Doing Qualitative Research Handouts

Handouts of Qualitative Research
Doing Qualitative Research

Handouts
WORKSHOP 1
Course Facilitator: Muqqadas Rehman

Module Leader: Sumaira Rehman
Page 1

1. Qualitative research
According to Bickman and Rog (2009), the qualitative research methods are often employed to answer the
whys and how is of human behaviour, opinion, and experience. Information that is difficult to obtain
through more quantitatively-oriented methods of data collection than ultimately increase concern about
qualitative research. Researchers and practitioners in fields as diverse as anthropology, education, nursing,
psychology, sociology, and marketing regularly use qualitative methods to address questions about
people’s ways of organizing, relating to, and interacting with the world (Bickman and Rog, 2009).
Despite the interdisciplinary recognition of the value of “qualitative research” (or perhaps because of it),
qualitative research is not a unified field of theory and practice. On the contrary, a plethora of viewpoints,
sometimes diametrically opposed to one another, exist on the subject. Scholars regularly debate about
what qualitative research is, how and why it should be conducted, how it should be analyzed, and in what
form it should be presented (Bickman and Rog, 2009). In fact, fundamental and often heated
disagreements about philosophical assumptions and the nature of data exist among qualitative researchers.
We don’t pretend to be able to solve any of these controversies. Nor do we suggest one approach or
viewpoint is superior to another in the grand scheme of things. How one approaches qualitative research,
and research in general, depends on a variety of personal, professional, political, and contextual factors.
Ultimately, there is no right or wrong way of conducting a qualitative research project. Giacomini and
Cook (2000) explained that nevertheless, some approaches and methods are more conducive to certain
types of qualitative inquiry than are others. A key distinction in this regard is the difference between pure
and applied research. It is the latter of these—applied research—for which the contents of this book will
be most (though certainly not exclusively) relevant.
Definition of term ‘Qualitative Research’
Qualitative research is a research strategy that usually emphasises words rather than quantification in the
collection and analysis of data (Bryman, 2008a:366). In other words, Qualitative research is “an informal,
subjective and semi-systematic research approaches that focuses on textual data or images and that is
inductive in nature (it generates theory) (Bryman and Bell, 2008:156). It is an umbrella term that is aimed
at discovering that how human beings understand, experience, interpret and produce the social world
(Sandelowski, 2004:893). It is the form of social inquiry that adopts a flexible and data driven research
design, emphasises on the essential role of subjectivity studying a small number of casses in detail and
uses a verbal rather than statistical form of analysis (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Qualitative research seeks to obtain cultural specific information in terms of opinion, perception,
behaviors and social context of particular research setting/population (Mark et, al., 2005). According to
Page 2

Silverman (2006), qualitative research seems to promise that we will avoid or downplay statistical
techniques and the mechanics of the kinds of quantitative research used in, survey research or
epidemiology. These are the certain features of qualitative research claimed by Silverman (2006) that it is
soft, flexible, subjective, political, case study, speculative and grounded. Qualitative researchers are
interested in understanding the meaning people have constructed, that is, how people make sense of their
world and the experiences they have in the world. (Merriam, 1998, p. 13)
Qualitative research is a research using methods such as participant observation or case studies which
result in a narrative, descriptive account of a setting or practice. Sociologists using these methods typically
reject positivism and adopt a form of interpretive sociology. (Parkinson and Drislane, 2011). Qualitative
research is a situated activity that locates the observer in the world. It consists of a set of interpretive,
material practices that makes the world visible. These practices transform the world. They turn the world
into a series of representations, including field notes, interviews, conversations, photographs, recordings,
and memos to the self. At this level, qualitative research involves an interpretive, naturalistic approach to
the world. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make
sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them (Denzin and Lincoln,
2005). While we don’t disagree with the above definitions, we don’t find them particularly useful in an
applied research context. We prefer the simpler and more functional definition offered by Nkwi,
Nyamongo, and Ryan (2001, p. 1) that “Qualitative research involves any research that uses data that do
not indicate ordinal values.” For these authors, the defining criterion is the type of data generated and/or
used. In short, qualitative research involves collecting and/or working with text, images, or sounds. An
outcome-oriented definition such as that proposed by Nkwi et al. avoids (typically inaccurate)
generalizations and the unnecessary (and, for the most part, inaccurate) dichotomous positioning of
qualitative research with respect to its quantitative counterpart. It allows for the inclusion of many
different kinds of data collection and analysis techniques, as well as the diversity of theoretical and
epistemological frame- works that are associated with qualitative research (Nkwi, Nyamongo, and Ryan,
2001, p: 1).
In a nutshell, qualitative research is an inquiry approach in which the inquirer:
 Explores a central phenomenon (one key concept)

 Asks participants broad and general questions
 Collects detailed views of the participants in the form of words or images
Page 3

2. Philosophical assumptions of qualitative research
A research philosophy refers to the systematic search for existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and
language (Levin, 1988). Saunders et al. (2007) opined that research philosophy is related to the
development of knowledge and the nature of that knowledge. Research philosophy contains the most
important assumptions of the researcher and his views. The entire research strategy and research process
are framed as per those basic assumptions. The assumptions will be changed according to the influences
by the practical considerations (Parkinson, G. and Drislane, R., 2011). Research philosophy is further
classified beliefs: such as epistemology and ontology.
2.1 . Epistemology
An epistemological issue concerns the questions of what is regarded as acceptable knowledge in a
discipline i.e. what is knowledge and how we can acquire it? (Bryman and Bell, 2008). Epistemology
provides the philosophical underpinning the credibility which legitimizes knowledge and the framework
for a process that will be produced through a rigorous methodology. According to Saunders et al. (2007),
epistemology concerns what constitutes acceptable knowledge in a field of study. The epistemological
landscape in qualitative research is as diverse and complex as the various disciplines that employ
qualitative methods. We don’t attempt to recreate it here. According to Bernard (2000), in the section of
practical orientation, we focus mostly on methodological procedures and offer actionable suggestions for
carrying out qualitative research in a rigorous manner. At the same time, Denzin (2009) felt that
researchers (and future researchers) need at least to be aware of the ongoing debates in social and
behavioural science pertaining to the philosophy of knowledge and the scientific method. Below, we
briefly address the two most commonly referred to approaches—interpretivism and positivism or post-
positivism. We briefly touch upon a relatively new epistemological viewpoint that has emerged from
theoretical physics—model-dependent realism— which, in our view, may provide a useful philosophical
framework for qualitative research and the social and behavioural sciences in general. There are two main
research philosophies recognised in the literature - philosophies of positivism and interpretivism (Kuznar,
2008).
2.1.1. Positivism
Bryman and Bell (2008) described that positivism emerged as a philosophical paradigm in the 19th
century with Auguste Comte’s rejection of meta- physics and his assertion that only scientific knowledge
can reveal the truth about reality. It was later formally established as the dominant scientific method in the
early part of the 20th century by members of the Vienna Circle.
Page 4

Positivist assumes that true knowledge is based on experience of senses and can be obtained by
observation and experiment. Positivistic thinkers adopt scientific methods as a means to generate
knowledge (Bryman and Bell, 2008). In the view point of Silverman, (2006), Positivism is an
epistemological position claims that knowledge arrives through gathering facts and objective explanation
by generating hypothesis. Positivism is called “Scientific Method”, Empirical Science, Post Positivism
and Quantitative Research. Positivism, at least within social and behavioural science, views knowledge
differently from interpretivism. Traditional positivism as envisioned by Compte (1998): (i.e., “logical” or
“rigid” positivism) assumes that there is an objective reality independent of the observer and that, given
the right methods and research design, one can accurately capture that reality. Nowadays, there are few
supporters of rigid or logical positivism in the social sciences. Rather, as Patton asserts, most
contemporary social scientists who adhere to the scientific method are really post-positivists (Patton,
2002, pp. 91–96), and are prepared to admit and deal with imperfections in a phenomenological messy and
methodologically imperfect world, but still believe that objectivity is worth striving for. (Patton, 2002: p.
93). Compte (1998) commented that a positivist approach to research is based on knowledge gained from
'positive' verification of observable experience rather than, for example, introspection or intuition.
Scientific methods or experimental testing are the best way of achieving this knowledge. The broader
context for this approach is the Modernist movement.
Presuppositions (Compte, 1998)
 There is an objective reality.
 People can know this reality.
 Symbols can accurately describe and explain this objective reality.
2.1.2. Interpretivism
Interpretivism is an alternative to positivism paradigm. It emphasises on the explanation and
understanding of human behaviour which requires the social scientists to grasp the subjective meaning of
social action (Bryman and Bell, 2008). In this paradigm, an individual seeks an understanding of the world
in which they live and work. They develop subjective meanings of their experiences or towards certain
objects or things (Bryman and Bell, 2008). Though there are various definitions of Interpretivism, for
brevity we like Walsham’s (1993) description, which posits that interpretive methods of research start
from the position that our knowledge of reality, including the domain of human action, is a social
construction by human actors and that this applies equally to researchers. Thus there is no objective reality
which can be discovered by researchers and replicated by others, in contrast to the assumptions of
positivist science. Proponents of the interpretive school, popularized by scholars such as Geertz, (1973),
Page 5

argue that the scientific method is reductionist and often misses the point of qualitative research. Instead,
this approach, stemming from a hermeneutic tradition, one is more interested in interpreting deeper
meaning in discourse that is represented in a collection of personal narratives or observed behaviours and
activities. As such, an interpretive perspective is based on the idea that qualitative research efforts should
be concerned with revealing multiple realities as opposed to searching for one objective reality. In
Denzin’s words, “Objective reality will never be captured. In depth understanding, the use of multiple
validities, not a single validity, a commitment to dialogue is sought in any interpretive study” (Denzin,
2010, p. 271).
We recognize that the interpretive field is much more diverse than we portray here and includes different
perspectives such as post-structuralism, experimentalism (not to be confused with experimental design),
and critical theory. For readers who wish to read more about these perspectives and the ongoing
epistemological debates, we suggest looking at Denzin and Lincoln (2011) and Alvesson and Skoldberg
(2009).
2.2. Ontology
Ontology is concerned with the nature of reality. Its central question is whether social entities can or
should be considered social constructions built-up from the perception and action of social actors
(Saunders et al., 2007). According to Bryman and Bell (2008), ontology is concerned with the questions
whether social entities should be considered objective where external reality is concerned with social
word. In the perspective of Mulligan (1992), Ontology as a branch of philosophy is the science of what is,
of the kinds and structures of objects, properties, events, processes and relations in every area of reality.
Ontology seeks to provide a definitive and exhaustive classification of entities in all spheres of being. The
classification should be definitive in the sense that it can serve as an answer to such questions as: What
classes of entities are needed for a complete description and explanation of all the goings-on in the
universe? Or: What classes of entities are needed to give an account of what makes true all truths? It
should be exhaustive in the sense that all types of entities should be included in the classification,
including also the types of relations by which entities are tied together to form larger wholes.
2.2.1. Objectivism
Moen (2006) identified that objectivism includes an emphasis on objects rather than feelings or thoughts
in literature or art. Objectivism is a central tenet of qualitative methodology. Objectivism is fully
secular and absolutist; it is neither liberal nor conservative nor anywhere in-between. Objectivism holds
that reality is an absolute that facts are facts, regardless of anyone’s hopes, fears, or desires. There is a
world independent of our minds to which our thinking must correspond if our ideas are to be true and
Page 6

therefore of practical use in living our lives, pursuing our values and protecting our rights (Moen, 2006).
William (2005) explained that objectivism is the view that there can be a “permanent, historical matrix or
framework to which we can ultimately appeal to determine the nature of rationality, knowledge, truth,
reality, goodness or rightness’’.
The major goal of objectivists is aligned with that of the natural scientists – they “identify causal
explanations and fundamental laws that explain regularities in human social behavior” (Easterby-Smith et
al. 1991:23). To achieve this end, the generalization of results from ample sample sizes is necessary
utilizing a hypothetic-deductive process. This process entails the formulation of hypotheses developed
from the researcher’s conceptualization of a particular phenomenon.
2.2.2. Constructionism
It asserts that social phenomenon and their meaning are continually being accomplished by social actors.
Constructivism, as a perspective in education, was explained by Bryman and Bell (2008) that how
knowledge is constructed in the human being when information comes into contact with existing
knowledge that had been developed by experiences. Constructivism is founded on the premise that, by
reflecting our experiences, we construct our own understanding of the world consciously where we live in.
While the concept subjectivists such as Weber, et, al., (1990) argued that researchers cannot distance
themselves from: (1) what is being observed, (2) the study’s subject matter, or (3) the methods of study;
in other words, the researcher is value-laden with inherent biasness reflected by their background, status,
interests, beliefs, skills, values, resources, etc. (Hunt 1993). According to Hunt (1993), the discussion on
paradigms perceived that research results were guided by “the interpretive part of scientific observation
and determined what researchers “saw”” (4). Hunt (1993) further stated that Kuhn argued that
observations are theory-laden and is incommensurable, thereby “making objectivity in science
impossible” (5). In short, subjectivists argue that the involvement of the researcher should be actively
encouraged – “phenomenologist attempt to minimize the distance between the researcher and that which is
being researched” (Hussey and Hussey 1997: 49). In contrast to the objectivists, subjectivists focus on the
meaning of social phenomena rather than its measurement. Furthermore, subjectivists do not utilize
reductionalism as they perceive that a problem’s understanding can only be comprehended through
investigating the problem in its entirety. For a concrete understanding of research paradigms and their
philosophical assumptions please see table below:
Page 7
HANDOUTS OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Table: Research Paradigms & Philosophical Assumptions
Sr. Philosophical Positivism Interpretivism Pragmatism

