QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS_MCNABB_3RDED (3) (2).pdf

p In".oduction to Qualitative Research Methods of research has been a wideone jmportant c_onsequence of lhe. pu§h to ex!enq the scope to replace or augment the s spread increase 1N lhe‘usc of ‘SlIb.JeCllVE 'clpa.illlatlve melhgd es. Lan and Anders (2000) ;_)rmcipl h r.esearc }t w‘;e-prﬂ‘illﬂll emphasis on o})Jecuve, Qosntlvn of science. phy philoso the in shift gm paradn major a as Jescribed this change Kuhn (The Structure of S. Building their argument on the seminal work of Thomas scientific Revolutions. 1970), Lan and Anders concluded that more than one approach to progress by shifts in paradigms, rescarch is not only possible, it is desirable. If science does indeed true that more than one is it if and s, suggest work 2 their interpretation of Kuhn’s n of which research approach questio the then paradigm can exist within a single discipline, same set of rules. White and the follow to d require not are hers Researc o fake is moot. t thus: Adams (1994) summarized this poin mological evidence that no We are persuaded by the weight of historical and episte science—is adequate for the label e accorded the highly positiv single approach—even if ch is to be guided by reason, a diverconduct of research in the social sciences. If resear necessary. tical reasons, seems sity of approaches, honoring both practical and theore (19-20) Qualitative Research Defined iry techniques to describe a set of non-statistical inqu Theterm “qualitative research™ is used data refers to _some l phenomena. Qualitative er data about socia - prpo:sm used to gath numeric records, malervm\s or artifacts [‘::l‘echon of words, symbols, pictures or other non- g:l-:)up under. that have relevance (0 the social % renocr:::;zi data are and er arch rese a by d smdya": collecte of events and go beyond simple description Tithey ;he uses for these data and for for subjective interpretation g, ndin rsta unde ting crea anaxy;i& ey are used for amental o ways. research in several fund tive tita quan from d'es.cnbe:n?isresearch differs 01 Qe typically involve what ha:.s been ies stud arch rese e tativ “i,,:,:::‘.m"lev quali °'s'eqsf Lee ositivist processes.” In °°“““S‘e": g, subjective, andestinonp theory-generatin TPOII e e rewe, rch S:):’ lTlVl poﬁl( and tive, ng, objec involves “deductive, theory-t h e (the Orige os)eac es diffe: et tified five ways these twoA approach i phigoc < ell (2018) iden ; : r‘;l"grs‘ alues): 2 thet°§e:"' 0s0phic: foundations: ; pllon percc rs arche (rese logy onto reses Eo‘r":};;m]. oaches el 4ssumpuonsmem0d°‘0gical appr o ogica tz by researchers); axiol oleses taken rad; (appr, ach‘e:“:-"s (the style of language used by researchers):and " di"&re‘:l €n by researchers). 17.1. ces identified by Creswell are displayed in Table 242 Qualitative Research Methods qua Tuble 17.1 How qualitative rescarch differs from ntitative rescarch Rescarch Strategics Philosophical Foundations Epistemology ( Roles for the Researcher) Ontology ( Perceptions of Reality) Axiology ( Rescarchers' Values) Rhetoric ( Language Sty! Methodology ( Approaches to Research) Qualitative Rescarch Designs Quantitative Research Designs Rescarchers commonly assume Researchers assume that they are independent from the variables that they must interact with their studied phenomena. Researchers assume that multiple, subjectively derived realities can coexist Rescarchers overtly actin @ value-laden and biased fashion. Researchers often use personalized, informal and context-laden language. under study. Rescarchers assume that a single, objective world exists. Researchers overtly act in a value-free and unbiased manner Researchers most often use impersonal, formal and rulebased text. Researchers tend to apply induction, multivariate and ‘multi-process interactions, following context-laden effect relationships, with context-free methods. methods. Source: Creswell (2018). A key difference lies in the epistemology of the two approaches. In qualitative research designs, researchers must often interact with individuals in the groups they are studying. Researchers record not only what they see, but also their interpretations of the meaning inherent in the interactions that take place in the groups. Quantitative researchers, on the other hand, maintain a deliberate distance and objectivity from the study group. They are careful to avoid making judgments about attitudes, perceptions, values, interactions or predispositions. Another way to describe the differences between qualitative and quantitative research methods has been proposed by Cassell and Symon (1997). The most fundamental of these differences is a bias against using numbers for qualitative research, whereas quantitative research is biased heavily toward numeric measurements and statistical analysis—the positivist approach to scientific analysis (White 1999). The objective of this positive approach © research is to control events through a process of prediction that is based on explanation; it employs inferential statistical methods (White and Adams 1994). T}}e second difference is what is referred to as the subjective-objective dichotomy: Qualitative researchers “explicitly and overtly apply” (Lee 1999, 7) their own subjectie interpretations of what they see and hear—often, they are active participants in the phe?;:;erzan under s}:u.dy. On the othcr{hand. a foundation stone of the quantitative, positivist unbiasedaupsz)tl’;:usxe’zrarCher objectivity. The researcher is expected to function :5 an These tho SDRAHE :: ve‘;..