Principles of Qualitative Research Methodology - Essay Example

What are the principles of qualitative research methodology? Introduction Qualitative research refers to a mode of systematic empirical inquiry into meaning centering on the nature of human experiences in relation to phenomena. Qualitative researchers try to unearth and understand the world around them through inquiry. In most cases, this data mainly relate to the social world and the concepts and behaviour found therein. Qualitative research is a mode of “inquiry from the inside” and seeks the “why” rather than the “how” of its topic via the analysis of unstructured information. Qualitative research mainly pursues to attain insights dwelling on people’s attitudes, behaviours, value systems, culture, or lifestyle, among other aspects. In qualitative research, the researcher employs inductive mode of reasoning, allowing the data to “speak.” Some of the approaches applied in qualitative research include participant observation, focus groups, in-depth interviews, content analysis, and ethnography. The core mandate of qualitative research is to illuminate social meaning by studying human behaviour and habits. Qualitative research is critical to policy making and planning whereby it avails descriptive information and understanding of the contexts (Golafshani 2003, p. 600). Principles of qualitative research methodology Qualitative research is interpretive; it looks at the micro sociological context. Researchers observe natural objects as well as natural occurrences, which they record and interpret using their own subject knowledge (Silverman 2006, p. 2). The core goal of qualitative research is viewing and exploring phenomena in its natural settings. The researchers must interpret raw data from a qualitative study by taking a small sample and formulating in-depth description of the phenomena. A Focus on Natural Settings Qualitative researchers pursue capturing life in natural situations. Therefore, qualitative researchers do not set up artificial experiments to avoid interrupting the normal course of life. In addition, qualitative researchers make a few assumptions prior to the study. Openness of the mind is critical when conducting qualitative research (Silverman 2006, p. 4). In qualitative research, situations deemed to be useful since they influence behaviour. Qualitative researchers favour comparatively lengthy and profound involvement in the natural setting. This is inspired by the assertion that social life is complex in its range and variability. Social life has multiple layers of meanings and qualitative research suits best to study the dynamic environment. An Interest in Meanings, Perspectives, and Understandings Qualitative researchers seek to unearth the meanings that participants attach to their behaviour and how the subjects interpret situations as well as their perspectives on certain issues. The research methods employed in qualitative research is sensitive to the perspectives of all participants (Silverman 2006, p.5). The methods are mainly geared towards picking up interactions between perspectives and situation in order to evaluate how they bear on each other. The principal focus mainly spotlights understanding people’s outlooks and experiences. Thus, the researchers must be close to the subjects, live with them, and view the world through the subject’s lens. The researchers are able to capture the subjects in various situations and diverse moods, discover their interests, understand their relationships, and appreciate the unpredictability, ambiguities, and negations in behaviour that may arise. Emphasis on Process: Analytical Process Qualitative research employs holistic and flexible research methods that provide descriptions for variations and explain the relationships between the variations. Qualitative research spotlights individual experiences or group norm in the research phenomena. When conducting qualitative research, the researchers observe and note down exactly what they see while creating well-rounded conclusions from their observations (Denzin & Lincoln 2011, p. 6). Qualitative researchers recognize the fact that everyday life is an ever shifting picture; a calm state does not exist. Qualitative research has a strong leaning to process to suit the ever changing subjects of inquiry. Inductive Analysis and Grounded Theory Qualitative researchers do not necessarily start with a theory that they endeavour to test. Mainly, qualitative researchers seek to generate a theory from the data (Strauss & Corbin 1998, p.3). Theorizing in qualitative research is grounded in the data with no need for hypothesis. The main methods employed in qualitative research include observation, interview, and documentary analysis. Constructive Ontology The ontological approach for qualitative research is mainly subjectivism, which means that social entities are considered as social constructions emanating from the perceptions and resultant actions of social actors. The constructionism asserts that social phenomena and their meanings are perpetually being achieved by social factors (Barbour 2008, p.11). It is crucial to study the circumstances in order to understand the reality or maybe the reality working behind the situations. Constructionism is linked with the epistemological position of interpretivism, which sponsors the requisite of investigating the subjective meanings inspiring the actions of social actors. Interpretivism Epistemology The inquiry from the inside, which qualitative research employs, represents an approach known as interpretivism. Interpretivism is an epistemological outlook that backs the obligation of researchers understanding the differences between humans in their capacity as social actors. This approach requires the researcher to implement an empathetic stance and view that cultures are understood by studying what people think about their ideas and the meanings central to them (Barbour 2008, p.9). Hence, qualitative researchers are expected to enter the world of their subjects and understand it from the subjects’ lens. The quality of qualitative research is built on three key conditions of validity, reliability, and generalizability. The three elements are bound to be affected by data gathering methods, personal bias, misinterpretation, as well as perceptions that may emerge. Validity