Data Collection in Qualitative Studies

-In-depth interviews are the most common method of collecting qualitative

data. Observation is used in some qualitative studies as well. Physiological

data are rarely collected in a constructivist inquiry. Table 11.1 compares the

types of data and aspects of data collection used by researchers in the three

main qualitative traditions. Ethnographers typically collect a wide array of

data, with observation and interviews being the primary methods.

Ethnographers also gather or examine products of the culture under study,

such as documents, artifacts, photographs, and so on. Phenomenologists and

grounded theory researchers rely primarily on in-depth interviews, although

observation sometimes plays a role.

• Qualitative Self-Report Techniques

-Qualitative researchers do not have a set of questions that must be asked in

a specific order and worded in a given way. Instead, they start with general

questions and allow respondents to tell their narratives in a naturalistic

fashion. Qualitative interviews tend to be conversational. Interviewers

encourage respondents to define the important dimensions of a phenomenon

and to elaborate on what is relevant to them.

• Types of Qualitative Self-Reports

-Researchers use completely unstructured interviews when they have no

preconceived view of the information to be gathered. Researchers begin by

asking a grand tour question such as “What happened when you first

learned that you had AIDS?” Subsequent questions are guided by initial

responses. Ethnographic and phenomenological studies often gather data

through unstructured interviews.

-Semi-structured (or focused) interviews are used when researchers

have a list of topics or broad questions that must be covered in an interview.

Interviewers use a written topic guide to ensure that all question areas are
addressed. The interviewer’s function is to encourage participants to talk

freely about all the topics on the guide.

-Focus group interviews involve groups of about 5 to 10 people whose

opinions and experiences are solicited simultaneously. The interviewer (or

moderator) guides the discussion using a topic guide. A group format is

efficient and can generate a lot of dialogue, but not everyone is comfortable

sharing their views or experiences in front of a group.

-Personal diaries are a standard data source in historical research. It is

also possible to generate new data for a study by asking participants to

maintain a diary over a specified period. Diaries can be useful in providing

an intimate description of a person’s everyday life. The diaries may be

completely unstructured; for example, individuals who had an organ

transplantation could be asked to spend 15 minutes a day jotting down their

thoughts. Frequently, however, people are asked to make diary entries

regarding some specific aspect of their lives.

-Photo elicitation involves an interview guided by photographic images.

This procedure, most often used in ethnographies and participatory action

research, can help to promote a collaborative discussion. The photographs

sometimes are ones that researchers have made of the participants’ world,

but photo elicitation can also be used with photos in participants’ homes.

Researchers have also used the technique of asking participants to take

photographs themselves and then interpret them, a method sometimes

called photovoice.

• Gathering Qualitative Self-Report Data

-Researchers gather narrative self-report data to develop a construction of a

phenomenon that is consistent with that of participants. This goal requires

researchers to overcome communication barriers and to enhance the flow of

information. Although qualitative interviews are conversational, the

wording of questions should reflect the participants’ worldview and

language. In addition to being good questioners, researchers must be good

listeners. Only by attending carefully to what respondents are saying can in-

depth interviewers develop useful follow-up questions.

Unstructured interviews are typically long, sometimes lasting an hour or

more, and so, an important issue is how to record such abundant

information. Some researchers take notes during the interview, but this is

risky in terms of data accuracy. Most researchers record the interviews for

later transcription. Although some respondents are self-conscious when

their conversation is recorded, they typically forget about the presence of

recording equipment (often a cell phone) after a few minutes.

• Evaluation of Qualitative Self-Report Methods

-In-depth interviews are a flexible approach to gathering data and, in many

research contexts, offer distinct advantages. In clinical situations, for

example, it is often appropriate to let people talk freely about their problems

and concerns, allowing them to take the initiative in directing the flow of

conversation. Unstructured self-reports may allow investigators to ascertain

what the basic issues or problems are, how sensitive or controversial the

topic is, how individuals conceptualize and talk about the problems, and

what range of opinions or behaviors exist relevant to the topic. In-depth

interviews may also help elucidate the underlying meaning of a relationship

repeatedly observed in more structured research. On the other hand,

qualitative methods are very time-consuming and demanding of

researchers’ skills in gathering, analyzing, and interpreting the resulting

data.
• Qualitative Observational Methods

- Qualitative researchers sometimes collect loosely structured observational

data, often as a supplement to self-report data. The aim of qualitative

observation is to understand the behaviors and experiences of people as

they occur in naturalistic settings. Skillful observation permits researchers

to see the world as participants see it, to develop a rich understanding of the

focal phenomenon, and to grasp subtleties of cultural variation.

Unstructured observational data are often gathered through participant

observation. Participant observers take part in the functioning of the group

under study and strive to observe, ask questions, and record information

within the contexts and structures that are relevant to group members.

Participant observation is characterized by prolonged periods of social

interaction between researchers and participants. By assuming a

participating role, observers often have insights that would have eluded

more passive or concealed observers.