&epgrung only what happens or what can be measuret: 0 _"1' fer in a third way: qualitative researchers tend to appfﬁm e e “f‘ ngness to be ﬁe)gble_, to follow where the data lead "pns: oﬂ: fars Qs il these'wreseipested o o e" approach a topic with little or no pre-conceived “ss""‘p,:'aﬁw el bt raon h::da: o;t of the data as it is collected and studied. QuantC o Ty pically: hypotheses srs E': ;I‘.U be guided by a strict set of rules and formal Pmﬁrin o the analysis. Variables s ?S ablished prior to the data gathering and are tested identified and explicitly defined beforehand. Searchin® ST Introduction to Qualitative Methods 243 cause-and-effect relationships between defined variables that can be measured is a hallmark of quantitative research studies. Afourth way that the two approaches differ has todo with the aim of the study. Qualitative searchers seek understanding of social interactions and processes in organizations, whereas tive studies are more often concerned with predicting future events and behaviors. To make these predictions, they often apply inferential statistical analyses to measurements taken from representative samples drawn from a population of interest. Another difference is associated with the context of the study. Qualitative research is usually concerned with a situation or event that takes place within a si gle organizational context. A major goal of much quantitative research is to apply the study results to other situations: thus, quantitative research is what Lee terms “more generalizable.” A sixth way that these two approaches to research differ is the emphasis that qualitative researchers assign to the research process. The way that subjects interact with, and react to, the researcher during the qualitative study is of as much an interest as the original phenomenon of interest. Quantitative researchers tend to take great pains to avoid introducing extraneous influences into the study and seek to isolate subjects from the process as much as possible by controlling for process effects. Qualitative Research Strategies Qualitative research strategies can be grouped into three broad strategic classes. These are 1) expository research studies, 2) interpretive research and 3) critical research. These strategies and the four key processes that are followed in many research studies are displayed in Figure 17.1. These roughly correspond to the exploratory-descriptive-causal categories of quantitative research designs. Qualitative Research Strategies Critical Rescarch Studies Interpretive Rescarch Studies. Expository Rescarch Studies = [ p ! MCc;I‘:;d o Rescarch | [ Reseorch g et e ! : ! hno ;;phic Action Science Grounded Theory Feminist || Research | | Research | | Rescarch Figure 17.1 Some qualitative rescarch strategies in political science rescarch. 244 Qualitative Research Methods Expository Rescarch Expository esearch was defined by Schwandt (1997) in his dictionary of terms and Concepy, carch as studies that are conducted to develop a dc\c,,m?f_ encountered in qualitative res The researcher identifies a specific socig| c\ﬁ:‘; phenomenon. explanation of some social h or circumstance (a consequence)—suc as crime- :_]mt I_|e or she wavms to invcsligute. The chmatc._prucncc or other such char. scarcher then seeks to identify the social, economi t explulr!cd‘ as a cause of the conge. onmen i?° can that (variable) in the social envir actel description of things as they gy, a : is it is, that itory ty expos is activi st. This e intere quenc of with no conclusions or opinions attached. g ] One of the major objectives of expository research is to give the researcher enough information upon which to propose a theory or theories that can then be posited as 4 explanation of an event, an outcome or a phenomenon, and which can then be used 1o predict future events, outcomes or phenomena in similar circumstances. The ability to pre. dict allows investigators a measure of control over events. Therefore, the ultimate goal of research is the control of natural and social events. Expository research is the first stepon the path to approach to understanding, as well as to keep the researcher focused on the original goal. In addition to this controlled aspect of expository research, this strategy is also the fastest way to start collecting and organizing a cumulative stream of data in a field or discipline. Possibly because of this and their relationship