# assumption
1. Ontology: - Singular reality existing apart Multiple realities shaped by Singular and multiple
What is the nature of from researcher’s perception researcher’s prior realities.
reality? OR what is and cultural biases. understanding and e.g. researchers test
knowledge? (Objectivism) assumptions. hypothesis and provide
(Constructionism).
e.g. researchers reject or fail to multiple perspectives.
reject hypothesis. e.g. researchers provide quotes
to illustrate different
perspectives.
2. Epistemology: - Distance and impartiality (e.g. Closeness (e.g. researchers Practicality (e.g.
What is the relationship researchers objectively collect visit participants at their sites researchers collect data
between the researcher data on instruments.) to collect data) by “what work” to
and that being Acceptable knowledge is gained It is cased on the perceptions address research
researched? through sense and is objectively of the individuals about the question).
What is regarded as real. (Objective) world. (Subjective) Objective + Subjective
acceptable knowledge
and how we know it?
3. Axiology: - Unbiased (e.g. researchers use Biased (e.g. researchers Multiple stances. (e.g.
What is the role of checks to eliminate bias) actively talk about their biases researchers include both
values? and interpretations) biased and unbiased
perspectives)
4. Rhetoric: - Formal style (e.g. researchers Informal style. (e.g. Formal or informal (e.g.
What is the language of use agree on definitions of researchers write in literary, researchers may employ
research? variables) informal style) both formal and informal
styles of writing).
Page 8
HANDOUTS OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

5. Methodology: - Deductive (e.g. researchers test Inductive (e.g. researchers Combining (e.g.
What is the process of a priori theory) start with participants views researchers collect both
research? and build “up” to patterns, Quantitative and
theories and generalizations) Qualitative data and mix
them )
6. Strategies of Inquiry Surveys, experiments and field Grounded theory, Sequential, concurrent
work ethnography, case study and and transformative.
narratives
7. Methods Closed ended questions, Open ended questions, Both open and closed
predetermined approaches emerging approaches, and text ended questions; both
numerical data, statistical and image emerging and
analysis (Quantitative) analysis.(Qualitative) predetermined
approaches; both
quantitative and
qualitative data and
analysis.
Adapted from: Creswell, J. W and Clark, V.P, 2007
Page 9

3. Characteristics of Qualitative Research
There are certain characteristics of qualitative research (Creswell, 2003) given as below:
 Take place in natural setting
 Qualitative research is emergent rather than prefigured
 Use multiple methods that are interactive and humanistic
 Interpretive in which researcher makes interpretation
 View social phenomenon holistically
 Reflexivity is acknowledged
Creswell (2003) discussed that qualitative research involves an interpretive, naturalistic approach to
the world. It takes place in a natural setting where researcher goes to the site of the participant to
conduct the research and use multiple methods that are interactive and humanistic. Researchers seek
involvement of their participants in data collection and seek to build rapport and credibility (Creswell,
2003). The data collected involves text (or word) data and images (or picture) that is emergent rather
than tightly preconfigured. The research questions may change and be refined; the data collection
process may change; the theory or general pattern of understanding will emerge and move toward
grounded theory or broad understanding is fundamentally interpretative as researcher describes
individuals, settings and relations; researcher filters observations through a personal lens that is
situated in a specific historical moment (Creswell, 2003). Qualitative research views social phenomena
holistically where broad views are taken rather than micro-analyses. In qualitative research, visual
models of the central process or phenomenon help establish holistic picture and researcher
systematically reflects who he or she is in the inquiry (introspection). Qualitative research
acknowledges biases, values and interests; statements of personal reflection emerge or are embedded
throughout a proposal or study. It involves complex reasoning that is multifaceted, iterative, and
simultaneous; reasoning is largely inductive but both inductive and deductive processes are involved
(Sapir, 1949).
4. Approaches/Traditions of qualitative research

In this section, we briefly describe some of the most common approaches to collecting and using
qualitative data. There is certainly overlap between them; the distinctions are not always readily
evident. But there is a brief description about approaches is given below;
 Narrative research
 Phenomenology
 Grounded theory

 Ethnography
 Case study
4.1. Narrative research: Narrative inquiry or narrative research emerges as a discipline from
within the broader field of qualitative research in the early 20th century. This approach is an inquiry
which retells someone’s story across time (Creswell, 2003). It explores what the story means and the
lessons are to be learned. As with all of the above techniques, narrative research is based on the study
of discourse and the textual representation of discourse. Holstein, and Gubrium (2011) identified that
Narratives, in this context, refer to stories that represent a sequence of events. They can be generated
during the data collection process, such as through in-depth interviews or focus groups; they can be
incidentally captured during participant observation; or, they can be embedded in written forms,
including diaries, letters, the Internet, or literary works. Narratives are analyzed in numerous ways
and narrative research itself is represented within a broad range of academic traditions—sociology,
anthropology, literature, psychology, health sciences, and cultural studies (Tuval-Mashiach and
Zilber, 1998). Narrative research can be used for a wide range of purposes. Some of the more
common include formative research for a subsequent study, comparative analysis between groups,
understanding social or historical phenomena, or diagnosing psychological or medical conditions.
The underlying principle of a narrative inquiry is that narratives are the source of data used, and their
analysis opens a gateway to better understanding of a given research topic (Reissman, 2007). This
approach includes exploring the life of an individual. In simple words, it is an inquiry in which the
researcher studies the lives of individuals and asks one or more individuals to provide stories about
their lives (Creswell, 2003). An example may be to study the life of General Colin Powell.
4.2. Phenomenology: according to Creswell (2003), Phenomenology is a school of thought that
focuses on people’s subjective experiences and interpretations of the world. Phenomenological
theorists argue that objectivity is virtually impossible to ascertain so to compensate, one must view all
research from the perspective of the researcher. The goal of phenomenological research is to describe
participants’ experiences in a specific context and understand a phenomenon (Baxter and Jack, 2008).
Phenomenology is an approach in which researcher identifies the “essence” of human experience
concerning a phenomenon as described by the participant in a study. In contemporary social science,
the term is used more broadly to denote the study of individuals’ perceptions, feelings, and lived
experiences. Smith, et, al., (2009), define phenomenology as a philosophical approach to the study of
experience that shares a particular interest in thinking about what the experience of being human is
like, in all of its various aspects, but especially in terms of the things that matter to us, and which
constitute our lived world. (p. 11). For example, what is it like to be homeless in Los Angeles?
Page 11

4.3. Grounded theory: This type of qualitative approach investigates a process, action, or
interaction with the goal of developing a theory (Strauss and Corbin, 2002). Grounded theory refers
to an inductive process of generating theory from data. Grounded theorists argue that theory
generated from observations of the empirical world may be more valid and useful than theories
generated from deductive inquiries (Creswell, 2003). A defining feature of grounded theory is the
“constant comparison method.” Done properly, grounded theory requires that all segments of text
are systematically compared and contrasted with each other. Theoretical models are created and
continuously revised as data are progressively collected and analyzed. The exhaustive comparison
between small units of text, such as lines or words, is often not a part of many applied inductive
thematic analyses because it is extremely time consuming, especially for larger datasets (Charmaz,
2006). Developed by Glaser and Strauss (1967), grounded theory is a set of iterative techniques
designed to identify categories and concepts within text that are then linked into formal theoretical
models (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Charmaz (2006, p. 2) described grounded theory as a set of
methods that “consist of systematic, yet flexible guidelines for collecting and analyzing qualitative
data to construct theories ‘grounded’ in the data themselves.” The process entails systematically
reviewing units of text (often line-by-line, but units can be words, paragraphs, or larger units of text)
as they are collected, creating emergent codes for those units, and writing memos that expand on
created codes and the relationships between codes. This process is repeated until data collection is
completed. To illustrate, a colleague of mine is observing the dyad relationship between a CEO and
an executive business coach across cultures.
4.4. Ethnography: Ethnography literally means “to write about a group of people”. It is an in-depth
description and interpretation of a cultural and social group of people done through “immersed”
participant observation and recorded in the language of the host culture (Dunican, 2006).
Ethnography emphasises the observation of details of everyday life as they naturally unfold in the
real world (Creswell, 2003). This is sometimes called naturalistic research. Ethnography is a method
of describing a culture or society. Ethnography literally means “to write about a group of people.”
Its roots are grounded in the field of anthropology and the practice of in situ research, where a
researcher is immersed within the community he/she is studying for extended periods of time.
According to perspective of Agar (1996), a hallmark feature of the ethnographic approach is a
holistic perspective, based on the premise that human behaviour and culture are complicated
phenomena and are composed of, and influenced by, a multitude of factors. These might include
historical precedents, the physical context in which people live and work, the social structures in
which individuals are embedded, and the symbolic environment in which they act (e.g., language,
shared meanings). Traditionally, ethnographic research has involved a researcher’s total and pro-
Page 12

longed immersion within a study community, often for a year or longer (Agar, 1996). With the
luxury of time, proximity to the field site and the ability to coordinate data collection in an integrated
and inductive manner, research can be more fluid. Another strength of the ethnographic approach is
the naturalistic, in situ manner in which it is carried out and its emphasis on understanding the emic
(insider/local) perspective. Observing individual and group behaviour in its natural context and
participating in that context can generate insights that other forms of research cannot. Not
surprisingly, participant observation has historically been an integral component of ethnographic
inquiry (Fetterman, 2009). An ethnographic study may look at the Cree people of Western Canada.
4.5. Case study: In which researcher explores in-depth a program, an activity or one or more
individuals (Creswell, 2003). It is the most common type of qualitative research. Case study looks at
developing an in-depth analysis of a single case or multiple cases (Merriam, 1998). A qualitative
case study examines a phenomenon within its real-life context. Data are collected on or about a
single individual, group, or event. In some cases, several cases or events may be studied (Ellet,
2007). The primary purpose of a case study is to understand something that is unique to the case(s).
Knowledge from the study is then used to apply to other cases and contexts. Qualitative case study
methods often involve several in-depth interviews over a period of time with each case (Ellet, 2007.
Interviews explore the unique aspects of the case in great detail, more so than would be typical for a
phenomenological interview. In the view of Swanborn (2010), Implications of a case study approach
for qualitative data collection and analysis are several. First, participants and/or cases, by definition,
should be selected for their unique properties. Because it is the case’s special attributes that are of
interest, sample sizes are generally small, usually one to several cases. Inquiry in these types of
studies focuses largely on their defining case features and the differences they exhibit from other
individuals/events in the larger population (Yin, 2008). The overall idea is to tease out what makes
them so different and why. Often, knowledge gained from case studies is applied to a larger
population. An example of a case study may be how the Durand Line Agreement established the
political boundary between the nations of Afghanistan and Pakistan in the 1890s.
To help make sense of the complexity, we include a summary of each approach and the implications
they have for data collection in Table given below.
Type of Defining Features Data Collection Implications

