PHILOSOPHY OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

PHILOSOPHY OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

By, Hanafi Pelu (181061001001)

A.  Background

Research methods can be classified in various ways; however one of the most common distinctions is between qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Quantitative research methods were originally developed in the natural sciences to study natural phenomena. Examples of quantitative methods now well accepted in the social sciences include survey methods, laboratory experiments, formal methods (e.g. econometrics) and numerical methods such as mathematical modeling.

Qualitative research methods were developed in the social sciences to enable researchers to study social and cultural phenomena. Examples of qualitative methods are action research, case study research and ethnography. Qualitative data sources include observation and participant observation (fieldwork), interviews and questionnaires, documents and texts, and the researcher’s impressions and reactions, (Michael D. Myers, 2: 2008).

Research in all fields of study focuses on finding and validating new ways to investigate and understand reality. The methods adopted to define and measure aspects of the natural, material, and social worlds depend very much on the individual researcher’s background, training, interests, and familiarity with the subject. At the same time, researchers may have fundamentally different ways of thinking (theories) about the social and material world around them. In this chapter we begin to appreciate the ways in which a qualitative research approach differs from a quantitative research approach; we also see the ways in which the two methodological approaches complement each other.

Research of any type is a cyclical rather than a linear process; methodological choices and methods themselves are not neutral but are always influenced by the assumptions you make about your subject of study. Your use of theory is related to your training, your reading of the relevant literature, your political positioning and so on – in short, what you hold to be a valid picture or explanation for the phenomenon under study. Theory shapes the questions you think are worth asking, which in turn determine a research strategy. The strategy (study design) helps you choose appropriate methods. Particular methods yield data sets which you analyze and which may lead to further questions. In turn, new and unexpected data help to refine theoretical assumptions.

B.  Discussion

Qualitative research is characterized by its aims, which relate to understanding some aspect of social life, and its methods which (in general) generate words, rather than numbers, as data for analysis.

Qualitative methods generally aim to understand the experiences and attitudes of patients, the community or health care worker. These methods aim to answer questions about the ‘what’, ‘how’ or ‘why’ of a phenomenon rather than ‘how many’ or ‘how much’, which are answered by quantitative methods. If the aim is to understand how a community or individuals within it perceive a particular issue, then qualitative methods are often appropriate, (Rotchford, A.P., Rotchford, K.M., Mthethwa, L.P. and Johnson, G.J. 5: 2002).

For researchers more familiar with quan­titative methods, which aim to measure something (such as the percentage of people with a particular disease in a community, or the number of households owning a bed net), the aims and methods of qualitative research can seem imprecise. Common criticisms include:  samples are small and not necessarily representative of the broader population, so it is difficult to know how far we can generalize the results; the findings lack rigour; it is difficult to tell how far the findings are biased by the researcher’s own opinions.

However, for many research projects, there are different sorts of questions that need answering, some requiring quantitative methods, and some requiring qualitative methods. If the question is a qualitative one, then the most appropriate and rigorous way of answering it is to use qualitative methods. For instance, if you want to lobby for better access to health care in an area where user fees have been introduced, you might first undertake a cross-sectional survey which will tell you that 16.5% of your population does not have access to care. This is essential information, but you might also have a number of other questions that the survey can’t answer very well, such as: what are people’s experiences of user fees? what other barriers exist to accessing health care?

These can be addressed through qualitative methods such as interviews or focus groups. If the final report is to be used for lobbying, the quantitative data and qualitative data together are very powerful. The survey identifies the extent of the problem, and the interviews can be used to give some of the detail, and the ‘story’ of how user fees have affected people.

In situations where little is known, it is often better to start with qualitative methods (interviews, focus groups, etc.). It can help you with generating hypotheses that can then be tested by quantitative methods. For instance, in an area where we had no idea what kinds of issue were acting as barriers to health care, it would be difficult to design a survey to cover the main factors. Once these have been identified, then a quantitative approach (such as a survey) can be used if you need to measure to what extent these issues are typical for the whole population.

The first step in research is, then, to identify whether the specific research question you want to answer is best answered by a quantitative or a qualitative approach. Often, there are several questions that we need to answer, such as ‘How many people are affected?’, or ‘How does this affect them?’. We’d then need to use both types of method.

