SURVEYS AND QUES TIONNAIRES

In some situations, you may be able to survey all the population rather than a sample where a
considerable amount of data is collected from each individual. Bryman (1989) provides the following
definition:

‘‘Survey research entails the collection of data on a number of units and usually at a single juncture in
time, with a view to collecting systematically a body of quantifiable data in respect of a number of
variables which are then examined to discern patterns of association.''

Practicalities will often dictate that data are collected over a period of weeks or even months, but they
are treated as if collection were simultaneous. Survey may be questionnaire based, interview based or
observational based.

Advantages and Disadvantages of surveys- Researchers tend to have strong, frequently polarized, views
about the place and importance of surveys. Some see the survey as the central 'real world' strategy
compared to laboratory based experiments. Survey is also viewed as generating large amounts of data
often dubious value as uninvolved respondents may give different data. The reliability and validity of
survey data depend on a considerable extent on the technical proficiency of those running the survey. If
the questions are incomprehensible or ambiguous, the exercise is obviously a waste of time. This is a
problem of internal validity, where we are not obtaining valid information about the respondents and
what they are thinking, feeling, doing, etc.

The problem of securing a high degree of involvement by respondents to a survey is more intractable.
This is particularly so when it is carried out by post, but is also difficult when the survey is carried out
fact-to-face. If the sampling is faulty, this produces a generalizabilty or external validity problem such as
that we cannot generalize our findings. Another type of external validity problem occurs if we seek to
generalize from what people say in a survey to what they actually do.

Notwithstanding all these caveats, a good, competently run survey is something all generalist real world
researchers should be able to offer. Surveys provide the sort of data which are not difficult for an
intelligent lay audience to understand, particularly an audience which is scientifically literate.

Questionnaire: It refers to a set of questions that a lot of people are asked as way of getting information
about what people think or do generally. The questions are usually systematically written and printed on
papers. Most kinds of researches including legal research method involve the use of a questionnaire as
the basic approach to fact or information collection. Most surveys also involve use of a questionnaire as
the basic approach to survey data collection.

There are three major ways in which questionnaire is administered:

Self-completion-Respondents fill in the answers by themselves. The questionnaire is often sent out by
post, permitting large samples to be reached with relatively little extra effort
Face-to-face interview- An interviewer asks the questions in the presence of the respondent, and also
completes the questionnaire.

Telephone interview- The interviewer contacts respondents by phone, asks the questions and records
the responses.

Responses in surveys are usually sought from individuals, although that individual might be responding
on behalf of a group or organization. The format and appearance of the questionnaire will vary
depending on the method of data collection selected.

Advantages and disadvantages of questionnaire -based surveys

Disadvantages General to all surveys using respondents

1. Data are affected by the characteristics of the respondents (e.g their memory; knowledge;
experience; motivation; and personality).

2. Respondents will not necessarily report their beliefs, attitudes, etc accurately (e.g there is likely to be
a social desirability response bias-people responding in a way that shows them in a good light). a. Postal
and other self-administered surveys

3. Typically have a low response rate. As you don't usually know the characteristics of non-respondents,
you don't know whether the sample is representative.

4. Ambiguities in, and misunderstandings of, the survey questions may not be detected.

5. Respondents may not treat the exercise seriously, and you may not be able to detect this.

Interview surveys

6. Data may be affected by characteristics of the interviewers (e.g their motivation; personality; skills;
and experience). There may be interviewer bias, where the interviewer, probably unwittingly, influences
the responses (e.g through verbal or non-verbal cues indicating 'correct' answers).

7. Data may be affected by interactions of interviewer/respondent characteristics (e.g. whether they are
of the same or different class or ethnic background).

8. Respondents may feel their answers are not anonymous and be less forthcoming or open.

Advantages General to all surveys using respondents

1. They provide a relatively simple and straightforward approach to the study of attitudes, values,
beliefs and motives.

2. They may be adapted to collect generalizable information from almost any human population.

3. high amounts of data standardization.

