent in terms of an alternative to aspects of mainstream psychology. Broadly, narrative psychology is concerned with the stories which we produce to tell about ourselves and the implications of these stories for understanding our lives. This is a natural part of interaction and people speak narratively even when they have not been asked to do so. Narratives have a point to them which may be in the form of some sort of moral message. Narrative analysis is the application of concepts from narrative psychology to understanding the narratives produced by individuals. In narrative analysis the researcher concentrates on specific instances of narrative to understand the ways in which stories are made by people and how these stories are used in order to understand the world. The perspective of narrative analysis is primarily that of the teller of the story, not the hearer of the story. The hearer (the researcher) carries out the analysis and interpretation but the focus is the person supplying the narrative. It is part of the task of the researcher to elicit suitable data for analysis and there are special techniques of qualitative interviewing which encourage the production of suitable narrative information. Narratives, then, are part of the way in which people represent their self and the social world both publicly to others and privately to themselves. The main characteristics of a narrative are as follows: A narrative involves some sort of transformation which occurs over time. There is some sort of action. There are various characters. The word ‘emplotment’ is sometimes used to describe the ways in which the various parts of a narrative are put together to make a story which would include major plots, some subplots, and diversions and digressions from the main story. The plot gives a narrative structure and connects the story’s beginning with the story’s end. But, more than that, the plot links different episodes in order to tie the story together. 12 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage PHENOMENOLOGY What is Phenomenology? Phenomenological psychology is the application, appropriately adapted, of ideas from phenomenological philosophy. Although some argue that the discipline should be termed phenomenologically-based psychology because it is not what was originally meant by the term, this is usually ignored in favour of the familiar phenomenological psychology. Phenomenology can be seen as something that people naturally engage in since ordinary people, poets, writers, artists and actors routinely pay attention to everyday life and their experiences of it. Phenomenological psychologists do much the same but in far greater detail and much more systematically. Nevertheless, it is important to understand phenomenology as an intellectual idea before making too many assumptions about what is and what is not phenomenology. Phenomenology is one of the oldest qualitative research methods and one with very deep philosophical roots. In phenomenological analysis, the role of the researcher is to: Assist the participant to describe the world of their experiences as effectively as they can and as far as possible free from their thoughts and reflections on their experiences. In this way, they are describing the experience as it was experienced, not their experience as they reflect on it. Formulate explanations of or understand the meanings of the dimensions of the world as they experience it. In order to do this, the researcher must suspend or disregard their own assumptions and understandings. They need to be open minded so that they can understand the experiences of the other person in new ways, unfettered by prior knowledge and assumptions. The practical usefulness of phenomenological psychology – actual or potential – can be summarised in the three following suggestions (Polkinghorne, 1989): Phenomenological psychology can offer an in-depth understanding of various types of experience (for example, depression or chronic back pain). Knowing just how these are experienced may help practitioners in the field of health or psychology in their work. It helps provide them with empathic understanding of their patients and clients. Phenomenology explores human consciousness and experience, which means that it contributes to our richer understanding of humanity. This, for example, may help researchers understand better the findings from more mainstream research. Usually mainstream research presents its findings in terms of correlations and patterns. Whatever the value of this research, 13 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage it is difficult to make complete sense of such decontextualised findings. Phenomenology can offer ways of grasping their meaning. Phenomenological research can inform public policy. Social interventions are unlikely to be successful unless built on real understanding and insight of people and communities. How does one help problem drug users without knowing about their lives from their perspective? It will come as no surprise to find that phenomenology and the word phenomenon are linked. The word phenomenon is common in psychology but its origins are in philosophy where it means the thing as it appears. It is from the Greek for ‘appearance’ or ‘to put into the light of the day’. It refers to any observable occurrence so its use to describe how things appear in our consciousness or conscious experience is understandable. A phenomenon is not the thing in ‘the real world’ but the thing as it appears in our subjective world – to our consciousness. In phenomenological psychology, then, people’s experiences (of the phenomenon in question) are the data. The primary concern is therefore the nature of these