Judgments about the validity of qualitative research depend on the ability of forming a judgment of the research process. Therefore, the researcher must provide a detailed record of the methods employed during the research. Given the non standardized nature of qualitative research, such records are more elaborate compared to those in quantitative research. Even though validity is a prominent issue in any research, some qualitative researchers do not dwell primarily on the validity as it is commonly understood (Golafshani 2003, p. 601). Instead, they opt to aim for “understanding,” which can be realized through thorough subjectivity. Validity in qualitative research often hinges on several factors such as unobtrusive measures where the researcher does his/ her best to avoid disturbing the scene. Another way of enhancing validity in qualitative research encompasses respondent validation. This incorporates understanding the meanings and perspectives of the subjects. This involves delivering an account back to those involved and asking them to judge. This enables the researcher to capture what it is like. Respondent validation enhances exposure of deficiencies in the researcher’s findings (Shenton 2004, p. 63). Lastly, qualitative research also employs triangulation as a means of enhancing chances of depth and accuracy. Triangulation may involve a combination of interviews with observation. Similarly, it may encompass consulting different people to gain a variety of perspectives concerning a certain issue. Reliability The reliability of the data analyses is promoted when the researchers are able to demonstrate that they have mulled over alternative plausible explanations for their data. There must be transparency in the manner in which sense is made from the raw data. The validity of the research finding within qualitative research is enhanced if the researchers are able to enhance their understanding of all members so as not to present a one-sided account (Golafshani 2003, p. 602). The reliability of the findings made is enhanced where there is evidence of the researcher’s sensitivity; this relates to the manner in which the data was shaped by the researcher’s presence. Generalizability In sampling decisions during qualitative study, the pragmatic consideration should be integrated to ensure that it is done in a systematic way. The concepts and constructs derived from the qualitative research should be relevant to other settings. The sampling decisions should be systematic and principled, and the researcher should avoid as much as possible employing opportunistic sampling. The relevance of qualitative research hinges on its potential generalizability to groups and settings beyond those studied (Shenton 2004, p.68). This is informed by the fact that much of qualitative research is grounded on a solitary case or a restricted number of subjects. The generalizability of qualitative research is achieved through the construction of theoretical statements that may guide policy makers, but remain to be tested via application to other contexts. Participant Observation In an attempt to explore the natural scene unobtrusively, the qualitative researcher may adopt participant observation as a method of collecting data. Participant observation is habitually longitudinal and allows direct participation in the phenomena (Seale, Gobo, Gubrium & Silverman 2004, p.217). In order to attain access to deeper levels of society, researchers have an obligation to develop rapport with the participants of the study. Thus, participant observation serves to accomplish this need. Participant observation is suitable in inquiry of naturally happening behaviours in their typical contexts. The categories of participant observation include overt and covert participant observation. Advantages of using this Method to Research Social Phenomena Firstly, the method yields more in-depth, comprehensive data. In addition, participant observation is flexible in many ways whereby it avails opportunities to follow unpredictable ideas during the research while simultaneously exploring diverse processes. This is manifested by the fact the researcher does not have to prejudge the issue of inquiry in advance. When studying social behaviour, participant observation allows the researcher to react to events or ideas, pursue leads and avenues of research open-mindedly. Participant observation gives the researcher a nuanced understanding of the context, relationships, and behaviour. Participant observation offers more room for adjustment accordingly so as to deal with diverse aspects of the inquiry (Seale, Gobo, Gubrium & Silverman 2004, p.220). Participant observation is sensitive to the prevalent contextual factors. Participant observation employs subjective information in order to describe the context of variables under consideration, as well as interactions of various variables in the context (Seale, Gobo, Gubrium & Silverman 2004, p.222). Participant observation avails quality and depth of information. Similarly, covert participant observation has an enhanced ecological validity, as the group is studied in its natural setting. Participant observation engenders a rich source of well –detailed and vast-quality information centering on people’s behaviour. Participant observation offers a platform to reinforce and evaluate findings over a broader scale. Participant observation offers the researcher an opportunity for understanding or empathy. Participant observation provides the researcher with an opportunity to understand the subject‘s norms that influences their behaviours. Participant observation offers the researcher increased opportunities significant in developing supported ideas and theories (Ospina 2004, p.1). Another advantage of participant observation is that it blends with the natural activity. Participant observation is helpful when the subject cannot provide information or when the subject is suspected of providing bogus data. Participant observation provides the researcher with an opportune chance to be in command of the data collected. Data provided through participant observation act as a check against participants’ subjective reporting (Flick 2009, p.221). Participant observation helps the researcher to discover critical information relevant to research for a thorough understanding of the research problem, but