Approach
Phenomenology  Focuses on individual experiences,  Questions and observations are aimed at drawing out
beliefs, and perceptions. individual experiences and perceptions.
 Text used as a proxy for human  In focus groups, group experiences and normative
experience. perceptions are typically sought out.
 In-depth interviews and focus groups are ideal
Page 13

methods for collecting phenomenological data.
Ethnography  Oriented toward studying shared  Questions and observations are generally related to
meanings and practices (i.e., culture). social and cultural processes and shared meanings
 Emphasizes the emic perspective. within a given group of people.
 Can have a contemporary or historical  Traditionally, it is associated with long term fieldwork,
focus. but some aspects are employed in applied settings.
Participant observation is well suited to
 Ethnographic inquiry.
Grounded  Inductive data collection and analytic  As above, in-depth interviews and focus groups are the
Theory methods. most common data collection techniques associated
 Uses systematic and exhaustive with GT.
comparison of text segments to build  Sample sizes for grounded theory are more limited than
thematic structure and theory from a for ITA because the analytic process is more intensive
body of text. and time consuming.
 Common analytic approach in Note: Many researchers incorrectly label all inductive
qualitative studies. thematic analyses “grounded theory,” as a default.
Technically, they are not the same thing.
Case study  Analysis of one to several cases that  Cases are selected based on a unique (often rarely
are unique with respect to the observed) quality.
research topic  Questions and observations should focus on, and delve
 Analysis primarily focused on deeply into, the unique feature of interest.
exploring the unique quality.
Narrative  Narratives (storytelling) used as  If generating narratives (through in-depth interviews),
source of da1ta. then questions/ tasks need to be aimed at eliciting
research  Narratives from one or more sources stories and the importance those stories, hold for
(e.g., interviews, Literature, letters, participants, as well as larger cultural meaning.
diaries).
5. Evaluating Quality of Qualitative Research:

There is debate in the literature about whether the concepts of quality used to assess qualitative
research should be roughly the same as parallel to or quite different from those used to assess
quantitative research (Bryman and Bell, 2008). This framework is based on the view that the concerns
which lie behind customary conceptions of quality have relevance for qualitative enquiry but need to
be reformulated and assessed quite differently – within the domain of qualitative research. In other
words, (Bryman and Bell, 2008) explained that qualitative research should be assessed on its ‘own
terms’ within the premises that are central to its purpose, nature and conduct. This, in turn, has led to
the generation of a number of checklists and guidelines that are used for assessing quality of
qualitative research which are as follows;
5.1. Credibility: Credibility refers to the objective and subjective components of the believability
of a source or message. It clarifies that research is carried out according to the canons of good practice
and sharing research findings to the members of social world who were studied (Bryman and Bell,
2008). Credibility has two key components: trustworthiness and expertise which both have objective
and subjective components. Trustworthiness is based more on subjective factors but can include
Page 14

objective measurements such as established reliability (Silverman, 2006). Expertise can be similarly
subjectively perceived but also includes relatively objective characteristics of the source or message
(e.g., credentials, certification or information quality).
5.1.1. Respondent validation: It refers to take one’s findings back to the subjects being studied.
Respondent validation is a procedure largely associated with qualitative research whereby a researcher
submits materials relevant to an investigation for checking by the people who were the source of those
materials (Bryman and Bell, 2008). Probably, the most common form of respondent validation occurs
when the researcher submits an account of their findings (such as a short report or interview transcript)
for checking (Bloor, 1997).
5.1.2. Triangulation: Denzin (1970) discussed that triangulation refers to the use of more than one
approach to the investigation of a research question in order to enhance confidence in the ensuing
findings. It includes comparing different kinds of data (quantitative vs. qualitative) and different
methods (e.g. interview vs. observation) to see whether they corroborate with one another (Creswell,
2003).
5.1.3. Audit trial: Lincoln and Guba (1985) suggested that by implementing an audit trail, an
auditor or second party who becomes familiar with the qualitative study, its methodology, findings and
conclusions can audit the research decisions and the methodological and analytical processes of the
researcher on completion of the study and thus confirm its findings. It keeps a detailed record of data
collection and rationale for important decisions.
5.2. Transferability: Transferability refers to the evidence supporting the generalization of
findings to other context – across different participants group, situation and so forth. It can be achieved
by producing rich thick description of the phenomenon. Transferability is a process performed by
readers of research (Bryman and Bell, 2008). Readers note the specifics of the research situation and
compare them to the specifics of an environment or situation with which they are familiar. If there are
enough similarities between the two situations, readers may be able to infer that the results of the
research would be the same or similar in their own situation (Creswell, 2003). In other words, they
"transfer" the results of a study to another context.
5.3. Dependability: Bryman and Bell (2008) referred the dependability is stability or
consistency of the inquiry processes used over the period of time. Dependability is an assessment of
the quality of the integrated processes of data collection, analysis, interpreting the findings and
reporting results. Dependability is a criterion which is considered equivalent to reliability and similarly
concerned with the stability of the results over time (Shenton, 2004). The qualitative researcher
gathers evidence to support the claim that similar finding would be obtained if study was repeated.
Page 15

Dependability can also be enhanced by common qualitative strategies such as audit trial, rich
documentation and triangulation.
6. Ethics in Qualitative Research

Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person’s behaviour for conducting of an activity.
Research ethics provides guidelines for the responsible person to conduct the research. In addition,
research ethics educates and monitors scientists/researchers conducting research to ensure a high
ethical standard (Fens, 2004). These are the following research ethics suggested by Bryman and Bell
(2008):
 Ensuring that people participate voluntarily
 Confidentiality and anonymity of the participants
 Informal consents
 Evaluating risk of harm
 No deception is involved
 Right of withdrawal from the study
 Data protection
Undertaking Reflexive Practice in Research (Atkinson, 1990)
 The Research Diary: A Place for Recording Reflections
Keeping a research diary is an essential part of undertaking qualitative research. It is useful to separate
this into four sections in order that you are prompted to reflect on different aspects of doing research
and your role within the construction of research knowledge (Blaxter, et, al., 2001):
 Observational Note
This is a descriptive note of an event such as an interview, chance encounter, and observation. They
contain as little interpretation as possible and are as reliable as you can construct them.
 Methodological Note
This is the place where you reflect on the methodological aspects of research and your actions in
undertaking an interview, observation and so forth. How did the interview go? What was your role
within it?
 Theoretical Note
It is here that you begin to make meaning about your data. What are your initial explanations? What
is your data telling you?
Page 16

7. Sampling
Sample: In research terms, a sample is a group of people, objects, or items that are taken from a
larger population for measurement (Cochran, 1963). The sample should be representative of the
population to ensure that we can generalize the findings from the research sample to the population as
a whole. According to Webster, 1985, a sample is a finite part of a statistical population whose
properties are studied to gain information about the population. When dealing with people, it can be
defined as a set of respondents (people) selected from a larger population for the purpose of a survey.
Sampling (definition): Sampling is the act, process, or technique of selecting a suitable sample, or a
representative part of a population for the purpose of determining parameters or characteristics of the
whole population (Cochran, 1963). Sampling is basically a process of taking any portion of a
population or universe as representative of that population or universe.
Advantages of Sampling (Mack, et. al., (2005)
 Sampling saves time and money
 Sampling saves labour.
 Sample coverage permits a higher overall level of adequacy than a full enumeration.
 Complete census is often unnecessary, wasteful, and the burden on the public.
What is Sample Size
Sample size relates to how many people to pick for the study. The question often asked is: How big a
sample is necessary for a good research? This depends on factors such as;
 The researcher hypotheses or questions
 Level of precision
 Population homogeneity
 Sampling technique used
 Monetary and personal resources
 The amount of time available
According to the law of large numbers, the larger the sample size, the better the estimates, or the
larger the sample the closer the "true" value of the population is approached (Mack, et. al., 2005).
How does qualitative sampling differ from quantitative sampling?
Quantitative researchers usually try to minimize study bias by ensuring that their sample accurately
reflects the larger population from which they drew it. Researchers identify different ways to
minimize bias (Murphy, 2002), but despite these differences, the goals of minimizing bias and
maximizing generalizability remain the same. Quantitative sampling techniques, therefore, are
designed to accommodate these goals of minimizing bias and maximizing generalizability. Rather
Page 17

than aiming to generalize about large populations, Giacomini and Cook (2000) suggested that the
purpose of qualitative studies is to offer a “window-like” or a “mirror-like” view on the specific
situation or phenomenon being studied. Because minimizing bias and maximizing generalizability are
not the primary goals of qualitative research, researchers have asserted, quantitative sampling
techniques cannot be transferred directly to qualitative research (Higginbottom, 2004, p. 18).
Depending on the situation being examined and the research question guiding that examination,
qualitative researchers might have a variety of different goals in selecting a sample. In some cases,
they might want to ensure that the sample exposes the differences within a population as much as
possible. In other cases, they might want to examine carefully the behaviours of a cross-section of a
larger population. Thus, rather than selecting a sample that will allow them to generalize to an entire
population, qualitative researchers aim to minimize the chance that a study’s findings will be entirely
idiosyncratic, that the findings will be completely different from what they might be at another site,
with other subjects (Mack, et. al., 2005). Despite these fundamental differences, qualitative and
quantitative sampling techniques are not mutually exclusive and can sometimes be used together to
develop a more suitable sample.
8. Primary qualitative sampling techniques

Even if it were possible, it is not necessary to collect data from everyone in a community in order to
get valid findings. In qualitative research, only a sample (that is, a subset) of a population is selected
for any given study. The study’s research objectives and the characteristics of the study population
(such as size and diversity) determine which and how many people to select. In this section, we briefly
describe three of the most common sampling methods used in qualitative research under the head of
purposeful sampling: convenience sampling, theoretical sampling, and snowball sampling (Mack, et.
al., 2005). As data collectors, you will not be responsible for selecting the sampling method. The
explanations below are meant to help you understand the reasons for using each method.
8.1. Convenience sampling
Convenience sampling is a type of non-probability sampling technique. Non-probability sampling
focuses on sampling techniques that are based on the judgement of the researcher. A convenience
sample is simply one in which the researcher uses any subjects that are available to participate in the
research study (Mack, et. al., 2005). This could mean stopping people in a street corner as they pass by
or surveying passersby in a mall. It could also mean surveying friends, students, or colleagues that the
researcher has regular access to relying on available subjects, however, is extremely risky and comes
with many cautions. For example, this method does not allow the researcher to have any control over
the representativeness of the sample. That is, the researcher cannot control how well the characteristics
Page 18

of the sample (gender, age, race, education, etc.) match the characteristics of the larger population it is
intended to represent. Convenience sampling is typically only justified if the researcher wants to study
the characteristics of people passing by the street corner at a certain point in time, for example. It can
also be used if other sampling methods are not possible. The researcher must also take caution to not
use results from a convenience sample to generalize to a wider population. e.g. let’s say that a
researcher and professor at a University are interested in studying drinking behaviors among college
students. The professor teaches a sociology 101 class to mostly college freshmen and decides to use
his or her class as the study sample. He or she collects data from class for the students to complete and
hand in (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Advantages of convenience sampling
 Convenience sampling is very easy to carry out with few rules governing how the sample should
be collected.
 The relative cost and time required to carry out a convenience sample are small in comparison
to probability sampling techniques. This enables you to achieve the sample size you want in a
relatively fast and inexpensive way. to get a list of all employees in the organisation, which you would
need to use a probability sampling techniques.
 The convenience sample may help you gathering useful data and information that would not have
been possible using probability sampling techniques, which require more formal access to lists of
populations (Mack, et. al., 2005). For example, imagine you were interested in understand more about
employee satisfaction in a single, large organisation in the US. You intended to collect your data using
a survey. The manager who has kindly given you access to conduct your research is unable to get
permission probability sampling technique such as simple random sampling or systematic random
sampling. However, the manager has managed to secure permission for you to spend two days in the
organisation to collect as many survey responses as possible. You decide to spend the two days at the
entrance of the organisation where all employees have to pass through to get to their desks. Whilst a
probability sampling technique would have been preferred, the convenience sample was the only
sampling technique that you could use to collect data. Irrespective of the disadvantages (limitations) of
convenience sampling, discussed below, without the use of this sampling technique, you may not have
been able to get access to any data on employee satisfaction in the organization.
Disadvantages of convenience sampling
The convenience sample often suffers from biases from a number of biases (Mack, et. al., 2005). This
can be seen in both of our examples, whether the 10,000 students we were studying, or the employees
at the large organisation. In both cases, a convenience sample can lead to the under-representation or
over-representation of particular groups within the sample. If we take the large organisation: It may be
Page 19

