Qualitative research

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Dr.C.Thanavathi
M.A.(His.), M.Phil. (His.), B.A. (Eng.), M.Ed., M.Phil. (Edn.)
DGT., DCA, SET (Edn.), CTE, PGDHE, Ph.D. (Edn.), Ph.D. (His.)
Assistant Professor of History,
V.O.C. College of Education, Thoothukudi – 628008.
9629256771
thanavathic@thanavathi-edu.in, http://thanavathi-
edu.in/index.html
UNIT II
CLASSIFICATION OF RESEARCH
M.Ed. – Semester I
Basics in Educational Research

Content
Introduction
Stages of QualitativeResearch
Collecting the Data
Data Analysis Steps
Characteristics of Qualitative Research
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS
1. Interviews
2. Focus Groups
3. Observation
a) Participant observation,
b) Non participant observation
4. Ethnography
5. Grounded Theory
6. Phenomenology
7. Narrative
8. Case Study
9. Action Research
10. Historical Research
11. Content Analysis
12. Document and Artifact Analysis
ANALYZING QUALITATIVE DATA
Overall Approaches to analysing qualitative
data
Methods for Analyzing Qualitative Data
TECHNIQUES FOR ENSURING QUALITY
IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCHES
Comparisons between Qualitative and
Quantitative Methods
Strengths of Qualitative Research
Weakness of Qualitative Research
Advantages of Qualitative Research
Disadvantages of Qualitative Research

Introduction
Qualitative research is defined as a research devoted to developing an understanding of
human systems, be they small, such as a teacher and his or her students and classroom, or
large, such as a cultural system. Qualitative research studies typically include ethnographies,
case studies, and generally descriptive in nature. They often are called ethnographies, which
are somewhat more specific. Goetz and LeCompte define ethnographies as "analytic
descriptions or reconstructions of intact cultural scenes and groups". A case study may
indeed be viewed as ethnography; however, the investigator may have set out to answer a
particular question rather than to describe a group or scene as a whole.
Qualitative research methods typically include interviews and observations, but may also
include case studies, surveys, and historical and document analysis.
Qualitative research has several hallmarks. It is conducted in a natural setting, without
intentionally manipulating the environment. It typically involves highly detailed
rich descriptions of human behaviors and opinions. The perspective is that humans construct
their own reality, and an understanding of what
they do it. There is allowance for the “multiple
they do may be based on why they believe
realities” individuals thus might construct
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS 1

in an environment. The research questions often evolve as the study does, because the
researcher wants to know “What is happening,” and may not want to bias the study by
focusing the investigation too narrowly. The researcher becomes a part of the study by
interacting closely with the subjects of the study. The researcher attempts to be open to the
subjects’ perceptions of “what is”; that is, researchers
views of the subjects.
are bound by the values and world
Stages of QualitativeResearch
• Identifying a research problem/stating the problem
• Reviewing the literature
• Specifying a purpose and research questions
• Collecting the data
• Analyzing the data
• Determining the quality of data
• Reporting the research

Collecting the Data
Qualitative research …
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Involves studying a small number of individuals or sites.
Is conducted in a natural setting.
Is focused on participant perspectives.
Has the researcher as the primary instrument for data collection.
Uses multiple methods of data collection in the form of words or pictures.
Involves extended firsthand engagement.
Focuses on the centrality of meaning for participants.
Deals with dynamic systems.
Deals with wholeness and complexity and assumes that change is constant.
Is subjective.
Uses an emergent design.
DataAnalysis Steps
• Step 1: Organize and prepare the data for analysis.
• Step 2: Read through all the data to obtain a general sense of the information
and to reflect on its overall meaning.

• Step 3: Begin detailed analysis with a coding process. Coding is the process of
taking text data or pictures, segmenting sentences (or paragraphs) or images
into categories, and labeling these categories with a term, often a term based on
the actual language of the participant.
Step 4: Use the codes to generate a description of the setting or people as well
as categories or themes for analysis. Description involves a detailed rendering
of information about people, place, or events in a setting. Researchers can
generate codes for this description.
Step 5: Advance how the descriptions and themes will be represented in the
qualitative narrative.
Step 6: Evaluate the lessons learned from the data and make interpretations (or
meaning) of data.
▪
▪
•
•
•
Characteristics of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research does not include statistical or empirical calculations [Brink, 1993].
The researcher is the primary instrument for data collection and analysis. It is usually
involved with
institutions to
hypothesis, or
fieldwork. The researchers must go to the people, setting, site, and
observe behavior in its natural setting. It
theories rather than tests existing theory.
builds abstractions, concepts,
Different types of qualitative

research have some common characteristics as follows [Ely et al., 1991; Hammersley &
Atkinson, 1993]:
• The researcher has the opportunity of collecting data directly from the participants
through direct encounters with individuals, through one to one interviews or group
interviews or by observation.
Data are used to develop concepts and theories that help us to understand the
social world.
The sampling seeks to demonstrate representativeness of findings through random
selection of subjects.
It seeks to gain a better understanding of people’s thoughts, attitudes, and
behaviors.
The researcher remains open to alternative explanations.
It is concerned with the opinions, experiences, and feelings of individuals
producing subjective data.
It is rooted in people’s everyday lives; how they experience and make sense of
phenomena occurring in their lives.
It requires clear information and detail analysis of the respondents’ opinions.
It describes social phenomena as they occur naturally.
The data have primacy; the theoretical framework is not given previously, but
can be derived from the data.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

