Analysis in Qualitative Research

Hennie R Boeije

• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Year: 2009
• eBook ISBN: 9781446241356
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Index: Social Sciences

Written for anyone beginning a research project, this introductory book takes you through the process of analysing your data from start to finish.

The author sets out an easy-to-use model for coding data in order to break it down into parts, and then to reassemble it to create a meaningful picture of the phenomenon under study. Full of useful advice, the book guides the reader through the last difficult integrating phase of qualitative analysis including diagramming, memoing, thinking aloud, and using one?s feelings, and how to incorporate the use of software where appropriate.

Ideal for third year undergraduate students, master students, postgraduates and anybody beginning a research project, the book includes examples covering a wide range of subjects - making the book useful for students across the social science disciplines.

Hennie Boeije is currently an Associate Professor with the Department of Methodology and Statistics of the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences at Utrecht University, The Netherlands.

1

INTRODUCTION TO QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Research is concerned with asking and answering relevant and researchable questions. To be referred to as social scientific research, the investigation should stick to the rules of the game called science. This book addresses the rules of the game for qualitative researchers and in particular how they are to shape their analytical activities. To begin the chapter, we draw the contours of qualitative research by briefly comparing it with quantitative research within the social sciences. Then we focus on the diversity within qualitative research and elaborate on the grounded theory approach that has mainly inspired the representation of qualitative research in this book and in particular how we look at qualitative data analysis. Considering the multiplicity of research types, why do scientists often pose the same sort of research questions and choose to work with more or less the same tools in their projects? At the end of the chapter we will outline the qualitative research process, position qualitative data analysis and give a summary of the contents of the book.

LEARNING AIMS

By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:

• Mention the necessary preparations when initiating scientific research
• Distinguish between quantitative and qualitative research
• Explain the role of theory in deductive and inductive approaches to research
• Define what is commonly referred to as a paradigm
• Know what paradigmatic issues qualitative researchers mostly agree on
• Outline the origins and purposes of the grounded theory approach
• Define qualitative research and elaborate on its three key elements
• Reproduce the steps of the qualitative research process and place data analysis within this process

Preparatory thoughts

If there is one activity in which thinking needs to precede doing, it is in a social science research enterprise. Science is only recognized and accepted as such when researchers stick to the rules that apply to conducting scientific research, the most important of these being that the study is theoretically informed, that it uses a systematic procedure, that approved methods and techniques are used, and that the study is documented in a way that allows others to assess the findings. This means that there is a lot to decide upon when thinking of starting a qualitative research project, such as: How will we deal with theory? What theories can be keys to our research? What steps are we going to take in the research as a whole? What steps will we use for analysis? How will we collect the data? What are common instruments for ensuring quality? Exactly what needs to be reported to convince our readers? Before exploring these issues, we will briefly look at some aspects which are probably already common knowledge to you.

It is evident that you have to come up with a research topic that is of interest to you and will engage you. Just as important, the topic needs to be viable to turn it into a small- or moderate-scale scientific research project. Studying the literature and talking to experts can lead you to research questions that lend themselves to scientific methods. And although all scientific research is about posing and answering questions, this cannot be reversed: not all endeavours to find answers are worth the label ‘research’ let alone earn the label ‘scientific’. For scientific research the questions asked need to be related to theory in some way, and the answers need to be found by the use of systematic methods that must be adequately documented.

You will have to find out what type of research is needed to answer your questions as well. The choice to use qualitative research methods has implications for your way of working, for the research design, the use of theory, the sample, the data collection methods, the data analysis, and the final publication. You may be in doubt about what research type matches best with your questions, or you may consider using a combination of both qualitative and quantitative research. In the next section, a comparison is made between qualitative and quantitative research to sharpen our insight in what it means to work within the qualitative approach. Whatever you choose, you have to convincingly legitimize the choice.

Answering the research questions in social scientific research is always done with a specific purpose. In other words, there is a reason why you want to answer these particular research questions. Whatever it is that you want to know, you must consider why you need this particular knowledge and what you need it for. If it is something you want to do, you must consider what problem you are trying to solve and who will benefit from the results. If your aim is predominantly to gain knowledge, it is referred to as fundamental research. If it is predominantly aimed at the use of knowledge to change or improve situations, then it is referred to as applied research. A qualitative research can be a fundamental one as well as an applied one.