that the organisation has multiple sites, with employee satisfaction varying considerably between these
sites. By conducting the survey at the headquarters of the organisation, we may have missed the
differences in employee satisfaction amongst non-office workers. We also do not know why some
employees agreed to take part in the survey, whilst others did not. Was it because some employees
were simply too busy? Did not trust the intentions of the survey? Did others take part out of kindness
or because they had a particular grievance with the organisation? These types of bias are quite typical
in convenience sampling.
Since the sampling frame is not know, and the sample is not chosen at random, the inherent bias in
convenience sampling means that the sample is unlikely to be representative of the population being
studied (Mack, et. al., 2005). This undermines your ability to make generalizations from your sample
to the population you are studying.
8.2. Snowball sampling
Snowballing sampling is also known as chain referral sampling – is considered a type of purposive
sampling. In this method, participants or informants with whom contact has already been made use
their social networks to refer the researcher to other people who could potentially participate in or
contribute to the study. Snowball sampling is often used to find and recruit “hidden populations,” that
is, groups not easily accessible to researchers through other sampling strategies (Mack, et. al., 2005).
In snowball sampling, you begin by identifying someone who meets the criteria for inclusion in your
study. You then ask them to recommend others who they may know who also meet the criteria.
Although this method would hardly lead to representative samples, there are times when it may be the
best method available. Snowball sampling is especially useful when you are trying to reach
populations that are inaccessible or hard to find. For instance, if you are studying the homeless, you
are not likely to be able to find good lists of homeless people within a specific geographical area.
However, if you go to that area and identify one or two, you may find that they know very well who
the other homeless people in their vicinity are and how you can find them (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Snowball sampling uses a small pool of initial informants to nominate, through their social networks,
other participants who meet the eligibility criteria and could potentially contribute to a specific study.
The term "snowball sampling" reflects an analogy to a snowball increasing in size as it rolls downhill
From the perspective of (Mack, et. al., (2005), Snowball sampling is a method used to obtain research
and knowledge, from extended associations, through previous acquaintances, "Snowball sampling uses
recommendations to find people with the specific range of skills that has been determined as being
useful." An individual or a group receives information from different places through a mutual
intermediary. This is referred to metaphorically as snowball sampling because as more relationships
Page 20

are built through mutual association, more connections can be made through those new relationships
and a plethora of information can be shared and collected, much like a snowball that rolls and
increases in size as it collects more snow. Snowball sampling is a useful tool for building networks
and increasing the number of participants. However, the success of this technique depends greatly on
the initial contacts and connections made. Thus it is important to correlate with those that are popular
and honorable to create more opportunities to grow, but also to create a credible and dependable
reputation.
Method
1. Draft up a participation program (likely to be subject to change, but indicative).
2. Approach stakeholders and ask for contacts.
3. Gain contacts and ask them to participate.
4. Community issues groups may emerge that can be included in the participation program.
5. Continue the snowballing with contacts to gain more stakeholders if necessary.
6. Ensure a diversity of contacts by widening the profile of persons involved in the snowballing
exercise.
When to use snowball sampling
Pre-assumption: The participants are likely to know others who share the characteristics that make
them eligible for inclusion in the study.
There are many reasons why an individual may want to use snowball sampling across any industry,
research, job, etc. Specific to business and marketing, however, snowball sampling can be used to
things such as identify experts in a certain field, product, manufacturing processes, customer relation
methods, etc. 3M did this when they were trying to identify experts in different fields of work in order
to become the lead user for surgical drapes, the small plastic covering that is applied at the incision site
of a surgery. To do this, 3M called in specialist from all fields that related to how a surgical drape
could be applied to the body. For example, they called in a veterinarian, who specializes with surgeries
on creatures with a lot of hair, and a Broadway make-up artist who specialized in applying foreign
materials to human skin in a non-irritating manner. In order to successfully identify these people, 3m
used snowball sampling. They called "experts" that they had contacts and after gathering information,
asked them to suggest another expert that they may know who could offer more information. They
repeated this process until they were satisfied with their experts and felt that they had found the most
knowledgeable individuals in a specific field. Thus, snowball sampling can be used to gather expert
information (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Page 21

Advantages
 Locate hidden populations: It is possible for the surveyors to include people in the survey that
they would not have known.
 Locating people of a specific population: There is no list or other obvious sources for locating
members of the population of specific interest.
Disadvantages
 Community Bias: The first participants will have strong impact on the sample. Snowball
sampling is inexact, and can produce varied and inaccurate results. The method is heavily reliant
on the skill of the individual conducting the actual sampling, and that individual’s ability to
vertically network and find an appropriate sample. To be successful requires previous contacts
within the target areas, and the ability to keep the information flow going throughout the target
group.
 Not Random: Snowball sampling contradicts many of the assumptions supporting conventional
notions of random selection and representativeness. However, Social systems are beyond
researcher’s ability to recruit randomly. Snowball sampling is inevitable in social systems.
 Vague Overall Sampling Size: There is no way to know the total size of the overall population.
 Wrong Anchoring: Another disadvantage of snowball sampling is the lack of definite
knowledge as to whether or not the sample is an accurate reading of the target population. By
targeting only a few select people, it is not always indicative of the actual trends within the result
group. Identifying the appropriate person to conduct the sampling, as well as locating the correct
targets is a time consuming process which renders the benefits only slightly outweighing the
costs.
8.3. Theoretical sampling
Theoretical sampling refers to the process of choosing new research sites or cases to compare with
ones that have already been studied. It is one of the tools of qualitative research. The iterative process
of qualitative study design means that samples are usually theory driven to a greater or lesser extent
(Mack, et. al., 2005). Theoretical sampling necessitates building interpretative theories from the
emerging data and selecting a new sample to examine and elaborate on this theory. It is the principal
strategy for the grounded theoretical approach but will be used in some form in most qualitative
investigations necessitating interpretation. Theoretical sampling is a central part of the grounded
theorizing advocated by Glaser and Strauss (1967). Grounded theorizing is usually regarded as a form
of qualitative inquiry, though in fact its originators saw it as applicable to quantitative data too. In this
context, theoretical sampling is tied to the purpose of generating and developing theoretical ideas,
Page 22

rather than being aimed either at producing findings that are representative of a population or at testing
hypotheses. This form of sampling does not take place at a single point in the inquiry process but is a
recurrent feature: at various times the researcher must ask what settings, events, people etc. it would be
worthwhile investigating next in order to develop aspects of the emerging theory. In this way,
theoretical sampling is guided by, and helps to generate, the ‘theoretical sensitivity’ that is necessary
in grounded theorizing, and indeed in qualitative and ethnographic work (Mack, et. al., 2005).
8.4. Purposive Sampling
Purposive sampling, also known as judgmental, selective or subjective sampling, is a type of non-
probability sampling technique. Non-probability sampling focuses on sampling techniques where the
units that are investigated are based on the judgement of the researcher. Field researchers are often
interested in studying extreme or deviant cases – that is, cases that don’t fit into regular patterns of
attitudes and behaviours. By studying the deviant cases, researchers can often gain a better
understanding of the more regular patterns of behaviour. This is where purposive sampling often takes
place. For instance, if a researcher is interested in learning more about students at the top of their class,
he or she is going to sample those students who fall into the "top of the class" category. They will be
purposively selected because they meet a certain characteristic. Purposive sampling can be very useful
for situations where you need to reach a targeted sample quickly and where sampling for
proportionality is not the main concern.
Purposive sampling starts with a purpose in mind and the sample is thus selected to include people of
interest and exclude those who do not suit the purpose. This method is popular with newspapers and
magazines which want to make a particular point. This is also true for marketing researchers who are
seeking support for their product. They typically start with people in the street, first approaching
only 'likely suspects' and then starting with questions that reject people who do not suit.
9. Qualitative research data collection methods

Qualitative research data collection methods are time consuming, therefore data is usually collected
from a smaller sample than would be the case for quantitative approaches - therefore this makes
qualitative research more expensive (Mack, et. al., 2005). The benefits of the qualitative approach are
that the information is richer and has a deeper insight into the phenomenon under study.
The main methods for collecting qualitative data are:
 Focus group
 Interviews
 Participant observations
Page 23

 Document analysis (as a source of data)
9.1. Focus group
Focus group is moderated group discussions (with 8-12 people) on a particular topic/issue (Randolph,
2007). Focus groups are useful for gathering information from a group of respondents at one time.
Mack, et. al., (2005) explained that it’s a common approach in focus group is to invite a group of
experts to discuss about the research topic. The aim is to get the experts to provide different
perspectives to the discussion. If the focus group session is organized correctly, the atmosphere can
encourage participants to speak and interact spontaneously. On the other hand, some participants may
dominate the conversation or others can feel uncomfortable in being open in a group situation. It is
common that the focus group interviews are both recorded on video and the researcher makes notes
during the focus group session. Following are certain strengths and weaknesses of focus group given
as below (Mack, et. al., (2005);
Strengths Weaknesses
 In depth knowledge from the  Time consuming and expensive to organize.
Respondents  Respondents may feel uncomfortable to speaking
 Flexibility and ability to get lot of useful openly to unknown interviewer – fear of losing the
information face.
 Allows focusing questions  Respondents are sometimes eager to give answers that
in their opinion interviewer want to hear.
 Source of bias; interviewer, respondent, and questions
(Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2000).
 Researcher will have some influence on the
interviewee, which will affect the data. For instance,
attitudes, opinions.
And expectations of the interviewer can have effect
on the answers.
 Data analysis takes time and resources
 Communication problems: Misinterpretation of
question and answer, poor handling of difficult
Interviews.
 Focus group interviews: how to Motivate the
experts to participate and how to get the
“correct” people.
Focus groups are a qualitative data collection method effective in helping researchers learn the social
norms of a community or subgroup, as well as the range of perspectives that exist within that
Page 24

community or subgroup. Focus groups are often used to determine what service or product a particular
population wants or would like to have, such as in marketing studies. Because focus groups seek to
illuminate group opinion, the method is especially well suited for socio behavioral research that will
be used to develop and measure services that meet the needs of a given population (Heckathorn,
1997).
Heckathorn (1997) discussed that focus group is a qualitative data collection method in which one or
two researchers and several participants meet as a group to discuss a given research topic. These
sessions are usually tape- recorded, and sometimes videotaped. One researcher (the moderator) leads
the discussion by asking participants to respond to open-ended questions – that is, questions that
require an in- depth response rather than a single phrase or simple “yes” or “no” answer. A second
researcher (the note-taker) takes detailed notes on the discussion. A principal advantage of focus
groups is that they yield a large amount of information over a relatively short period of time
(Randolph, 2007). They are also effective for accessing a broad range of views on a specific topic, as
opposed to achieving group consensus. Focus groups are not the best method for acquiring information
on highly personal or socially sensitive topics; one-on-one interviews are better-suited for such topics
(Mack, et. al., 2005). Table given at below summarizes some of the strengths of focus groups in
comparison to in-depth interviews.
Strengths Limitations
 Specifically effective for capturing information  Not good for acquiring information on highly
about social norms and the variety of opinions and personal and socially sensitive issue.
views.
 They yield large amount of information over a  The researcher may have less control over
relatively short period of time. proceedings.
 The technique allow researcher to develop an  The data may be difficult to analyze and organize.
understanding about why people feel the way they
do.
 Offers the researcher an opportunity to study the  Recordings are time consuming
ways in which individuals collectively make sense
of the phenomenon and construct meanings around
it.
 Individuals will often argue and challenge each
others’ view.
Page 25

Behavioral techniques for building rapport in focus groups
 What can we learn from focus groups?
Focus groups are especially effective for capturing information about social norms and the variety of
opinions or views within a population. The richness of focus group data emerges from the group
dynamic and from the diversity of the group. Participants influence each other through their presence
and their reactions to what other people say (Mack, et. al., 2005). Because not everyone will have
the same views and experiences – because of differences in age, gender, education, access to
resources, and other factors – many different viewpoints will likely be expressed by participants.
Focus group data can also capture idiosyncratic experiences and views of individuals, but it is
preferable to collect that data during one-on-one interviews, rather than in a group environment
(Heckathorn, 1997). Within a study, focus groups are typically one method among many that are used
to create a complete picture of how a given issue affects a community of people. Focus groups
contribute to this broad understanding by providing well-grounded data on social and cultural norms,
the pervasiveness of these norms within the community, and people’s opinions about their own values
(Randolph, 2007).
 What form do focus group data take?

