자연주의적 탐구조사(Naturalistic Inquiry)

Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques

This article examines the function of documents as a data source in qualitative research and discusses document analysis procedure in the context of actual research experiences. Targeted to research novices, the article takes a nuts‐and‐bolts approach to document analysis. It describes the nature and forms of documents, outlines the advantages and limitations of document analysis, and offers specific examples of the use of documents in the research process. The application of document analysis to a grounded theory study is illustrated.

Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method

Lincoln, Yvonna, and Egon Guba, "Postpositivism and the Naturalist Paradigm," pp. 14-46 in Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985.*

Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11135-017-0574-8.pdf

Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization

Saturation is mentioned in many qualitative research reports without any explanation of what it means and how it occurred. Recognizing the saturation point presents a challenge to qualitative researchers, especially in the absence of explicit guidelines for determining data or theoretical saturation. This research note examines the saturation concept in naturalistic inquiry and the challenges it presents. In particular, it summarizes the saturation process in a grounded theory study of community-based antipoverty projects. The main argument advanced in this research note is that claims of saturation should be supported by an explanation of how saturation was achieved and substantiated by clear evidence of its occurrence.

/pdf/naturalistic-inquiry-and-the-saturation-concept-a-research-2p3otmxs0y.pdf

Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note

Grounded theory is a qualitative research approach that uses inductive analysis as a principal technique. Yet, researchers who embrace this approach often use sensitizing concepts to guide their analysis. In this article, the author examines the relationship between sensitizing concepts and grounded theory. Furthermore, he illustrates the application of sensitizing concepts in a study of community-based antipoverty projects in Jamaica. The article contains commentary about trustworthiness techniques, the coding process, and the constant comparative method of analysis, as well as a synopsis of study findings.

/pdf/grounded-theory-and-sensitizing-concepts-1xpoo0uti6.pdf

Grounded Theory and Sensitizing Concepts

In this article, a newly minted Ph.D. shares seven lessons learned during the process of preparing a dissertation based on qualitative research methods. While most of the lessons may be applicable to any kind of research, the writer focuses on the special challenges of employing a qualitative methodology. The lessons are: (1) Read, read, read; (2) Consult the experts; (3) Adhere to university regulations; (4) Pay attention to rigor and trustworthiness; (5) Give details of the methodology; (6) Don't be afraid to include numerical data; and (7) Prepare to publish. Key Words: Confirmability, Credibility, Dependability, Grounded Theory, Inductive Analysis, Transferability, and Trustworthiness ********** As the new millennium dawned, I made a decision: I would reach for something seemingly beyond my grasp. That special something turned out to be a doctoral degree. However, even after I had fully embarked on that upward journey of discovery, I had no inkling of the methodological challenges that would mark many milestones on that journey. A social research neophyte, I have spent my adult life honing my skills and developing expertise as a journalist and public relations practitioner. Over the years, I have researched and written numerous news stories, feature articles, general-interest columns, and special reports for newspapers, magazines, and radio. Researching and writing a dissertation--particularly one based on qualitative research methods--demanded a different set of skills and offered some special challenges because of its nature and scope. In reflecting on that experience, I can identify various lessons learned along the way. During coursework, I learned all the quantitative stuff: descriptive statistics, t-test procedures, univariate and multivariate analyses of variance, chi-square test, regression analysis, factor analysis, structural equation modeling, and the like. What's more, I developed facility in Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Coursework also focused on basic matters like having a well-written research question; stating the purpose of the study (exploratory, descriptive, explanatory, or evaluative, or some combination); reviewing the literature thoroughly; and presenting a conceptual or theoretical framework for the study. Guiding me on the early part of my journey, my statistics professor emphasized the "power" of numbers and the precision of measures characterizing quantitative studies. Like so many numbers-crunching researchers, my stats professor viewed qualitative research with suspicion. It seemed the good professor considered a methodology in which the generation of hypotheses often replaces the testing thereof, explanation replaces measurement, and understanding replaces the making of generalizations as "airy fairy" (not "real") research (Labuschagne, 2003). Consequently, I became somewhat skeptical of this kind of research. In the end, though, I let the topic and goals of my research dictate the methodology. Fortunately, all four members of my dissertation committee (including the outgoing coordinator of the doctoral program) were enlightened enough to appreciate and support my choice of research methodology. Indeed, they emphasized the need for me to gather data reflecting the interactions and experiences of individuals and communities in relation to the research problem that I had identified. It was important to know quantitative research methodology and its assumptions, as well, so I could defend my choice of research design and methods. It is like preparing for a debate. To be effective, the debater had better know both (or all) sides of the issue. Before too long, it became clear to me that quantitative and qualitative research have distinct and complementary strengths. The main strength of qualitative research is that it yields data that provide depth and detail to create understanding of phenomena and lived experiences. …

/pdf/preparing-a-qualitative-research-based-dissertation-lessons-4m4od6mi3v.pdf

Preparing a Qualitative Research-Based Dissertation: Lessons Learned

An audit trail can enhance the rigor and transparency of qualitative research. It can serve as a means of holding up to scrutiny the methodological and theoretical decisions made throughout the research process. However, what constitutes an audit trail is often narrowly conceived and inadequately explained. This article elucidates the process of creating an audit trail as a trustworthiness technique applied to the grounded theory methodology. In particular, it presents, as an illustration, an audit trail that supports a theory of stakeholder collaboration developed from a study of community‐based antipoverty projects in Jamaica. The antipoverty projects were supported by social funds – special grants from the national government to non‐governmental and community‐based organizations, which sponsored and organized the projects.

Glenn A. Bowen

Papers

Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method

Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note

Grounded Theory and Sensitizing Concepts

Preparing a Qualitative Research-Based Dissertation: Lessons Learned

Supporting a grounded theory with an audit trail: an illustration