• It is conducted in ‘real life’ and day-to-day settings, not in controlled or
laboratory settings.
It focuses on individual and person-to-person interactions.
A researcher needs to spend a lot of time in the research settings with the
participants.
The data are presented in a narrative form, i.e., in the words of the individuals
participating.
A researcher must avoid taking premature decision of the study.
It is context-bound, and researchers must be context sensitive.
It seeks to establish a holistic perspective of a given situation.
It focuses on discovery and understanding, which requires flexibility in the
research design.
A researcher is responsible to obtain true information and to ensure the
participants’ ethical treatment.
The product of it is richly descriptive.
A researcher is an integral part of the research process. The issue is not one of
minimizing the influence of the researcher, but of knowing how the researcher
was involved in data collection and analysis in order to assess better the
information they provide.
It has the ability of the researcher to use their motivation and personal interest
to stimulate the study.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

• Data collection and data analysis proceed together.
• Typically the findings are in the form of themes, categories, concepts or tentative
hypotheses or theories.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS
1.Interviews
In contrast to the relatively non-interactive, non-participant observation methods described
earlier, interviews represent a classic qualitative research method that is directly interactive.
Interview techniques, too, vary in how they may be classified, and again, most vary in certain
dimensions along continua, rather than being clearly dichotomous. For instance, Bernard
(1988) describes interview techniques as being structured or unstructured to various degrees.
He describes the most informal type of interviewing, followed by unstructured interviewing
that has some focus. Next, Bernard mentions semi-structured interviewing and finally
structured interviews, typically involving what he calls an interview schedule, which others
call interview protocols, that is, sets of questions, or scripts. Fontana and Frey (1994) expand
this classification scheme by noting that interviews may be conducted individually or in
groups. Again, exemplifying modern trends
unstructured interviews now may include
in qualitative research, these authors add that
oral histories, and creative and postmodern

interviewing, the latter of which may include use of visual media and polyphonic
interviewing, that is, almost verbatim reporting of respondents’ words, as well as gendered
interviewing in response to feminist concerns.
Goetz and LeCompte (1984) note that other classification schemes may include
scheduled versus nonscheduled or standardized versus non-standardized. However, their
division of interview techniques into key-informant interviews, ‘career histories, and surveys
represents a useful introduction to the range of interviewing techniques.
An interview is a form of conversation in which the purpose is for the researcher to gather
data that address the study’s goals and questions. A researcher, particularly one who will be
in the setting for a considerable period of time or one doing participant observations, may
choose to conduct a series of relatively unstructured interviews that seem more like
conversations with the respondents. Topics will be discussed and explored in a somewhat
loose but probing manner. The researcher may return periodically to continue to interview
the respondents in more depth, for instance to focus on questions further or to triangulate with
other data.
In contrast, structured interviews may be conducted in which the researcher follows a sort of
script of questions, asking the same questions, and in the same order, of all respondents.

Goetz and LeCompte (1984) consider these to be surveys, while other authors do not make
this distinction, and some consider surveys and questionnaires to be instruments respondents
complete on their own without an interview.
Interviews or a series of interviews may focus on aspects of a respondent’s life and represent
a standard technique in anthropology for understanding aspects of culture from an insider’s
view. Fontana and Frey (1994) call these as oral histories. Goetz and LeCompte (1984) note
that for educators such interviews, which focus on career histories, may be useful for
exploring how and why subjects respond to events, situations, or, of interest to educational
innovations.
Guidelines for conducting interviews are relatively straightforward if one considers that
both the researcher, as data-gathering instrument, and the respondents are human
beings with their various strengths and foibles at communicating The cornerstone is to
be sure that one truly listens to respondents and records what they say, rather than to the
researcher’s perceptions or interpretations. This is a good rule of thumb in qualitative
research in general. It is best to maintain the integrity of raw data, using respondents’
words, including quotes liberally. Most researchers, as a study progresses, also maintain
field notes that contain interpretations of patterns, to be refined and investigated on an
ongoing basis.

2.Focus groups
In this method of data collection, the researcher brings together a small
subjects/respondents to talk about on the area of interest. The group size is kept
small, so that its members can convey opinions unreservedly. A ‘topic guide’
number of
consciously
to facilitate
conversation is usually prepared in advance and the researcher typically leads the group to
ensure that a variety of facets of the topic are discovered. The discussion is normally tape-
recorded, then transcribed and analyzed.
3. Observation
(a) Participant Observation
Participant observation is a qualitative method frequently used in social science research. It
is based on a long tradition of ethnographic study in anthropology. In participant observation,
the observer becomes “part” of the environment, or the cultural context. The method
usually involves the researcher’s spending considerable time “in the field,” as
anthropologists do. Anthropologists typically spend a year or more
order to really understand the culture in depth, even when they begin
in a cultural setting in
the study with a broad
overall research question. The hallmark of participant observation is interaction among the
researcher and the participants. The main subjects take part in the study to varying degrees,
but the researcher interacts with them continually. For instance, the study may involve
periodic interviews interspersed with observations so that the researcher can question the

