The Characteristics of Qualitative Research Qualitative methods tend to be associated with an “interpretive” worldview. This explores how people “make sense of their social worlds and how they express these understandings through language, sound, imagery, personal style and social rituals” (Deacon et al. 1999:6). Qualitative researchers are less interested in studying and predicting external variables than on exploring people's intentions, motivations and subjective experiences. Those who take an interpretive position try to understand social reality from the point of view of those within it. For example, to study sponsorship, you might interview people in a company that sponsored an arts event, and perhaps go to the event to observe how the sponsorship was promoted. Qualitative research emphasizes: • Words. Qualitative research focuses on words rather than numbers, although numbers can (for example) indicate how often a theme is found in transcripts or an action occurs. • Researcher involvement. The main research “instrument” in qualitative research is the researcher, who engages with the people being studied. This differs from quantitative research where researchers try to be remote from respondents (using such “objective” methods as surveys or structured interviews). • Participant viewpoints. A desire to explore and present the various subjective perspectives of participants is associated with qualitative research. By accepting subjectivity, it accepts that interpretation of the data is influenced by the researcher's worldview and involvement with respondents. • Small-scale studies. Qualitative researchers are interested in deep exploration in order to provide rich, detailed, holistic description, as well as explanation. Therefore, small samples are typical. • Holistic focus. Rather than directing their attention to one or two isolated variables, qualitative researchers tend to be oriented to a wide range of interconnected activities, experiences, beliefs and values of people in terms of the context in which they are situated. This allows them to consider many, interacting dimensions and relationships in a “real-world” context. • Flexibility. Although researchers have a topic and an agenda, they usually explore new and often surprising aspects that emerge as informants reveal their understandings and interests. Research procedures may be unstructured, adaptable and sometimes spontaneous. • Process. Qualitative research rarely offers static portraits of phenomena, but dynamic processes that unfold over time. Long-term studies mean that qualitative research can focus on change, sequences of events and behaviors, and the transformation of cultures.
• Natural settings. Most qualitative investigations are carried out in natural environments such as offices or shops. Researchers can observe people in routine activities and interactions. Even in artificial settings like a focus group, researchers often gather information about natural settings. • Inductive then deductive. Qualitative research tends to start out with inductive (data to generate theory) reasoning and then can work toward deductive reasoning (theory to test data). This makes it excellent for new or little-understood phenomena. However, most qualitative studies never have a deductive phase. Theory emerges mostly out of data collection rather than being generated from the literature and tested out through fieldwork. The literature review at the start of study, therefore, acts to guide the study only.
Qualitiative Analysis 1. In positivistic/quantitative research, the main goal of analysis is to assess how the data helps answer the research question(s) and refine its theoretical basis; analysis takes place in one fairly specific point of the process. In qualitative research, analysis is part of almost every part of the process, often including writing the report of the study. 2. Instead of being as objective as possible, interpretivistic research (to varying extents) accepts— and even somewhat celebrates— the subjective contribution of the researcher. Despite what many quantitative researchers believe, this approach does have rigor (effectiveness), though a different and less formulaic version than positivistic methods. 3. Because interpretivistic methods are much more inductive, the methods (including analysis) vary widely compared to positivistic research. This makes it much harder to identify and suggest a single approach. It also makes it harder to conduct qualitative analysis, since the burden is more on the researcher and less on an established structure. There are two key approaches: grounded and ethnographic. In both, theory emerges during data collection itself. 4. In the “grounded” approach, the data are intensively studied so that patterns emerge that help develop theory about that particular case; at each step, a “constant comparative” method compares existing theoretical concepts with ones that are emerging. 5. Ethnographic approaches, based on anthropology, emphasize on-the-spot analysis of “thick description”: at the end of every day of data collection, field notes are elaborated in analysis that continues in parallel until the end of data collection and beyond. Then these analyses are analyzed as a whole for deeper, broader conclusions and insights.