Postal and other self-administered surveys

4. Often this is the only, or the easiest, way of retrieving information about the past history of a
large set or people.

5. They can be extremely efficient in providing a large amount of data, at relatively low cost and in a
short period of time.

6. They allow anonymity, which can encourage frankness when sensitive areas are involved.

Interview surveys

7. The interviewer can clarify questions.

8. The presence of the interviewer encourages participation and involvement (and the interviewer
can judge the extent to which the exercise is treated seriously)

Guidelines for preparing questionnaire

-The central part of the survey questionnaire is devoted to the survey questions which derive from
your research questions. Their wording is crucially important. For this reason, here you are provided
with 16(sixteen) guidelines in the form of suggestions for avoiding the most obvious problems in
question wording. They are also called characteristics of good Questionnaire. The preparation of
good questionnaire is a highly skilled art. The requisites of a good questionnaire are given below:

1. Keep the language simple. Avoid jargon. Seek simplicity but avoid being condescending.

2. Keep questions short. Long and complex questions are difficult to understand.

3. Avoid double-barreled questions. Such questions ask two questions at once.(e.g Is your key
worker caring and supportive?'').Split into separate questions.

4. Avoid leading questions. Leading questions encourage a particular answer.(e.g Do you agree
that....)

5. Avoid questions in the negative. Negatively framed questions are difficult to understand;
particularly when you are asked to agree or disagree.

6. Ask questions only where respondents are likely to have the knowledge needed to answer.

7. Try to ensure that the questions mean the same thing to all respondents. Meanings and terms
used may vary for different age groups, regions, etc.

8. Avoid a prestige bias- This occurs when a view is linked with a prestigious person before asking
the respondent's view.

9. Remove ambiguity. Take great care with sentence structure.

10. Avoid direct questions on sensitive topics (in interview situations). Several indirect strategies are
possible (e.g. using numbered cards with the alternatives; respondent gives relevant number).

11. Ensure that the question's frame of reference is clear. When asking for frequency of an event,
specify the time period.

12. Avoid creating opinions. Respondents do not necessarily hold opinions on topics. Allow a no
opinion alternative

13. Use personal wording if you want the respondents own feelings, etc. Impersonal wording gives
their perception of other people's attitudes.

14. Avoid unnecessary or objectionable detail.

15. Avoid prior alternatives. Give the substance of the question first, then the alternative. Not the
reverse.

16. Avoid producing response sets/particularly in interview situations/.

OBSERVATIONAL METHODS

As the actions and behaviour of people are central aspects in virtually any enquiry, a natural and
obvious technique is to watch what they do, to record this in some way and then to describe,
analyze and interpret what we have observed. Much research with people involves observation in a
general sense.

Fundamentally different approaches to the use of observation methods in enquiry have been
employed. Two popular extreme types are participant observation and structured observation.
Participant observation is an essentially qualitative style which has been used in variety of disciplines
including in the legal profession. Participant observation is a widely used method in flexible designs,
particularly those which follow an ethnographic approach. Structured observation is almost
exclusively linked to fixed designs of both experimental and non-experimental types.

Concentration on these two approaches has tended to eclipse a third one, which may be styled
unobtrusive observation. Its defining characteristic is that it is nonparticipatory in the interests of
being non-reactive. It can be structured but is more usually unstructured and informal. Both
extremes have their own advantages and limitations.

Observation in Real world Research

Observation, in part, because it can take on a variety of forms, can be used for several purposes in a
study. It is commonly used in an exploratory phase, typically in an unstructured form, to seek to find
out what is going on a situation as a precursor to subsequent testing out of the insights obtained.
For this purpose, the unobtrusive observation approach is most appropriate.
Observation can also be used as a supportive or supplementary method to collect data that may
complement or set in perspective data obtained by other means. Suppose that the main effort in a
particular study is devoted to a series of interviews, observation might then be used to validate or
corroborate the messages obtained in the interviews.