subjects and verify perceptions and patterns. These interviews may themselves take many
forms. For example, a researcher may begin by conducting open-ended unstructured
interviews with several subjects to begin to formulate the research questions. This may be
followed by a set of structured interviews with a few other subjects, based on results of the
first series, forming a sort of oral questionnaire. Results of these interviews may then
determine what will initially be recorded during observations. Later, once patterns begin to
appear in the observational data, the researcher may conduct interviews asking the subjects
about these patterns and why they think they are occurring. Similarly, a researcher might
conduct videotaped observations of a set of subjects, analyze
taxonomies of behaviors, and then conduct interviews with the
the tapes together, to determine how the subjects themselves
the tapes to begin to make
subjects, perhaps they view
categorize these behaviors.
Thus, the researcher becomes a long-term participant in the research setting.
The stages of participant observation, from an anthropological perspective, have been
delineated by Bernard (1988). He describes (1) the excitement, and sometimes fear, of the
initial contact period; (2) which is often a type of shock as one gets to know the culture in
more detail; a period of intense data collection he identifies with discovering the obvious, (3)
followed by the need for a real break; a stage in which the study becomes more focused;
(4) followed by exhaustion, a break and frantic activity; and (5) finally, carefully taking leave
of the field setting.

Borg and Gall (1979) discuss the types of questions one might address using participant
observation techniques. These include such questions as who the participants are; what are
their typical and atypical patterns of behavior; and where, when, how, and why the
phenomena occur. In short, participant observation is often successfully used to describe
what is happening in a context and why it happens. These are the questions which cannot
be answered in the standard experiment.
3.(b) Nonparticipant Observation
Nonparticipant observation is one of several methods for collecting data considered to
be relatively unobtrusive. Several types of nonparticipant observations have been identified
by Goetz and LeCompte (1984). These include stream-of-behavior chronicles, recorded in
written narratives or using videotape or audiotape; proxemics and kinesics, that is, the study
of uses of social space and movement; and interaction analysis protocols, typically in the
form of observations of particular types of behaviors, categorized and coded for analysis of
patterns. Bernard (1988) describes two types of nonparticipant observation, which he calls
disguised field observation and naturalistic field experiments. He cautions in the first case
for care to be taken that
and constructivist (as
subjects are not harmfully
well as deconstructionist)
deceived. Reflecting recent postmodern
trends, Adler and Adler (1994) extend

paradigms of observational research to include dramaturgical constructions of reality, and
auto-observation, as well as more typical ethno-methodology.
As with participant observation, nonparticipant observers may or may not use structured
observation forms, but are often more likely to. In this type of study, often several trained
observers make brief sampled observations over periods of time, and observation forms help
to ensure consistency of the data being recorded.
Nonparticipant observation is often used to study focused aspects of a setting, in order to
answer specific questions within a study. This method can yield extensive detailed data, over
many subjects and settings, if desired, in order to search for patterns, or to test hypotheses
developed as a result of using other methods, such as interviews. It can thus be a
powerful tool in triangulation. Observational data may be coded into categories, frequencies
tabulated, and relationships analyzed, yielding quantitative reports of results.
Goetz and LeCompte (1984) recommend that researchers strive to be as unobtrusive and
unbiased as possible. They suggest verification of data by using multiple observers. The units
of analysis, thus data to be recorded, should be specified before beginning; recording
methods should be developed; strategies for selection and sampling of units should be
determined; and finally, all processes should be tested and refined, before the study is begun
in earnest.

4.Ethnography
The word ‘ethno’ means people or folk and the meaning of ‘graphy’is to describe something.
The origin of ethnography is in cultural anthropology. Ethnography means describing a
culture and understanding another way of life from the native point of view (Neuman, 1997).
Here the researcher studies an intact cultural group in a natural setting over a prolonged period
of time by collecting primarily observational data (Creswell, 2003). Ethnography is carried
out in a natural setting (not in a laboratory) involving intimate, face-to-face interaction with
the participants and it presents an accurate reflection of participants’ perspectives and
behaviors by using the concept of culture as a lens through which to interpret results
(LeCompte and Schensul, 1999).
5.Grounded Theory
Grounded theory is considered a type of qualitative methodology. Strauss and Corbin (1994),
however, in their overview of grounded theory note that it is “a general methodology for
developing theory that is grounded in data systematically gathered and analyzed’, adding
that it is sometimes called the constant comparative method and that it is applicable as well
to quantitative research. In grounded theory, the data may come from observations,

interviews, and videotape or document analysis, and, as in other qualitative research, these
data may be considered strictly qualitative or may be quantitative. The purpose of the
methodology is to develop theory, through an iterative process of data analysis and
theoretical analysis, with verification of hypotheses ongoing throughout the study. A
grounded theory perspective leads the researcher to begin a study without completely
preconceived notions about what the research questions should be, assuming that the theory
on which the study is based will be tested and refined as the research is conducted.
The researcher collects extensive data with an open mind. As the study progresses, he or she
continually examines the data for patterns, and the patterns lead the researcher to build
the theory. Further, data collection leads to refinement of the questions. The researcher
continues collecting and examining data until the patterns continue to repeat and few
relatively, or no clearly, new patterns emerge. The researcher builds the theory from the
phenomena, from the data, and the theory is thus built on, or “ grounded” in, the
phenomena.
As Borg and Gall (1989) note, even quantitative researchers see the value of grounded theory
and might use qualitative techniques in a pilot study without completely a priori notions of
theory to develop a more- grounded theory on which to base later experiments.