to control, expository studies that are designed to explain a phenomenon as it exists are a popular strategy in political science research Expository strategies fulfill much the same role in qualitative research that exploratory research does in quantitative research; they are used as a means of gathering fundamental information about the topic, its contributing factors, and the influences a phenomenon might have on various outcomes. This process can be described as gaining insights and ideas about a study problem. These studies are seldom complete in themselves; they are conducted as preliminaries to additional, follow-up research. Interpretive Research Not all research theorists agree that human events or actions can be defined by the causal explanations and conclusions that are part and parcel of explanatory research. Instead. these critics argue that human action can never be explained this way. It can only be under stood by studies that follow the second approach in the triad of qualitative approaches. Wwhich is interpretation. The researcher arrives as a subjective interpretation of a phenom™ enon by dev_eloping perceptions and meanings of events or actions. 4. Interpretive research helps us achieve understanding of actions of people in socil circumstances and situations. An example the way an interpretive researcher goes beyon describing why a job-enrichment program is not working, using established hypotheses 5 motivation and job design. Instead, the interpretive research might circulate amongempl¥*® in their job setting, ask them what they think about the program, the meaningit has for e and how it conflicts or reinforces their e: ing attitudes, opinior;s and behaviors. I this W&: the research seeks to “discover the meaning of the prv;gram how it fits with (the worke®® Pngry;‘mfm& rules, values, and social practice™ (White and A(‘iams 1994, 45). wa cls siﬁc;n::“:: (Iliz::" 73) has oITcrec_i this description of interpretation in rese‘?_fd‘: ‘A“:(er. T st;ndi:‘s 1on, or explanation of the meaning of some phenomenon- ‘T_h"" hat® Phenomenon isn:gmlre IPF msearcker to go beyond simply describing or exPh}"mg ‘:i ing an interpretation 0‘?. ;%a:'::crp,"e‘ the phenomenon for the reader. This entails FI:E et means. as well as what it is, Schwandt concluded tha Introduction to Qualitative Methods 245 ynonym for hermeneutics or Verstehen ( Verstehen defines an nterpretive when it is builds on the assumption that humans ty from the meanings assigned to social phenomena such shared experiences, publications, tools, and other arti onstantly changing. Thus, the meanings that people assign are in constant flux. At the same. interpretive research is always context-laden. Therefore, interpretation is like shooting it a constantly moving target. A primary goal of the interpretive research approach is to provide many-l scriptions and interpretations of human experiences (Mea oal. interpretive research looks at the way humans make sense out of events in their lives s they happen, not as they are planned. Therefore, to thoroughly understand an event or an rganization, the rescarcher must also understand its historical context. Interpretive research is important for the studyof government organizations and agencies. e fundamental objective for interpretive research makes this approach particularly rele- ant in applications such as those described by White and Adams (1994): The basic aim of the interpretive model is to develop a more complete understanding of social relationships and to discover human possibilities. Recent studies of organizational culture demonstrate the importance of interpretive methods for properly understanding norms, values, and belief systems in organizations. (45) Principles of Interpretive Research rc genary. and €rally not open for general access or circulation. alysis design. In this zq_aprouch‘ © third approach is what is known as a miefd-andisi s is a quantitative techTesearchers yse other studies as subjects for analysis. Meta-ana lysis n!que for summarizing other in\resligﬂwl'S' research on a top1 asource of daty in its own right. s such. it uses the literature 254 Qualitative Research Methods Conducting the Literature Review A erucial early step in the design and conduct of all research is & thorough inyeygy. of the relevant literature on the study topic, the rescarch question and the methoqy. " followed by others who have studied the same or similar problems. Called a rexiey of relevant literature or. simply, a literature review, lhe_ process has been defined a5 tematic, existing ;,\% explict, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and interpreing. (. body of recorded work produced by researchers, schol. s, and practitioners” 1998, 3). Purposes for the Literature Review The literature review serves three fundamental purposes: First, it shows those who read youy research findings that the researcher is aware of the existing work on the topic. Second, it identifies what the researcher believes