Focus group data consist of tape recordings, transcripts of those recordings, the moderator’s and note-
taker’s notes from the discussion, and notes from the debriefing session held after the focus group.
Notes are initially handwritten in field notebooks, on the focus group guide, or on special forms
(Randolph, 2007). After data collection, all handwritten notes are expanded into more complete
narratives, then entered into a computer (Mack, et. al., 2005).
 How is focus group data used?
Typed transcripts are the most utilized form of focus group data. During the data analysis phase of the
research, after data collection, transcripts are coded according to participants’ responses to each
question and/or to the most salient themes emerging across the set of focus groups (Mack, et. al.,
2005). The moderator’s and note-taker’s expanded focus group notes (from the discussion and the
debriefing session) are used:
a) By moderators during the focus group discussions, to remind themselves of questions they
need to go back to, where they need more complete information, etc.
b) During debriefing sessions with other field staff and investigators
c) During transcription of focus group recordings, to clarify and add contextual details to what
participants have said
Page 26

 Ethical Guidelines
 How do I explain the purpose of the focus group?
Sometimes participants or potential participants ask focus group recruiters or facilitators to answer
questions about the research or the topic of discussion before the focus group session begins. In this
event, it is important not to talk about the topic in any detail, to avoid influencing what people say
during the discussion.
You should, however, explain the purpose of the focus group as it fits within the broader context of the
research study. In doing so, it is important that you be truthful and straightforward about the objectives
of the study and the anticipated risks and benefits to the individual participant and the community
(Mack, et. al., 2005). You should also identify the organizations involved in the study. Do not create
false expectations in order to obtain a participant’s cooperation. Be cautious about making even small
promises, such as saying a staff member can give a participant a ride home after the focus group,
unless you know for certain that they can be fulfilled. Participants may ask you questions that you
prefer to answer at the end of the focus group – for example, if your response would risk influencing
the discussion. Write them on a board or large piece of paper to ensure that you come back to them at
the end.
 What should I say about confidentiality?
Maintaining confidentiality requires special precautions and emphasis in focus groups. For this reason,
it is often preferable to avoid using participants’ names during the focus group. In such instances, you
should implement a system of name substitution before the session begins. For example, you could
assign participants numbers, letters, or pseudonyms for the moderator and note-taker to use on the
seating charts and to identify speakers in their notes.
Although the moderator and note-taker should assure participants that everything they share in the
focus group will be treated as confidential by project staff, they cannot promise that other members of
the focus group will do the same (Mack, et. al., 2005). It is therefore important to emphasize both at
the beginning and end of each session that participants should respect each other’s privacy and
anonymity. Once outside the focus group setting, they should not reveal the identities of other
participants nor indicate who made specific comments during the discussion.
If any participants express concern about their privacy during the focus group, assure them that you
have taken special precautions to protect participants’ identities and the data. You should understand
the procedures outlined in the study protocol for protecting participants’ privacy and instructions about
focus group.
Page 27

 How should informed consent be handled for a focus group?
Before beginning the focus group, you must obtain informed consent in accordance with the
procedures of the specific study protocol. Typically, you will obtain informed consent individually
with each participant before the person joins the group. As noted in the Qualitative Research Methods,
the overarching purpose of informed consent procedures is to ensure that participants understand that
they are not for any reason obligated to participate in the focus group, nor are they required to answer
any questions they do not wish to answer. Informed consent for focus groups is often oral and may
be tape- recorded in full or in part, but some studies may require written informed consent (Mack, et.
al., 2005). It is also essential to provide participants with information on how the focus group data
will be used and who will have access to it.
 Who conducts the focus group?
Focus groups work best when conducted by two researchers, often called facilitators. These facilitators
have both individual and shared responsibilities. One person acts as the moderator of the discussion
and the other is the note-taker. Both facilitators should be prepared to perform either role, in case it
becomes necessary to switch roles during the focus group.
 What does the moderator do?
Typical duties of the moderator are described in detail in this module’s section on How to Be an
Effective Moderator, and the specific scope of the moderator’s role will be clarified for every project
(Mack, et. al., 2005). In general, however, moderators are responsible for leading the focus group
discussion, posing all questions specified in the focus group question guide, keeping the discussion on
track, and encouraging all participants to contribute.
 What does the note-taker do?
Note-takers are responsible for taking detailed notes of the discussion, even though focus group
sessions are typically tape-recorded. These notes serve as supplementary documentation of the
discussion, documentation of the note-taker’s observations, and as a backup in the event that the
recording system fails. Note-takers may also be responsible for tasks related to recording (operating
the tape recorder, labeling the cassette tapes, and taking appropriate security measures to protect the
tapes once the session is over). Finally, note-takers typically facilitate the logistics of participant
arrivals and departures, such as early withdrawal and escort to the restroom (Mack, et. al., 2005).
 How many people are necessary for a focus group?
The qualitative work plan for each site will specify the approximate number of participants to be
recruited for each focus group, as well as the number of focus groups required for the project. A
typical number of participants is eight to ten people, with a maximum of 12. In most cases, more than
Page 28

the target number of people will be recruited because it is common for people who are scheduled to
participate not to show up. If more than 12 people come to the session, one of the facilitators should
explain to the last arrivals that the group is already full, provide them with the full reimbursement (if
there is one), offer refreshments (if applicable), and thank them for coming (Mack, et. al., 2005). If a
participant is especially disappointed at not being able to participate in the focus group, the facilitator
can try to schedule him or her for another group or for an individual interview, if feasible.
 How do I recruit people for the focus group?
Recruiting participants is often a challenge for a variety of reasons, including the often delicate nature
of working with vulnerable populations; possible stigmatization of participants resulting from
affiliation with the study; the high mobility of some populations; participants’ concerns about
confidentiality; and misinformation, lack of information, fear, or rumors about the study. The work
plan for each site should outline policies and strategies for recruiting participants. However, it is
common for realities in the field to necessitate creative revision of these strategies. When developing a
recruitment strategy, it can be helpful to consult with local people who are active in or have
connections to the study population (Mack, et. al., 2005). They may be able to offer ideas about how
to gain access to the population, how best to approach people, and possible obstacles to recruitment.
 How do I identify individual participants in my notes?
In most cases you should identify individual participants by some convention other than their real
names. Once all participants have arrived, assign them each a number, letter, or pseudonym and
provide them with the materials to display their “nametag” clearly. Both the moderator and note-taker
should draw a seating chart and label it (Mack, et. al., 2005). This will be of benefit as you take notes
during the focus group and expand them later. The sample seating chart on page 70 uses numbers to
identify participants.
 Where should I conduct the focus group?
Whenever possible, focus groups should be conducted in a location affording a maximum degree of
privacy to participants (Mack, et. al., 2005). This decision should be made by someone who is
familiar with the local area and cultural context.
 How should I present myself to focus group participants?
Dress is an important part of making a good impression on participants, as are initial remarks, manner
of speaking, and body language. All of these should be appropriate for the specific culture and setting
and convey respect for the participants (Mack, et. al., 2005). Cell phones should be turned off and
placed out of view so as not to imply that the participants’ testimony is of secondary importance.
Page 29

 How long should the focus group last?
Focus group sessions usually last from one to two hours and should include time for participants to
take a break. If possible, they should be scheduled no closer than 90 minutes apart to allow time for
each staff member to take a break, participate in a debriefing session, and prepare for the next focus
group. As you begin the focus group, consider how much time you are likely to have and set realistic
goals for covering all of the questions in the focus group guide. Keep track of which questions have
been addressed, and be ready to redirect the conversation if necessary in order to cover all questions. It
is a good idea to record the start and end times of each focus group (Mack, et. al., 2005).
 What if a participant does not stay for the entire discussion?
Participation in focus groups is always voluntary. Participants who do not want to remain for the
duration of the discussion, for any reason, should be reminded of the confidentiality agreement,
thanked for their participation, and reimbursed, if applicable. In such a situation, the note-taker can
take the participant aside to handle departure, and the moderator can take notes until the note-taker
returns.
 How to Be an Effective Moderator?
The moderator is responsible for moving the discussion of each focus group along and for keeping it
on topic. A good moderator should be skilled at creating a discussion in which he or she participates
very little. In this regard, the moderator should stress the value of participants’ contributions to the
study and emphasize the moderator’s own role as a learner rather than a teacher. Moderators also need
to be adept at directing the discussion at a pace that allows all questions in the guide to be addressed
thoroughly (Mack, et. al., 2005). Having these skills depends on your familiarity with the focus group
guide, flexibility, ability to monitor and gauge the tone of the discussion, and ability to make quick
judgments about when and how to interject.
 How do I prepare for a focus group?
An effective focus group facilitator knows the research material well and is practiced in the method.
As a first step in preparing for a focus group, become thoroughly familiar with the informed consent
documents. Although you will read the form to participants, you should also be able to explain its
contents in your own words. Be prepared to address any questions participants may have about the
content of the consent form, the terminology used, whom to contact for further information, the
purpose of the research, and so on (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Next, the moderator should become thoroughly familiar with the focus group guide. Being familiar
with the guide allows the moderator to be more engaged during the discussion, to adhere to the guide
more easily should the conversation begin to deviate from the questions, and to focus on encouraging
Page 30

equal participation from group members rather than on locating the questions in the guide. It is
important to understand the purpose behind each question and how it fits within the overall research
aim (Mack, et. al., 2005). It may be necessary to rephrase questions that are unclear to participants, or
to spontaneously think of follow-up questions and probes. You should be able to recognize when
participants have adequately addressed the intent of the question, when a response or responses
contain information that applies to a separate question or to a scripted follow-up question, and when or
which probes are needed to elicit additional information from individuals or from the group as a
whole. Being familiar with the guide also enables you to use it flexibly, taking advantage of natural
shifts in the discussion. It is advisable to review the focus group guide before every session. If multiple
versions of a guide have been developed, make sure you are using the correct version.
Encouragement of positive group dynamics
Efforts by the moderator to cultivate a positive atmosphere for the focus group can foster a productive
and rewarding discussion that is rich in data. Ideally, participants will express a wide range of
perspectives and some points of disagreement, controversy, or debate, rather than consensus (Mack, et.
al., 2005). Of course, participants may all agree on a given issue, but you should make certain that this
is the case by encouraging participation of all those in attendance. A crucial skill for moderating a
productive focus group is the ability to build rapport with and among participants from the start of the
discussion. This involves quickly establishing a positive, relaxed, and mutually respectful group
dynamic (Mack, et. al., 2005). If participants do not feel comfortable expressing personal opinions
and experiences during the discussion, the focus group will not achieve its objectives. Specific
techniques for building positive rapport are culturally specific; words and behaviors that would put
someone of one culture at ease may be offensive in another. Therefore, if you are unfamiliar with the
context, it is a good idea to ask colleagues who have qualitative research experience in the local
culture for ideas about establishing rapport. Table given as below outlines some suggestions for
establishing and maintaining good rapport in any culture, and suggests some ground rules that can help
ensure that the focus group goes smoothly (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Behavioral techniques for building rapport in focus groups
Fostering a relaxed, positive Establishing mutual respect among researchers and group
atmosphere members
 Be friendly Smile  Set ground rules at the beginning of the focus group
 Make eye contact with participants  Have a humble attitude
(if culturally appropriate)  Do not be patronizing, for example, by unnecessarily repeating
 Speak in a pleasant tone of voice everything participants say or “talking down” to them
 Use relaxed body language  Do not scold or berate participants for the content of their responses or
Page 31

