MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

EAST AFRICAN SCHOOL OF HIGHER EDUCATION

STUDIES AND DEVELOPMENT

(EASHESD)

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN EDUCATIONAL

MANAGEMENT

EXAMINING THE QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION

METHODS ON THE PLIGHT OF LIVING IN WAR
TORN AREAS
BY

PROSCOVIA NALWADDA

2020/HD04/23993

05/05/2021
Introduction

The plight of living in a war torn area can be a challenging phenomenon resulting in the
displacement of thousands of families and loss of life on top of constraints in basic needs like
food, water, medication and shelter; and with constant and perpetual fear. As an investigator, I
would focus on examining the psychological effects of specific and most vulnerable groups of
people - the women of child-bearing age, and children between two and 17 years. And in such a
study, using a qualitative research design would bring out a clear picture of what the target
population is undergoing. Just as McGrath, C., et al, (2019), puts it that qualitative research
interviews are preferable when the investigator strives to understand the interviewee’s subjective
perspective of a phenomenon. Mohajan, H, (2018), also stresses that qualitative research is a
form of social action that stresses on the way people interpret, and make sense of their
experiences to understand the social reality of individuals. Consequently, Albine M. & Korstjens
I. (2018), emphasize that the most frequently used data collection methods in qualitative research
designs are participant observation, interviews, and focus group discussions on top of case
studies, surveys, and historical and document analyses (Mohajan, H. 2018).

Interviews: Interviews are a data collection method in which an interviewer asks the
respondents questions, face-to-face, by telephone or online. The qualitative research interview
seeks to describe the meanings of central themes in the life world of the participants (Albine M.
& Korstjens I. 2018). There are three basic types of qualitative interviews; Focused interviews,
unstructured interviews, and semi-structured interviews ( Adrienne Smith, 2019).

(a) Focused interviews:

Mierton and Kendall (n.d), described focused interviews as designed to determine the responses
of persons exposed to a situation previously analyzed by the investigator. In this case, as an
investigator, I would use focused interviews to examine the significant psychological aspects of
the war to the women and children just in case the results of the previously analyzed design have
major pending or controversial areas that may need to be subjectively examined within the
experiences of my participants. These would be participants previously exposed to the pre-
analyzed situation may be through a psychological experiment or an uncontrolled observations.
Other causes to using focused interviews would be include discrepancies between what I might
have anticipated and actual, and the need to discover responses of deviant subgroups in my
population.
The advantageous side of Focus interviews in this context is that, they would help me to clearly
interpret the discrepancy between the real psychological effects and those previously anticipated
on the basis of other findings or previously formulated theories. During the investigation process,
I may again find that one subgroup of my population exhibits psychological effects like fear and
stress which differ in degree or direction from those observed among other parts of the
population. Focused interviews always help bring out the gaps in the previously used data
collection tools but also identify their strengths. For example, during uncontrolled observations,
some of the adults may not exhibit their anxiety over food shortage for fear of shame before their
kids, but bring it out during the focused interviews. Lastly, when well-managed, focus interviews
can help the respondents to make rightful interpretations of their experiences, hence opening up to
the investigator which may be noted as the investigator tries to make the comparability of data
obtained in different interviews.

Despite the good and appealing advantages of the focus interviews, they also have significant
disadvantages take for example; they are time wasting and may make respondents get fed up
with the entire exercise. And since this is a war torn zone, in time of crisis, it may not be easy for
the investigator to get into contact with the same participants she may have previously observed.