experiences – the task of phenomenology is to describe how the phenomenon appears to people. In phenomenology the term lifeworld is used to refer to the world that a person experiences through their consciousness and how this is experienced and reflected upon is the focus of phenomenological psychology. Modern phenomenological psychologists regard a person as a conscious participant constructing meaning for their experiences. Not everything is available to our consciousness, of course. There are things which are not accessible but may nevertheless be psychologically important. We can only have access to our conscious experiences and some of these may be beyond expression in verbal terms. These, though, are experiences and may be communicated sometimes by non-verbal means. Things experienced through our consciousness are not to be regarded as linguistic or verbal in nature though usually in research they are expressed in language perhaps in an interview or perhaps in some written statement. Conscious experience, then, is not regarded as a matter of language though language is the medium for communicating about experience. Phenomenology is a branch of philosophy based primarily on the work of Edmund Husserl (1859– 1938) from which phenomenological methods such as phenomenological psychology developed. His basic position can be put simply: the only thing that we humans can reliably know is our conscious experiences. This appears easy enough and it is – deceptively so – but it was not only highly influential in philosophy but, clearly, forms the basis of phenomenological psychology. The central point of phenomenological research is straightforward and readily understood. A phenomenological researcher studies phenomenon and their nature and meaning. The prime focus is on just how phenomena appear to us experientially or in our consciousness. The major strategy is to obtain rich data which are detailed and provide the texture of our experiences. Husserl wanted to return to the phenomenon, which is another way of saying that he wanted to 14 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage know the world as experienced by the individual in their day-to-day lives. He was not so concerned about the things which many modern psychologists have dwelt on – that is, how people think about their experiences. Our attitudes, values and beliefs concerning the things we experience are simply not the experience but our thoughts about our experiences. Phenomenological psychology seeks to obtain descriptions that their participants give about their experiences. Through these, the phenomenological psychologist attempts to make apparent to themselves the nature of the phenomenon, initially, in the sort of terms or using the sort of language that the participant uses. The hope is to get close to the lived experience of their participant. But there are obstacles to knowing the experiences of other people. One aspect of this is that our understanding of their experience will be affected by things in our own heads – our beliefs, biases, assumptions, presuppositions, attitudes, opinions and so forth – call them what you will, there are things in our own minds which make it difficult to understand the experiences of others. This stuff needs to be separated out as fully as possible in order to know as purely as possible of the experiences of others. Setting aside these things is not easy and it is unlikely that a full separation can ever be achieved. The researcher wants to understand the experience in its manner of appearing to the participant rather than in its manner of appearing through the eyes of the researcher. This issue was important to Husserl, for obvious reasons, and he suggested the process of bracketing as the way of suspending the influence of our thoughts, etc. so that our understanding of our participant’s experiences gets back to the experience as they experienced it – not their experience as we see it from our point of view. The state of being in perfect touch with another person’s experiences as they experienced them is known as epoché and is closely connected to bracketing. HOW TO DO PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH STEP 1 Ensure that you have a broad understanding of the nature of phenomenological research. The phenomenological method is only appropriate when your intention is to study how things in the world are experienced. If you are planning a biographical study of an individual, for example, and their lives then phenomenology may not be appropriate. Such a study might focus on the way the individual thinks about their situation and their interpretations of what is happening to them. This is not a phenomenological study but might pass as one among psychologists who know nothing of Husserl and Heidegger’s ideas. 15 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage STEP 2 The phenomenological researcher does not usually formulate their research question in great detail. To do so risks structuring what emerges in their research too much and so interfering with the task of knowing the participants ‘in the manner of their appearing’. Indeed, having expectations about the nature of the phenomenon experienced is not part of the Husserlian fundamentals of phenomenology. STEP 3 The nature of the phenomenon being considered in the research determines which participants should be sought for the study. The availability of a certain sort of individual, however, should not be allowed to determine which phenomenon will be studied, according to Groenewald. Probability sampling will almost certainly be inappropriate whereas some form of purposive sampling is likely. The researcher, then, needs to seek out individuals who have experienced the phenomenon in question. Snowball sampling might supplement this as it is a way of getting participants to nominate people they know who also have had experience of the phenomenon. Purposive sampling allows the researcher to try things such as telephone enquiries and Internet searches to help locate more participants. For example, if the researcher was interested in partner abuse then support groups for such individuals might be approached for help. Groenewald argues that something between two and ten participants may be sufficient to reach ‘saturation.’ Saturation is when nothing new of interest is emerging in the later interviews compared to earlier ones. So do not regard a sample of ten as the upper limit since more may be needed in particular studies. The interviews, however, are likely to be long as there is a great deal of detail to be extracted from the participants. The sample may consist of two or more subgroups which differ in important respects that might result in different findings. Groenewald sees this as a form of triangulation: if the structure of the phenomenon is the same in each of these groups then this can be seen as a form of validation for a phenomenological study. STEP 4 Some form of unstructured phenomenological interview is likely to be the preferred mode of data collection. The most likely alternative to the interview would be extended written accounts provided by participants of their experiences of the phenomenon. Either way, it is essential that the questions posed encourage the rich detailed descriptions of the phenomena which phenomenology requires. In other words, a great deal of preparation will go into ensuring that the participant talks in detail at length or writes copiously. Although the focus of the data collected will be on the phenomenon as experienced, data collection usually stretches wider than this. That is, anything which may be helpful in understanding the experiences may be part of the data collected. You may wish to introduce the interview with a brief explanation of what it is you want to know about. This, of course, will stress that the primary thing you are interested in is the 16 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage individual’s experience of the phenomenon in question. Normally the detailed descriptions of the individual’s experiences of the phenomenon are obtained first – only later should the researcher allow the more reflexive aspects to be introduced by the participants. So start with a direct question about the experience (e.g. How did/do you experience redundancy?). Concrete examples of experiences should be requested frequently during the course of the interview. Broad impressions and generalisations are not the sort of level of detail required in a phenomenological study. Hence, specific, detailed examples should feature strongly in the data. Phenomenological interviews are quite lengthy as a consequence of these requirements. Of course, the interviews are recorded. Essentially the phenomenological. Interview can take the form of an informal dialogue – it is reciprocal in nature so simply reading out a list of questions is not what the researcher does. At the same time, the researcher must be aware that they play a role in the construction of the dialogue. As a consequence, the researcher should feel under an obligation to understand what their constructive role is in any particular interview. One approach to the phenomenological interview is the intentional-expressive approach of Anderberg (Anderberg, 2000; Sin, 2010). This technique is useful for obtaining meanings of concepts used by the participant and confirming that the researcher has properly understood them. Basically, the interview starts with questions concerning the phenomenon under study. Follow-up questions are used to help the interviewee reflect on the conceptual meaning of terms and phrases that they have employed. So the researcher may interrupt and ask the meaning of any concept that the participant uses – the researcher does not assume that they share the meaning of concepts with the interviewee. In their joint exploration in the phenomenological interview, the topic is explored together by the researcher and the participant. The influence of the researcher is minimised using a number of techniques (Sin, 2010). STEP 5 It is an appropriate strategy to encourage the participants to try to separate out the pure experience from the more interpretative and evaluative thoughts that are likely to fill their heads. That is, the participants are encouraged to bracket-out all perspectives but the immediate one of their experience of the phenomenon. This means that the participant needs to use language as devoid of intellectual and social ideas as possible. STEP 6 It is important to remember that in phenomenological research the task of the researcher is to know the individual’s experiences of the phenomenon and, additionally, reveal what meaning there is in those human experiences. This meets both Husserl’s and Heidegger’s requirements. What should appear in the analysis is a description of a particular person’s experiences as they experienced it and so the researcher must encourage the interviewee to let the essence of the 17 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage person’s experiences emerge. Groenewald recommends using the qualitative procedure of memoing, as is common in other forms of qualitative research, especially grounded theory. The memo is the researcher’s field notes concerning what they saw, heard, experienced and thought in the process of data collection. The memo should include both descriptive notes and more reflexive impressions, hunches, ideas and feelings according to Groenewald. The researcher needs to maintain an open stance towards their data throughout the research process. STEP 7 Although this is not absolutely necessary in phenomenological analysis where repeated listening to and processing the original recording may suffice, the data normally should be transcribed using whatever transcription method seems appropriate. Jefferson transcription would normally be avoided but there is no strong reason why it should not be used other than it is time consuming and may add nothing over secretarial-style transcription in this context. The focus, of course, in phenomenology is on the content of the interview, not on the manner of communication. The transcript can be checked together with the participant at any subsequent attempts at analysis. 