research & stats w2

Qualitative research

• – Explores the experiences of

  individuals

  – Concerned with the individuality

  of experiences

  – Does not recognise quantifiable

  ‘social facts’

  – Uses less structured methods

  (e.g., interviews)

  – More interested in description

  than prediction

Nomothetic approach

• asses few behaviours

• Large sample

• Develop laws of behaviour in populations

• Problem: average person doesn’t exist

Idiographic approach

• assesses many behaviours

• Smaller sample

• Find depth and meaning

• Problem: may not be useful for generalising

Aim & focus of qualitative research

• represent participants lived eexpeerience

• Focus on naturalistic data - replicate natural, normal circumstances

• Avoid reduction - let them express themselves in a broader way. As much rich data as possible

• Focus on richness and depper analysis of data - approrpiate sample (right group), saturation (to collect data until themes and issues stop appearing stop popping up in data), sample size

• Recognitionthat findings will vary due to the infuence of personal/social - triangulation, credibility

• theoretical generalisability - can identify some general themes which may be generalised

• Participants active role in research - let participant guide

• Recognize that researcher can have a major impact on research

Constructivism

• reality is constructed by each individual based on their experiences

Social constructionism

• human experience, perception, is mediated by history, culture and language

Demand characteristics

The presence of an experimenter/the exprimenter may influence the study.

Realist

Qual approach

• we try to get a true picture of the world and phenomena. Can be naive or critical

Phenomenological

Qual approach

• capturing and describing someone’s experiences is in focus

Social constructionist

Qual approach

• concerrned not just with the experience or knowledge, but more meta. How it is constructed

Triangulation

Look for patterns across different sources, different studies, to see that you are identifying similar topics

Credibility checks

Have participant check that they recognize themselves in your collection of data, accurate representation

Reflexivity

That the researchers experiences may come into research. We may bring or own thinking and biases into the work. Must be a reflexive thinker:

Questioning our own attitudes, habits, assumptions, etc to understand how we relate to others.

See themselves from the outside, how do others experience my research? Look at mistakes

Big part of clinical psych

Social Graces (GRRAACCEESS)

Gender

Race

Religion

Age

Ability

Class

Culture

Ethnicity

Eductation

Seuality

Spirituality

Understanding

• social differences how it may effect research

• Differences may be visible or invisible

• Understand that your interpretation may depend on these differences (GRRAACCESS)

• Challenge and reconsider our world view

Qualitative research goal

• Describe and explain, but not predict future experiences

Qualitative research’s roles

• hypothesis generation

• Study areas unsuitable for traditional study. Ex: get street children to draw pictures instead of interviewing bc may not be able to speak (well?) etc. Children. - low literacy

(Bonus: contributing to general understanding)

Bonus - understanding development through qual

• can help us undertanding in and of itself

• Ex: athlete’s definition of cheating - does the perception differ between different athletes? Seen as an unfair advtange, ppl breaking rules, taking a short cut

Health research role

• undetanding individual and group experiences of health

• Lends itself t developing knowledge on poorly understood or compex areas of health care

• Eliciting contextual data to make more valid quant research (survey)

• Elaborate a more in-depth understanding of issues

Evaluating quality of qual research

Methdological rigour

1. Congruence - does method fit

2. Responsiveness - was method designed to fit in and adapt to real life situation? Researcher engage with participants?

3. Appropriateness - were the sampling and the data gathering approaches appropriate to the research question?

4. Adequacy - did consult enough sources beforehand? Did they gather dtaa from enough sources? Did they corroborate and rival account to explore ddiff perspectives?

5. Transparency - are the data gathering and results reported transparently?

Interpretive rigour

• authenticity - not paraphrasing people badly. Say verbatim? Does participant understand what you wrote about their words?

• Coherence - link between data and conclusions drawn/interpretation of data

• Reciprocity - extent review/interpretation of analyses are shared with participant?

• Typicality - what kinds of claims about generalisation being made?

• Permeability - is researcher’s role transparent? Did the study change the researcher’s view? Are the researcher intentionss/preconceptions/views revealed in the report? Is ithe personal experience of the researcher made clear?