Approaches to observation-Classifying observational methods

One important dimension of the difference in approaches to observation is the degree of pre-
structure in the observation exercise. This can be dichotomized as formal or informal observation.
Informal approaches are less structured and allow the observer considerable freedom in the
information gathered and how it is recorded. They would include note taking and generally
gathering information from informants. Formal approaches impose a large amount of structure and
direction on what is to be observed. The observer has only to attend to these pre-specified aspects;
everything else is considered irrelevant for the purposes of the study.

A second dimension, in practice by no means is independent of the formality/structure dimension,

connecting the role adopted by the observer in the situation observed. Specifically, this relates to
the extent of participation in that situation.

The classes of observational methods in both dimensions will be discussed as follow:

1. Participant observation- A key feature of participant observation is that the observer seeks to
become some kind of a member of the observed group. This involves not only a physical
presence and a sharing of life experiences but also entry into their social and 'symbolic' world
through learning their social conventions and habits, their use of language and non verbal
communication, and so on. The observer also has to establish some role within the group. The
primary data are the interpretations by the observer of what is going on around him. The
observer is the research instrument, and hence great sensitivity and personal skills are called for
if worthwhile data are to be collected.
Participant observation might be useful in a small project: with small groups, for events or
processes that take a reasonably short time , for frequent events, for activities that are
accessible to observers, when your prime motivation is find out what is going on, and when you
are not short of time.
2. The complete participant- The complete participant role involves the observer concealing
that she is an observer, acting as naturally as possible and seeking to become a full member of
the group.
3. The participant as observer- It is a feasible alternative to have the participant as observer
role. The fact that the observer is an observer is made clear to the group from the start. The
observer then tries to establish close relationships with members of the group. This stance
means that as well as observing through participating in activities, the observer can ask
members to explain various aspects of what is going on. It is important to get the trust of key
members of the group. It would appear that this role would have more of disturbing effect on
the phenomena observed than that of the complete participant, and several, experienced
participant observers have documented this. How ever, one effect may be that members of the
group are led to more analytical reflection about processes and other aspects of the group's
functioning.
4. The marginal participant- In some situations it may be feasible and advantageous to have
lower degree of participation than that envisaged in the preceding sections. This can be done by
adopting the role of a larger passive, though completely accepted, participant- a passenger in a
train or bus, or a member of the audience at a concert or sports meeting.
5. The observer as- participant- This is some one who takes no part in the activity but whose
status as researcher is known to the participants. Such a state is aspired to by many researchers
using systematic observation. However, it is questionable whether any one who is known to be a
researcher can be said not to take part in the activity-in the sense that their role is now one of
the roles within the larger group that includes the researcher.

Advantages and Disadvantages of observational methods

A. Advantages
 Its major advantage as a technique is its directness. You do not ask people about
their views, feelings or attitudes; you watch what they do and listen to what they
say.

 Data from direct observation contrasts with, and can often usefully complement,
information obtained by virtually any other technique. Interview and questionnaire
responses are notorious for discrepancies between what people say that they have
done, or will do, and what they actually did, or will do.

 Observation also seems to be preeminently the appropriate technique for getting at

'real life' in the real worlds direct observation. Direct observation in the field permits
a lack of a artificiality which is all too rare with other techniques. For example, a
judge in a court of law can use his observation in performing his daily judgeship
tasks to do researches on the application of law on various issues.

B. Limitations

 Observation is neither an easy nor a trouble free option. There is a major issue
concerning the extent to which an observer affects the situation under observation.

 A practical problem with observation is that it tends to be time consuming. The

classic participant observation study, deriving from social anthropology, for
example, demands an immersion in the 'tribe' for two or three years. The same also
seems true as to the time required to do legal research by the observational
methods, though it may not take years.