Now that some preparatory thoughts have been put into your mind, we will elaborate on them with the aim to sharpen the contours of qualitative research and to delineate the focus of this book. We will start with a comparison between quantitative and qualitative research, because by concentrating on the commonalities and differences we will better understand what is meant by qualitative research. This might suggest that qualitative research is one clearly defined research approach. However, this is not the case. We will briefly look at different traditions and types of research and then we will specify the area of qualitative research that is covered in the book. Next we will formulate a definition and touch upon the distinguishable features of qualitative research. Finally, we will present an overview of the qualitative research process including the analytic stage, which is the focus of this book, and have a look at where the different aspects of the research process will be dealt with in the rest of the book.

Considering quantitative or qualitative research

To get a better grasp on qualitative research we will look at two example studies that initially start with an interest in the same research topic but use different research methods (Boxes 1.1 and 1.2). Both cases are concerned with partners who care for their spouses who have a severe illness. The outcome of each study is very different because the researchers use different approaches. The first study is an example of a quantitative research, whereas the second study applies qualitative research methods.

BOX 1.1 A QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH ON PARTNER RELATIONS

Kuijer, Buunk and Ybema (2001) studied the partner relationship from an equity theory viewpoint. This theory poses that a situation of inequity arises when the ratio between the outcomes and investments of one partner are different from those of the other partner. When someone is struck by a severe illness, such as cancer, the balance between giving and taking in a relationship may shift. It is assumed that on the one hand the patient is less able to contribute, and on the other hand receives more help and support from the partner. On the basis of this theory two hypotheses were formed, to be tested in the investigation. The first hypothesis was that people who, in terms of outcomes, comparatively receive a lot (patients) or a little (partners), will feel respectively either advantaged or disadvantaged in their relationship. The second hypothesis was that experienced inequity is correlated with dissatisfaction with the relationship.

The researchers decided to use questionnaire research, as well as other strategies of investigation such as the experiment. There are existing questionnaires which validly measure the variables that the researchers are interested in. For example, there is a nine-item questionnaire which measures relationship satisfaction. Additionally, there is a measure devised to assess physical fitness. In order to measure equity, participants were asked to rate giving and taking in the relationship on a five-point scale ranging from ‘My partner does a lot more for me than I do for him/her’ through ‘My partner does the same for me as I do for him/her’ to ‘My partner does a lot less for me than I do for him/her’. The research involved the participation of 106 cancer patients and their partners, as well as a control group of 80 healthy couples.

One of the outcomes of this study was that patients generally feel advantaged in the relationship. The hypothesis that partners feel disadvantaged was not confirmed. Various explanations were provided for these findings. It is possible that partners take into account the limitations which are imposed upon the patient by the disease, and that they are grateful for any support the patient is able to offer. In accordance with equity theory, patients reported the most anger when they were feeling disadvantaged. They reported the most guilt when they were in an advantaged situation. When the patient was in bad physical shape, partners reported being satisfied with the relationship, regardless of whether they feel advantaged, disadvantaged or equally treated. Partners seem to think it is only fair that they are doing more for the patient than the patient is doing for them. In such situations, the patient’s need is more important than equity in the relationship.

BOX 1.2 A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ON PARTNER RELATIONS

Boeije, Duijnstee and Grypdonck (2003) investigated the relationship between individuals who suffer from multiple sclerosis, a severe neurological disease, and their partners who provide care. Previous research has shown that partners of people with multiple sclerosis often feel heavily burdened as a consequence of the debilitating character of the illness. Although a lot has been written about the burden of caring, a number of studies were also found which focus on the benefits of caring. These latter studies suggest a balance between giving and taking. Additionally, the perspective of the receivers of care often does not seem to be accounted for. Based on the findings of the literature study, the researchers examined what it is that binds both partners to the relationship, and in particular, what both partners do to continue the caring within the relationship.