 Incorporate humor where for personal characteristics
appropriate  Do not allow any participants to berate others in the group
 Be patient and do not rush  Do not coerce or cajole participants into responding to a question or
participants to respond responding in a certain way
Tips for taking focus group notes (Mack, et. al., 2005):
 Create a form on which to write your notes. If a note-taking form is not provided, creating
one can help you organize your notes during the session and make it easier to expand your
notes. For example, you might have several columns – one to identify the speaker, another to
write quotes or the main idea of what a speaker said, and another in which to write your
observations. Begin each notebook entry with the date, time, place, and type of data collection
event, and either leave space on the page for expanding your notes, or plan to expand them on
a separate page.
 Take notes strategically. It is usually practical to make only brief notes during data collection.
Direct quotes can be especially hard to write down accurately. Rather than try to document
every detail or quote, write down key words and phrases that will trigger your memory when
you expand notes. However, remember that your notes will be the only documentation of the
session if the recording fails or is faulty. Try to capture the content of all essential verbal
contributions, and when possible, to document especially representative quotes word- for-
word.
 Record participant identifiers. It can be a great help during later transcription if you note the
identifier of each participant as they speak. The moderator can make this easier for you by
asking participants to say their identifier before making a contribution.
 Use shorthand. Because you will expand and type your notes soon after you write them, it
does not matter if you are the only person who can understand your shorthand system. Use
abbreviations and acronyms to quickly note what is happening and being said.
 Record both the question and the response. If the question or probe comes from a focus
group question guide, save time by noting the question number. If it is not possible to record
direct quotations, write down key words and phrases.
 Distinguish clearly between participant comments and your own observations. You could
use your own initials or “MO” to indicate “my observation.” For example: “MO – embarrassed
by empty beer bottles in room.” This documents the researcher’s observation that the
participant seemed embarrassed about the empty beer bottles in the room.
Page 32

 Cover a range of observations. In addition to documenting what people say, note as well as
you can their body language, moods, or attitudes; the general environment; and other
information that could be relevant.
How to Be an Effective Note-taker
Note-takers play just as important a role in focus groups as moderators. Their efforts, focused largely
on documentation, are essential in providing a record that can be used for immediate review of the
focus group data, improvement of the focus group guide, and improvement of the facilitator’s skills.
Ideally, note-takers should have the versatility to conduct the focus group in the moderator’s stead
should the need arise, but their expertise draws for the most part on a different set of skills (Mack, et.
al., 2005). These skills include mastery of an efficient system for taking copious notes and the ability
to quickly identify and take down individual quotes that capture the spirit of a given point. Effective
note-takers should also be careful observers of verbal and nonverbal behaviors and be discreet about
note-taking as they operate the recording equipment. They should be able to synthesize their
observations to serve as the basis for immediate discussion following each focus group session.
Gaining proficiency in these areas rests on preparation for the focus group, developing effective note-
taking techniques, and learning how to lead a productive debriefing session (Mack, et. al., 2005).
9.2. Participant observation
Participant observation is a qualitative method with roots in traditional ethnographic research, whose
objective is to help researchers learn the perspectives held by study populations. As qualitative
researchers, we presume that there will be multiple perspectives within any given community. We are
interested both in knowing what those diverse perspectives are and in understanding the interplay
among them (Jorgensen, 1989).
Qualitative researchers accomplish this through observation alone or by both observing and
participating, to varying degrees, in the study community’s daily activities. Participant observation
always takes place in community settings, in locations believed to have some relevance to the research
questions. The method is distinctive because the researcher approaches participants in their own
environment rather than having the participants come to the researcher (Mack, et. al., 2005). Generally
speaking, the researcher engaged in participant observation tries to learn what life is like for an
“insider” while remaining, inevitably, an “outsider.”While in these community settings, researchers
make careful, objective notes about what they see, recording all accounts and observations as field
notes in a field notebook. Informal conversation and interaction with members of the study population
are also important components of the method and should be recorded in the field notes, in as much
Page 33

detail as possible. Information and messages communicated through mass media such as radio or
television may also be pertinent and thus desirable to document (Jorgensen, 1989).
What can we learn from participant observation?
Data obtained through participant observation serve as a check against participants’ subjective
reporting of what they believe and do. Participant observation is also useful for gaining an
understanding of the physical, social, cultural, and economic contexts in which study participants live;
the relationships among and between people, contexts, ideas, norms, and events; and people’s
behaviours and activities – what they do, how frequently, and with whom.
In addition, the method enables researchers to develop a familiarity with the cultural milieu that will
prove invaluable throughout the project. It gives them a nuanced understanding of context that can
come only from personal experience (Jorgensen, 1989). There is no substitute for witnessing or
participating in phenomenon. Through participant observation, researchers can also uncover factors
important for a thorough understanding of the research problem but that were unknown when the study
was designed. This is the great advantage of the method because, although we may get truthful
answers to the research questions we ask, we may not always ask the right questions. Thus, what we
learn from participant observation can help us not only to understand data collected through other
methods (such as interviews, focus groups, and quantitative research methods), but also to design
questions for those methods that will give us the best understanding of the phenomenon being
studied (Mack, et. al., 2005).
What are the disadvantages of participant observation? (Jorgensen, 1989).
 The main disadvantage of participant observation is that it is time-consuming. In traditional
ethnographic research, researchers spend at least one year in the field site collecting data through
participant observation and other methods. This is not practical for most applied research studies,
which necessarily require a shorter period of data collection. This weakness is partially mitigated
in most current international development projects by the tendency for the inquiry to be more
focused than in traditional ethnographic study and for the data collection team to include
researchers who are native rather than foreign to the region. Researchers who already possess a
solid base of cultural awareness are better able to concentrate on the research question itself
(Mack, et. al., 2005).
 A second disadvantage of participant observation is the difficulty of documenting the data – it is
hard to write down everything that is important while you are in the act of participating and
observing. As the researcher, you must therefore rely on your memory and on your own personal
Page 34

 A third disadvantage of participant observation is that it is an inherently subjective exercise,
whereas research requires objectivity. It is therefore important to understand the difference
between reporting and describing what you observe (more objective) versus interpreting what you
see (less objective).
Strengths Weaknesses
 Firsthand experience  Time consuming
 Insight into context, relationships and  Researchers may not have good attending
behaviors and observing skills
 Recording information as it is revealed  Documentation relies on personal
 Useful in exploring topic that may be description and diligence of researcher
uncomfortable for participants  Problem in gaining rapport
Practical consideration of participant observation in the language of (Mack, et. al.,

2005).
 How much should I disclose about who I am and what I am doing?
When conducting participant observation, you should be discreet enough about who you are and what
you are doing that you do not disrupt normal activity, yet open enough that the people you observe and
interact with do not feel that your presence compromises their privacy. In many situations, there is no
reason to announce your arrival at the scene; in many others, however, it is essential that you openly
state your identity and purpose (Mack, et. al., 2005). You should always alert relevant gatekeepers
(community members in positions of official or unofficial authority) as to your presence and purpose.
You should never be secretive or deliberately misleading about the research project or your role in it.
If someone asks directly what you are doing, always provide a truthful response, using your judgment
to gauge how exactly to handle a given situation. Be open, polite, and cognizant of your position as a
guest or outsider (Jorgensen, 1989).
There are no formal rules about disclosing your involvement in a research project while in casual
conversation with community members, but it is usually advisable to do so. If you are at a bar, for
example, you might spend a significant amount of time chatting with other people there. If someone
begins talking to you about a topic related to the research, you might still continue to talk casually for
Page 35

a while. If it gets to the point where you want to ask specific questions and direct the conversation
(Mack, et. al., 2005). However, then you should reveal your mission. Also, do not neglect to inform
the person or persons of their right to refuse further discussion and of your commitment to
confidentiality if they decide to continue talking with you.
 How do I maintain confidentiality during participant observation?
As with all qualitative methods, researchers involved in participant observation must make a personal
commitment to protect the identities of the people they observe or with whom they interact, even if
informally. Maintaining confidentiality means ensuring that particular individuals can never be linked
to the data they provide. This means that you must not record identifying information such as names
and addresses of people you meet during participant observation. If it becomes necessary to get such
information – for example, if the person wants you to telephone him or invites you to his home or
workplace – it should not be included in the field notes that are entered into the computer. Similarly, it
may be reasonable in some instances to record the names and locations of establishments – if, for
example, follow-up observation will be required (Mack, et. al., 2005). These names and locations may
be documented in field notes and shared with other research staff, but they should be coded and
eliminated upon entry of the field notes into the computer, with the code list kept in a separate, secure
computer file with limited access. Sometimes, you may develop informal personal relationships with
key informants. If that hap- pens, be sure that no personal information they give you is ever included
in the actual participant observation data. If you are unsure whether information they provide is
appropriate for your official field notes, ask their permission (Jorgensen, 1989).
Protecting participants’ confidentiality also requires that researchers do not disclose personal
characteristics that could allow others to guess the identities of people who played a role in the
research. This dictates that you take great care not only in entering participant observation data into
field notes but also when talking with other people in the community, whether for research purposes or
otherwise. People may test you to see whether you disclose information by asking questions about
things you may have seen or heard (Mack, et. al., 2005). Your refusal to divulge confidences will
reassure them that you will protect their confidentiality as well. Participant confidentiality must also be
respected during eventual presentation of the data in public dissemination events, as well as in printed
publications.
 How should informed consent be handled for participant observation?
It is not necessary to obtain formal informed consent for participant observation. However, when
talking to people informally about the research and your role in it, it is important to emphasize that
they are not required to talk to you and that there will be no repercussions if they do not (Jorgensen,
1989). If your involvement with an individual appears to be progressing beyond participant
Page 36

observation to a formal interview, it is necessary to obtain informed consent before beginning an in-
depth interview (Mack, et. al., 2005).
 What are my responsibilities as a participant observer?
Researchers conducting participant observation need to be prepared and willing to adapt to a variety of
uncontrolled situations and settings. How much you actively participate in activities versus observe
them depends on the objectives and design of the specific project, on the circum- stances in which you
find yourself, and on your ability to blend in with the study population (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Your specific responsibilities include:
 Observing people as they engage in activities that would probably occur in much the same
way if you were not present
 Engaging to some extent in the activities taking place, either in order to better understand
the local perspective or so as not to call attention to yourself
 Interacting with people socially outside of a controlled research environment, such as at a
bar, public meeting place, bus depot, religious gathering, or market – if casual conversation
gives way to more substantive discussion of the research topic, you would need to disclose
your identity, affiliation, and purpose
 Identifying and developing relationships with key informants, stakeholders, and
gatekeepers
 Is participant observation done individually or as a team?
Participant observation may be done individually, in pairs, and in teams – whichever arrangement is
most appropriate for covering the locations and topics at issue. Factors often considered in determining
the appropriate arrangement include the age, gender, physical appearance, ethnicity, personality, and
linguistic abilities of different data collectors. The objective should be to gather data in the least
obtrusive and most efficient manner possible, in light of the specific population and context. One way
to do participant observation is for members of a team to disperse to different locations individually, or
in pairs or groups, to spend time doing focused observation to address particular questions (Mack, et.
al., 2005).
They can then reconvene to compare notes. From these notes, they can construct a more complete
picture of the issues being studied. They might then create a map indicating places where some
activity of interest was observed or where certain types of people go at different times of the day or
week.
Page 37