b) Unstructured interviews: An unstructured interview is a type of interview that is non-

directive in nature ( Adrienne Smith, 2019). Here, the interviewer does not rely on a set of
standardized questions but adopts spontaneity when gathering relevant information from the
respondent in line with the purpose of the interview. Examples of unstructured interviews may
include; Recruitment Process interviews, Exploratory Research, Telephone Interviews, and Panel
Interviews. Tools used may be open-ended questioning, telephones, and audio tapes. While
conducting this unstructured interview, in such a war torn area, as the investigator, prior
preparations and observance of all ethical considerations is key. The unstructured Open-ended
questions would be the best choice. They will allow me to arrive at more objective research
findings since they aid in collection of large amounts of information and do not limit the
participants from reaching to possible answers. Specifically, I would set clear goals for the
interview and remain focused on them. On interaction with the participants, I would build
rapport with them, explain the dynamics of the interview process while keeping flexibility at the
top of my mind and use all opportunities to dig deeper or ask for clarification during the
interview session, using questions like; how did you feel when your daughter was carried away
by armed men can be instrumental!
The advantages of unstructured interviews include the interview experience that feels natural,
creating a warm and personal experience for participants which could allow them to relax and
open up more. Secondly, all verbal and nonverbal cues can easily be understood by the
investigator since it’s more like a free-flowing conversation. Unstructured interviews allow the
examiner to ask for clarification on answers they hear, as needed.
The disadvantages of the unstructured interview include the need of critical thinking and quick
decision making on the side of the investigator in selecting the next rightful question and still
keep the flow and then different questions for different participants may lead to unexpected gaps
in data acquisition.

b) Semi-structured interviews: This is an interview style that combines the pre-planned

questions of the structured interview but also with flexibility to pursue a free-flowing format of
the unstructured interview. It is also known as a hybrid interview, combined interview, or
moderately-structured interview (Albine M. & Korstjens I., 2018). By virtue that it has a
structured component, it may therefore need piloting. A pilot study is a useful procedure in
preparation of a full-scale study (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). It can be employed to address
potential practical issues in the research procedures (Van Teijlingen & Hundley, 2002) and
trying out the questions. It would aid me obtain experience in conducting in-depth, semi-
structured interviews and to build rapport with the informants as supported by Jacob and
Furgerson (2012), that, “Building a good rapport with the participants could facilitate better
responses.” Since these interviews are to be conducted in a war torn area - internally displace
camps; the pilot study will give me opportunity to identify the safest place where the study
interview will be conducted and to secure informed consents from the participants. The
interviews sessions would be recorded with any available gadgets like IC recorders. Due to the
nature of situations at hand, the interview sessions would be limited to between 30 and 35
minutes to allow the participants to have time for themselves. The interview should not exceed
90 minutes to consider other commitments of participants (Jacob & Furgerson, 2012).

The advantages of semi-structured interviews include but not limited to allowing the
investigator to compare participants’ responses on the same set of questions; giving significant
flexibility to pursue new ideas as need may arise.; while their disadvantage of this method is
they are not as objective, making them subject to scrutiny of bias (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003) .

(d)   Participatory observation: Akash (2018) defines participatory observation as a means of

watching the events or situations or activities from inside by taking part in the group to be
observed. He freely interacts with the other group members, participates in various activities of
the group, acquires the way of life of the observed group or his own, and studies their behavior
or other activities not as an outsider but by becoming a member of that group. In this case for
example, I would go and live within the war torn area-n probably in the Internally Displaced
Camps in order to get the best experience of what these people undergo in there. It will also be
the best method to be used for the young children; playing with them, and eating the same meal
with them would help me generate what they cannot express in words.

However, before starting the observation, it would be important to decide on what I would focus
on in each individual observation since each observation provides answers regarding ‘Who do i
observe?’, ‘What do i observe?’, ‘Where does the observation take place?’, ‘When does it take
place?’, ‘How does it happen?’, and ‘Why does it happen as it happens?’ Observations are not
static but proceed in three stages: descriptive, focused, and selective. I would employ both the
focused and selective observation; meaning that I will only observe children of 2 to 14 years, and
observe their behavior reactions over absence of basic needs in a household during the day, their
fears during the night. I would take field notes and add my own reflections on the situations
observed. After the observations, I would immediately transcribe the notes before forgetting the
details. This is also supported by Albine M. & Korstjens I. (2018), emphasizing that, the field
notes need to be worked out and transcribed immediately to be able to include detailed
descriptions.