are the key issues, crucial questions and obyious g in the field. Third, it establishes a set of guiding signs that allow readers to see what theorigs and principles the researcher used to shape the research design and analysis. Despite the critical importance of the literature review, some researchers cither skip this step entirely in the mistaken belief that theirs is a “unique” study problem, or, ifthey do look into the literature of the study topic, field or discipline, they often take a wrong approach. The literature review is not intended to be simply a summary of the articles and books that were read, nor should it be a list of the authors with whom the researcher agrees or disagrees. A good literature review has a greater purpose than this; it is a source of datain its own right. Among the most meaningful strategic purposes to which the literature review can be put include the following: 1. 2. 3. The review can trace the historical evolution of the study problem or key issues. themes or constructs pertaining to the problem, The review can provide a schematic of the strategies researchers have adopted or ¢ developing for analysis of the study problem. : The review can examine the study problem from the perspectives of several disciplines (for example, looking at welfare reform from the points of view of social work and economics). 4. 5. 1?]1.e review can examine the positions of different stakeholder groups suchas researchiers citizen groups and nonprofit organizations. emenged The r_cview can trace different conceptual schools of thought that have € teraluf® over time and may currently be taking opposing or conflicting views in the I (Piantanida and Garman 1999). The important thing to remember about this list is that these approaches 19 S:[ln le cgies are not mutually exclusive. A good literature review can achieve many £00/5 x\al"‘ Is.ame time. l..ang_ and Heiss (1994) identified two key purposes for reviewing the ‘eb'”“' "iimlme. First, it hones the researcher’s weapons of attack on a specific Study p"i:w £ g:d}:esczl;d'hlt provides a point of reference to use when discussing and in‘ﬂpr:llllofIbe ful]ow%ng» the research. Specifically, a well-conducted literature review can 40 ,Se: : specific limits for subseq uent research, 3. He;:?}?:t: ese the arcre‘her search and dif ent ways of looking at the probler: avoefid {0errnew ors and omifer ssions in pla nning the study: Expository Research I 255 o Suggest new ideas. o Acquaint the researcher with new sources of data and, often, totally different ways of looking at an issue. Steps in the Literature Review Studics Acquirc and Read the Literature I Code and Categorize the Data Found in the Literature e Analyze the Data in Detail ! Note Salient Themes and Trends in the Data ! Write Interpretive Notes and ‘Mcmos Describe the Source Documents for the Report Report all Relevant Findings Figure g "8ure 181 Stepsin the literature review process. Quality Criteria VIR Content Critcria Seleet Methodological SOANAL Identify High-Quality B ] i Establish Feasible et bt Bt Literature Sources VEERN Identify and Locate All VYV FTRT - A formal literature review should follow an organized series of steps. The model in Figure 18.1 encourages researchers to study all their options before embarking on their journey through the literature. This means that all potential sources should be considered. Limiting a literature search to a quick perusal of the Internet or a run through a single database is not the way to conduct a thorough, scientific review of the literature, Qualitative Research Methods 256 The second step in the literature review proc activities. well is madeup of three equally Mpor selecting uru‘cles (conteny C“lmnd,“ The researcher must establish some basis for me methodological criteria. For example, should the studies all be quapyj, ativeN g, qualitative, or can a combination be used? S_Imuld they all be about IhE. same size the samples discussed all have been selected in the same way? Thes:: decisions on the study question and may change somewhat when the search itself—the in this step—is underway. The collected research must then be read in detail. As this occurs, relevant These categories are then coded, with information should begin to stand out. Shoulg wif " thirg a ity Categories o the Pertiney information copied onto index cards or worksheets. Repeated salient themes in the i, ture should be recorded; these often serve as discussion points during the writing of 1p final research report. As this point, the rescarcher often begins writing interpretive memos that summarize the material and allow the researcher to comment on the content. These mepgs are sometimes carried into the final report with little or no revision. During the next-to-last stage in the process, the researcher is encouraged to record g the important bibliographic information on the source documents. This usually includes information about the author(s), the discipline in which they performed the