Direct and Indirect Qualitative Research Procedures - Essay Example

Direct and Indirect Qualitative Research Procedures Undertaking a research is considered an important milestone for a student as it helps him/her in applying the skills learnt during the course together with the analytical skills. Research plays an important role in finding an innovative to many issues while assisting in pointing out the root cause of any problem. Research as such is defined as a systematic process of gathering and analyzing information about a subject or event which subsequently helps not only the researcher but the society in general in understanding the subject or phenomenon in a better way. The process of collecting data involves investigation into a chain of events, material and sources to arrive at some conclusions or to establish new facts. In general research study can be carried out in two ways; i. Qualitative Research: This allows exploring even the traits like attitudes, perceptions or beliefs. Such research activity requires in-depth study of the subject. Albert Einstein once said1, “Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts”. The qualitative research is meant to take care of such situations actually. ii. Quantitative Research: This type of research calls for mathematical modelling and analysis of data collected during the process of research. It is more structured than qualitative and calls for quantification of data together with generalising the results. Talking about the comprehensive approach adopted during a qualitative research activity, Myers (2002) stated, “In communicating or generating the data, the researcher must make the process of the study accessible and write descriptively so tacit knowledge may best be communicated through the use of rich, thick descriptions”. The qualitative research in turn is further divided into two types namely; Direct research and Indirect research. Though at times, both these types appear to lead in similar direction, yet the procedures with which research is carried out often brings out many differences amongst these two types. While comparing these two approaches we find that; The direct approach to qualitative research is a non-disguised method while the indirect approach happens to be somewhat disguised. The difference is more apparent in the figure shown below; Qualitative research has the potential to go into different aspects of the subject in detail. Meredith et al (1989) feels that often research of this kind lends itself to the semi-structured, open ended type of interview to enable interviewees to expand on what they consider to be important and to frame those issues in their terms. In direct qualitative research in-depth interview is the norm. The focus group approach requires that we prepare a focus group well in advance to carry out the research. The group is prepared with the help of a selected few research participants. This is more like a brain storming session. The topic is discussed amongst the focus group with the help of a moderator from amongst the focus group participants only. Subsequently, the group interview is conducted and a final report is prepared by the researcher based on the outcomes of the discussion. On the other hand the depth interviews imply that one-to-one interviews are held amongst the researcher and the research participants. The researcher is supposed to solicit information from the research participant during the interview and accordingly prepare the databank. Burgess (1982) points out that such interview allows the researcher to probe deeply in order to find out ‘expansive’ responses, which often helps in uncovering previously unknown details so that a direction is also provided to future researchers. In the indirect method on the other hand the research participants are encouraged to come out with their own versions and understandings about the issue/s being taken up by the researcher. The respondents are supposed to ‘project’ their feelings or attitudes about the situation. In direct qualitative research, while the in-depth interviews help the researcher in coming out with a thorough knowledge, but it has couple of disadvantages as well. Conducting an interview is a specialised job in itself, and if the researcher goes for a professional interviewer, that leads to an increase in costs. The quality and comprehensiveness of the results in such type is heavily influenced by the competency of the researcher. Quite often after completing the in-depth interview, if the researcher is able to have lots of data and information, it gives rise to another kind of problem; now it becomes quite an arduous task to tabulate, interpret and analyse the data. The key feature of focus group can be tabulated as; Characteristics of Focus group Steps involved in Focus group research Advantages of Focus Group Disadvantages of Focus group 1. Group size 2. Group composition 3. Physical setting 4. Time duration 5. Recording 6. Moderator 7. Candidness of respondents amongst similar people 1.State the objectives of the research 2.Prepare the questionnaire 3. Prepare an outline for the moderator 4. Conduct the session 5. Tabulate the findings Synergism Stimulation Spontaneity Specialization Structure Speed 1. Lot depends on moderation. 2. Possibility of misjudgement 3. It could prove to be messy if an argument develops or too many speakers wish to speak simultaneously The indirect method of qualitative research helps the respondents in coming out with a response. Quite often it so happens that the respondent feels shy in coming out with a response to a question, which could be owing to a number of reasons like ignorance of the respondent about the subject, lack of confidence about the response that he/she may like to come out with, unwillingness to share the response or may be some fear factor. In such situations the projective techniques prove to a great asset. In this method of indirect qualitative research, the respondent is encouraged to respond to a situation or interpret the behaviour of people in certain situations. It is worthwhile here to mention that while interpreting the behaviour or actions of some other people, the respondent actually ends up projecting his/her own beliefs, feelings and attitudes about that particular situation. For example, in word association technique of projective technique, the research participants are asked to come out with something that comes to their mind after listening to a particular word. The same set of words is repeated in front of a number of people, and the researcher is bound to get a different response every time. The difference in responses or the frequency of similar responses or the time taken in responding to particular words forms the databank of the researcher. While most of the words taken are thoughtfully chosen from the research topic, some neutral words are also interspersed in between, so that the respondent doesn’t’ start typifying the responses and some amount of mask is provided to the research topic. In such situations where the respondent becomes conscious about the interview and tends to sidestep the key issues, the in-depth interview approach of direct qualitative research proves futile, but even in such difficult situations the indirect approach is able to come out with some relevant information. Another very important indirect method of qualitative research is completion techniques like sentence completion. In such a technique, the respondents are provided with some incomplete sentences and they are requested to complete the sentences as per their understanding of the situation or as per the thought process going in their minds. Similar other completion techniques include paragraph completion or story completion, where the respondents are provided with a situation or a part of the story and they are asked to complete the rest. This helps the researcher in compiling lot of data and views from the research participants. But it is very important in such an approach that the researcher is a qualified and competent person in analysing the diverse and subjective responses. It is therefore amply clear that interpreting the data in qualitative research as such quite a challenging task, as Miles (1979) points out when he says, ‘qualitative data is an attractive nuisance’. But when we compare the two approaches of qualitative research we find that in case of direct approach of research the responses are comparatively easier to interpret, but in case of indirect qualitative approach the responses are far more difficult to interpret and the researcher often requires help from experts in deciphering the responses, because that actually amounts to deciphering the psychological behaviour of the respondents. But on the other hand, gathering information from the respondents or encouraging them to respond to the research program is relatively easier in case of indirect qualitative approach. There are chances that the respondent feel shy or even refuse to respond to the volley of questions being directed towards him/her by the researchers. References: 1. Burgess, R.G. (1982), Field Research: A Sourcebook and Field Manual, Allen and Unwin, London 2. Meredith, J.R., Raturi, A., Amoako-Gympah, K. and Kaplan, B. (1989), ``Alternative research paradigms in operation'', Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 8 No. 4. Quoted in Barnes, Davis (2001). Research methods for the empirical investigation of the process of formation of operations strategy. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 8. 3. Miles, M.B. (1979), ‘Qualitative data as an attractive nuisance: the problem of analysis’. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24. 4. Myers, M. (2000). Qualitative research and the generalizability question: Standing firm with Proteus. Analysis of Professional Literature, Class 6: Qualitative Research I. available online at http://wilderdom.com/OEcourses/PROFLIT/Class6Qualitative1.htm (Jan 10, 2009) Read More