6.Phenomenology
Phenomenology is concerned with the ways in which human beings gain knowledge of the
world around them, moreover, phenomenology identifies different approaches to human
understanding and it argues that certain forms of knowing may be more constructive than
others. In a phenomenological research, the researcher identifies the essence of human
experiences concerning a phenomenon as described by participants in a study (Creswell,
2003). For example, Lauterbach (1993) studies five women who had lost a baby in late
pregnancy and their memories and experiences of this loss. Patton (1990) says that the key
question of phenomenology is ‘what is the experience of an activity or concept from these
particular participants’perspective?’
7.Narrative
Creswell (2003) says that narrative research is a form of inquiry in which the researcher
studies the lives of individuals and asks one or more individuals to provide stories about their
lives and then this information is retold or restoried by the researcher into a narrative
chronology.

8.Case Study
According to Willig (2001): The case study is not itself a research method, instead, it
constitutes and approach to the study of singular entities, which may involve the use of a wide
range of diverse methods of data collection and analysis. This is an extensive investigation of
just one person, group or event. The focus of case study is upon a particular unit and that is
the case. A case can be an organization, a city, a group of people, a community, a patient, a
school etc. The social unit being studied defines the case study, whether it is a person, a
program, a company, a situation or whatever. The strength of case study is that it can take
an example on an activity – ‘an instance in action’–and use multiple methods and data sources
to explore it and interrogate it and thus it can achieve a rich description of a phenomenon.
Neuman (1997) states that a qualitative researcher may use a case study approach where
he/she might gather a large amount of information on one or few cases, go into greater depth,
and get more details on cases being examined.
9.Action research
Action research is intended to result in the solution or improvement of a practical problem
(Krathwohl, 1998). This kind of research can solve the problems especially in the field of
education, social work, library science etc. This kind of research is mainly carried out by
the persons facing a problem or considering adopting a practice (Krathwohl, 1998).

10.Historical research
F. N. Kerlinger [1972] defines historical research as “Critical investigation of events,
development, and experiences of the past, careful consideration of past testimonies from the
perspective of information sources validity and subsequent interpretation of the concerned
testimonies.” Historical research seeks not only to discover the events of the past but also
to relate these past happenings to the present and to the future. According to Leininger
(1985), “Without a past there is no meaning to the present, nor can we develop a sense of
ourselves as individuals and as members of groups.”
The procedures of historical research are similar to other types of researches. It is the
systematic collection of past data, and subsequently to identify, classify, arrange, clarify,
evaluate, synthesize, elaborate, develop, and publish them by means of scientific methods.
It also helps the both researchers and readers to analyze the present events and realize future
ones. Many educational practices and theories can be captured properly by the use of
experiences. A historical researcher can neither manipulate nor control any of the variables,
as past events are unchangeable (Hroch et al., 1985).

The sources of historical data are divided them into four types as follows [Danto, 2008]:
• primary sources (these are original documents found in archives),
• secondary sources (works by other authors writing about history),
• official records (official records from various institutions, case reports), and
• private materials (chronicles, autobiographies, diaries, memoirs, records of oral
history).
The data for historical research should be subjected to two types of evaluation. These
evaluations are called external criticism and internal criticism. External criticism is concerned
with the authenticity or genuineness of the data and should be considered first. Internal
criticism examines the accuracy of the data, and is considered after the data are considered
to be genuine. Whereas external criticism establishes the validity of the data, internal
criticism establishes the reliability of the data. Aims of historical research are as follows
[Berg, 2012]:
11.Content analysis
Content analysis is a method of analyzing written, verbal or visual communication messages.
Leedy and Ormrod (2001) define it as “A detailed and systematic examination of the contents
of a particular body of materials for the purpose of identifying patterns, themes, or biases.”

The emphasis in conventional content analysis is on counting, where researchers would count
occurrences of a word, phrase, or theme. Sociologists used it to analyze social life by
interpreting words and images from documents, books, newspapers, films, arts, music, and
other cultural products and media. For example, responses to open-ended questions are on
the basis of content analysis. Content analysis, the examination of communication messages,
is used in evaluating the data from case studies.
The collection of data in content analysis is a two-step process: i) the researcher must analyze
the materials, and put them in a frequency table as each characteristics or qualities, and ii)
the researcher must conduct a statistical analysis so that the results are reported in a
quantitative format.
12.Document and Artifact Analysis
Beyond the above said methods many other unobtrusive methods exist for collecting
information about human behaviors. These fall roughly into the categories of document and
artifact analyses, but they overlap with other methods. For instance, the verbal or nonverbal
behavior streams produced during videotaped observations
microanalysis to answer an almost unlimited number of
may be subjected to intense
research questions. Content