• The Observer-Participant Role in Participant Observation

-In participant observation, the role that observers play in the group is

important because their social position determines what they are likely to

see. The extent of the observers’ actual participation in a group is best

thought of as a continuum. At one extreme is complete immersion in the

setting, with researchers assuming full participant status; at the other

extreme is complete separation, with researchers as onlookers. Researchers

may in some cases assume a fixed position on this continuum throughout

the study, but often researchers’ role evolves toward increasing participation

over the course of the fieldwork.

Observers must overcome two major hurdles in assuming a satisfactory

role in the group. The first is to gain entrée into the group under study; the

second is to establish rapport and trust within that group. Without gaining

entrée, the study cannot proceed; but without the group’s trust, the
researcher will be restricted to “front stage” knowledge—information

distorted by the group’s protective facades. The goal of participant

observers is to “get backstage”—to learn the true realities of the group’s

experiences. On the other hand, being a fully participating member does not

necessarily offer the best perspective for studying a phenomenon—just as

being an actor in a play does not offer the most advantageous view of the

performance.

• Gathering Participant Observation Data

Participant observers typically place few restrictions on the nature of the

data collected, but they often have a broad plan for types of information

desired. Among the aspects of an observed activity likely to be considered

relevant are the following:

1. The physical setting—Where questions. What are the main features of

the setting?

2. The participants—Who questions. Who is present and what are their

characteristics?

3. Activities—What questions. What is going on? What are participants

doing?

4. Frequency and duration—When questions. When did the activity begin

and end? Is the activity a recurring one?

5. Process—How questions. How is the activity organized? How does it

unfold?

6. Outcomes—Why questions. Why is the activity happening? What did not

happen (especially if it ought to have happened) and why?

Participant observers must decide how to sample events and select

observational locations. They often use a variety of positioning approaches

—staying in a single location to observe activities in that location (single

positioning), moving around to observe behaviors from different locations

Direct observation is usually supplemented with information from

interviews. For example, key informants may be asked to describe what

went on in a meeting the observer was unable to attend or to describe an

event that occurred before the study began. In such cases, the informant

functions as the observer’s observer.

• Recording Observations

- The most common forms of record keeping for participant observation are

logs and field notes, but photographs and video recordings may also be

used. A log (or field diary) is a daily record of events and conversations.

Field notes are broader and more interpretive. Field notes represent the

observer’s efforts to record information and to synthesize and understand

the data.

Field notes serve multiple purposes. Descriptive notes are objective

descriptions of events and conversations that were observed. Reflective

notes document researchers’ personal experiences, reflections, and progress

in the field. For example, some notes document the observers’

interpretations; others are reminders about how future observations should

be made. Observers often record personal notes, which are comments about

their own feelings during the research process.

The success of participant observation depends on the quality of the

logs and field notes. It is essential to record observations as quickly as

possible, but participant observers cannot usually record information by

openly carrying a clipboard or a recording device because this would

undermine their role as ordinary participants. Observers must develop skills

in making detailed mental notes that can later be written or recorded.

• Evaluation of Unstructured Observational Methods

- Qualitative observational methods—especially participant observation—

can provide a deeper understanding of human behaviors and social

offers opportunities to delve deeply into a situation and illuminate its

complexities. Participant observation can answer questions about

phenomena that are difficult for insiders themselves to explain because

these phenomena are taken for granted.

Like all research methods, however, participant observation faces

potential problems. Observers may lose objectivity in sampling, viewing,

and interpreting observations. Once they begin to participate in a group’s

activities, emotional involvement might become a concern. Researchers in

their member role may develop a myopic view on issues of importance to

the group. Finally, the success of participant observation depends on the

observer’s observational and interpersonal skills—skills that may be

difficult to cultivate.

• Critical Appraisal of Unstructured Data Collection

- It is often difficult to critically appraise the decisions that researchers made

in collecting qualitative data because details about those decisions are

seldom spelled out. In particular, there is often scant information about

participant observation. It is not uncommon for a report to simply say that

the researcher undertook participant observation, without descriptions of

how much time was spent in the field, what exactly was observed, how

observations were recorded, and what level of participation was involved.

Thus, one aspect of an appraisal is likely to involve an evaluation of how

much information the article provided about the data collection methods.

Even though space constraints in journals make it impossible for

researchers to fully elaborate their methods, researchers have a

responsibility to communicate basic information about their approach so

that readers can assess the quality of evidence that the study yields.

Researchers should provide examples of questions asked and types of

Triangulation of methods provides important opportunities for

qualitative researchers to enhance the integrity of their data. Thus, an

important issue to consider in evaluating unstructured data is whether the

types and amount of data collected are sufficiently rich to support an in-

depth, holistic understanding of the phenomena under study. Box 11.2

provides guidelines for appraising the collection of unstructured data.