The Importance Of Qualitative Research Methods

(2005) which explain that the exploration and description of case take place through detailed, in-depth data collection methods which multiple sources of data collection method in order to acquire information that are rich in context .Tessier (20120 supported that combination of data collection methods should be used in qualitative study to improve quality of data

There are two types of collecting data for research, which are qualitative and quantitative research. Qualitative research is used to gain a thorough explanation about a phenomena, and ‘is normally recognisable via the use of methods that include, at least, in-depth interview and group-moderation techniques’ (Bailey 2013)

Thus, this method gives a researcher an in-depth understanding of the participants’ experiences using qualitative inquiry to determine the why, when, where, what, and how of the study.

Qualitative research reflects different ways that researcher’s collect data and explore all of the information through literature review. Participant’s that are reviewing is often observed for analysis while “the role of the researcher focuses as the primary data collection instrument necessitates the identification of personal values, assumptions and biases at the outset of the study; Qualitative researchers ask at least one central question” (Creswell, 2014, which can be explored in several contexts with further questions. According to the text Research Design (2014) “the researcher’s role is typically involved in a

According to Schneider, Elliot, LoBiondo-Wood & Haber (2004), qualitative research methods, search for the meaning and understanding of human experiences in a naturalistic setting. A researcher obtains subjective facts in order to explore the experiences of each participant (Schneider, Elliot, LoBiondo-Wood & Haber 2004). As a result, qualitative research is a means in which a researcher gains an insight into the participant's point of view concerning their personal experiences; in order gain an understanding of the information given. Therefore this allows a researcher to collect subjective information to create a description of the phenomenon (Vishnevsky & Beanlands 2004).

Participant observation is defined as first hand experience. Participant observation is a method developed by Anthropologists in the early 20th century. When Anthropologists noticed that in order to fully understand the question, “Why” in culture. Why do a certain people do this, why is that important, or why do they all do it, are just some of the questions anthropologists use participant observation. The key to participant observation is fieldwork, where the anthropologist actively lives with the people of the culture they are studying for about a year or more. Where the anthropologist goes through culture shock by leaving all their possessions at home and starting a new. This technique of studying gets the anthropologist to become one

A qualitative methodological approach was the obvious choice in that it allows for the collection and interpretation of stories, narratives, interviews and other forms of non-quantifiable data. A qualitative approach also does not demand or strive for detached objectivity of the researcher but instead encourages the disclosure of researcher bias and the engagement of the researcher with the research and subjects, often in the role of participant-observer (Dade, Tartakov, Hargrave, & Leigh,

Following a critical overview of the literature, this chapter outlines the research methodology. It will provide a justification for a qualitative methodological approach and specification of methods employed. Highlighting the appropriateness of interviews and focus groups in relation to the methodology and overall research. It will also provide recognition of their relative strengths and limitations.

Epistemological criticism argues that all approaches are unlikely to produce consistent evidence because of the inherent property. It will generate a new viewpoint. However, through abundant reading, triangulation will enlarge width and depth in qualitative research and provide an analysis with security- a overall perspective. Participants can improve the validity of research. Bloor (1978) argues that sociologists can establish a correspondence with participants, in which participants can identify, give assent and judgement to sociologists.

Researchers who uses qualitative study for addressing a problem they are interested in are most often confronted with enormous background knowledge they could use to make their research more successful. (Flick, 2007)

Consequently, qualitative research approach emerges from the philosophical belief that truth is socially constructed and subjective to individual experiences associated with critical theory, constructivism, interpretatism, and naturalistic paradigms (Feilzer, 2010; Ponterotto, 2010; Ryan, Coughlan, & Cronin, 2007; Scotland, 2012; Venkatesh, Brown, & Bala, 2013; Vishnevsky & Beanlands, 2004). Paradigms are the philosophical underpinning that guides qualitative research methodology as result evaluating scientific merit slightly differs from the quantitative methodology. As a result, the scientific merit of qualitative lies in the credibility (trustworthiness), dependability (consistency), transferability (applicability), and comfirmability (verification/neutrality) of the data to answer the research question (Ellis & Levy, 2009; Horsburgh, 2002; Ponterotto, 2010; Ryan, Coughlan, & Cronin, 2007; Vishnevsky & Beanlands, 2004).

In order to do this, a researcher must work on establishing trust among the participants being studied, while also not endangering the relationship by being overly demanding to the privileges given, such as by gatekeepers (Shenton, 2004). Therefore, the researcher should accept that limitations exist within research that cannot be controlled, and should not be taken advantage of (Freeman et al., 2007). Most importantly, qualitative research is not about predicting or generalizing results to others in society, rather gaining an understanding of human beings in various contexts (Freeman et al., 2007). In order to make the study credible, trustworthy, and valid the researcher must acknowledge shortfalls, such as recognize biases both from the researcher and participants, which perhaps affected the outcome of the research (Freeman et al., 2007). In order to prevent biases, it is best for the researcher to conduct a random sampling to ensure unknown influences (Shenton,

In the interpretivist paradigm, observation is regarded as an invaluable method of data collection because it is a great source of primary data (Yin, 2011). According to DeWalt and DeWalt (2002) participant observation allows the researcher to learn about the activities of the participants being studied in the natural setting through observing and participating in those activities. Moreover, direct observation of activities assists the researcher to learn about aspects that the participants are either unaware of or are unwilling to discuss in interviews (Stake, 2010). DeWalt and DeWalt (2002) also noted that a good observer should have an open and nonjudgmental attitude and be able to observe and listen carefully.

Among multiple methods of data collection observation and semi-structured interviews remained the dominant strategies; however, some of the researchers have also analyzed related documents and artifacts. In some studies anecdotal notes and reflective journals are also used to get more comprehensive data. Addition to these, in the phenomenological and ethnographic studies participant observations were used as compare to the case studies where the researcher took the role of non-participant observer (Maxwell, 1997). Moreover, in majority of the studies interviews and discussions were audio taped and observations were videotaped. After the transcription of the data in some of the studies, data was rechecked by the research participants, which, is important to maintain reliability and validity of the collected data (Robson, 2002). Addition to this, ethical considerations like, maintaining the confidentiality of the research participants, prior permission for interviews, respecting participants’ autonomy were taken into consideration throughout the studies; however, none of the writer could describe their ethical framework in more detail, probably due to the word limits.

As mentioned, the research method used for this study was participant observation. This was further divided into three different segments. Each of these segments featured its own distinct observation site and involved one hour of observation per site.