In this guide, we suggest some ways of making the qualitative parts of your research more rigorous, so that users can have more faith in your findings. The first step, though, is to clarify some of the situations in which qualitative methods might be chosen, (Michael Quinn Patton and Michael Cochran, 4: 2002).

Quantitative research, in general, holds a more positivist view of the world; it suggests that reality is something tangible that can be objectively measured with the help of observational and experimental methods.

Qualitative research generally adheres (although not always) to a constructivist view of the world, one that suggests that reality is in the eye of the beholder; in other words, that there is no single reality for a given phenomenon, but multiple, relative dimensions of reality which can only be partially captured using subjective, naturalistic methods.

Qualitative research is humanistic because it focuses on the personal, subjective, and experiential basis of knowledge and practice. It is holistic because it seeks to situate the meaning of particular behaviors and ways of doing things in a given context (as opposed to isolating these as a quantitative researcher would). These features influence two other characteristics of the qualitative approach.

Qualitative researchers are constantly trying to make sense of what they see and hear in a specific context; their approach to understanding what is going on is interpretive, in other words, their aim is more often to explain rather than to merely describe. Finally, as we have already said, how the data gathered on people’s experiences are interpreted depends much on the researcher’s theoretical presuppositions and background. Qualitative researchers, more than quantitative researchers, generally adopt a reflexive position vis-à-vis their research, in other words, they are explicit about how their personal history and biography shape the questions asked, the framing of the research and the presentation of data.

In qualitative research the way the sample is designed, and sample size chosen, depends on the aims of the researcher. As discussed in the previous chapter, the methods are less structured; hence the data generated will differ from individual to individual or group to group. We need enough in-depth data from individuals or groups to be able to capture variations in informants’ perspectives and experiences related to our research question. For some types of studies, for example, a study examining how traditional healers have changed practices in a particular setting over the past 30 years, a few cases may be enough – as collecting the life histories of a few elderly healers will provide rich and ample detail in order to address this question.

To use qualitative methods means that you will be generating data that is primarily in the form of words, not numbers. Some of the most common data collection methods are different types of individual interviews (general or key informants) and group discussions. In this section, we also discuss other types of data that might help you understand the context, (Ellsberg M and Heise L 106: 2005).

C.  Conclusion

This guide to using qualitative research methodology is designed to help you think about all the steps you need to take to ensure that you produce a good quality piece of work.

The guide starts by telling you what qualitative methodology is and when to use it in the field (understand people’s belief system, perspectives, and experiences). It also flags the most important ethical issues that you will encounter (consent and confidentiality).

The second part of the guide tackles how you can concretely develop qualitative research designs; starting from clearly defining your research question (one of the most important steps in your research!), to how to develop a research protocol; and finally giving you tips on the sampling methods which are available and how to use them.

The third part details how you can actually obtain the data - what methods can you use to get the information you want? The three main methods (individual interviews, group interviews and observational methods) are explained, and the steps to build these different methods are outlined.

References

Ellsberg M and Heise L 2005. Researching Violence Against Women - A Practical Guide for researchers and activists, Washington DC, United States, World Health Organisation and PATH.

Kielmann, K., Cataldo, F. and Seeley, J., 2012. Introduction to Qualitative Research Methodology: A Training Manual, produced with the support of the Department for International Development (DfID), UK, under the Evidence for Action Research Programme Consortium on HIV Treatment and Care (2006-2011).

Michael D. Myers, 2008. Qualitative Research in Information System. MIS Quarterly MISQ Discovery, archival version. http://www.misq.org/discovery/MISQD_isworld/. MISQ Discovery, updated version, last modified: January 4, 2008 http://www.qual.auckland.ac.nz/

Michael Quinn Patton and Michael Cochran, 2002. A Guide to Using Qualitative Research Methodology. MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERS.

Rotchford, A.P., Rotchford, K.M., Mthethwa, L.P. and Johnson, G.J., 2002. Reasons for poor cataract surgery uptake – a qualitative study in rural South Africa’, Tropical Medicine and International Health.