Qualitative psychological research

Qualitative psychological research is psychological research that employs qualitative methods. [1]

Qualitative research methodologies are oriented towards developing an understanding of the meaning and experience dimensions of human lives and their social worlds. Good qualitative research is characterized by congruence between the perspective that informs the research questions and the research methods used.[2]

Lincoln & Guba

The work of Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba is an example of a contribution to the field of qualitative research.[1]

Conversation Analysis

Conversation analysis is a type of qualitative research in the field of sociology.[3]

Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is type of qualitative research in the field of sociolinguistics. [3]

Historical Analysis

Historical analysis is a type of qualitative research in the social sciences.[3]

Grounded Theory

Grounded theory is a type of qualitative research in the social sciences.[3]

Focus-grouping

According to Lederman, focus-grouping is a "technique that involves the use of profound group interviews in which participants are selected because they are a purposive sampling of a specific population, with the group being 'focused' on a given topic".[4] According to Powell et al., a group of individuals selected and gathered by researchers to discuss and comment on, from personal experience, the topic that is the subject of the research form a focus-group.[5]

Some of the features of focus-group discussions include a member's involvement, a number of consecutive meetings, common characteristics of members with respect to interests, the evolvement of qualitative data, and discussion that is focused on a topic that is determined by the purposes of the research.[6]

One of the main purposes of focus-group discussions is to get insight into the respondents' phenomenological world of experience, thinking, perceiving, and feeling, which might be independent of a group or its cultural and social settings but are more likely to be revealed in interaction with other people in a group or other social setting. Focus-group discussions help in elaborating the different viewpoints and emotional processes of each member within a group. The individual interview is simpler for the researcher to control, but a focus-group discussion helps the researcher to gain a larger pool information in a lesser amount of time. However, focus-group discussions are still organized and planned. The discussions are especially helpful when there are differences relating to power between its members, decision-makers, or professionals; and when the researcher or a member wants to understand and explore the level of consensus on a given topic.[7]

How to conduct focus-grouping discussions

When conducting a focus-grouping discussion where the topic being discussed is of sensitive nature, it is recommended that the participants be of the same sex, age-range and socio-economic background. The group moderators should also be of the same sex, if the topic of discussion is sensitive. It is also desirable that the participants do not know each other prior to the discussion.[8]

Informed consent must be granted before beginning the discussion, where the members should be briefed about the topic of discussion, informed about their rights, and confidentiality (e.g., that their identities will not be revealed in any report or publication).[9]

Important considerations are the homogeneity of the group members, settings, and the nature of open-ended questions, which will encourage the members to talk more freely, free from constraints they might feel during a personal interview.[8] The discussion must be held in a relaxed and natural setting, with the entire session recorded (audio or visual). There should also be a note-taker who writes down all important aspects of the discussion, but who is not a part of it. This note-taker must have in-depth knowledge about the issue at hand, should be trained in observing verbal and non-verbal feedback (for example, noting facial expressions), and whose duty it is to translate the notes taken during session into data for analysis.[8]

Areas of interest to be discussed during the session need to be specified by the moderators and organizers prior to the session and then, it is the duty of the moderator to make sure that all these areas are covered during the discussion. The moderator, and whose duty it is to introduce new topics, directs the conversation and encourages participation, while being unbiased throughout the discussion.[8]

The moderator should facilitate in creating an environment that encourages members to share and put forth their views, while keeping track of the discussion and preventing it from drifting from the topic under discussion.[10] Often the participants do not know each other; and, so, it is the job of the moderator to ensure that everyone feels comfortable and there is good rapport. The purpose and format of the discussion should be made clear at the beginning of the session. All participants should be encouraged to participate, share their views, and be told that divergent views are welcome.[9]

Flick says that a formal explanation of the procedure should be given to the participants.[10] Expectation-setting is an essential component in this step. Expectations can include being involved in the discussion, arguing about certain topics, and collective problem solving. Introducing the members to one another, and having a "warm up", is necessary to prepare them for the discussion. Here, the moderator establishes the common ground of the members to facilitate community feeling. The actual discussion takes place following "discussion stimuli", which may be in the form of a provocative thesis, a short film, lecture on a text, or unfolding of a concrete problem for which a solution needs to be found. In groups where the members do not know one another in advance, phases of strangeness with, of orientation to, adaptation to, and familiarity with the group, as well as conformity and possibility of the discussion drying up, are addressed.

The questions must be open ended and there should be smooth transitions among the types of questions asked throughout the course of the discussion. The session should ideally start with introductory questions to address the general topic, helping the participants to understand the broader context of the issue, followed by key questions designed to address the specific information, and ending with questions aimed to summarize the opinion of all the participants.[11]

Advantages of focus-grouping

The use of focus-groups has several advantages in collecting data while conducting qualitative research. Focus-group research can be used as part of a purely qualitative method or in combination with quantitative techniques to explore the meaning of quantitative facts and helps in the development of subsequent surveys.[12][13][14][15] The moderator can inquire into and examine unforeseen issues with this format. The format provides face-validity and is naturalistic, as it includes storytelling, joking, disagreements, and boasting.[12][16] It is simple and relatively inexpensive to implement.[12][17] It consumes less time than structured interviews, thus increasing sample sizes, lessening resource investment, and providing fast results.[12][17] It is more efficient when the data being gathered is related to the researcher's interests.[16] It is helpful and important for needs-assessment and project-evaluation.[13] Information is gained from group interactions in a controlled setting, due to group dynamics, information that can't be gained in other ways.[17][14] Often these interactions result in creating 'synergistic effects'.[15] Vocabulary can be observed.[15] The reactions of participants to each other can be analyzed.[18] It helps in obtaining and gathering contracted and incisive data of a specific topic.[16] New, insightful perspectives and opinions are obtained.[16] Sensitive topics can be discussed, leading to personal disclosures.[15] The moderator keeps the discussion in sync with the topic and makes sure no one individual can dominate the group; creating an 'egalitarian' method.[15][19] Non-verbal behavior plays a role in the moderator's decision-making and research results,[19] there being an increased possibility of gaining rich and in-depth information.[19][14] Previously neglected or unnoticed phenomena can be brought to the researcher's attention.[15]