 Where should I do participant observation?
Where you should go to do participant observation depends on the research goals. Generally, you
should try to go where people in the study population often go in their daily lives, and if appropriate,
engage in the activity of interest. A key informant could tell you where those places are. For example,
you might go where people in the study population seek medical care, socialize, eat, or shop. You
could visit places where high-risk sexual activities are negotiated, such as discotheques or bars.
Another option is to attend organized events such as religious services, municipal activities, and public
information sessions. In team-based research, data collectors could decide to distribute themselves
among observation sites that best match their ages and genders.
 When should I do participant observation?
Participant observation is often done at the beginning of the data collection phase, but the method is
also sometimes revisited later to address questions suggested by data collected using other methods.
The best time to schedule participant observation sessions depends on what, whom, and where you
need to observe. You may need to set up specific times based on when the particular activity takes
place, such as on the day a weekly women’s health clinic is scheduled at a local health facility. There
might be specific times of day when an activity usually occurs, as at bars or public parks (Jorgensen,
1989). It may also be important to observe the same population in several different locations and at
different times. Less structured, unscheduled participant observation may occur any time you are
moving about the community and interacting with people. For example, you might talk to people at a
bus stop while you, too, are waiting for a bus, or observe interactions between people at a market
while you are doing your own shopping. You may wish to carry your notebook and a pen so that you
can take advantage of spontaneous opportunities without relying completely on memory (Mack, et. al.,
2005).
 How long does participant observation take?
The specific duration of participant observation depends on the setting, activity, and population of
interest (Mack, et. al., 2005). For example, the researcher might spend an hour, an afternoon, or a
series of afternoons in a particular setting.
 How do I document what I learn during participant observation?
Documentation of participant observation data consists of field notes recorded in field notebooks.
These data are records of what you experienced, what you learned through interaction with other
people, and what you observed. Field notes should include an account of events, how people behaved
and reacted, what was said in conversation, where people were positioned in relationship to one
another, their comings and goings, physical gestures, your subjective responses to what you observed,
Page 38

and all other details and observations necessary to make the story of the participant observation
experience complete. Field notes may be written either discreetly during participant observation or
following the activity, depending on where you go and how much you participate (Mack, et. al., 2005).
Whatever the case, notes should be expanded as soon as possible before your memory of the details
fades. Audio and video recordings of participant observation are generally not permissible in applied
public health or international development research activities because of ethical requirements for
obtaining informed consent.
 What should I do with my field notes?
As soon as possible after collecting participant observation data, you should expand whatever notes
you were able to make into a descriptive narrative. If you plan to do participant observation late in the
evening, make sure that you will have time the next morning to expand your notes. You will not have
been able to write down everything that transpired and that you observed, and maybe not anything at
all, if you were participating quite actively (Jorgensen, 1989). Alternatively, rather than expanding
your notes, you might be asked to share your notes with other members of the research team to
produce a joint product, such as an ethnographic map of an area. Once you have expanded your notes,
either you or a typist hired for the project will need to type your field notes into a computer file (Mack,
et. al., 2005). The notebook and hard copy of the typed data should then be stored in a secure location
(along with maps and any other products of participant observation) for procedures related to
computer files and data security.
 How do I prepare for participant observation?
First, know what the research is about. A thorough understanding of the study will help you stay
focused during participant observation. Once you have a clear idea of what the research is about, you
can determine specific objectives for the participant observation activity. It may be useful to create a
list of things to pay attention to, and either write it in your field notebook or keep it in your pocket for
quick reference (Jorgensen, 1989). Note, however, that it is most important to keep your eyes open for
scenarios you had not expected to encounter, which may suggest new directions for the research. In
preparing for the participant observation activity, it is useful to find out as much as you can about the
site where you will be participating or observing and about any activities in which you might
participate. If necessary, visit the scene and make initial observations before you set up your official
data collection time (Mack, et. al., 2005). Also, take some time to rehearse how you will describe or
explain yourself and your purpose, if necessary. Similarly, establish in advance your own personal
shorthand conventions – that is, how you will indicate and abbreviate the words and concepts you are
likely to use in your note- taking. Know how you will separate your objective observations from your
Page 39

interpretations; how you will indicate men, women, and children, and their ages; and so forth
(Jorgensen, 1989).
 How should I behave during participant observation?
The most important behavioural principle in participant observation is to be discreet. Try not to stand
out or to affect the natural flow of activity. One way to do this is to behave in a way similar to the
people around you, such as praying in a religious setting or drinking in a bar. It also helps to be aware
of local meanings for particular body language (positions and gestures, for example) and tones of
voice, as well as what types of physical and eye contact are locally appropriate in different situations
(Mack, et. al., 2005). Field staff engaged in participant observation always needs to use good judgment
in determining whether to participate in certain types of activities. You should not engage in illegal or
sexual activities with study participants, for example. You should exercise caution about the amount of
alcohol you consume in a social setting. It may be socially appropriate to buy a beer for someone or to
accept their offer to buy you one, but it may not be necessary to actually consume alcohol in any
quantity.
 What should I document?
Simply put, document what you observe, taking care to distinguish it from both your expectations and
your interpretation of what you observe. It is important to document what is actually taking place
rather than what you were expecting to see and to not let your expectations affect your observations.
The purpose of participant observation is partly to confirm what you already know (or think you
know) but is mostly to discover unanticipated truths. It is an exercise of discovery (Mack, et. al.,
2005).
Tips for taking Field Notes (Mack, et. al., (2005):
 Begin each notebook entry with the date, time, place, and type of data collection event. Leave
space on the page for expanding your notes, or plan to expand them on a separate page. (See
the section above on “How do I expand my notes?”).
 Take notes strategically. It is usually practical to make only brief notes during data collection.
Direct quotes can be especially hard to write down accurately. Rather than try to document
every detail or quote, write down key words and phrases that will trigger your memory when
you expand notes.
 Use shorthand. Because you will expand and type your notes soon after you write them, it
does not matter if you are the only person who can understand your shorthand system. Use
abbreviations and acronyms to quickly note what is happening and being said.
Page 40

 Cover a range of observations. In addition to documenting events and informal
conversations, note people’s body language, moods, or attitudes; the general environment;
interactions among participants; ambiance; and other information that could be relevant.
 Identifying questions for follow-up. Write down questions about participant responses that
need further consideration or follow-up, issues to pursue, new information, etc. This continual
adjustment of the research questions and techniques is part of the iterative nature of qualitative
research. Reviewing your expanded notes and adding any final comments. If you have not
typed your expanded notes directly into a computer file, add any additional comments on the
same page or on a separate page. If you use additional pages, be sure to clearly cross-reference
new notes with the original pages in case another staff member types your notes (Mack, et. al.,
2005).
What to observe during participant observation?
Category Includes Researchers should note
Appearance Clothing, age, gender, physical Anything that might indicate membership in groups or in sub-
appearance populations of interest to the study, such as profession, social
status, socioeconomic class, religion, or ethnicity
Verbal behavior and Who speaks to whom and for Gender, age, ethnicity, and profession of speakers; dynamics
interactions how long; who initiates of interaction
interaction; languages or dialects
spoken; tone of voices
Physical behavior and What people do, who does, How people use their bodies and voices to communicate
gestures what, who interacts with whom, different emotions; what individuals’ behaviors indicate about
who is not interacting their feelings toward one another, their social rank, or their
profession.
Personal space How close people stand to one What individuals’ preferences concerning personal space
another suggest about their relationships
Human traffic People who enter, leave, and Where people enter and exit; how long they stay; who they are
spend time at the observation (ethnicity, age, gender); whether they are alone or
sites accompanied; number of people
Participant Observation Steps (Mack, et. al., 2005)
 Preparing for Participant Observation

 Determine the purpose of the participant observation activity as related to the overall
research objectives.
Page 41

 Determine the population(s) to be observed.
 Consider the accessibility of the population(s) and the venues in which you would like to
observe them.
 Investigate possible sites for participant observation.
 Select the site(s), time(s) of day, and date(s), and anticipate how long you will collect
participant observation data on each occasion.
 Decide how field staff will divide up or pair off to cover all sites most effectively.
 Consider how you will present yourself, both in terms of appearance and how you will
explain your purpose to others if necessary.
 Plan how and if you will take notes during the participant observation activity.
 Remember to take your field notebook and a pen.
 After Participant Observation
 Schedule time soon after participant observation to expand your notes.
 Type your notes into computer files using the standard format set for the study.
Comparative chart of methods of data collection
List of Define (what) Objective (why) Limitations

methods
In which researcher take  Used to get firsthand  Time consuming

notes on the behavior and experience  Researchers may not have good
Participant observation
activities of individuals at  Insight into context, attending and observing skills

the research site. relationships and behaviors  Documentation relies on personal
 Recording information as it is description and diligence of
revealed researcher
 Useful in exploring topic that  Problem in gaining rapport
may be uncomfortable for
participants
It is a form of data  For capturing information  Not good for acquiring
collection method in which about social norms information on highly personal
Focus group
one or two researchers and  Yield large amount of and socially sensitive issue.
several participants meet as information over short time  The researcher may have less
a group to discuss a given  Individuals will often argue control over proceedings.
topic. each other’s view  The data may be difficult to
 Allow researcher to develop analyze and organize.
Page 42

understanding about feelings  Recordings are time consuming
of people
Document analysis is a form  Develop a rich understanding  Difficulty in gaining access to

of qualitative research in of the phenomenon. variety of documents.
Document analysis
which documents are  Capture those data which may  Familiarizing oneself with these
interpreted by the researcher not disclose in interviews and types of documents may be time
to give voice and meaning focus groups. consuming.
around an assessment topic.  Help to produce large amount
. of valuable background and
contextual information to
strengthen findings.
9.3. Document analysis

Document analysis is a form of qualitative research in which documents are interpreted by the
researcher to give voice and meaning around an assessment topic. Analyzing documents incorporates
coding content into themes similar to how focus group or interview transcripts are analyzed (Mack, et.
al., 2005). A rubric can also be used to grade or score a document.
Document analysis is a social research method and is an important research tool in its own right and is
an invaluable part of most schemes of triangulation (Jain and Zhong, 1996). Documentary work
involves reading lots of written material (it helps to scan the documents onto a computer and use a
qualitative analysis package) (Mack, et. al., 2005). A document is something that we can read and
which relates to some aspect of the social world. Official documents are intended to be read as
objective statements of fact but they are themselves socially produced. A wide variety of written
materials may serve as a valuable source of data (Jain and Zhong, 1996).
There are three primary types of documents:
 Public document: The official, ongoing records of an organization’s activities. Examples
include student transcripts, mission statements, annual reports, policy manuals, student
handbooks, strategic plans, and syllabi.
Page 43

 Personal documents: First-person accounts of an individual’s actions, experiences, and beliefs.
Examples include calendars, e-mails, scrapbooks, blogs, Face book posts, duty logs, incident
reports, reflections/journals, and newspapers.
 Audio-visual material: it is that type of documents which are available in recording or
audible form or must be in visualary form such as photographs, video-tapes, art objects and
films.
 Organizational document: any documents related to the organizational affairs and matters
such as newsletter, organizational charts, consultancy reports, manuals for organizational
policies i.e. Recruitment, training and development and company regulations.
Strengths and limitations of documents
Strengths Limitations
 Develop a rich understanding of the phenomenon.  Difficulty in gaining access to

variety of documents.
 Capture those data which may not disclose in  Familiarizing oneself with these
interviews and focus groups. types of documents may be time
 Help to produce large amount of valuable consuming.
background and contextual information to
strengthen findings.
(Mack, et. al., 2005).
Criteria for assessing quality document (Mack, et. al., 2005).
 Authenticity: “Authentic” means authoritative, reliable, trustworthy, real, pure, true, or
genuine. It includes;
 Genuine: (of a thing) authentic or real; something that has the quality of what it is
purported to be or to; (of an instrument) free of forgery or counterfeiting. Proven of an
original when it was written, printed, executed, or signed as it claims to have been
 Proven of a copy when it is a true copy of the original.
 True Copy: A copy of a legal document exactly the same as the original with notations,
court stamps, signatures of parties and the court registrar, insertions and corrections written
in the copy within quotation marks.
 Proven of the copy of a letter, telecommunication, or telegram when the original was sent
as claimed and received by the addressee.
Page 44

 A document is considered “authentic” if the sponsoring witness vouches for its authenticity
or if the document meets requirements of self authentication.
 Self-authentication: Authentication without extrinsic evidence of truth or genuineness.
 Credibility: Credibility refers to the objective and subjective components of the believability
of a source or message. It includes the question that is the document free from error or
distortion? (Jain and Zhong, 1996).
 Representativeness: Can the documents available be said to constitute a representative sample
of the documents that originally existed? (Jain and Zhong, 1996).
 Meaning: What is the surface meaning? Is there a deeper/semiotic meaning?
Reasons for using document analysis
Document analysis is a useful method to investigate:
 Decision making and strategic planning
 Resource allocation
 Outcomes alignment and library policy
Advantages of document analysis
The main advantages of document analysis are:
 It overcomes the difficulties of encouraging participation by users
 There are few costs involved other than staff time.
Disadvantages of document analysis
The main disadvantages of document analysis are:
 It is not suitable to evaluate user opinions, needs or satisfaction with services
 Some documents may be sensitive and not publicly available.
9.3.1. How to interpret documents qualitatively?