The advantages of using Participant Observation are:

Since in participant observation the respondents do not know that they are being observed their
behaviour is not constrained by the conscious feeling of being observed by a stranger. They will
thus behave real. Closeness with the group is also strength since the observer participates in all
activities with the participants. Hence building good rapport with them, keep very close with
hence, interpreting the situation than a non-participant observer. More to that, the ability to
studying the real character makes this method peculiar for it allows the observer to make an
intensive and inclusive study of the group while gaining into the real character of such group.
This is key especially for young children and adolescent who cannot clearly express themselves
in words and other inhibited people. Lastly, Participant observation can aid me as observer to
better understand the psychological feelings of the respondents than an outsider. For example, if
the war opponents approached at night, trying to kidnap all youth, I would be in position to hear
all parents’ comments and struggles for their boys and girls.

In-spite of the above advantages of participant observation it also has some disadvantages, some
of which are getting biased and losing objectivity as the investigator due to engaging and
becoming a member the vulnerable groups. I may get emotionally attached and sentimental,
killing my impartiality and unbiased analysis. As investigator, I may still miss important issues
due to familiarity where crucial events may appear as of little or no significance hence missing
out on many of the important issues. Confining myself to a particular group, my experience
becomes very deep in that group, while the range of my experience becomes very limited. Lastly,
the Involvement in groupism including quarrels and group factionalism may elicit losing of the
observer’s status as an ‘impartial observer’ and take sides, which may destroy the very purpose
of the investigation and as an investigator, I may find it very difficult to get proper information
from the group.

e) Non-participatory observation: Akash, C. (2018) defines non-participant observation as a

situation where the observer observes the group passively from a distance without participating
in their group activities. He also describes it as a situation where the non-participant observer
opts not to influence or take part in the group activities. In the situation of investigating the
psychological effects of the people in a war torn area, purely non-participant observation may
extremely be difficult since these are issues of the mind – not tangible; it may not be easy to
penetrate into the heart of their plight without proper participation in it. The rapport formation
may be very difficult since they will look at me a person outside their environment. I would only
prefer using this method in combination with participant observation just as Akash, (2018),
stresses that the situation of having the investigator around but without participating in group
activities is hardly conducive for both the observer and the group. A combination of both
participant and non-participant method is sometimes selected where the observer actively
participates in some of the ordinary activities and observes passively from distance in others.

In employment of non-participant observation there are some advantages like objectivity and
neutrality since the observer in this type of observation gives a detached and unbiased view
about the group unlike in the participant observation where the observer lives together with the
participants. This method will still support the observer to have some clear physical and
emotional boundaries with the group hence playing an impartial role, command respect and
impartial co-operation since every member of the group shall be giving him/her a special status
and co-operate with her study. In addition, given the war torn area, non-participant observation
will give room to the investigator to see what participants would not have told her verbally. In
case of young children, they will be observed unaware in their very natural way of behavior
hence getting authentic participant experiences, even in times of crises like running for safety,
hiding and fighting for their lives. Lastly, because of the much familiarity with daily
occurrences, the participant observer may not realize the significance of same events and may
neglect a few. However, this is not possible in non- participant observation where the observer
will carefully judge the merits and demerits of each and every phenomenon under study.

Having discussed the advantages of non-participant observation, let’s now examine its
disadvantages. In non-participant observation usually, the observer does not have clarity about
certain events on activities, yet she has no room for probing and digging deeper for she cannot
have the clients available to answer them. Her understanding will only be based on her own
understanding and interpretation making some of her findings biased. For example, while
observing, she may see a child running all by herself, the assumption may be that she is
abandoned by parents, yet it’s the parents that are sending her to some other place for safety!
Secondly, Since in nonparticipant observation, the observer/ investigator is tied to viewing only
what is before them, they may do inadequate observation yet a vast range of information is
needed for the investigation. Yet she could have accessed many things about the group when she
participates in the group and interacts with the group members. For example, some people may
be killed behind the observer’s eye and may not capture such as a concept. Lastly, in non-
participant observation, the safety of the investigator may be at stake as members of a group may
become suspicious of a person who observes them and such a war tone area, she may be
suspected in one way or another to be a spy.

