Qualitative Methods

 Qualitative methods focus on understanding the meaning underlying an

intention, action, object or phenomenon. In other words, researchers
adopting qualitative methods aim to develop an understanding, an
interpretation, of the way in which those they study understand their
actions and the context in which they act. In political science research,
qualitative methods are usually contrasted with quantitative methods,
which typically deal with large amounts of data, using surveys and
statistical methods, with the aim of establishing causal relationships
between social phenomena.
 Qualitative methods generate rich, detailed data that leave the
participants' perspectives intact and provide multiple contexts
for understanding the phenomenon under study. In this way,
qualitative research can be used to vividly demonstrate phenomena or to
conduct cross-case comparisons and analysis of individuals or groups.
 The advantage of using qualitative
methods
 Among the specific strengths of using qualitative methods to study social science
research problems is the ability to:
 Obtain a more realistic view of the lived world that cannot be understood or experienced in
numerical data and statistical analysis;
 Provide the researcher with the perspective of the participants of the study through
immersion in a culture or situation and as a result of direct interaction with them;
 Develop flexible ways to perform data collection, subsequent analysis, and interpretation of
collected information;
 Yield results that can be helpful in pioneering new ways of understanding;
 Respond to changes that occur while conducting the study ]e.g., extended fieldwork or
observation] and offer the flexibility to shift the focus of the research as a result;
 Interact with the research subjects in their own language and on their own terms; and,
 Create a descriptive capability based on primary and unstructured data.
Keyfiyyət metodologiyası
 Features of Qualitative Research
 Qualitative research is labor- and time- intensive, especially when it involves
fieldwork. One particularly difficulty is that there is no clear cut distinction
between the data- generation and data- analysis phases of the research. Such
research hardly proceeds in a neat and tidy way. Rather, qualitative research
involves a constant meaning- making process that requires appreciation of the
ambiguity that may arise from multiple interpretations of the same
events/processes/actions (Hendriks 2007). The researcher has to be flexible,
changing the research design in the face of ‘research site- realities that the
researcher could not anticipate in advance of the beginning the research’.
This is a totally different process than that involved in the use of a quantitative
methodology, which uses either existing data-sets, for example, those compiled
by government or generated from prior research, or data sets generated by the
researcher. In contrast, qualitative research utilizes methods such as:
participant observation; ethnography; individual or group interviews; focus
groups; documentary analysis; and the examination of visual objects and
artefacts.
 Interviewing
 Interviewing is perhaps the core research methodology used in most small-n
research. Interviews might be held with political leaders, social movement
participants, civil servants, or any variety of public and/or political actors. The
unquestionable advantage of interview research is that it allows analysts an
opportunity to learn about their research topic straight from the mouths of their
study participants. Nonetheless, Jeffrey Berry points out that interviews risk a
number of measurement errors. Because interview questions are typically not
standardized in the way that sur vey questions are, readers of such studies have no
way of knowing if questions were well written, impartial, and not leading.
Furthermore, as in a survey, interviewees might hide their true thoughts and
preferences or misrepresent events. Particularly on sensitive subjects, such as our
examples of corruption or ethnic conflict, interviewees might intentionally mislead
researchers. On the one hand, inter viewers can respond to this problem by
disregarding information that they consider to be inaccurate.
 Observation

 In social sciences, covert observation is a research method used to study human

behavior in natural settings without the participants being aware that they are
being observed. Unlike overt observation, where the researcher openly observes
and interacts with the participants, covert observation involves observing people
without their knowledge or consent. This method allows researchers to gain
insights into social behavior that may not be possible through other means.
 Covert observation is often employed in situations where the presence of a
researcher could potentially alter the behavior of the participants. For example,
if a researcher is studying the dynamics of a workplace environment, openly
observing the employees may lead to a self-consciousness that alters their
natural behavior. By conducting covert observation, researchers can obtain a
more accurate representation of how individuals interact and behave in their
everyday lives.
 The use of covert observation also allows researchers to study sensitive or taboo
subjects that individuals may be less willing to discuss openly.
 Observation
 To conduct covert observation, researchers often employ various strategies to blend in with
the environment and avoid detection. This may involve disguising themselves as regular
participants, using hidden cameras or recording devices, or adopting inconspicuous roles
that allow them to closely observe the target group without raising suspicion. Ethical
considerations are crucial in covert observation, and researchers must ensure that the
potential benefits of the study outweigh any potential harm or invasion of privacy.
 Despite its advantages, covert observation also presents challenges. The covert nature of
the method means that researchers may face difficulties in obtaining informed consent from
the participants. This raises ethical concerns regarding privacy and autonomy. Additionally,
the data collected through covert observation may be subjective and influenced by the
researcher’s interpretations and biases. Therefore, it is essential for researchers to maintain
a high level of reflexivity and transparency throughout the research process.
 When conducting covert observation, it is essential for the researcher to carefully plan and
prepare for their role in order to effectively blend in with the participants. This may involve
studying the social norms, behaviors, and language of the group or community being
observed. By immersing themselves in the environment and adopting appropriate attire,
mannerisms, and speech patterns, the researcher can increase their chances of going
unnoticed.
 Focus Groups

Focus group interviews are becoming increasingly common, often linked to follow-up, individual
interviews. This method involves engaging small number of people in an informal group
discussion ‘focused’ on a particular topic. This could be, for example, young people discussing
the meaning of ‘political’ participation. The discussion is usually based on a series of questions
and the researcher generally serves as a facilitator, keeping the discussion flowing. One
advantage of the focus group interviews comes from their interactive and deliberative nature:
rather than focusing on individual responses in isolation, focus group interviews help researchers
to identify the common issues of concerns, as well as the points of agreement and disagreement
among the participants. They also provide a way of generating data relatively quickly from a
large number of research participants.