QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

1. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH AN OVERVIEW

2. I. DEFINING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH • A. No commonly accepted definition. • 1. Some do not want to define precisely, so as not to limit the technique. • 2. Applied to a philosophical approach to research, to a type of research methodology, & to a specific set of research techniques. • B. Interpretive--aims to understand how people in everyday settings create meanings & interpret the events of their world

3. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t. • C. Qualitative inquiry often naturalistic--focuses on how people behave when absorbed in real life experiences in natural settings. • D. Some include critical textual analysis; others argue criticism is a separate type of research. • 1. Critical work aims to understand meanings & functions of texts, using certain theories & philosophies. • 2. It ranges from fairly objective neo-Aristotelian criticism to more complex models concerned with issues of power & ideology

4. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t. • Jensen (1991) contrasts qualitative to quantitative, using the modes of inquiry & the levels of analysis: • QualitativeQuantitative • Meaning Information • Internal External • Occurrence Recurrence • Experience Experiment • Exegesis Measurement • Process Product

5. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t. • Bernard & Ryan (2010) have a different comparative grid (see Fig. 1.1, p. 4), with four quadrants:

6. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t • Wimmer & Dominick note differences in science & interpretive (qualitative) research: • A. The role of the researcher: • 1. Science strives for objectivity, with researcher separated from the data. • 2. Interpretive researchers are integral to the data (to varying degrees of participation). • B. The research design: • 1. Predetermined in scientific research. • 2. In interpretive research, can be modified or changed as the study progresses.

7. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t • C. The research setting: • 1. Science seeks to control the setting as much as possible, even in field research. • 2. Science limits confounding variables that might influence generalizability and/or validity of the results. • 3. Interpretative research influenced by the belief that phenomenon should be studied in its natural context.

8. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t • D. The use of measurement instruments: • 1. In science, instruments are separate from researcher. • a. Usually quantifiable • b. Aim for replicability • 2. In interpretative research, the researcher is the instrument. • a. Non-quantifiable • b. Exact replication is not possible (nor is it desired)

9. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t • E. Building theory: • 1. Science research tests, supports, or rejects theory. • 2. For interpretive research, theory is “data driven”--emerges as the data is collected. • a. Not seeking causal explanations • b. Discover or infer patterns in the data • c. Thus primarily descriptive for W & D (in contrast to critical work)

10. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t. • F. Reliability & validity in data analysis: • 1. Different connotations in interpretive research vs. science. • a. Confidence in process of inquiry. • b. Decide whether or not to believe the research conclusions. • 2. Behavior & perceptions change over time, thus the types of reliability & validity used in science are inappropriate.

11. Defining Qualitative Research, con’t. • For Lindlof & Taylor (2011), qualitative research is caught up in the the performances & practices of everyday communication. “Through them, we enact the meanings of our relationships in various contexts” (p. 4). This leads to the ability to study nearly any communicative act.

12. Specific Assumptions of Interpretive Work (Qualitative/Critical) • A. Reality is subjective & exists only in relation to the observer. • B. Humans are different from each other, thus cannot be pigeonholed. • C. Explanations about a given situation or individual should strive for depth over breadth • 1. What C. Geertz called “thick descriptions” • 2. Doesn’t aim to generalize.

13. Assumptions, con’t. • D. One tradition involves a phenomenological view of research, with several assumptions: • 1. Object of interest examined without any preconceived notions or a priori expectations. • 2. The researcher must “bracket out” potential biases, so can “get into the mind of the actor.” • 3. Review literature to see what has been discovered & get guidance, but not to make predictions (or hypotheses).

14. Assumptions, con’t • E. Second tradition is the Social-Cultural • 1. Ethnomethodology (e.g. Garfinkle 1967) • a. An empirical study of how individuals give sense to their daily actions. • b. Focuses on communicating, making decisions, & reasoning. • c. May involve participant-observation techniques, as well as intensive interviews • 2. Symbolic Interactionism • 3. Social Constructivism

15. Assumptions, con’t • 4. Ethnography--the study of specific persons or groups in their own societies & how they interact. • a) External • 1) Examines environmental, contextual, and/or cultural forces that influence our behaviors. • 2) Looks at observable phenomenon & infers patterns from the data (usually through field observations). • b) Internal--Understanding how subjects think about their actions, which usually means interacting with individuals through intensive interviews or participant observation • 5. Structuration Theory • 6. Actor Network Theory

16. Assumptions, con’t • F. A third tradition is the Critical • 1. Cultural Studies (neo-Marxism, post-structuralism, semiotics, etc.) • 2. Feminism • 3. Postcolonial • 4. Critical Race Theory • 5. Queer Theory • 6. Rhetorical

17. Paradigms of Research • A. James Carey (1975) viewed interpretive work as opposed to that from a positivist (or scientific, deterministic) perspective. • B. Because of the critiques of positivism, some communication researchers affiliated with a post-positivist paradigm, which Corman (2005) defined as those who value science but which also transcend its limitations. • See p. 7, Lindlof & Taylor for a list of premises of the post-positivist position.

18. Paradigms of Research, con’t. • C. In the 1970s & 1980s, a group of scholars argued for interpretivism, aka naturalism, “hermeneutic empiricism,” or constructivism. (see pp. 8-9, L & T) • 1. Had to overcome concerns that qualitative methods were a soft science(with imprecise instruments, biased observations, selective reporting, limited findings, etc.) • 2. Also such approaches were seen as trivial, irrelevant or offensive since often examined alternative or deviant sub-cultures. • 3. Work of the 1990s became more sophisticated, answering such criticisms.

19. Paradigms of Research, con’t • D. More recently, in the past 20 years, has been an emphasis on a critical paradigm. • 1. Rooted in a rich intellectual tradition • 2. Using critical theory, such work focused on the relationships between power, knowledge, and discourse. • (see pp. 10-11, L & T for characteristics)

20. Paradigms of Research, con’t • 3. Critical traditions have 3 pts. of intersection with qualitative methods: • a. 1st, such research has been strong in humanistic subfields such as rhetoric • b. 2nd, such traditions have been used in internationally-related subfields such as media studies & organization communication • c. 3rd, although conflict exists between the two paradigms, critical theorists & interpretive theorists often inform each other’s work