18 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage DESCRIPTIVE QUALITATIVE RESEARCH Sources: Lambert, V. A., & Lambert, C. E. (2012). Qualitative descriptive research: An acceptable design. Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research, 16(4), 255-256. Neergaard, M. A., Olesen, F., Andersen, R. S., & Sondergaard, J. (2009). Qualitative description – the poor cousin of health research? BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9(1), 1-5. Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334-340. Descriptive qualitative research is a widely used method in qualitative inquiry that aims to gain deep insights into people's thoughts, experiences, and behaviors by offering a thorough and comprehensive description of the phenomena being studied. This approach is particularly focused on understanding the "what," "how," and "why" of a phenomenon from the perspective of those experiencing it, making it a valuable tool in fields where understanding complex, context- dependent human experiences is critical. Data Collection and Analysis In descriptive qualitative research, data is typically collected through various qualitative methods such as interviews, focus groups, observations, and document analysis. These methods allow researchers to gather rich, detailed information from participants in their natural settings, ensuring that the context of the phenomenon is preserved. The researcher’s role is to remain as unobtrusive as possible, allowing the data to speak for itself. Once data is collected, the analysis process begins with an inductive approach. This means that rather than testing hypotheses or applying pre-existing theories, the researcher allows patterns, themes, and meanings to emerge directly from the data. The analysis often involves coding the data to identify key themes and relationships, which are then used to construct a detailed narrative that accurately reflects the participants' experiences and perspectives. Applications of Descriptive Qualitative Research Descriptive qualitative research is particularly useful in several contexts: 19 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage 1. Exploratory Research. It is ideal for exploring new or poorly understood areas where little prior research exists. In such cases, it provides a foundational understanding that can guide future research or inform theory development. 2. Context-Specific Understanding. This method excels in providing a deep understanding of specific contexts or groups. For example, it is often used in studies involving marginalized or underrepresented populations where context plays a crucial role in shaping experiences. 3. Policy and Practice. In fields like psychology, education, healthcare, and social work, descriptive qualitative research is valuable for informing practice and policy. By capturing the lived experiences of individuals, it can provide insights that lead to more effective interventions, programs, and policies. Key Features 1. Emphasis on Natural Settings Data is collected in the natural environment where the phenomenon occurs. This allows the researcher to capture the complexity of the situation and understand the phenomenon within its real-world context. 2. Participant Perspective The research is conducted from the viewpoint of the participants, focusing on their lived experiences, perceptions, and interpretations. The goal is to present their voices accurately and authentically. 3. Inductive Analysis Data analysis in descriptive qualitative research is typically inductive. The researcher identifies patterns and themes that emerge organically from the data, rather than imposing pre-existing theoretical frameworks. 4. Rich Descriptions The findings are presented in the form of detailed descriptions that convey the complexity and depth of the phenomenon. These descriptions aim to provide a vivid and accurate representation of the participants' experiences. Strengths and Limitations 20 | P a g e Private Use Only  Field Methods Lecture Notes Topic: Qualitative Research: Designs Source: Howitt D. (2016). Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage Strengths: 1. Flexibility. Descriptive qualitative research is flexible and adaptable, allowing researchers to explore complex phenomena in a way that is sensitive to context and participant experiences. 2. Depth of Understanding. It provides a deep, nuanced understanding of the phenomenon, often revealing insights that might be missed in quantitative research. Limitations: 1. Lack of Generalizability. The findings from descriptive qualitative research are often context-specific and may not be generalizable to other settings or populations. 2. Subjectivity. The researcher's interpretation plays a significant role in the analysis, which can introduce subjectivity. However, rigorous methodological approaches can mitigate this. 21 | P a g e Private Use Only