f) Group discussion: Group discussions are a data collection method with a small group of
people to discuss a given topic, usually guided by a moderator using a questioning route (Albine
M. & Korstjens I. 2018). Freitas H. et al, (1998) describes a group discussion as a type of in-
depth interview accomplished in a group, whose meetings present characteristics defined with
respect to the proposal, size, composition, and interview procedures. The focus or object of
analysis is the interaction inside the group. The participants influence each other through their
answers to the ideas and contributions during the discussion. The moderator stimulates
discussion with comments or subjects. The fundamental data produced by this technique are the
transcripts of the group discussions and the moderator's reflections and annotation.

Given the above description of group discussion, in sampling I will make sure group participants
share certain characteristics; are all women in child bearing age/ adolescents; have all shared
similar experiences - testing the plight of the war in this same particular area. I shall use their
interactions to collect the information needed over the psychological effects of the war they face.
They will be elicited to discuss the in-depth of their plight by encouraging them to share their
views and experiences. The group discussion shall take 90–120 minutes but first, I would
develop and use a questioning route that will be used in the discussion.

Since the topic of discussion is sensitive and may elicit emotional outbursts, the investigator
shall use smaller groups of discussion. This will give the participants more time to voice out
their views. For example, if I would want women who were raped, and girls that were defiled to
express their plight, it would not need to be in a large group. Albine M. & Korstjens I. (2018),
suggest that discussion groups generally consist of 6–12 participants. Prior to the discussion, I
would make sure I am a good time manager to determine how much time is devoted to
answering each question, and how much time is available for each individual participant. During
the discussion, the observer should need to be prepared to manage difficulties as they arise, for
example, dominant participants during the discussion, little or no interaction and discussion
between participants, participants who have difficulties sharing their real feelings about sensitive
topics with others, and participants who behave differently when they are observed, and those
that become too emotional due to the pain they are experiencing. However, in such a war
ravaged area, putting people in groups may expose them to insecurity; they may be killed
together at once. This would not be a good method to use in such a crisis.

Freitas H. et al, (1998), states the following as advantages of group discussions: He feels that
group discussions are comparatively easier to drive or conduct, they allow for exploration of
topics and to generate hypotheses, generate opportunity to collect data from the group
interaction, which concentrates on the topic of the researcher’s interest, they have high “face
validity” (data), low cost in relation to other methods, give speed in the supply of the results,
and allow the investigator to increase the size of the sample.

On the other hand, he feels group discussions have disadvantages too, including failure for them
to be based on a natural atmosphere; the investigator having less control over the data that are
generated; inability to know whether the interaction in group contemplates or not on the
individual behavior. Data analysis for group discussions is more difficult to be done, and demand
that the interviewers be carefully trained. Its difficulty in assembling the groups, and need of the
discussion to be conducted in an atmosphere that facilitates the dialogue which may not be
available.

g) Visual or Audio interpretation: Mohajan, H. (2018), states that the new media are
increasingly used for collecting qualitative data today, for example, through online observations,
online interviews and focus group discussions, and in analysis of online sources. Data can be
collected synchronously or asynchronously, with text messaging, video conferences, video calls
or immersive virtual worlds or games. This methodology can be very instrumental in data
collection in a war torn area. Data shall be transcribed verbatim, where recordings are fully typed
out, and the transcripts are accurate and reflect the all data collection methods used, putting more
emphasis on aspects of transcribing the participants’ words, all parts of the audiotape and
carefully revisiting the tape and rereading the transcript.
In data analysis, the transcription and coding of the voice-record data obtained during the
participant interviews would be cross-checked, and transcribed into text and exported to the
NVIVO package program for analysis. NVIVO is a program that can process most data types
used such as documents, audio and video recordings, e-mails, visuals, and photographs,
especially in qualitative research (Kilinc and Firat, 2017). Content analysis would be used to
analyze data from the semi-structured interviews. Inductive analysis would be used for content
analysis. Inductive analysis is a method that requires in-depth data analysis with the possibility
of revealing previously unrecognized themes and dimensions to reach concepts and associations
(Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2005). The grouped data according to the research questions would be read
for induction analysis, and the nature and general appearance of the data would be revealed.
Subsequently, the main themes and codes related to these main themes would be drawn forth
based on the research questions. Relations between themes and codes would be determined by
taking into account the related literature together with the obtained data (Creswell, 2013).
Finally, the findings would be interpreted by enriching them with relevant texts according to
their significance in response to the research questions, and interpretations made using direct
quotations. Code names would be used instead of participants’ real names.