analysis, as one example, may be done on these narratives. Moallem (1993), Higgins, and
Rice (1991) and Reiser and Mory (1991) used documents developed by the teachers (such
as instructional plans, class notes, hints, actual test papers etc.,) and analysed them to study
teacher’s planning, thinking, behaviors, and conceptions of testing.
Content analysis of prose in any form may also fall into this artifact-and-document category
of qualitative methodology. For Pelto and Pelto (1978), content analysis refer to analysis of
such cultural materials as folktales, folksongs, myths, and other literature, as educational
researchers would more likely analyze content presented in learning materials.
ANALYZING QUALITATIVE DATA
Qualitative data are considered to be the “rough materials researchers collect from the
world they are studying; they are the particulars that form the basis of analysis” (Bogdan
& Biklen, 1992). Qualitative data can take many forms, such as photos, objects, patterns of
choices in computer materials, videotapes of behaviors, etc. However, words often are the
raw materials that qualitative researchers analyze, and much advice from researchers
discusses analyzing these words.

Overall Approaches to Analyzing Qualitative Data
Qualitative researchers choose their methods of analysis not only by the research questions
and types of data collected but also based on the philosophical approach underlying the
study. For example, Miles and Huberman (1994) outline three overall approaches to
analyzing qualitative data.
(a) Interpretive Approach: An interpretive approach would be phenomenological
(objective reality) in nature or based on social interactionism. Researchers using this
approach would seek to present a holistic view of data rather than a condensed
view. They might seek to describe a picture of “ what is” They would generally not
choose to categorize data to reduce it. Miles and Huberman note that the interpretive
approach might be used by qualitative researchers in semiotics (Philosophy- A
philosophical theory of the functions of signs and symbols), deconstructivism,
aesthetic criticism, ethnomethodology (a branch of anthropology methodology), and
hermeneutics (the branch of theology deals with the principles of interpretation).
(b) Collaborative Social Research Approach: It is often
many,
used
and
by action researchers
in partnerships composed of members of sometimes opposing
organizations.

(c) Social Anthropology Approach: This approach to analyzing data described by
Miles and Huberman relies primarily on ethnography. Researchers using this
approach seek to provide detailed, or rich, descriptions across multiple data sources.
They seek regular patterns of human behavior in data, usually sifting, coding, and
sorting data as they are collected, and following up analyses with ongoing
observations and interviews to explore and refine these patterns in what is called a
recursive approach (Goetz and LeCompte, 1994). Researchers using the social
anthropology approach also tend to be concerned with developing and testing theory.
Researchers who develop life histories, work in grounded theory and ecological
psychology, and develop narrative studies, applied studies, and case studies often
base their analyses on this social anthropology approach. Many of the methods for,
and views about, analyzing qualitative data can be seen to be based on this social
anthropology approach.
Methods for Analyzing Qualitative Data
Depending on the basic philosophical approach of the qualitative researcher, many
methods exist for analyzing data. Miles and Huberman state that qualitative data analysis
consists of “three concurrent flows of activity: data reduction, data
conclusion drawing/ verification” (1994). Most researchers advocate that
display, and
reducing and

condensing data, and thereby beginning to seek meaning, should begin as the study begins
and continue throughout data collection.
Data Reduction. Goetz and LeCompte (1994) describe the conceptual basis for reducing
and condensing data in this ongoing style as the study progresses. The researcher theorizes
as the study begins and builds and tests theories based on observed patterns in data
continually. Researchers compare, aggregate, contrast, sort, and order data. These authors
note that while large amounts of raw data are collected, the researcher may examine in detail
selected cases or negative cases to test theory. They describe analytic procedures
looking for
qualitative
researchers use to
patterns, links, and
researcher engages
determine what the data mean. These procedures involve
relationships. In contrast to experimental research, the
in speculation while looking for meaning in data; this speculation will
lead the researcher to make new observations, conduct new interviews, and look more deeply
for new patterns in this “recursive” process.
Researchers may derive patterns in many ways. They may, for example, engage in what
Goetz and LeCompte call “analytic induction”, reviewing data for categories of
phenomena, defining sets of relationships, developing hypotheses, collecting more data,
and refining hypotheses accordingly. As noted earlier, interpretivists would be unlikely to

use this method. They would not tend to categorize, but would scan for patterns in order to
build a picture or tell a story to describe what is occurring.
Another method, constant comparison, would rely on those using a grounded-theory
approach. This method involves categorizing, or coding, data as they are collected, and
continually examining data for examples of similar cases and patterns. Data collection can
cease when few or no new categories of data are being encountered.
It should be noted that virtually all researchers who use an ethnographic approach, advocate
writing up field notes immediately after leaving the research site each day. Observations
not recorded will quickly be forgotten. Researchers may not realize the importance of some
small phenomenon early on, so these details should be recorded each day. Most
authors further recommend that researchers scan these data daily, analyzing thoughtfully
for patterns and relationships, and perhaps adding to or modifying data collection
procedures accordingly.
Field notes consist of observations and the researcher’s interpretations. Bogdan and Biklen
(1984) call the contents of field notes in two forms as the descriptive part and the reflective
part.