that were unidentified during the design and commencement of the research. Participant observation is vital in aiding the understanding of data collected via other methods as well as designing of questions for those methods. This helps the researcher to attain the best understanding of the phenomenon (Barbour 2008, p. 15). The enhancement of understanding of the inquiry promotes the derivation of a sound findings or theory. Disadvantages of using this Method to Research Social Phenomena The first weakness of participant observation encompasses general scope and scale. Participant observation is limited to reasonably small-scale studies, which are carried out over an extended period. Similarly, the group under study will be unlikely representative of any other group, and it is difficult to establish cause and effect relationships between behaviours observed. Secondly, participant observation faces the shortcoming of researcher’s level of participation or involvement with the group. The researcher must learn the culture of the group if he/ she were to participate fully in their behaviour. The researcher faces difficulty of being seamlessly integrated into the group, which may determine the success of failure of the inquiry. When using participant observation, the researcher may face difficulties in the organization as he/she has to secure an agreement with the subjects on availing themselves at certain times, as well as logistical problems emanating from equipment used such as audiovisual (Seale, Gobo, Gubrium & Silverman 2004, p. 217). In addition, it is difficult to document the data since one cannot possibly write everything that is pertinent, while actively participating in the activities. In addition, overt Participant observation may affect the behaviour of the subjects. Groups or subjects who feel that they are been observed, may alter their behaviours to conform to what they think is the expected or acceptable behaviour. This is referred to as Hawthorne Effect and will yield inaccurate or invalid data. When conducting qualitative research using participant observation, there is always a danger of “going native.” This infers that the researcher may “over identify” with the subjects’ views to the extent that the researcher’s perspectives are submerged beneath them (Flick 2009, p. 224). Furthermore, participant observation is intrinsically subjective and relies on memory, whereas research demands objectivity. Filtering out personal bias within the research activity is difficult. Consequently, the research may be skewed either in favour or prejudiced against the group. Moreover, participant observation is habitually time consuming for the researcher. It takes a lot of time for the researcher to become fully integrated into the group. For instance, traditional ethnographic research required the researcher to spend at least a year collecting data. In addition, participant observation is costly compared to other qualitative research methods. Participation contributes to the intricacy of the method as researchers have to commit their valuable time as well as adopt extra responsibilities (Flick 2009, p. 225). A researcher who chose participant observation as a mode of inquiry faces the shortcoming of skills required for research. Participant observation demands a phenomenal possession of skill and commitment from the researcher. The success or failure of a research inquiry is grounded in the ability to fit-in with the subjects and the ability to communicate with the subjects on their level and terms. If the research is engaged in covert participant observation, the researcher may be confronted by the shortcoming of ethics. This is informed by the fact that the researcher is deceiving the subjects by not informing them the true purpose of the research (Flick 2009, p. 226). Ethics Limitation Ethical debates within qualitative research manifest a contest between covert and overt research, as well as participant’s right to privacy. The researcher should not employ extreme unobtrusive practices such as concealing tape-recording or telephone tapping. The researcher should be non-judgemental and be sensitive to the subjects (Orb, Eisenhauer & Wynaden 2000, p. 94). The practice should not violate the principle of informed consent and should not result to harm to the participants. When conducting research, researchers should adopt and cultivate relationships along values of openness and respect for the subjects (Orb, Eisenhauer & Wynaden 2000, p. 93). The ultimate aim should be to leave them in a desirable position than he, or she found them. Ethics are critical to the research and should be observed during all phases of the research such as data collection, data analysis, data representation, data interpretation, and data validation (Denzin and Lincoln 2011, p.82). Conclusion Whereas there are strengths and limitations in qualitative approaches, just as there are in quantitative methods, qualitative research has much to offer in exploring phenomena. When qualitative research is conducted with precision and data is analyzed thoroughly, the approach can avail valuable information on issues centering on social phenomena. Thus, qualitative research avails more in-depth viewpoints into individuals and their lives. References List Barbour, R. (2008). A student guide to the craft of doing qualitative research, California, Sage. pp.9-15. Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research, London, Sage. pp.81-90. Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research, London, Sage. pp.221-230. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research, The Qualitative Report 8 (4), pp.597-607. Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L. & Wynaden, D. (2000). Ethics in qualitative research, Journal of Nursing Scholarship 33(1), pp.93-96. Ospina, S. (2004). Qualitative research, London, Sage. pp.1-5. Seale, C., Gobo, G., Gubrium, J. & Silverman, D. (2004). Qualitative research, London, Sage. pp.217-228. Shenton, A. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects, Education for Information 22 (1), pp.63-75. Silverman, D. (2006). Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, London, Sage. pp.1-8. Silverman, D. (2010). Doing qualitative research, London, Sage. Pp.43-61. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, London, Sage. pp. Read More