Street children in Kalkata

• got street children to draw their career desires

• Bc low literacy, may not be interested in being interviewed

• Find themes ad patterns in their careers

Qual and quant post

Both qual and quant build on post-positivism (postitivism = the idea that there is an objective reality we are able to measure)

Qualitative research draws on constructivism - reality is constructed by each individual based on their experiences and interactions.

Social constructionism

• human experience is constructed by linguistics, history, culture

• Ex: we might all use different words to describe the same thing

• Created in our interactions with other people

Realist approach

• We can and try to get to reality of the worl through some phenomena

• Naive realism would think we would be getting to reality

• Critical - we may never get the full picture, but we think we do

Phenomenological approach

• more interested in indiviual experience

Social constructionist approach

• ask why they are experiencing it this way

Qualitative research design

• Phenomenology

• Grounded theory

• Discourse analysis

• Action research

• Ethnography

Phnomenology

• how individuals experience a phenomenon

• Focus on lived experience, how something is experienced (rather than why it occurs)

• Ex: what stress feels like for first year uni students

• Study: Walking the walk: A Phenolenological Study of Long Distance Walking

• Interview - collect common throughlines (codes) in people’s experiences

Grounded theory

• answering questions through the development of a theory through the data

• Collect data & hypothesis made at the same time

• Ex: ”And you’re telling me not ot stress?” -A grounded theory on postpartum depression symptoms among low-income mothers.

• Picking up on themes, then analyse and pick out a theory. What ties all those themes together?

Action research design

• Study done with ppl rather than on

• Ex: collaboration etween a researcher and a memnerv of an organisation to solve an irganisational problem

• Blurs the line between research and practice

Discourse analysis

• focus on language - language doesnt simply reflect reality, it constructs reality

• All language has a purpose/function. Focus on how language is used as a body of data

• Focus on exact words participants use to describe a situation

• Ex study: chocolate ”addicts” accounts

Ethnography

• deep immersion in the social or cultural setting to understand how the place works

• Focus on social and cultural context

• Ex: Deinstitutionalisation for long term mental illness: an ethnographic study. Participated as an observer fieldwork for 2.5 years pre and post discharge

OBSERVATION

Research design

• approaches taken to gain research

Different research methods

• interviews

• Focus groups

• Drawings/photographcs

• Observations

• Case notes/case studies

• Diary studies/blogs

• Correspondence/records

Interviews

• One of most felxibl tools available to researchers

• Can be used for qual questions, to inform participant, development of other instruments (creating a scale), check the researcher’s interpretation of data

• Still a systematic approach

Structured interviews

• predetermined questions asked in order

Unstructed interview

• organic discussion, no map or framework

• may have a guiding topic but there is limited lanning. Allow the respondents and the topic to influence what comes up

• Interviewer can still influence the process

Semi-structured interviews

• most common forM

• Allow interviewer to be flexible but there is a thematic framework and continuity of questions between participants

• Allows key points to be covered + unexpected issues/answers to emerge

Focus groups

• a discussion involving a small group of participants

• More like a focused discussion,

• skilled moderator and interviewer,

• limited number of participants.

• Questions deliberately sequenced to direct discussion

Can be useful with vulnerable groups or groups with special needs (helps feel like a shared experience, support)

Narrative elaboration

• final type of interview

• Designed to help children or others explain Themselves

• Uses different cues - visual cues such as images, people, emotions, actions etc

• Helps tell fuller stories, tell more information, reduce the risk of contamination

Drawing and photography research

• images as prompts and cues - let them draw and take photographs

• People share more this way, what they share tend to be more accurate

Photovoice

• widely used in research with groups who are vulnerable and powerless

• Express feelings and thoughts about a specific issue

• Analysis focus on denotation and connotation

• Freirean principles of education for critical consciousness (aka being aware of inequality and power imbalances)

• Allow participants to reflect critically on their surroundings

• Ex: CSL study with a sample of 189 schools + case studies at 13 schools to reflect full spectrum of school types

Drawings and writing

• Look at self esteem/self concept through drawings

• Active and social self

• ex: Tatlow-Golden and Guerin - ”my favourite thing to do” study

Pro/con of visual methods

• both structured and open ended examination topics

• Variety of analysis methods

• Methods of inter rater reliability can be applied

• risky to use in siolation

• May still be influenced by aspects of social desirability

• Only certain concepts can be represented - hard to represent abstract concepts visually