Seventeen couples participated in this study. The partners were interviewed separately. The interviews were recorded on tape and transcribed. The interview questions dealt with issues which had predominantly been taken from the literature. The carers were asked how they fulfil their role, what changes have been made in their lives, how their partners handle the situation, what motivation they have to go on, and what doubts they may have. The patients were asked what it is like to receive care from their partners, how their spouse deals with the situation, and what their role is in the relationship.

Analysis of the collected data yielded three elements that link partners to one another. First, both the afflicted and the carer viewed the situation as inevitable; the reason being that they either have the disease or promised to care for their partner upon marriage. Second, both partners felt that they are in it together, and realized that the reverse could have been the case as well. In terms of exchange theory, this is known as ‘hypothetical trade’ or ‘hypothetical reciprocity’. Third, both partners expressed the desire to postpone institutionalizing the ill partner to a nursing home for as long as possible.

The examples demonstrate that different approaches and methods can be used to study the same subject. In the first example a quantitative research is carried out. Literature and previously selected theory are used to deduce hypotheses. These hypotheses, or propositions, are tested by means of the research. The building blocks of hypotheses and the relationships between them are interesting attributes, commonly referred to as ‘variables’. In Box 1.1 these are, among others, the severity of the illness, relationship satisfaction, experienced equity and feelings of anger and guilt. Observations are made on a sizable number of cases, in this case couples, mainly by means of standardized measures. Results are reached by working with numbers, and statistical criteria are used to determine whether the results offer support for the hypotheses or not. Subsequently, the findings are fed back into the theory in an attempt to explain the results and reflect on the implications.

Box 1.2 is an example of qualitative research. Here, literature including theory is used mainly to understand what is going on in the field and to discover theoretical perspectives, including proper concepts to look at the social phenomenon of interest. Data collection takes place by means of semi-structured measuring instruments that are tailored to the research subject and refined as the research progresses. In general, the research sample should accurately represent the research subject and must be studied intensively. During data analysis, the textual accounts of interviews or observations are searched for common themes and regularities. The findings consist of descriptions of the field using the various relevant, theoretical concepts necessary to interpret the participants’ view of their social world and their behaviour.

It is worth drawing our attention to the use of theory in both types of research. Theory here is viewed as an attempt to describe, understand and explain a certain social phenomenon. The use of social theory is often seen as the main difference between quantitative and qualitative research (Bryman, 2008). In quantitative research a deductive process is employed, which means that theory is the starting point for formulating hypotheses that will be tested in research. The outcome of this process, of course, says something about the theory that was tested. In qualitative research inductive thinking is paramount, which means that a social phenomenon is explored in order to find empirical patterns that can function as the beginning of a theory. The choice of whether you test a theory or build one naturally influences how the research is carried out. In practice, however, it is never this black and white. Quantitative research can be used to explore scientific domains and make use of an inductive approach as well, while in qualitative research existing theory can be used more deductively as a background to see whether it applies to other settings or contexts (see Chapter 6).

The choice of research method, either quantitative or qualitative, tells us something about what we think research in the social sciences should look like. In fact, there are systems of beliefs and practices that guide a field of study regarding social science research methodology. Such a framework for thinking about research design, measurement, analysis and personal involvement that is shared by members of a speciality area is called a paradigm (Morgan, 2007). Paradigms reflect issues related to the nature of social reality and to the nature of knowledge. The nature of social reality, referred to as ontology, attempts to answer the question whether the social world is regarded as something external to social actors or as something that people are in the process of fashioning (Bryman, 2008). The nature of knowledge, referred to as epistemology, is concerned with whether there is one single route to truth or that diverse methods are needed to grasp the meaning of social experience.

Qualitative research generally starts with the assumptions that individuals have an active role in the construction of social reality and that research methods that can capture this process of social construction a...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• About the author
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of figures and tables
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction to qualitative research
• 2 Research design
• 3 Ethics in qualitative research
• 4 Data collection
• 5 Principles of qualitative analysis
• 6 Doing qualitative analysis
• 7 Integrative procedures
• 8 Findings
• 9 Quality of the research
• 10 Writing the research report
• References
• Index