If researchers collect data using audiotape or videotape, written transcripts of language
recorded are often prepared. Later analysis can be done, but notes should still be recorded
immediately after being in the field. Such notes, for instance, will include observations
about participants’nonverbal behaviors, what was occurring in the immediate surroundings,
or what activities participants were engaging in. Even in the case of interviews, notes might
include these descriptions, as well as what participants were doing just prior to interviews.
As noted in the discussion of data collection methods, audiotapes and videotapes may be
subjected to detailed microanalysis. Usually data are coded and counted, but, due to the
labor-intensive nature of this type of analysis, segments of these “streams of behavior” are
often systematically selected for analysis.
If researchers have collected documents from subjects, such as logs, journals, diaries,
memos, and letters, these can also be analyzed as raw data. Similarly, official documents of
an organization can be subjected to analysis.
Collecting data in the form of photographs, films, and videotapes, either those produced by
participants or by the researcher, has a long tradition in anthropology and education. These
data, too, can be analyzed for meaning.
Coding Data. Early in the study,
develop categories of phenomena.
the researcher will begin to scan recorded data
These categories are usually called codes. They
and to
enable

the researcher to manage data by labeling, storing, and retrieving it according to the
codes. Of course, the codes created depend on nature of the study, setting, participants, and
research questions. In fact, the codes are the researchers’ way of beginning to get at the
meaning of the data. There are, therefore, as many coding schemes as researchers. Still,
examples of coding schemes will here be provided in an attempt to help the reader.
Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest that data can be coded descriptively or
interpretively. Unlike some authors, they suggest creating an initial “start list” of codes
and refining these in the field. Researchers using a strictly inductive approach might choose
not to create any codes until some observations and informal interviews were conducted
from which codes could be induced.
Bogdan and Biklen (1992) recommend reading data over at least several times in order to
begin to develop a coding scheme. They describe coding data according to categories and
details of settings; types of situation observed; perspectives and views of subjects of
all manner of phenomena and objects; processes, activities, events, strategies, and
methods observed; and social relationships. Goetz and LeCompte (1984) describe coding
to form a taxonomic analysis, a sort of outline of what is related to what, and in what ways.

TECHNIQUES FOR ENSURING QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCHES
Erlandson et al. (1993) describe these techniques for ensuring the quality of a study:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Prolonged engagement
Persistent observation
Triangulation
Referential adequacy
Peer debriefing
Member checking
Reflexive journal
Thick description
Purposive sampling
Audit trail

Comparisons between Qualitative and Quantitative Methods
Sl.
No
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
1. Reality is objective and singular, separate
from researcher.
Reality is subjective and multiple, as seen by
participants in the study.
2. Researcher is independent from what is
being researched.
Researcher interacts with what is being
researched.
3. The aim is to classify features, count
them, and construct statistical models, in
an attempt to explain what is observed.
The aim is complete and detailed description.
4. Researcher knows clearly in advance
what he/she is looking for.
Researcher may only know roughly in
advance what he/she is looking for.
5. Primary purpose is to determine cause
and-effect relationships
Primary purpose is to describe on-going
processes
6. Precise hypothesis is stated before the
start of the investigation; theories govern
the purpose of the investigation in a
deductive manner
Hypotheses are developed during the
investigation; questions govern the purpose
of the investigation; theories are developed
inductively

Sl.
No
7. The independent variable is manipulated There is no specific independent controlled
and variable; the concern is to study naturally
occurring phenomena without interference
8. Researcher uses tools, such as
Questionnaires or equipment to collect
Numerical data
Researcher is the data gathering instrument
9. Objective – seeks precise measurement
and analysis of target concepts (ex.) uses
surveys, questionnaires etc.
Subjective – individuals interpretation of
events is important, (ex) uses participant
observation, in-depth interviews etc.
10. Quantitative data is more efficient, able to
test hypotheses, but may miss contextual
detail.
Qualitative data is more ‘rich’, time
consuming and less able to be generalized.
11. Context – free. Context – bound.
12. Objective collection of data is a
requirement
Objective collection of data is not a
requirement; data collectors may interact with
the participants
13. Researcher tends to remain objectively
separated from the subject matter.
Researcher tends to become subjectively
immersed in the subject matter.

generalization) if at all
Sl.
No
14. Research design is specified before the
start of the investigation
Research design is flexible and develops
throughout the investigation
15. Facts are value-free and unbiased. Facts are value-laden and biased.
16. Data are represented and summarized in
numerical form
Data are represented or summarized in
narrative or verbal forms, picture or objects.
17. Reliability and validity determined
through statistical and logical methods
Reliability and validity determined through
multiple comparison of sources of
information (triangulation)
18. Samples are selected to represent the
population
Samples are purposefully selected or single
cases are studied
19. Study of behavior is in the natural or
artificial setting
Study of behaviour is in the natural setting
20. Use of design or statistical analyses to
control for threats to internal validity.
Use of logical analyses to control or account
for alternative explanations.
21. Use of inferential statistical procedures to
demonstrate external validity
(specifically, population validity)
Use of similar cases to determine the
generalizability of findings (logical

Sl.
No
22. Rely on research design and data
gathering instruments to control for
procedural bias
Rely on the researcher to come to terms with
procedural bias
23. Phenomena are broken down or
simplified for study
Phenomena are studied holistically, as a
complex system
24. Conclusions are stated with a
predetermined degree of certainty (i.e.,
level).
Conclusions are tentative and subjected to
ongoing examination
25. Generalisations leading to predication,
Explanation and understanding.
Patterns and theories developed for
understanding.
26. Recommended during latter phases of
Research projects.
Recommended during earlier phases of
Research projects.