Kilinc and Firat (2017) sight higher numbers of participants and easy data processing as very
prominent advantages of visual or audio interpretations. Rice et al, (2017) also sights other
advantages as access to new and broader populations with a wider base of characteristics, the
ability to collect larger volumes of quality data, savings in time and cost, and the ability of
participants to take part anonymously. As for the disadvantages Kilinc and Firat (2017), sight the
codes of “low response rate,” “distracting and boring,” and “external validity danger.”

Conclusion: The above discussed data collection tools are instrumental in examining
disadvantaged individuals in society, as well as groups with special skills or abilities. Fo example
audio and visual data interpretations can be good for collection of data cases of research with
groups that do not have face-to-face study, in this context within people in war torn areas –
where the environment may be insecure for physical approaches. This paper has provided
information on both advantages and disadvantages of each method, and situations at hand can
dictate what any investigator may use at a particular time.
References:

Adrienne, S. (2019). Differences between Structured, Unstructured and Semi-Structured

Interviews.https://www.comeet.com/resources/blog/structured-unstructured-semi-
structured-interviews
Akash, C. (2018). Participant Observation and Non-Participant Observation. Cogent Social
Sciences.https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/social-research/data-collection/participant-
observation-and-non-participant-observation/64510

Albine, M. & Korstjens, I. (2018). Practical Guidance to Qualitative Research, Part 3: Sampling,
Data Collection and Analysis. Europe, UK. Onforma UK Limited.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091

Collingridge, D. S., & Gantt, E. E. (2008). The quality of qualitative research. American Journal
of Medical Quality, 23(5), 389-395.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Freitas H.,Oliveira M., Jenkins M., and Popjoy O., (1998). The Focus Group, a qualitative
research method. ISRC, Merrick School of Business, University of Baltimore (MD,
EUA),WPISRCNo.010298..https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241399754_THE
_FOCUS_GROUP_A_QUALITATIVE_RESEARCH_METHOD

Hakan K. and Mehmet F., (2017). Opinions of Expert Academicians on Online Data Collection
and Voluntary Participation in Social Sciences Research.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317401567_Opinions_of_Expert_Academician
s_on_Online_Data_Collection_and_Voluntary_Participation_in_Social_Sciences_Resear
ch

Jacob, S. A., & Ferguson, S. P. (2012). Writing interview protocols and conducting interviews:
Tips for students new to the field of qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 17(42),
110.

McGrath, C., Palmgren, P.J. & Liljedahl, M. (2019). Twelve tips for conducting qualitative
research interviews. Informa UK Limited.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1497149

Mohajan, H. (2018). Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects.
Munich Personal RePEc Archive. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/85645/

Paisley, P. O., & Reeves, P. M. (2001). Qualitative research in counseling. In D. C. Locke, J. E.

Myers, & E. L. Herr (Eds.), The handbook of counseling (pp. 481-498). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Percy, W. H., Kostere, K., & Kostere, S. (2015). Generic qualitative research in psychology. The
Qualitative Report, 20(2), 76-85

Rice. S., Scott R. W., Shawn D., and Mattie M., (2017). Advantages and Disadvantages of Using
Internet-Based Survey Methods in Aviation-Related Research. Journal of Aviation
Technology and Engineering 7:1 58–65http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jate

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social &
behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Van Teijlingen, E., & Hundley, V. (2002). The importance of pilot studies. Nursing Standard,
16(40), 33-36

Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (5. baskı.)
[Qualitative research methods in the social sciences (5th ed.)]. Ankara, Turkey: Seçkin
Yayınları