9.3.1.1. Content Analysis: It is most common approach to qualitative analysis of
documents. It involves searching out of under-lying themes in the material being analyzed.
Content analysis is like a social survey but uses a sample of images rather than people (Lincoln
and Guba, 1985).
 Choose a question which can be measured with variables and use a coding scheme to
capture them.
 Make a sampling frame, choosing the cases to analyse that are representative and unbiased.
To get a sampling frame, search for relevant cases in contemporary or historical archives.
The sample has to be representative, yet small enough for analyzing in depth. Very often
you are counting words - e.g. how many times does the word 'hooligan' appear in articles
Page 45

sensationalising the reporting of disturbances at football matches? (Miles and Huberman,
1994)
 Code all the cases and analyze the resulting data.
 Produce semi-quantitative results using cross-tabulations, charts or graphs and where there are
few cases, use tables.
 Report in a standard 'scientific' format.
Miles and Huberman (1994) identified that content analysis is formal and systematic. It lends structure
to your research. Variables are categorised in a precise manner so you can count them. However,
content analysis ignores context and multiple meanings. As an evaluation approach, content analysis is
considered by some to be quasi-evaluation because content analysis judgements need not be based
on value statements if the research objective is aimed at presenting subjective experiences. Thus, they
can be based on knowledge of everyday lived experiences. Such content analyses are not evaluations
(Lincoln and Guba, 1985). On the other hand, when content analysis judgements are based on values,
such studies are evaluations.
Uses of content analysis
Holsti groups fifteen uses of content analysis into three basic categories (Lincoln and Guba, 1985):
 Make inferences about the antecedents of a communication
 Describe and make inferences about characteristics of a communication
 Make inferences about the effects of a communication.
9.3.1.2. Semiotics: It refers to as ‘science of signs’. It is approach to analyze symbols in
everyday life and as such can be employed in relation not only to documentary sources but to all kinds
of other data. It is because of its commitment to treating phenomenon as texts (Stam 2000, 216-217).
Semiotics is a science that studies the life of signs in society. It is the opposite to the positivist method
of content analysis. It is used a lot in media analysis. In semiotics, the analyst seeks to connect
the signifier (an expression which can be words, a picture or sound) with what is signified (another
word, description or image) (Nichols 1981:19). The use of language is noted as it is considered to be a
description of actions. As part of language, certain signs match up with certain meanings. Semiotics
seeks to understand the underlining messages in visual texts. It is related to discourse analysis and
forms the basis for interpretive analysis (Stam 2000, 216-217).
Semiotics is a discipline, in which culture, society and natural phenomena are explored as signs. The
fundamental question in semiotics is how meanings are formed. Semiotic research approaches signs
as existing in various forms: pictures, words, letters, objects, natural objects, gestures, phenomena and
actions a telephoto or wide-angle lens is used (Nichols 1981:19). Semiotics explores the content of
Page 46

signs, their use and the formation of meanings of signs at both the level of a single sign and the
broader systems and structures formed by signs. Semiotics as a discipline includes several
distinguished traditions, each using its own terminology and concepts. Stam (2000, 216-217) opined
that Semiotics is the study of signs and sign processes (symbiosis), indication, designation,
likeness, analogy, metaphor, symbolism, signification, and communication. Semiotics is closely
related to the field of linguistics, which, for its part, studies the structure and meaning
of language more specifically. However, as different from linguistics, semiotics also studies non-
linguistic sign. Semiotics is often divided into three branches:
 Semantics: Relation between signs and the things to which they refer; their detonate,
or meaning
 Syntactic: Relations among signs in formal structures
 Pragmatics: Relation between signs and sign-using agents
Applications of semiotics include (Nichols 1981:19):
 It represents a methodology for the analysis of texts regardless of the medium in which it is
presented. For these purposes, "text" is any message preserved in a form whose existence is
independent of both sender and receiver;
 It can improve ergonomic design in situations where it is important to ensure that human
beings can interact more effectively with their environments, whether it be on a large scale, as
in architecture, or on a small scale, such as the configuration of instrumentation for human use.
What’s it useful for? (Stam 2000, 216-217).
 Clearly, cross cultural work
 Understanding categories, brand positioning and communications; your own and
competitors.
 Analyzing communications – ensuring they are relevant and up to date
 Preceding qualitative to create hypotheses and following qual, to explain findings
 Visioning the future, looking at what is emergent and finding territories a brand can own
 Deep dives into popular culture
9.3.1.3 Hermeneutics: It refers to an approach devised particularly to the understanding or
interpretation of texts and of the logical texts in particular. The analyst must play attention to the
social and historical context within which the text was produced (Forster, 2006).
Byrne (1996) explained that it is the theory of text interpretation, especially the interpretation of
biblical texts, wisdom literature, and philosophical texts. The terms hermeneutics and exegesis are
sometimes used interchangeably. Hermeneutics is a wider discipline that includes written, verbal, and
Page 47

nonverbal communication. Exegesis focuses primarily upon texts. Hermeneutic as a singular noun
refers to a single particular method or strand of interpretation. To define a concept such as
hermeneutics within the parameters of a perspective built upon the foundation of multiple
perspectives, intersexuality, contextuality, and situativity, seems to be a contradiction. There is not
one way of defining this term. Therefore, in the spirit of what I have found hermeneutics to mean, I
have decided to look not only at several brands of hermeneutics in the field qualitative research, but to
examine the historical development of the term (Forster, 2006). For if to return to the “things
themselves are to return to that world which precedes knowledge” (Merleau-Ponty, 1962), then to
define the term “hermeneutics” without looking at the evolution of its meaning across history would
be to devalue the very essence of this concept's being. Hermeneutics was “derived from the Greek
verb, hermeneueuein, “to interpret” and from the noun, Herminie, or “Inerpretation” (Bryne, 1996).
Within the field of qualitative research this term still holds the connotation of “interpretation”.
However, the depth and type of interpretation, and the object under interpretation has changed
throughout history. Today, within the sphere of qualitative methods, the word hermeneutics seems to
be interchangeable with the term phenomenology (Byrne, 1996). They are linked closely, but they in
fact do have different implications to qualitative researchers. Both phenomenology and hermeneutics
are modes of analysis used by qualitative researchers to interpret data (Myers). The two modes share
the underlying assumption that interpretation of a text, or of an artifact, should be approached from a
multi-perspective vantage point.
In conclusion, hermeneutics in the field of qualitative research seems to be a mode of analysis used to
interpret artifacts. I have described several ways this term has been conceived throughout history.
Although each of the perspectives on hermeneutics imply differences, I think that the application of
any of these views rests on the same basic assumption; that is, one should consider many perspectives
in order to provide the most accurate frame of understanding for the object under study (Forster,
2006). The scope and type of perspective may bear differences; however, the core of hermeneutics
rests on the premise of varied interpretations. Of course, this is all just my interpretation.
9.3.1.4. Discourse Analysis: Hyland (2000) concerned with the production of meaning through
talk and texts. Language is viewed as the topic of the research and how people use language to
construct their accounts of the social world is important. It is an approach to language that can be
applied to forms of communication other than talk. It can be applied to other types of texts such as
company mission statement, websites, emails etc. Discourse studies, is a general term for a number
of approaches to analyzing written, vocal, or sign language use or any significant semiotic event.
Schäffner (2002) discussed that the objects of discourse analysis, discourse writing, conversation,
communicative event are variously defined in terms of coherent sequences of
Page 48

sentences, propositions, speech prefer to analyze 'naturally occurring' language use, and not invented
examples. Discourse Analysis can be characterized as a way of approaching and thinking about a
problem (Hyland, 2000). In this sense, Discourse Analysis is neither a qualitative nor a quantitative
research method, but a manner of questioning the basic assumptions of quantitative and qualitative
research methods. Discourse Analysis does not provide a tangible answer to problems based on
scientific research, but it enables access to the ontological and epistemological assumptions behind a
project, a statement, a method of research, or - to provide an example from the field of Library and
Information Science - a system of classification. In other words, Discourse Analysis will enable to
reveal the hidden motivations behind a text or behind the choice of a particular method of research to
interpret that text (Hyland, 2000). Expressed in today's more trendy vocabulary, Critical or Discourse
Analysis is nothing more than a deconstructive reading and interpretation of a problem or text (while
keeping in mind that postmodern theories conceive of every interpretation of reality and, therefore, of
reality itself as a text. Every text is conditioned and inscribes itself within a given discourse, thus the
term Discourse Analysis). Discourse Analysis will, thus, not provide absolute answers to a specific
problem, but enable us to understand the conditions behind a specific "problem" and make us realize
that the essence of that "problem", and its resolution, lie in its assumptions; the very assumptions that
enable the existence of that "problem" (Schäffner, 2002). By enabling us to make this assumption
explicit, Discourse Analysis aims at allowing us to view the "problem" from a higher stance and to
gain a comprehensive view of the "problem" and ourselves in relation to that "problem". Discourse
Analysis is meant to provide a higher awareness of the hidden motivations in others and ourselves
and, therefore, enable us to solve concrete problems - not by providing unequivocal answers, but by
making us ask ontological and epistemological questions.
Uses of Discourse Analysis
The contribution of the postmodern Discourse Analysis is the application of critical thought to social
situations and the unveiling of hidden (or not so hidden) politics within the socially dominant as well
as all other discourses (interpretations of the world, belief systems, etc.) (Stubbs, 2001). Discourse
Analysis can be applied to any text, that is, to any problem or situation. Since Discourse Analysis is
basically an interpretative and deconstructing reading, there are no specific guidelines to follow. One
could, however, make use of the theories of Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Julia Kristeva, or
Fredric Jameson, as well as of other critical and postmodern thinkers (Schäffner, 2002).. Again, the
purpose of Discourse Analysis is not to provide definite answers, but to expand our personal horizons
and make us realize our own shortcomings and unacknowledged agendas/motivations - as well as that
of others. In short, critical analysis reveals what is going on behind our backs and those of others and
which determines our actions.
Page 49

For example, Discourse Analysis applied to the theory of Library Science, would not argue for or
against the validity and "truth" of a certain research method (qualitative or quantitative), statement, or
value (i.e. the Library Bill of Rights, or policies concerning free speech) (Hyland, 2000). Rather,
discourse analysis would focus on the existence and message of these texts and locate them within a
historical and social context (see Bernd Frohmann's article "The Power of Images: A Discourse
Analysis of the Cognitive Viewpoint" below) (Stubbs, 2001). In this manner, Discourse Analysis aims
at revealing the motivation and politics involved in the arguing for or against a specific research
method, statement, or value. The concrete result will be the awareness to the qualities and
shortcomings of each and the inception of an informed debate. Though this debate will never be
settled, it allows for the correction of bias and the inclusion of minorities within the debate and
analyzed discourse (Schäffner, 2002).
Advantages and Disadvantages of discourse analysis
Discourse Analysis and critical thinking is applicable to every situation and every subject. The new
perspective provided by discourse analysis allows personal growth and a high level of creative
fulfilment (Stubbs, 2001). No technology or funds are necessary and authoritative discourse analysis
can lead to fundamental changes in the practices of an institution, the profession, and society as a
whole. However, Discourse Analysis does not provide definite answers; it is not a "hard" science, but
an insight/knowledge based on continuous debate and argumentation (Schäffner, 2002).
Page 50

Doing Qualitative Research Handouts

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Doing Qualitative Research Handouts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handouts of Qualitative Research

Doing Qualitative Research

Course Facilitator: Muqqadas Rehman

 Explores a central phenomenon (one key concept)

Sr. Philosophical Positivism Interpretivism Pragmatism

4. Approaches/Traditions of qualitative research

Type of Defining Features Data Collection Implications

5. Evaluating Quality of Qualitative Research:

6. Ethics in Qualitative Research

8. Primary qualitative sampling techniques

9. Qualitative research data collection methods

 What form do focus group data take?

 Firsthand experience  Time consuming

 Recording information as it is revealed  Documentation relies on personal

 Useful in exploring topic that may be description and diligence of researcher

uncomfortable for participants  Problem in gaining rapport

Practical consideration of participant observation in the language of (Mack, et. al.,

Category Includes Researchers should note

Participant Observation Steps (Mack, et. al., 2005)

 Preparing for Participant Observation

Comparative chart of methods of data collection

List of Define (what) Objective (why) Limitations

In which researcher take  Used to get firsthand  Time consuming

activities of individuals at  Insight into context, attending and observing skills

Document analysis is a form  Develop a rich understanding  Difficulty in gaining access to

9.3. Document analysis

 Develop a rich understanding of the phenomenon.  Difficulty in gaining access to

9.3.1. How to interpret documents qualitatively?

You might also like