Strengths of Qualitative Research
In qualitative research, we need to emphasize less on counting numbers of people who
think or behave in certain ways, and need more emphasis on explaining why people
think and behave in certain ways. It is good at simplifying and managing data without
destroying complexity and context. Some major strengths of qualitative research are as
follows [Yauch & Steudel, 2003; Creswell, 2014]:
• Open-ended questioning reveals new or unanticipated phenomenon, and raises
more issues through broad and open-ended inquiry.
It includes a diverse and representative cross-section of affected persons.
It is in-depth analysis of the impact of an emergency.
It is rich and detailed information about affected populations.
It allows researchers to explore the views of homogenous as well as diverse
groups of people help unpack these differing perspectives within a community.
As statistics are not used in it, and uses a more descriptive, narrative style; and
gains new insight.
It can play the important role of suggesting possible relationships, causes, effects,
and dynamic processes.
It allows people to open up and allows for new evidence, not even initially
considered.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

• It provides a rich picture of social phenomena and in its specific contexts
reveals critical incidents.
It provides a holistic interpretation of the detailed processes that have, and
shapes people’s lives.
Its cultural assessment is the ability to probe for underlying values, beliefs, and
assumptions.
It provides insights into intra-household relations and processes.
It offers deeper insights into causes and direction of causal processes.
It permits researchers to access data on difficult issues, e.g., domestic violence.
The data collection process requires limited numbers of respondents, which can
be carried out with limited resources.
Data on marginal groups that surveys often cannot locate can be collected, e.g.,
illegal migrants, the homeless, child-headed households.
Because of close researcher involvement, the researcher gains an insider’s view
of the field, which allows the researcher to find issues that are often missed by
the scientific, more positivistic enquiries.
It encourages creativity and innovative explanatory frameworks.
Data analyst is usually heavily involved in data collection and knows its
strengths.
Participatory methodologies empower, rather than objectify respondents.
It adds flesh and blood to social analysis.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Weaknesses of Qualitative Research
In qualitative research participants studies often involve smaller numbers of tools
include and utilize open-ended questionnaires interview guides. Qualitative research has
some weaknesses as other researches. Some major weaknesses of qualitative research
are as follows [Yauch & Steudel, 2003; Bowen, 2006]:
•
•
Is difficult to demonstrate the scientific rigor of the data collection exercise.
It is generally open-ended; the participants have more control over the content
of the data collected.
It does not have a preconceived, finite set of issues to examine.
Results in data are not objectively verifiable.
Collection of the data can be time consuming and costly. Therefore, the time
required for data collection, analysis, and interpretation is lengthy.
It needs skilled interviewers successfully carry out the primary data collection
activities.
It requires a labor-intensive analysis process, such as, categorization, recoding,
etc.
The important issue could be overlooked and go unnoticed.
•
•
•
•
•
•

• Low levels of standardization; and definitions/criteria, etc., vary from researcher
to researcher.
Contexts, situations, events, conditions, and interactions cannot be replicated to
any extent, nor can generalizations be made to a wider context than the one studied
with any confidence.
The viewpoints of both researcher and participants have to be identified and
elucidated because of issues of bias.
All researchers’ interpretations are limited and positioned subjects; personal
experience and knowledge influence the observations and conclusions.
It needs skilled interviewers successfully carry out the primary data collection
activities.
Completion of research is often dependents on a single individual.
Often results cannot be generalized as it is unclear, whom they represent.
Findings less likely to influence policy as they lack the legitimacy of science, and
the precision of numbers.
Datasets are rarely made publicly available so that findings cannot be tested, and
other researchers cannot use the dataset.
Because of the subjective nature of qualitative data and its origin in single contexts,
it is difficult to apply conventional standards of reliability and validity.
No objectively verifiable results obtained.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Advantages of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research reflects the detailed description of participants’ feelings,
opinions, and experiences; and interprets the meanings of their actions [Denzin, 1989].
The advantages of qualitative research make it possible to gather and analyze
individualistic data on deeper levels. In qualitative research, it is possible to gain new
insights into consumer thoughts, demographic behavioral patterns, and emotional
reasoning processes. The advantages of performing qualitative research are as follows
[Conger, 1998]:
• It is flexible to follow unexpected ideas during research and explore processes
effectively.
It raises the sensitivity to contextual factors.
A researcher has a clear vision on what to expect.
Issues and subjects covered can be evaluated in depth and in detail.
Smaller sample sizes are used, which save costs.
Here subject materials can be evaluated with some greater details.
Complexities and subtleties about the subjects of the research can be avoided in
many positivistic inquiries.
It enhances the ability to study symbolic dimensions and social meaning.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
Research frameworks are based on available data.
Interviews are not limited to particular questions, and can be redirected by
researchers in real time.
Data are based on human experiences and observations. As a result they are more
compelling and powerful.
Data complexities can be incorporated into generated conclusions.
It provides more contents for the creation of new ideas.
The direction and framework of research can be revised quickly as soon as fresh
information and findings emerge.
It increases opportunities to develop empirically supported new ideas and
theories, for in-depth and longitudinal explorations of leadership phenomena, and
for more relevance and interest for practitioners.
•
•
•
•
•
Disadvantages of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research displays its own strengths however; it has also disadvantages.
Qualitative research approaches sometimes leave out contextual sensitivities, and focus
more on meanings and experiences [Silverman, 2010].
neglect the social and cultural constructions of the
Richards, 1994]. Some disadvantages are as follows:
Purely qualitative research may
variables studied [Richards &