research, 4l information about the source, and any connections to other sources that have been or might also be investigated. The last step in the process is preparing and presenting a report of the research findings. Researching Archival Data Archives, which have been long thought to be of interest only to librarians, have come o be recognized as rich sources of research material in the social sciences, including politica! science. They are particularly valuable as a source for cross-checking interview and narrative study data. In this way they contribute to improved validity through triangulation—usind several approaches in a research study. Although it is certainly possible for bias and dishonesty to exist in archival data, they are less susceptible to some types of error. including researcher error. The research element in an archival study is the record (Dearstyne 1993). Records 1 concrete extensions of human memory. They are created and stored to record inform® tion, document transactions, justify actions and provide official and unofficial evidencu]c|\.. 1; ©flen used to augment a quantitative analysis of content. The mutually supportive roles o Qualitatiye and quantitative research processes supplement each other. et At A advantages], however, the gnawing reality remains that archives D For all their gains [i.e. have been produced for someone else by someone else. There must be a careful evaluation of the way in which the records were produced, for the risk is high that one is getting a cut-rate version of another’s errors. (Webb et al. (2000, 84) D SIANA YV AVINDE I Y IFXT K D workers often indifferently keep archives with no stake in the accuracy of their product, Bec: record keepers may 'I'cel that the saved material has little value, it may be haphazardly stored. 1t may be years if not decades before the material is again examined; therefore, (heir diligence or lack thereof seldom comes to light. However, when a rt her appears on the scene, there is a tendency for their interest to be revitalized, with the unfortunate result of some altering or even destruction of recorded data. Archive research involves a way of looking at published or previously prepared material o defines the type of materials that are examined. Although this approach to the ation of archival records of all types can serve as an excellent source of pertinent data for many studies, it is not without its disadvantages. This warning was added: 260 Qualitative Research Methods Tuble 18.2 The Labov/Cortazzi six-part narrative evaluation model Structural Element Comment Questions Abstract Oriemtion Complication A 100-word summary ; lishes the situation Major account of the events that are W thiss aboyy o What £ was Who? What? Wien Then what happenegs., Evaluation High igh point poi of the analysis aly: So ’ wha Result Ou%comc of the events or resolution of central to lhesloryl ) R ) the problem Returns to the present Conclusion What finally happeneg o Finish of the narratiye It is by moving back and forth between lhese_ approaches that the investigator s mog likely to gain insight into the meaning of his [S'F] d_ala. +.. It should not be assumed ghy qualitative methods are insightful, and quantitative ones merely mechanica] Methods for checking hypotheses. The relationship is a circular one; each provides new insights on which the other can feed. (Holsti 1969, Narratives are a record of events that have significance for both the narrator and hisor her audience (a researcher, for example). Narratives are formally structure d; they have beginning, middle, and an ending. Furthermore, they are organized according 1o g setof distinct structures with formal and identifiable characteristics (Coffey and Alkinson 199¢) Cortazzi (1993) adapted the Labov narrative evaluation or analysis model shown in Table 18.2. The purpose for developing the model was to illustrate how informal styles of narrative correlate with a number of extant social characteristics. The specific document selected for analysis might be newspaper stories, speeches at local service clubs, or offcal records such as the Congressional Record. Manning and Cullum-Swan (1998) described several approach es to the analysisof narratives, among which are Russian formalism and structura l methods such as top-downor The same approach has been used to examine myths, poetry, and fictio Top-down approaches analyze the narrative textaccording to a set of n. culturally cstahlis}l#\l rules of grammar and exposition. These methods are used extens ively in educatior- Alternatively, bottom-up methods use elements in the text to build a structure for analya the whole. This is the approach followed most often in ethnographic research. " 3 5 Merrell 1982) provided an carly three-function ffﬂ"]“f“ of narrative and discourse analysis that is still relevant today. First, it must be expressi message must serve to convey the emotions or thoughts of the user of the language smﬂ itmust serve a signaling or stimulative