QRAM 9th National Seminar 2012 Keynote

  • 725 views
Uploaded on

The keynote speech by Dr Sharon Bong (Monash University) at the 9th QRAM National Seminar 2012 at UM on March 31, 2012.

The keynote speech by Dr Sharon Bong (Monash University) at the 9th QRAM National Seminar 2012 at UM on March 31, 2012.

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
725
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Purpose: To describe; uncover deep meaning; study ONE unit on many variables; build theory (not to generalise, make inferences about relationships, study many units on a few variables, inferentially, test theory) Methods: Interviews, focus groups, case studies, ethnography, phenomenological studies (not experimental studies) Assumptions: Value-laden (not value-free), context embedded (not context free), subject-object dependent 9not subject-object independent), many realities exist (one reality exists), relativism (not objectivism) Findings: in-depth description of a case, categories of themes/ data (not statistically on-significant or significant relationships among variables, support/ non-support for hypothesis Implications: no neutrality possible, findings generalisable to some extent, emerging theory/ hypothesis
  • Truth value: confidence of reader in research findings
  • ‘ strong objectivity’: intellectual rigour & political commitment (feminist standpoint epistemology); situating self in research (transparent with biases), reflexivity Ethnography: more accurate reflection of culture or history (i.e. cultural trends or idiosyncrasies); interviewing: follow-up Variety of data sources for reliabiltiy check  complete picture Accuracy of data (i.e. audio-taped interviews) Emerging meanings by interweaving data sets (quan-qual) rather than logical consistency between different data sets
  • Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee ( MUHREC ) confidentiality ≠ anonymity (high & low impact) Theoretical sampling: following where data leads you  hypothesis-generating
  • Applicability—can research be applied to other samples Context limited (transferability)—do findings hold upon other settings Replicability (consistency)—same circumstances  same outcomes  knowledge that is situated, contextual (partial truths)
  • Analyses of words and images ≠ nmbers Naturally occurring data  situations that exist independently of researcher’s intervention;  presuppositions in order to witness subjects’ world in their own time Attempting to document the words from point of view of people studied ≠ hypothesis testing
  • Interviewees who are ‘influential, prominent and well-informed’ (Marshall and Rossman 1995)
  • http://www.monash.edu.au/research/ethics/human/index.html

Transcript

  • 1. Refining Qualitative Data QRAM 9th National Seminar 2012
  • 2. Consistency-questions model What are questions or purposes of the research? What then are the research methods? What are the underlying assumptions? What are the findings? What are the implications from the findings?
  • 3. Qualitative method & methodology Research ‘Hypothesis’ design Theory Data building generation Data analyses
  • 4. Design validity criteria Viable data Reliable method Generalisable analyses  truth value (credibility)
  • 5. Viable data Objectivity Prolonged engagement on-site Triangulation Member checking Structural relationships
  • 6. Reliable method Interviewing as method of generating data Ethics in researching (MUHREC) Theoretical sampling Data analyses (CAQDAS)—ATLAS.ti
  • 7. Generalisable analyses Applicability Context limited (transferability) Replicability (consistency) Leaving an audit trail
  • 8. Sense of qualitative methods Preference for qualitative data Preference for naturally occurring data Preference for meanings Preference for inductive research (hypothesis-generating)
  • 9. Quan-Qual continuum Qualitative  Quantitative Data  theory  Theory  data Grounded theory  Hypothesis testing Empirical  conceptual  Conceptual  Inductive (theory- empirical building)  Deductive (theory testing) Political (value-laden)  Apolitical (value free)
  • 10. Interviewing ‘purposeful conversation’ Method of generating data (interview transcript as non-extant text) Semi-structured, in-depth, face-to-face ‘paradigmatic feminist method’ Emancipatory paradigm: ‘praxis, empowerment/ reciprocity
  • 11. Interviewer-interviewee Locating self in research Being transparent & accountable Epistemic privilege (who knows) Reciprocal reflexivity: Knower/ known  knower-known Theoretical sampling (Grounded Theory Methodlogy)  generalisability of analyses Elite interviewing
  • 12. Ethics in interviewing Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (MUHREC) High risk/ low risk research : Participants Types of activities Informed Consent (≠ implied consent) Collection, use and disclosure of information
  • 13. Explanatory Statement Sampling (how & why) Research aims Benefits Method of generating data Time involved Inconvenience/ discomfort Withdrawal from research Confidentiality Data storage (data for other purpose)
  • 14. Consent Form Data as information  Agree to be interviewed  Agree to allow interviewed to be recorded  Agree to make myself available for follow- up interviews Data as potential information  Use of data for future research projects (optional)
  • 15. Sensitive topic ‘one that potentially poses for those involved a substantial threat, the emergence of which renders problematic for the researcher and/or researched the collection, holding, and/ or dissemination of research data’ (Renzetti and Lee 199: 5) Researcher: stewardship of data
  • 16. Grounded Theory Methdology Data as source of theory (hypothesis- building) ‘Theory’: relationship among categories that is inductively generated from ‘units of meaning’ (Kelle 1997) ‘Hypothesis’: tentative and imprecise conjecture about possible relationships between two domains of interest (Kelle 1997)
  • 17. Data analyses using CAQDAS CAQDAS: Computer-assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (ALTAS.ti) Data: interview transcript Data analyses: data management & interpretation  coding (code-and-retrieve) Codes: heuristic devices (units of meaning)  theory-building Coding: De-contextualise (data reduction) & re- contextualise  Fine-grained hermeneutic analysis