Though focus-groups method of data collection has several advantages; the limitations of the same cannot be ignored. This method gives less experimental control.[12] Data collected is usually difficult to analyze; as the discussion must be audio or videotaped, field notes to be recorded, and comments transcribed verbatim.[12][13] It requires carefully trained interviewers.[12] Groups may vary considerably and may be difficult to assemble.[12] Discussion must be conducted in an environment that is conducive to conversation.[12] There is high potential for leading questions and bias.[19] The ability of the leader to facilitate the discussion may be critical, as the group largely relies on the assisted discussion in order to produce results.[13] There is the need for skilled leaders.[12] There is a high chance or risk for the leader to dominate or 'hijack' the discussion.[13] Results obtained may be biased, as one or two people may dominate the discussion.[19] There may be difficulties in terms of the sample study results representing the population, as participants are self-selected; hence generalization becomes difficult or impossible.[13] The moderator may influence the group interactions, thus distorting results or findings.[16] The participants' involvement in, and contribution to, the discussion plays a major role.[16] Issues may arise if topics are controversial in nature, leading to disagreements and arguments.[16] Dealing with sensitive topics is a challenge.[19] A contrived or artificial environment may influence the interactions and responses, thus leading to biased results.[19] Ethical issues may arise regarding confidentiality.[14] Measurement validity may be low.[18] Opportunistic use of focus-groups results in improvised research design and impoverished data.[15]

Using computers in focus-grouping research

Many computer programs are available to help in analyzing qualitative data. The capacity of computers to effectively sort, store, and retrieve information makes their use in qualitative data analysis appealing.[2] However, it is important to notice that computers can only aid in some parts of analysis; computer software does not code data nor can replace conceptual analysis. It cannot analyse qualitative data for the researcher.

References

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, G. (2003). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The landscape of Qualitative Research – Theories and issues (2nd ed.) (pp. 253–276). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage
Fossey, E., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(6), 717-732. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1614.2002.01100.x.
For an example of a historical approach to psychology see Wertsch, James (1998), Mind as Action, New York: Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-511753-0
Rabiee, F. (November 2004). "Focus-group interview and data analysis". Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 63 (4): 655–660. doi:10.1079/pns2004399. PMID 15831139.
Gibbs, Anita (Winter 1997). "Focus Groups". Social Research Update (19). Retrieved 28 January 2020.
Freitas, H.; et al. (February 1998). "The Focus Group, A Qualitative Research Method" (PDF). Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul. ISRC Working Paper 010298. Retrieved January 30, 2020.
Kreuger, D. M. (1993). When to use Focus Groups and Why? Successful Focus Groups .
Odimegwu, C. O. (2000). Methodological Issues in the Use of Focus Group Discussions as a Data Collection Tool. Retrieved from KRE Publishers: http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/JSS/JSS-04-0-000-000-2000-Web/JSS-04-02-03-117-2000-Abst-PDF/JSS-04-02-03-207-212-2000.pdf
Toolkit for Conducting Focus Groups. (n.d.). Retrieved from Rowan Education: http://www.rowan.edu/colleges/chss/facultystaff/focusgrouptoolkit.pdf
Flick, U. (2006). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. California: Sage Publications.
Magloff, L. (n.d.). Focus Group Technique. Retrieved from Chron: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/focus-group-technique-10741.html
Leach, Glen (2018). "Qualitative Psychological Research". Forensic Psychology. Scientific e-Resources. pp. 130–140. ISBN 978-183947409-5. Retrieved January 29, 2020. "Focus Groups Advantages and Disadvantages". Scribd. Retrieved January 29, 2020.
Savithiri, R. (2009). spotlights on focus groups. Canadian family physician, 218-219.
Deem, R. (1997). Focus Groups. Retrieved December 5, 2014, from Focus Groups: Plymouth Education: https://web.archive.org/web/20141124231416/http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/interviews/focusgroups.htm
Silverman, D. (2004). Focus group research. In D. Silverman, Qualitative Research Theory, Method and Practice (pp. 177–200). New Delhi: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd.
Morgan, D. L. (n.d.). Focus groups as qualitative research. Retrieved December 5, 2014, from https://www.kth.se/social/upload/6566/morgan.pdf
"Tools for Qualitative Researchers: Focus Groups Method". National Center for Postsecondary Improvement. Retrieved January 29, 2020.
n.d. (n.d.). Southalabama Education: Strengths and Weaknesses of Focus Groups. Retrieved December 5, 2014, from Southalabama.edu/coe/bset/johnson/oh_master: http://www.southalabama.edu/coe/bset/johnson/oh_master/Ch6/SWFOCUSG.pdf
n.d. (n.d.). Focus Groups: Issues Regarding Advantages and Disadvantages. Retrieved December 5, 2014, from PBworks Focus Groups: Issues Regarding Advantages and Disadvantages: http://focusgroups.pbworks.com/w/page/5677430/Issues%20including%20advantages%20and%20disadvantages