•
•
•
It is not statistically representative.
Data rigidity is more difficult to assess, demonstrate, and maintain.
Data are usually gathered from few individuals or cases. Therefore, findings
and outcomes cannot be spread to larger populations.
The created data are not always accepted.
The quantity of data makes interpretation and analysis time-consuming.
Researcher influence can have a negative effect on the collected data.
Unseen data can disappear during the research process.
Replicating results can be very difficult with research.
Difficult decisions may require repetitive research periods.
It is heavily dependent on the skills of the researcher, and can be easily
influenced by personal idiosyncrasies and biases of researchers.
It is sometimes not accepted and understood especially within scientific
communities.
Issues on confidentiality and anonymity can pose problems during presentation
of findings.
The presence of researcher in the process of data gathering is unavoidable, and
can therefore affect or influence the responses of subjects.
Findings can be difficult to present in visual ways.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

REFERENCES
Adler, P.A. & Adler, P. (1994). Observational techniques. In NX Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln, eds.
Handbook of qualitative research, 377-92.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bernard, H.R. (1988). Research methods in cultural anthropology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: an introduction to theory and
methods, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Brinkmann, S., Jacobsen, M. H., & Kristiansen, S. (2014). Historical Overview of Qualitative
Research in the Social Sciences. Patricia Leavy (Ed.) pp. 17–42. The Oxford Handbook of
Qualitative Research. Chapter 2, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burgess, R. G. (1985). Issues in Educational Research: Qualitative Methods. Lewes, Falmer
Press.
Burns, N., & Grove, S. K. (2009). The Practice of Nursing Research: Appraisal, Synthesis,
and Generation of Evidence (6th Ed.). St. Louis, Mo: Saunders/Elsevier.
Clifford, C. (1997). Qualitative Research Methodology in Nursing and Healthcare.
Open Learning Foundation/Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five
Approaches (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method
Approaches (3rd Ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Danto, E. A. (2008). Historical Research. Pocket Guides to Social Work Research
Methods. New York: Oxford University Press.
Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive Interactionism. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of
Qualitative Research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of
Qualitative Research (3rd Ed.), pp. 1–32. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (2011). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research
(5th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Ely, M., Anzul, M., Friedman, T., Garner, D., & Steinmetz, A. (1991). Doing Qualitative
Research: Circles within Circles. London: Falmer Press.
Erlandson, D.A., Harris, E.L., Skipper, B.L. & Allen, S.D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry: a guide
to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Flick, U. (2014). An Introduction to Qualitative Research (5th Ed.). SAGE, London.
Fontana, A. & Frey, J.H. (1994) Interviewing: the art of science. In N.K. Denzin, & Y.S. Lincoln,
eds. Handbook of qualitative research, 361-77. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.
Glaser, B. G. (1992). Emergence vs. Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill
Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Goetz, J.P. & LeCompte, M.D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research.
Orlando, FL: Academic.
Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction. London: SAGE Publications.
Hancock, B., Ockleford, E., & Windridge, K. (2009). An Introduction to Qualitative Research,
National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The NIHR RDS EM/YH.
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing Qualitative Research in Educational Settings. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative Researching. London, SAGE Publications.

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook,
2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moallem, M. (1994, Feb.). An experienced teacher~ model of thinking and teaching: an ethnographic
study on teacher cognition. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for
Communications and Technology, Nashville, TN.
Neundorf, K. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousand
Oaks: CA.
Pelto, P.J. & Pelto, G.H. (1978). Anthropological research: the structure of inquiry, 2nd ed. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press.
Silverman, D. (2010). Qualitative Research. London: SAGE.
Simons, H. (2009). Case Study Research in Practice. SAGE, London.
Spradley, J.P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, London, New
Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative Research for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Strauss, A.L. & Corbin, J.M. (1994) Grounded theory methodology: an overview. In NX Denzin
YS. Lincoln, eds. Handbook of qualitative research, 273-85. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stringer, E. T. (1999). Action Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Wolcott, H. (2009). Writing up Qualitative Research (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
----ooooOOOOoooo----
&

Follow Me
Youtube
https://www.youtube.co
m/c/THANAVATHIC
Slideshare
https://www.slidesh
are.net/thna1581981
Blog
https://thanavathi.
wordpress.com/

Dr.C.Thanavathi
M.A.(His.), M.Phil. (His.), B.A. (Eng.), M.Ed., M.Phil. (Edn.)
DGT., DCA, SET (Edn.), CTE, PGDHE, Ph.D. (Edn.), Ph.D. (His.)
Assistant Professor of History,
V.O.C. College of Education, Thoothukudi – 628008.
9629256771
thanavathic@thanavathi-edu.in
http://thanavathi-edu.in/index.html
THANKYOU

Qualitative research

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Qualitative research

More from Thanavathi C

Recently uploaded

Qualitative research