function, and the message must stimulate an “‘P“‘ response by the receiver. Third, it must have must be able to use it to describe a parti a descriptive function; the user of the |;.ng“: cular state of affairs in ways that convey the picture. Others have added additional functions; the most important of these isan a rgum” i : though t 5 Vi , by which language users present alternative. Or propositi ons to the descriptive messages. ’ Dis. course Analysis of Communications gentfh is1t a method of analyzing oral or wri tte com n n\u nlc 1|l |op 5h: : 0¥ e formal structure of the mes jcati thl‘urSre uur.n' o analysis Is sage while at the same tim e keeping a use-0f Expository Rescarch purpos in mind. Th_' s approach is often used in political science research, It o the same types of messages, texts and documents that are I 261 n be applied appropriate for content ana- beit for a different purpose. Discourse analysis is stron ngly associated with the anaJysis of IinguistiF structures in the message or text. Potter oter and Wetherell (1994) referred to this point in their discussion of three particul arly pertinent features of discourse analysis: |, Discourse analys ncerned with talk and texts as “social practices.” It examin es the linguistic content—the meaning and the topics discussed—in a message as well as the features of language form, such as grammar and cohesion. Discourse analysis has a “triple concern” with the themes of action, construction and variability in the message. Discourse analysis is concerned with the rhetorical or augmentative organization of 3. | texts and talks (48). Finally, the objective of discourse analysis is to take the focus of analysis away from questions of /o a text version relates to reality to ask instead how the version is designed to compete successfully with one or more alternative versions. The following five points direct discourse analysis: | X : LY H Variation in theme and message is to be used as a lever in analysi: The discourse must be read and analyzed in minute detail. A key point in the analysis is the search for rhetorical organization. Accountability: Are the points that are made supported? Discourse analysis requires cross-referencing with other studics. ~ ~ 7 4 q N Summary This chapter discussed some of the ways that rescarchers go about examining and analyzing texts and similar types of written and unwritten communications, records,_dogl_xmenls. These different sources of research data are grouped into three broad categories. The first category is written texts, which includes books, periodicals, narratives, reports, pamphlets, Mass media and other published materials. The rescarch process using these sources is often called /ibrary research, or desk research. The second category is forrlmll and mfor.mul documents and includes personal messages and assorted types gt elrchx_\'a! information, such as personal notes and memos, government records and vital statistics, and other informal written materials, including e-mail. The third category is the wide variety of f"Ch' al materiyls, including graphic displays (graphs, tables and charts), photographs :md flluslmtions, personal remarks, office memos, company reports and OEhcr_rccnrded materials Including films, Cps, videotapes, emails and other Internet co.mmu'nu; l(l]ono\ir S—" a“;(s::?‘afrchersemploya variety of analysis toolsand methods in their study P m; P'rOXEr!\ics, kinesics, discourse analysis and site surcvcy& The analy i1 public and nonprofit organization e herma ey feutic analysisof textual material; content, “nalysis. meta-analysis and archival analysis. Key Terms Archiva] analysis ’\!l‘hival data IScourse analysis Mg, disco! nd narrative analysis; and con- ? ) 1 \\ 262 Qualitative Research Methods Episodic record Library research Literature review Narrative analysis Nonwritten communication STWK = Discussion Questions Name and describe the four classes of expositive research. What are some types of archival data that would interest a political science researcher! What are the purposes for library research? Why do researchers study archival resources? What are the two classes in bias that can color archival research? Describe episodic records, What are nontextual archives? Additional Reading Bay)ks‘ Marcus. 20 I_S, Visual Met hods in Sociql Research. 2nd ed. Lon don: Sage. Gaillet, Lynec Lewis, and Helen D. Edison. 2015. Landmark Essays on Archival Research. New Yors Routledge. % Rourke, : Arianne, 3 and Vaughan Rees , eds. 3 2014, - Rese arch i Rese arching the Visu i al: Demystififying That's Worrlx a Thousund ying the Pietr Pi t Words, Champaign, IL: Common Ground. Tilley, Christopher, Webb Keane, Susann e Kue chl erFogden, Mike Rowlands, 2006. Handbo ok of Material Cultyre, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.. i and Patricia Spyer.&

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS_MCNABB_3RDED (3) (2).pdf

Document Details

Tags

Related

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue