A Guide to Qualitative Field Research [3 ed.] 9781071909614, 2017030295, 9781506306995

Table of contents :
Table of Contents
Copyright
Preface
Acknowledgments
About the author
CHAPTER 1: Introduction to Qualitative Field Research
CHAPTER 2: Ethics
CHAPTER 3: Topic, Purpose, and Research Questions
CHAPTER 4: Theory and Review of Literature
CHAPTER 5: Paradigms, Research Design, and Introduction to Methodology
CHAPTER 6: From Gaining Entrée to Exiting the Field
CHAPTER 7: Observations
CHAPTER 8: Interviews
CHAPTER 9: Field Notes
CHAPTER 10: Procedures for Increasing Validity and Trustworthiness
CHAPTER 11: Introduction to Analysis and Coding
CHAPTER 12: Descriptions and Typologies
CHAPTER 13: Thematic Analysis
CHAPTER 14: Research Stories and Critical Events and Cases
CHAPTER 15: Writing and the Final Paper
REFERENCES
GLOSSARY

Citation preview

SAGE Research Methods A Guide to Qualitative Field Research Author: Carol A. Bailey Pub. Date: 2023 Product: SAGE Research Methods DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614 Methods: Fieldwork, Research questions, Field notes Disciplines: Sociology, Criminology and Criminal Justice, Business and Management, Communication and Media Studies, Education, Psychology, Health, Social Work, Political Science and International Relations Access Date: February 24, 2023 Publishing Company: SAGE Publications, Inc City: Thousand Oaks Online ISBN: 9781071909614 © 2023 SAGE Publications, Inc All Rights Reserved.

Table of Contents Front Matter Copyright Acknowledgements List of Tables, Figures, and Photographs List of Figures Photographs Preface Acknowledgments About the Author Chapters Chapter 1: Introduction to Qualitative Field Research Chapter 2: Ethics Chapter 3: Topic, Purpose, and Research Questions Chapter 4: Theory and Review of Literature Chapter 5: Paradigms, Research Design, and Introduction to Methodology Chapter 6: From Gaining Entrée to Exiting the Field Chapter 7: Observations Chapter 8: Interviews Chapter 9: Field Notes Chapter 10: Procedures for Increasing Validity and Trustworthiness Chapter 11: Introduction to Analysis and Coding Chapter 12: Descriptions and Typologies Chapter 13: Thematic Analysis Chapter 14: Research Stories and Critical Events and Cases Chapter 15: Writing and the Final Paper Back Matter References Glossary

icon backBack to table of contents

Copyright None FOR INFORMATION: SAGE Publications, Inc. 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, California 91320 E-mail: [email protected] SAGE Publications Ltd. 1 Oliver’s Yard 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd. B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044 India SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd. 3 Church Street #10-04 Samsung Hub Singapore 049483 Copyright © 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Bailey, Carol A., author. Title: A guide to qualitative field research / Carol A. Bailey, Virginia Tech. Description: Third Edition. | Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications, [2018] | Revised edition of the author’s A guide to qualitative field research, 2007. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017030295 | ISBN 9781506306995 (pbk. : alk. paper)

Subjects: LCSH: Social sciences—Research—Methodology. Classification: LCC H62 .B275 2018 | DDC 300.72/3—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017030295 This book is printed on acid-free paper. Acquisitions Editor: Helen Salmon Content Development Editor: Chelsea Neve Editorial Assistant: Megan O’Heffernan Production Editor: Andrew Olson Copy Editor: Diane DiMura Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd. Proofreader: Rae-Ann Goodwin Indexer: Wendy Allex Cover Designer: Anupama Krishnan Marketing Manager: Susannah Goldes Next Acknowledgements

icon backBack to table of contents

Preface Qualitative field research is conducted to help us understand people’s experiences in a particular setting by interacting with and observing them and participating in parts of their daily lives over a long period of time, usually months or years. My task is to guide you through the process of conducting field research—from selecting a topic to writing the final paper. My primary goal is to provide you with clear, practical, and specific instructions about how to conduct field research. For example, I include a template that can be used when writing an informed consent form, rather than simply telling you that one is required. In this edition, I give increased attention to the early and last stages of field research. Although selecting a topic, deciding upon the purpose of your research, and writing the final paper seem like they would be relatively easy, this is not always the case for the novice researcher. I discuss these steps in detail with a generous number of examples to help you generate ideas. A major theme of this book is the role of the research question. Given that the purpose of research is to answer research questions, every aspect of your research has to be connected to your questions. I consistently stress that what you observe, the questions you ask, the research literature you read, the analytical technique you employ, and what you write in your final paper all depend upon your research questions. Information about research questions and examples are woven into every chapter. I give you concrete suggestions, advice, and even dictums. At the same time, many questions you have about field research will be answered with the sentence, It depends. My instructions are frequently qualified by noting that they depend upon the purpose, research questions, audience, and so on. No one size fits all. I highlight the ambiguities related to and diverse ways of conducting field research. Rather than masking the difficulties inherent in research or concealing controversies and debates, I make you aware of the messiness within the academic garden of field research. Despite this messiness, researchers adhere to standards. It would be a grave error to leave you with the impression that “anything goes.” Because this is an introductory text, I purposely simplify complex material at times. My philosophy is that teaching field research is parallel to teaching you how to play the piano—I would have you begin with “Row, Row, Row Your Boat” and not with Handel’s Fugue in A Minor. I want you to learn the basics, with us all knowing that you have to learn more before you are highly proficient. You can count on your professor to flesh out areas that space precludes me from explaining in detail here. I emphasize ethical issues in every chapter because ethical concerns are pervasive. Unethical research can cause harm to others, your institution, and yourself. Unfortunately, the ethical path is not always clear. To help you make good ethical decisions, I stress the rules you must follow. I point out potential ethical breaches and possible ways to avoid them. Within the last few decades, the concept of “field” in field research has expanded to include virtual settings. My primary focus is on face-to-face field research, but research in the digital world is discussed. The considerable overlap between face-to-face field research and virtual field research means that most of the book applies to both. Where differences occur, they are presented. The primary audience for this book is undergraduates and, to a lesser extent, graduate students unfamiliar with field research. Compared to earlier editions, I more explicitly mention graduate student researchers and use their work as examples. The references to graduate students do not mean I have made the book more difficult than it would be otherwise. The methodological procedures for the two groups of students are largely the same. Graduate student research provides good illustrations of research in practice and models to follow. Again, undergraduate students should not feel intimidated by using examples from dissertations. I carefully selected those that are easily understood. This edition has an increased number of tables, checklists, diagrams, and summary charts. Reading a summary table is not sufficient for you to thoroughly understand the content of a chapter but will help focus your reading and be useful as a review. I use the familiar “frequently asked questions” format in some cases and employ pedagogical techniques shown to increase learning. Each chapter has objectives, chapter

highlights, and exercises. Because of the length of the book, I cannot provide the kind of detailed instructions that I normally give for completing assignments; your course instructors can furnish those. The glossary should be useful for a quick reference, and terms that appear in the glossary are printed in bold in the text. An online supplement is available at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e and recommended readings are included—both provide examples and more advanced discussion of topics. One of my goals is to make this book useful beyond just the context of field research. Many of us believe that higher education should help students learn skills for adjudicating differences, resolving conflict, seeing other perspectives, weighing evidence, and valuing diversity. By becoming producers and informed consumers of research, you are in a better position than you would be otherwise to evaluate the claims of politicians, advertisers, media pundits, parents, and peers. Good research skills can help all of us be skeptical about conclusions that are not scientifically supported. Finally, I hope to convey my passion for teaching and field research so that it will inspire in you a passion for learning and conducting your own research. Visit the open-access companion site at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e for key materials to support teaching and learning with this book: The Student Study Site includes the following: EXCLUSIVE! Access to full-text SAGE journal articles that have been carefully selected for each chapter by the author. Additional writings provided by fellow scholars in the field, including sample field notes and an essay on Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). Password-protected Instructor Resources include the following: Editable, chapter-specific Microsoft PowerPoint slides offer you complete flexibility in easily creating a multimedia presentation for your course. EXCLUSIVE! Access to certain full-text SAGE journal articles that have been carefully selected for each chapter by the author. Previous Photographs Next Acknowledgments

icon backBack to table of contents

Acknowledgments I am thankful for having such a rich literature written by students and advanced scholars from which to draw. My apologies if in tailoring their research for my purposes, I misrepresented their work. I am in awe of the editing skills of Carolyn Kroehler, who improved the content and readability of this guide. Anthony Kwame Harrison, Jordal Christian, Donna Sedgwick, and Betty Etzler all made valuable contributions. It is my pleasure to share the photographic talents of William Snizek and the artistic ingenuity of Chad Seymour. The comments by reviewers were helpful, and the patience and guidance of Helen Salmon at SAGE made the book possible. Chelsea Neve, Diane DiMura, and Andrew Olson were invaluable during the home stretch and excel at author care. I cannot overstate my gratitude for the constant support and astute insights of Lisa Norris, Beth Mabry, and Paula M. Seniors. I am particularly appreciative of Mark Newman for his expertise and understanding. Thanks also to Carol Hansen, Sarah Leffke, Julie Sutherland, Shanna Head, Mandi Martinez, Rhiannon Watson, Karen Scruggs, Brenda Husser, Clinton Stone, J. Scott Long, Bob Davis, and Patricia Leavy. John Ryan and Jim Hawdon deserve special recognition. Nicolai Fuhrman, Sae Jung, and Nicole and Kevin McGuckin are a blessing. Life doesn’t get any better than sharing my retirement with my fantastic husband, Ellsworth “Skip” Fuhrman, who suggested a list of positive attributes to describe himself that included caring, intelligent, generous, funny, and handsome. Finally, SAGE gratefully acknowledges the following reviewers for their contributions during the development of this edition: Pamela A. Kaylor, Ohio University Lancaster David E. Hammond, Arizona State University Melanie Lorek, The Graduate Center (CUNY) Bryan Lee Miller, Georgia Southern University Jenell Navarro, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Amira Proweller, PhD, DePaul University, College of Education Eric Wiebelhaus-Brahm, University of Arkansas at Little Rock Raymond Dart, Trent University Katja M. Guenther, University of California, Riverside Michael Birzer, Wichita State University Andrew Nelson, University of North Texas Previous Preface Next About the Author

icon backBack to table of contents

About the Author Carol A. Bailey is an associate professor emerita of sociology at Virginia Tech. She is the recipient of numerous teaching awards at the department, college, and university level, including the Alumni Award for Teaching Excellence and the Wine Award for Excellence in Teaching. Among a wide array of courses, she consistently taught undergraduate research methods and graduate-level courses on qualitative methodology and pedagogy. She served as the director of the University Writing Program and chair of the Academy of Teaching Excellence. Her research focused on evaluating programs that promote science education and those that serve children with severe mental illnesses and their families. Previous Acknowledgments

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 1: Introduction to Qualitative Field Research

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • write an overview of field research, • compare face-to-face field research with virtual field research, • explain what a research design is, and • discuss the types of data used by field researchers and how they are collected.

Venkatesh (2008) begins the preface to his book with these lines: I woke up at about 7:30 A.M. in a crack den, Apartment 1603 in Building Number 2301 of the Robert Taylor Homes. Apartment 1603 was called the “Roof,” since everyone knew that you could get very, very high there, even higher than if you climbed all the way to the building’s actual rooftop. (p. xiii) Although these words might suggest the book is a confessional about the struggles of a drug addict, this is not the case. The book is about the results of Venkatesh’s qualitative field research on the Black Kings, a crack-selling gang in what he considers one of the worst neighborhoods in America. My overarching purpose for this book is to introduce you to the methodology of qualitative field research. Field research is the systematic study, through long-term interactions and observations, of people’s lives in a particular setting. Given that you are reading this book, chances are at least moderate that you are going to be conducting field research or some other form of qualitative research. My task is to help you conduct high quality research and produce an excellent final paper, whether an undergraduate class project, a master’s thesis, or a dissertation. To that end, I provide step-by-step instructions on how to proceed, present options available to you, prepare you for problems you might encounter, make suggestions, ask you questions, and assure you that you are capable of conducting this type of research.

Page 2 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Overview I start this chapter with an overview of field research. Given the large body of research that shows learning is enhanced by repetition and building upon what is already known, I follow this overview with more details about the major features of field research. The remaining chapters will build upon this base. A primary goal of field research is to understand people’s culture and experiences in a particular setting by interacting with and observing them and participating in parts of their daily lives over a long period of time—usually months or years. The setting might be a car dealership, elementary school classroom, food bank, public housing community, or small village in Mongolia. The people, often referred to as participants, can be novices on a search and rescue team, employees at a water treatment facility, women equestrians, coal miners, competitive sky divers, beauticians, 4-H camp counselors, protestors, or members of a darkweb, drug-use community (Barratt & Maddox, 2016). Field researchers are interested in activities, processes, events, feelings, norms, beliefs, and interactions. Specifically, a researcher might want to learn about human trafficking, training sales managers, ways of expressing grief, assimilation, purchasing decisions, religious conversion, parental practices, playing video games, obtaining credit, or organic gardening. Researchers study social organizations, institutions, rituals and artifacts: rehabilitation programs, gentrification, rap music, the Fair Housing Act, weddings, windmill farms, and NGOs. When you are conducting your field research, you will start with a broad topic of interest and then determine the purpose of your study. Your purpose could be to examine police responses to displays of nudity among attendees at a Mardi Gras parade (Redmon, 2010), rehabilitative practices within a residential drug treatment facility that works closely with the criminal justice system (Kaye, 2013), or dumpster diving for discarded food to protest against environmental degradation (Barnard, 2011). Once you have your purpose, you have to decide what narrow, specific, related research question your research is intended to answer. For example, How do the police respond to the illegal practice of dumpster diving? What are the reasons elementary school students engage in bullying? When describing her experiences as a researcher, Etzler (personal communication, 2016) wrote As a qualitative researcher, I did not start my journey knowing what I thought were answers to my questions and then proving what might be true or false. Instead, I started with a set of questions that Page 3 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

I seriously wanted to gather insight and perspective about. To answer your research question, you need to collect data, which are information from and about the participants and the setting. The data are collected by interacting with and observing people in the setting over a long period of time and possibly by engaging in some of their activities. Field research is considered qualitative research because the data consists of texts: written field notes about what was observed, interview transcripts, and paraphrases of conversations. By way of contrast, quantitative researchers use numerical data. The analysis of textual data results in themes, typologies, research stories, and so on, rather than statistics generated by the analysis of numerical data. The findings are presented in a final paper that contains detailed descriptions, verbatim quotes and paraphrased conversations to support the findings, theoretical explanations, and an in-depth discussion of the methodology used during the research. The results of field research paint a more holistic picture of participants and their lives than what would be obtained by asking them to take part in an experiment or complete a survey about everyday events. Field researchers derive understanding from the larger, complicated, multifaceted, social, and historical contexts within which people’s lives unfold. The long-term engagement of the researcher with the participants leads to a deep understanding of people’s activities in a setting, in part because it allows the researcher to be attentive to the temporal order of events and to changes over time. Field researchers believe that life is, metaphorically, better captured by a movie than by a photograph. Field research requires systematic procedures to be closely followed for it to be rigorous and worthy of attention. Four examples of the many methodological requirements you have to follow when you are conducting your research are • your research must be ethical, • you must keep detailed notes throughout the research process, • you must spend a considerable amount of time observing participants, and • you must read your data multiple times during the analysis. At the same time, field research lacks rigid rules for some aspects of the research process, and you will have to be flexible because the best-laid plans sometimes fall apart when attempts are made to implement them. After all, when studying people, you can never be certain how they will react. Luck, ambiguity, time constraints, and feelings often affect the planning, execution, and ultimately the results of field research. Factors Page 4 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

such as these make it imperative that you know and follow the rigorous procedures for conducting high-quality field research because they provide guidance on how to deal with these sorts of issues. Engaging in this type of research has the potential to be exciting, scary, fun, intellectually stimulating, and boring. Most important, the questions you had at the beginning of your research will be answered.

Examples of Field Research Now that you have an overview, some examples will add to your understanding of field research. What follows are summaries of three classic studies that I refer to throughout this book. Russell (1991) wanted to learn about the lives of homeless women from their perspectives. More specifically, Russell was concerned with how women without homes deal with the practical aspects of their daily lives. Instead of making an appointment with homeless women to conduct interviews, Russell lived with them. She slept in shelters, and she ate in soup kitchens. Much of her data was collected during the time when she volunteered for 4 months at a day shelter. In this setting, she could directly observe the women in their roles as residents of the shelters, diners at soup kitchens, participants in social activities, and mothers of children. Russell held babies, poured coffee, and interacted with the women in other ways. To discover how they found food, where they bathed or did their laundry, and how they coped with the routine and problematic events of their daily lives, she not only observed but also talked to them. She wished to know about the women’s activities during the day and wanted to explore how they made sense of their lives and how they viewed themselves and other women without homes. It was through her participation at the shelter that Russell gained answers to her questions about the women. During his field research, Duneier (1999) became involved in the daily activities of street vendors—individuals selling books and magazines—on Sixth Avenue in Greenwich Village in New York. He began his research as a customer, then became an assistant (scavenging magazines from the trash, going for coffee, watching the tables), and eventually worked as a full-time magazine vendor (p. 11). Duneier’s continual presence on the streets over several years allowed him to become privy to events, conversations, and rhythms of life among the vendors and panhandlers. Over a 5-year period, Bourgois (1995) spent hundreds of nights on the streets and in crack houses in East Harlem while conducting his field research. As a result of his immersion in their world, Bourgois was able to gain access to the personal lives of some of the participants. He wrote about how he Page 5 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

visited families, attending parties and intimate reunions—from Thanksgiving dinners to New Year’s Eve celebrations. I interviewed, and in many cases befriended, the spouses, lovers, siblings, mothers, grandmothers, and—when possible—the fathers and stepfathers of the crack dealers. (p. 13) He observed, interviewed, and took photographs of them, even one of “Primo feeding cocaine to Caesar on the benches of a housing project courtyard” (p. 101). Why did these researchers conduct research that took so long to complete in places with which they were largely unfamiliar? Their reasoning goes like this: If you want to learn how to swim, you have to jump in the water; being told how to swim isn’t enough. In a similar way, field researchers believe that if they want to learn about the lives of people in a particular setting, they have to immerse themselves in it.

Major Features of Field Research In keeping with my promise to repeat and build upon what you are learning, I present the major features of field research in Table 1.1 and follow with in-depth information about each of them. You may find parts of this table confusing at first reading. By the end of the chapter, more of it will make sense. By the time you finish the book, you will understand everything in the table, and more importantly, you will know how it applies to your own research. Table 1.1 Major features of field research

Ethics

Rules and guidelines must be followed to make the research ethical, and great care should be taken to ensure that the research is ethical even when rules and guidelines fail to apply to a situation.

Natural

Research is conducted in the place, the natural setting, where the people are engaging in the activities of interest to the re-

Settings

searcher. The setting is referred to as the field and can be a setting in the virtual world.

Purpose

Research is conducted to understand people’s lives, such as their activities and the meanings they attach to them.

Research

The research is designed to answer one or more specific research questions. All parts of the research have to be connected to the

Question

research questions, and, thus, to each other.

Page 6 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Theory and Re-

Theories are used to guide the research and to explain the findings. The research has to take into account related research, so a

view of

review of the literature is required.

Literature

A paradigm is a set of fundamental assumptions about the nature of social reality, the creation of knowledge, the role of values Paradigm

during research, and the appropriate methodology to use during the research. The paradigmatic assumptions held by researchers affect whether they choose quantitative research or a specific type of qualitative research.

Research

A research design determines the methodology used during research. Field research is one of many research designs. A field re-

Design

search design includes all the features in this table and many other methodological requirements.

Data are collected by interacting with, observing, and interviewing participants and engaging in their activities over an extended peData

riod of time. The researcher and relationships between the researcher and participants affect what data are collected and ultimately what is learned from the research. The data are textual, such as written field notes and interview transcripts.

Analyzing the vast amount of data collected requires coding, which is a process used for organizing the data and eliminating what Analysis

is not relevant for answering the research question. When analyzing the data, researchers look for commonalities and differences, themes, types, causes, time ordering of events, and so on, rather than conducting statistical analyses.

Results

Final Paper

The results of the analysis are themes, typologies, research stories, patterns, and thick descriptions. Theories are used to explain and interpret the findings.

The final paper includes richly detailed, written accounts of the findings and procedures

I am now going to build upon what you learned in the overview by discussing each of the major features.

Ethics First and foremost, great care should be taken to ensure that your research is ethical. Ethical issues abound in field research, whether or not it is conducted in the real or virtual world. Face-to-face long-term interactions in natural settings can lead to numerous ethical dilemmas. Because of the potential harm unethical research can cause, field researchers must follow rules and guidelines to insure their research is ethical. And although it may seem that anything publicly available online should be devoid of ethical concerns, this is not the case. Page 7 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Before conducting field research, you will have to get approval from a university committee. A basic ethical requirement for most field research is that you get the informed consent of the participants. If you promise to keep their identities confidential, then you should make sure you do. Many professional associations prohibit deception during field research. When you are conducting your research, you may find it is sometimes difficult to know what is or is not ethical in a particular setting, and implementing ethical requirements is not always easy.

Natural Setting A distinguishing feature of field research is that it takes place in the setting where the participants are engaging in the activities of interest. The setting in which the research takes place is called the field. Research conducted in the field is referred to as naturalistic inquiry because it does not require participants to deviate much from their daily routines during the research. Field researchers go to myriad locations, from city council meetings to racetracks, from television stations to beauty pageants. They observe factory workers, dogcatchers, tattoo artists, volunteers, and flight attendants as they go about their daily lives or when they are engaging in a specific event. Even though we tend to speak of field research as taking place in one, fairly well-defined setting, this is not always the case. You might want to examine multiple settings to make comparisons across locations. Sometimes an interest in a social group will require you to collect data in different locations to get a more holistic view of the group’s experiences. For example, research on student athletes might include observations both in classrooms and at practices. In the last few decades, some scholars have expanded the concept of field to include places in which the researcher is not physically present—most notably the virtual world. Virtual field research shares many of the characteristics as other types of field research. However, the primary difference is that if you were conducting virtual field research, you would not be in the same physical, three-dimensional space as the participants. You would still collect data by interacting, observing, interviewing, and participating, but you would use a digital device to accomplish these activities. You might interview others online via FaceTime, observe their videos, study an online culture, and be involved in an online setting by posting comments, asking questions, and participating in games. Data can come from blogs, tweets, discussion groups, YouTube channels, reviews, Page 8 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

videos, Facebook, Instagram, selfies, and newer forms of social media. Harrelson (2011) provides what she refers to as a short and sweet summary of a type of field research, virtual ethnography, conducted in a virtual world. She writes, Virtual ethnography is a highly interactive process that provides the ability to make observations of and participate in computer/device mediated cultures through a multitude of non-face-to-face methods. It is used to better understand the behaviors and knowledge of participants in and contributors to those cultures. It is also concerned with the artifacts these cultures produce and the methods in which these cultures share, use, and iterate on them. (n.p.) Excluding the words computer/device mediated and non before face-to-face, she is accurately describing field research in the nonvirtual world as well. The lines between digital lives and real lives are increasingly blurry (Harrelson, 2011), and many of the methodological requirements for studying online and offline worlds are similar. Further, being a field researcher does not negate collecting data in the virtual field, and virtual field researchers can interact with participants face-to-face. To reflect the similarities and differences, I use the terms field research when a distinction is not needed or the information applies only to face-to-face research. The context will tell you which of these is the case. I add the word virtual when talking about research that primarily takes place within digital spaces. This book is geared toward helping you learn about face-to-face field research, but given the overlap, the book should be useful for both types.

Page 9 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Photo 1.1 Each weekend, thousands of volunteers drive dogs that have been rescued to their forever homes in 1-hour legs. Research on the volunteers, the transport coordinators, and the rescue organizations would require the field researcher to go to multiple locations. Figure 2

Source: Photo courtesy of the author.

Purpose of Research A general purpose of field research is to learn things about people in a particular setting that the researcher did not know before the research. You would have a similar purpose if you moved to another country because you would need to learn about the people and their culture in order to function smoothly in your new environment. What are their daily routines, norms, and values? Where is food purchased? How big of a tip is expected? Is eye contact with powerful people expected or prohibited? You would benefit from knowing the meanings people attach to their experiences to help you make decisions about your own behavior. In short, you would need to become a field researcher. Field researchers conduct research for the purposes of learning about Page 10 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• values, beliefs, worldviews, and norms relevant to the lives of the people in the setting; • people’s feelings about themselves, others, and their experiences; • routine and not-so-routine behaviors; • functions of, reasons for, and consequences of actions; • social structures, organizations, and institutional practices that affect people’s lives; • the whats, hows, whys, whens, and wheres of people’s activities and who is affected by whom and to what effect; and • meanings people attach to their actions and those of others. Although researchers share these general purposes, they have to determine the specific purpose of their research. For example, Choi’s (2016) purpose was to explore how social class was related to parents’ ideas about learning and leisure in relationship to the actual leisure activities of their young children. Palacios’s (2011) purpose was to understand the process of becoming a proficient juggler as a mechanism for shaping young people’s views about contemporary Chile. Once you know your purpose, the next step is to zero in on the exact research question that you want to answer with your research.

Research Questions Researchers usually begin with a big overarching purpose, issue, or problem, which they then funnel down to a narrow research question. For example, Duneier (1999) began his work with a broad interest in the moral order of street vendors (p. 9). As his research progressed, he narrowed his purpose until he arrived at a specific research question (p. 190): Why are the informal mechanisms of social control not able to regulate the interactions between the [street venders] and women pedestrians? You will have at least one research question, possibly three or four, but you will not have twenty. Deciding what your research question will be is one of the most important tasks you will undertake. Ask yourself: What is it I want to know? Research questions often begin with what, why, and how: What accounts for school policies that prohibit wearing the hijab by female Muslim students? Why do people participate in tours featuring tree houses and zip lines in order to see gibbons? How do skydivers overcome their initial fear of parachuting? Cleaveland and Pierson (2009, p. 515) asked, “How do day laborers, who are conspicuous because of their racial-ethnic and language differences, find work by meeting employers in public spaces despite legal Page 11 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

restrictions against their presence there?” Given that your goal is to answer a question, all parts of your research should be linked to that question. The literature you read, the data you collect, the analytical technique you use, and a host of other activities are determined by your research question. Eventually your work will be judged, in part, on whether all parts of your research are tightly related. Keeping a focus on your research question will help you establish the links.

Theory and Review of Literature Descriptions are a central part of field research results, but they are insufficient for making sense of your findings. This is where theory comes into play. A theory is an explanation of a phenomenon. A theory might explain why only some people save money or what factors affect how people cope with grief. Theories are made up of concepts, such as power, inequality, leadership style, positive rewards, political subjectivities (Casati, 2016), and social support. These concepts become the basis for explaining your results. The concept of social support, for example, might be useful for trying to understand different ways people cope with grief. You could have a predetermined theory that frames your research. In such a case, you would look during your analysis for concepts of interest to you and how their relationships are manifested in your data. Alternatively, you might arrive at an unanticipated theoretical explanation as your analysis reveals concepts that you had not expected. An excellent way to help you gain theoretical knowledge is to read about research on a topic similar to yours. You will need to include a review of this research literature in your final paper, and the review should contain discussions about theory and others’ research. Your final paper will include a comparison of your findings with that of others and possible explanations of why your findings are similar or different.

Paradigms A paradigm is a set of fundamental assumptions researchers hold about the nature of social reality, the creation of knowledge, effect of the researcher on what is learned from the research, the role of values during research, and what procedures should be used to acquire knowledge about a setting. Each set of assump-

Page 12 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

tions is given a name, such as post-positivist paradigm or interpretive paradigm. Understanding the role of paradigms in research can be challenging until you know more about field research. For the purposes of this overview, it is sufficient for you to know that a particular set of paradigmatic assumptions held by a researcher affects whether they choose quantitative research or a specific type of qualitative research.

Research Design A research design determines the overarching methodology used during research. A research design consists of a template to follow when conducting research. Different designs are used for different types of research. Field research is the design that is the focus of this book. Which research design to use is driven by the purpose, paradigm, research question, use of theory, and other factors. For example, if your purpose were to determine whether a drug intervention program reduces drug use, then you would use an evaluation research design. A methodological procedure for this design is to start with the program objectives and ultimately arrive at a conclusion as to whether the objectives were met. The design for oral histories would be appropriate if you were interested in people’s experiences related to specific events. An example is the aftermath of a hurricane. You would ask the participants questions, but the methodology associated with an oral history design does not require you to observe them as events unfold. In contrast, if you are conducting field research on how people go about rebuilding their lives and communities after a hurricane, a methodological requirement of a field research design is that you interact with and observe people over a sustained period of time during the rebuilding. Table 1.1 presents only the major methodological features of a field research design; many other methodological features are embedded in each category in the table. For example, researchers have to obtain permission to gain entrée into the natural setting and write notes, called field notes, about their activities in the field. You will learn more about all of these in subsequent chapters. Although I use the general terms field research, the design that I present is sometimes referred to as ethnographic research. Almost all of my examples in this chapter and elsewhere are ethnographies. You should benefit from reading this book if you want to conduct ethnography, and the information contained herein also applies to types of qualitative research other than just field research.

Page 13 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Data To answer research questions, field researchers collect data primarily through systematic observations, interactions, and participation in naturally occurring events. As a researcher, you would observe people’s actions in the field and probably conduct various types of interviews with people in the setting. For example, Russell (1991) held semi-structured interviews with 22 women, 10 more than once, and more free-flowing, unstructured interviews with 50 to 60 women. Interviews can be held face-to-face or by phone, Skype, e-mail, or other digital forms of communication. The bulk of data used for analysis by field researchers consists of text and not numbers as might be the case if you were conducting survey research. The data typically include many pages of details about observations and other field notes, as well as transcripts of interviews and conversations. Virtual field researchers utilize data generated by capturing chat logs, watching videos, and “collecting” virtual artifacts among other ways. The amount of data collected by field researchers can be staggering. Sandelowski (2001) reported that one of the Ph.D. students with whom she worked conducted a 17-month ethnography in a hospital. The student’s interviews with 20 people resulted in 325 pages of text, and 124 hours of observations led to 1,162 pages of field notes! Not to worry. You will not be expected to have anything close to that much data in a semester-long project. However, you will probably have more than you thought you would have at the start. The data are the clay that researchers use, but ultimately, the researcher determines what is made from the clay—what is learned from field research. The researcher asks the questions, conducts the observations, and engages in the interactions. The project’s data include the researcher’s written accounts of these interactions. The researcher also analyzes the data, interprets them, and creates the final paper. That is, you do not stand “outside” the research looking in; you are part of it. Further, the researcher’s history, personality, values, training, and status characteristics—gender, race, ethnicity, age, sexuality, and social class—are relevant in the production of knowledge through field research. Whether you are male or female can affect how participants respond to your questions. Your race and age might make a difference in the questions you ask. However, this does not mean the research is biased. Rigorous procedures are followed to make sure the conclusions are substantiated by the data. One practice used by researchers is to allow the participants in the setting to read their work and comment to help ensure that

Page 14 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the results seem accurate based on the perspectives of participants.

Analysis Trying to make sense out of the massive amount of data is a difficult but often an interesting task. You begin your analysis by engaging in the rigorous process of coding to identify portions of the data potentially useful for further analysis. When you are coding, you will identify such things as key events, daily routines, implications of people’s action, and so on. The analysis stage is where you focus, in particular, on concepts and how they are related. You will use the appropriate analytical technique to arrive at the answers to your research questions. Depending upon the question, you might use a technique that helps you find common themes in the data or one that allows you to arrive at a more holistic story about the participants’ lives.

Results The results of your analysis will meet the general purpose of your research—to understand the culture, behaviors, values, beliefs, norms, social interactions and organizations, and so on that affect the lives of people in a particular setting and the meanings people attach to their experiences. More important, the findings answer your specific what, why, and how research questions. The answers to research questions are not merely descriptions; theories are used to make sense of the findings. The results reflect the researcher’s theoretical explanations for the relationships found in the data.

Final Paper Field researchers often write their final paper in the form of engaging narratives that include detailed descriptions and answers to their research questions that are theoretically informed. The final paper compares the findings with those of other studies identified in the review of literature. The possible applications and theoretical implications of the research are included. An important part of the final paper is in-depth accounts of the methodology employed.

Page 15 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

What your final paper will look like depends upon your course requirements, department norms, and educational status. The format for a class paper, master’s thesis, or dissertation can follow a traditional model: Introduction, Theory and Review of Literature, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions. Alternatives to the standard template are permissible in some cases. For instance, for her dissertation, Chenault (2004) conducted a 2-year study of the disjunctions between what was expected of a resident council in a public housing community and what it actually accomplished. Her dissertation chapter headings included Just Getting Started, The Voices of Rivertown, and Centering the Council.

Putting It All Together Another example might be useful at this point. As you read this summary of Browning’s (2014) research on vampire communities, watch for the major features of field research discussed in this chapter. Browning (2014) engaged in 5 years of intensive field research studying real vampirism in New Orleans, Louisiana, and Buffalo, New York. His purpose was to determine whether vampire culture varied by setting and whether the vampires were similar to how they are portrayed in mass media. The theoretical concepts of interest to him were self-identification, defiant culture, empowerment, resisting “normalcy,” and critiques of power structures. He conducted a review of previous research about “real vampires” and their communities, as well as studying how vampires are represented in popular culture. He went to Gothic apparel shops, nightclubs, sidewalks, alleyways, and homes. It took him months to find the first self-identified vampire who was willing to take part in his research. One thing that helped him gain entrée to the world of vampirism was meeting Zaar, who was an elder in the New Orleans Vampire Association. Browning interviewed Zaar, who then introduced him to other vampires. Prior to data collection with the real vampires, he obtained their informed consent. He went to considerable length to protect the confidentiality of the participants. In one case, a woman’s husband was unaware of her activities, and serious problems could have resulted if Browning’s actions led to the husband finding out. Browning collected data by interviewing participants, observing, and participating in some of their activities. He also had them write answers to openended questions on a survey: Do you prefer blood to be chilled or warm, or both? Most of the participants in his study were sanguinarians who consumed blood because they suffered fatigue, headaches, and excruciating stomach pain. Feeding on people’s blood helped relieve these symptoms. Others engaged in psychic Page 16 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

feeding to draw nourishment from the energy of others; this activity did not involve blood (Browning, 2014). Browning provided rich descriptive details in his final paper. The vampires were mostly unremarkable in other ways—professionals 18 to 50 years old and married with children. Only some had their teeth filed to make fangs or wore prosthetic fangs as a way to identify themselves to others and not for the purpose of biting victims. Donors were friends and family members, and they had their blood tested for transmissible diseases. Through his observations and interactions, he learned that the vampires used disposable, sterile scalpels and syringes, and swabbed the skin before making incisions. Some vampires collected the blood in vials for consumption later, rather than directly from the donors. The community had a Donors Bill of Rights (Browning, 2014). Field researchers engage in some of the activities of participants, and this was the case for Browning, who allowed his blood to be drawn. The vampire obtained Browning’s blood after an incision was made in his arm. Browning took detailed field notes about all his interactions. Part of the entry related to his donation read, “He said my blood was not as metallic as it should have been—so he was a little disappointed” (Browning as cited in Robson, 2015). After the blood letting, the vampires left to attend an event held each year by the vampire community to raise money to feed homeless people. As in research he had reviewed, Browning’s findings were inconsistent with the representations of vampires in films, television shows, books, and other forms of popular culture (Browning, 2014; Robson, 2015).

Conclusions Charles Dickens (1843) once wrote, “This must be distinctly understood, or nothing wonderful can come from the story I am going to relate.” What must be distinctly understood is that much of what I tell you about field research will be qualified, either implicitly or explicitly, with the words “it depends.” The “field” of field research is somewhat messy (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994). Not all scholars agree on what constitutes best practices. What is appropriate for investigating a research question in one setting might not be for a similar research question in another setting. How you should react when faced with a particular predicament could be the opposite for someone else. The traditions of field work vary by historical period and academic discipline, and there are many disciplines that value field research: architecture; anthropology; Africana studies; building construction; composition studies; communication; cultural studies; disability studies; education; engineering education; family and child studies; gay, lesbian, and Page 17 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

queer studies; gerontology; film and photography; heritage and folklore studies; health studies; hospitality and tourism; human development; human geography; indigenous studies; management; media studies; music studies; nursing; philosophy; rural and urban studies; science and technology studies; sociology; theatre; women’s studies; and more. Given all the diversity, I cannot escape having to say my advice “depends” upon a host of factors. When there are disagreements among scholars, I will point out some of the varied perspectives rather than hide them. At this stage in your educational career, I believe you have the skills to compare viewpoints and make your own decisions based on which you think is most valid when faced with various options—preferably after consultation with your professor. The good news is that there is greater agreement than disagreement about how field research should be conducted. Therefore, the bulk of this book is about the well-accepted methodological requirements of field research. I will not let you flail about, overwhelmed by too many choices, as you plan and execute your research. I want to assure you that the skills needed to conduct field research are not limited to professors who have been employed at a university for 20 years or students working toward a master’s or Ph.D. degree. Undergraduates are more than capable of conducting field research. Consequently, I designed this book for undergraduate students and, to some extent, for graduate students who have never had a qualitative field research course. In a few cases, I address only one group or the other, but despite the double audience, the content should be understandable by all. I use examples primarily from dissertations because many of you undergraduates will go on to graduate school. Reading about field research completed by graduate students should reassure you that graduate research is within your grasp, because it is an extension of what you are learning now and not something totally different. And as most graduate students are close in age to undergraduates, making you almost peers, you share some of the same struggles that are not of concern to faculty members. Regardless of your educational status as an undergraduate or graduate student, this book contains the basics of what you will need to know to engage in qualitative field research. One thing that undergraduates, graduates, and professors all have in common is the fundamental requirement that our research be ethical, the topic of the next chapter.

Page 18 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter Highlights • Field research is the systematic study, through long-term interactions and observations, of people’s lives in a natural setting. • A basic tenet of field research is that it be ethical. • The general purpose of field research is to understand the culture, behaviors, values, beliefs, norms, social interactions and organizations, and so on that affect the lives of people. • Field research is conducted to answer a specific research question, which is a prime determinant of and linked to all the other parts of the research process. • A field research design has a set of methodological procedures that should be followed, while at the same time allowing the researcher flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances. • Field researchers collect data by observing, interviewing, and interacting with people in their natural setting. • The virtual field researcher uses digital data, such as blogs, tweets, videos, and online interactions with participants, rather than data generated by face-to-face interactions and observations. • What is learned during field research is not independent of the researchers’ characteristics.

Exercises 1. Write a one-page summary of what field research is based on the information in this chapter. Use quotations sparingly. 2. Make a list of the 11 major features in Table 1.1. Ethics will be the first item in your list, Natural setting the second, and so on. Find instances of as many of these 11 major features as you can in the summaries of the real research that were used as examples in this chapter. Then put what you have found under the appropriate headings in your list. For example, under your heading Research question, you will complete the sentence Duneier’s research question was . . . Data are collected over Page 19 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

extended period of time. Under this heading, you will have answers to these and other questions: How much time was spent in the field by each of the researchers? How did the various researchers collect their data? Some features will have lots of entries and others will be empty. For example, none of the examples mentioned a paradigm. 3. What part of conducting research do you think would be the most difficult for you if you were conducting research? What part do you think would be the easiest? Justify your answers. In so doing, include a brief explanation of each and explain why you think it would be difficult or easy. Use quotes sparingly

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Backstrom, L. (2016). Embodied resocialization at a children’s weight loss camp. Ethnography, 17, 539–558. Corman, M. (2016). Street medicine—Assessment work strategies of paramedics on the front lines of emergency health services. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 1–24. First published date: January-12-2016. DOI: 10.1177/0891241615625462. Garcia, A., Standlee, A., Bechkoff, J., & Cui, Y. (2009). Ethnographic approaches to the internet and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 38, 52–84.

Recommended Additional Reading Brinkmann, S., Jacobsen, M, & Kristiansen, S. (2014). Historical overview of qualitative research in the social sciences. In P. Leavy (Ed.) The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 17–42). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Page 20 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chesebro, J., & Borisoff, D. (2007). What makes qualitative research qualitative? Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 8, 3–14. Jackson, R., Drummond, D., & Camara, S. (2007). What is qualitative research? Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 8, 21–28. Silverman, D. (2014). What is qualitative research? In D. Silverman Interpreting qualitative data (5th. ed., pp. 3–28). London, England: Sage Publications Ltd.

• Fieldwork • Research questions https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 21 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 2: Ethics Everything is relative; and only that is absolute. Relativity applies to physics, not ethics. —Einstein

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • explain the conditions under which informed consent is required, • distinguish between overt and covert research and explain ethical problems related to covert research, • justify why deception should not be used in field research except in highly limited circumstances, • identify ethical issues related to virtual field research, and • write an informed consent form that meets the requirements of the Institutional Review Board at your university.

In field research, abiding by ethical standards is absolute, but the ethical standards themselves are relative. Professional associations, university review boards, and laws that govern research on human subjects set the standards for ethical research. Unfortunately their coverage of potential ethical dilemmas is limited and not always consistent or clear. Consequently, you might encounter ethical quandaries without rules that tell you how to solve them, and you will have to make decisions that seem right to you. This chapter covers some of the rules for ethical research and the types of ethical problems you might face. Ethical considerations permeate every aspect of the field research process, from selecting the research topic to disseminating the results. The often prolonged and personal interactions with those in the setting during field research create the possibility of myriad ethical questions, many of which are not accompanied by easy solutions. You are not saved from encountering ethical problems when conducting virtual field research, and you will have fewer well-developed guidelines to help you than for face-to-face field research. Professional organizations recognize the ethical difficulties faced by field researchers and have established codes designed to guide ethical decision-making. You also will be required to adhere to the ethical requirePage 2 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ments of your university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) that has to approve your research. Still, these do not cover all the ethical dilemmas that qualitative researchers encounter, and you may have to rely on your own judgment and moral compass in some cases. Ideally, you can seek the advice of a faculty member, but this is not possible when decisions need to be made on the spot. To sensitize you to the salience and complexity of ethics in fieldwork, I begin with four major issues field researchers face: informed consent, deception, confidentiality, and relationships. These are more or less relevant in different situations.

Informed Consent In many research contexts, ethical research on human subjects requires informed consent of the participants in the research. In brief, people must be told—informed—about the research and give their approval—consent—before they can be included in the research. In addition to the IRB regulations on informed consent, many disciplinary codes include guidelines for informed consent. These vary considerably, so be sure to read them carefully and follow those for your discipline. For this discussion of research ethics, I primarily use the code of ethics for sociologists. The American Sociological Association Code of Ethics begins its presentation of informed consent as follows (American Sociological Association [ASA], 1999): Informed consent is a basic ethical tenet of scientific research on human populations. Sociologists do not involve a human being as a subject in research without the informed consent of the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative, except as otherwise specified in this Code. (p. 12) The code further states that informed consent is required of research subjects if the “data are collected from research participants through any form of communication, interaction, or intervention” or if the “behavior of research participants occurs in a private context where an individual can reasonably expect that no observation or reporting is taking place” (ASA, 1999, p. 12). Field researchers and virtual field researchers, almost by definition, collect data through communicating with and interacting with people in the setting. Thus, informed consent is needed. An exemption to the informed consent requirement involves research conducted in public places. The ASA code lists “naturalistic observations in public places” (p. 12) as not requiring informed consent. However, even Page 3 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

in what seems clearly to be a public place, when you are interacting and communicating with people for the explicit purpose of data collection, informed consent most likely will be required. Informed consent requires that you discuss the research with potential participants and that participants sign a detailed informed consent document before they can be included in the research. IRB requirements for informed consent follow those specified by the Office for Human Research Protections. The elements of an informed consent document are listed in Table 2.1. Be sure to check the requirements for your institution because they might vary slightly from that required by the Office for Human Research Protection. For example, my university, Virginia Tech, requires that potential participants be informed of the total number of people involved in the research and why they were selected. In order to help you write an informed consent form, the Virginia Tech’s template (www.irb.vt.edu/pages/consent.htm) is shown in Table 2.2. Your university might have a model for you to follow. Table 2.1 Requirements for an informed consent statement The Office for Human Research Protections requires the following basic elements in an informed consent statement: • a statement that the study involves research • an explanation of the purposes of the research • the expected duration of the subject’s participation • a description of the procedures to be followed • identification of any procedures that are experimental • a description of any reasonably foreseeable risks or discomforts to the subject • a description of any benefits to the subject or to others that may reasonably be expected from the research • a disclosure of appropriate alternative procedures or courses of treatment, if any, that might be advantageous • a statement describing the extent, if any, to which confidentiality of records identifying the subject will be maintained • for research involving more than minimal risk, an explanation as to whether any compensation, and an explanation as to whether any medical treatments are available, if injury occurs and, if so, what they consist of, or where further information may be obtained • an explanation of whom to contact for answers to pertinent questions about the research and research subjects’ rights, and whom to contact in the event of a research-related injury to the subject • a statement that participation is voluntary, refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled, and the subject may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled (www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/consentckls.html)

Page 4 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Source: Office for Human Research Protections, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Informed Consent Checklist (1998). Table 2.2 Template for an informed consent form VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY Informed Consent for Participants in Research Projects Involving Human Subjects Title of Project: _________________________________________________ Investigator(s): __________________ Name

E-mail/Phone number

__________________ Name

_____________________

_____________________

E-mail/Phone number

I. Purpose of this Research Project

Subjects should be informed in clear, concise language about the nature of the study and the purpose for conducting the research, including whether results may be used for publication, dissertation, etc. The total number of subjects involved and a brief description of the subject pool (age range, health status, etc.) should also be provided.

II. Procedures

Use this section to inform subjects of the tasks they will be asked to complete. The procedures must be explained in sufficient detail so that subjects are fully informed of their role, what activities or functions they will be expected to perform, for how long, the number of times they are expected to appear and over what period of time. Subjects must be told where the research will take place, what instrumentation is to be used, if any, and conditions involved. At the end of this section, the subjects must have a clear understanding of what will be expected of them. Use of an itemized list is sometimes useful for this section. Note: for readability purposes, the consent form, except for Section VII, should be written in language directed to the subject (for example, “Should you agree to participate, you will be asked to participate in a 60-minute audio-recorded interview.”)

III. Risks

Any risks or discomforts to the research subject must be fully disclosed. Risks may range from physical danger such as muscle injury from strenuous exercise to emotional distress caused by remembering unpleasant experiences. Safeguards that are to be employed to reduce or minimize the risks must be described.

Page 5 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

If as a result of the research project, the investigator determines that the subject should seek counseling or medical treatment, a list of local services should be provided. If accurate, inform participants that any expenses accrued for seeking or receiving treatment will be the responsibility of the subject and not that of the research project, research team, or Virginia Tech.

IV. Benefits

The tangible or intangible benefits, if any, to the subjects who participate must be described. If no benefits accrue to the subjects, what are the larger societal benefits for conducting the research? An analysis of the risks to benefits must clearly be on the benefits side. Include the following statement— No promise or guarantee of benefits has been made to encourage you to participate.

V. Extent of Anonymity and Confidentiality

Explain to subjects whether the data you collect from them will include information that identifies them (e.g., name, e-mail address), or whether the data will be collected anonymously. If identifiers will be included, explain how data will be used and stored in a confidential manner (for example, data coded; identifiable information stored separately and securely from coded data). Describe who will have access to identifiable and/or de-identified data (e.g., collaborating Universities, study sponsor). You may state, “At no time will the researchers release identifiable results of the study to anyone other than individuals working on the project without your written consent.”

Also, insert the following statement—

The Virginia Tech (VT) Institutional Review Board (IRB) may view the study’s data for auditing purposes. The IRB is responsible for the oversight of the protection of human subjects involved in research. Note: in some situations, it may be necessary for an investigator to break confidentiality. If a researcher has reason to suspect that a child is abused or neglected, or that a person poses a threat of harm to others or him/herself, the researcher is required by Virginia State law to notify the appropriate authorities. If applicable to this study, the conditions under which the investigator must break confidentiality must be described.

VI. Compensation

There is no requirement that subjects are compensated, but if they are, they must be fully informed of the amount (per task/session and total, if applicable), when it will be paid, and how (e.g., gift card, raffle, check). Note: if using a raffle system, the anticipated odds of winning must be provided. If no compensation is to be earned, subjects must be so informed. If extra credit in a course is the compensation, the subject must be informed as to how much credit is to be earned and the impact of that extra

Page 6 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

credit on their course grade. If extra credit is a form of compensation for participation in research involving human subjects, there must be alternate and equitable ways to earn the equivalent credit in the same course without participating as a subject in research. The subjects must be so informed. The course syllabus must describe the alternate ways to earn extra credit. Insert the following three sections (VII, VIII, and IX)—

VII. Freedom to Withdraw

It is important for you to know that you are free to withdraw from this study at any time without penalty. You are free not to answer any questions that you choose or respond to what is being asked of you without penalty. Please note that there may be circumstances under which the investigator may determine that a subject should not continue as a subject. Should you withdraw or otherwise discontinue participation, you will be compensated for the portion of the project completed in accordance with the Compensation section of this document.

VIII. Questions or Concerns

Should you have any questions about this study, you may contact one of the research investigators whose contact information is included at the beginning of this document. Should you have any questions or concerns about the study’s conduct or your rights as a research subject, or need to report a research-related injury or event, you may contact the VT IRB Chair, Dr. David M. Moore at [email protected] or (540) 231-4991.

IX. Subject’s Consent

I have read the Consent Form and conditions of this project. I have had all my questions answered. I hereby acknowledge the above and give my voluntary consent: _______________________________________________ Date_____________ Subject signature _______________________________________________ Subject printed name

Source: Institutional Review Board, Virginia Tech. Consent Form & Process. http://www.irb.vt.edu/pages/consent.htm. Courtesy of David Moore. Only after the potential participant understands each of the items in the informed consent document and signs

Page 7 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the form can the research begin. In some limited situations, informed consent can be explained orally without having a written document, but the same elements should be included. Some IRBs require certification that you have been trained in the ethical treatment of human subjects. To obtain the certificate, you will need to complete Human Subjects Protection Training. The online training is available to you through your university IRB website, the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) (www.citiprogram.org), or the National Institutes of Health (https://phrp.nihtraining.com/users/login.php). I strongly recommend that you obtain a certificate even if you are not conducting research that requires IRB approval, as the training is an excellent way to learn more about research ethics. The training provides a review of major historical ethical violations, such as experiments by Nazis, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service, and government-sponsored radiation experiments, which were the impetus for ethical rules governing research. A significant complicating factor for obtaining informed consent during field research is that people come and go in a setting. Some people are central to the research; others are not. It is simply impractical, if not impossible, to inform everyone that you might encounter in your research setting. Because of this, IRB and some disciplinary codes allow field researchers leeway when there is generally low risk to others. This flexibility also applies to tape recording or filming, but read the rules carefully because they are allowed only under limited circumstances.

Deception Inextricably linked to informed consent is the issue of deception that can happen in a variety of ways. For example, deception may occur when people are not told they are participating in a study, are misled about the purpose of the research, or are not aware of the correct identity or status of the researcher. If any such deception transpires during research, the participants are denied the opportunity to give informed consent; they simply are not fully informed. Research conducted without those in the setting being aware of the researcher’s role is referred to as covert research. If the members in the setting know, the research is classified as overt research. Covert research is seen as deception and is prohibited or at least highly limited by some IRBs and professional associations. Overt research is not immune from deception, such as when people know you are a researcher but you lie about the nature of your research. Page 8 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

In some codes of ethics, a distinction is made between full disclosure and withholding some details. For example, the code of ethics for the British Psychological Society states that deception is not appropriate for a variety of reasons. Then it provides the qualification that not fully disclosing the precise purpose of the research is not unethical if (1) doing otherwise would lead to invalid results, (2) the research has strong scientific merit, (3) there is small likelihood of the participates being upset once the purpose is made known to them after the research, and (4) procedures are in place to minimize negative effects on participates. Notice that the word and means that all these conditions must be met. The claim that research cannot be completed without research being covert is one that rarely can be convincingly made for most student research topics. After all, a wide array of overt field research has been done on people and activities that one would incorrectly assume nearly impossible without being covert—pimps, cock fighters, and men who beat their wives. Some argue that covert research is necessary because individuals modify their behavior when they are aware that they are part of research study, a phenomenon called reactivity. Reactivity does occur. Still, participants will react to your presence even if they are unaware that you are a researcher so covert research does not prevent reactivity. People adjust their behavior all the time, depending upon where they are and whom they are with. Thus, there is no “true” behavior that the researcher changes. People who agree to participate in research may be more revealing than they might be otherwise, and participants will get used to your presence. Reactivity is a concern but not a sufficient argument to deceive people and not obtain informed consent. In addition, deception frequently fails because people figure out that there is a researcher in their midst and resentment can follow. Deceiving participants can be emotionally upsetting for you as a researcher. Marzano’s (2007) experiences, recounted in Table 2.3, are examples of how deception caused him so much discomfort that he changed where he was conducting his research. I agree with Taylor and Bogdan (1998), who say it is “difficult to justify outright deception of anyone merely for the sake of completing degree requirements or adding a publication in an obscure journal to a vita” (p. 37). At the same time, if the research topic itself is extremely important and would go uninvestigated without covert research then get IRB approval and be careful. Sometimes safety concerns necessitate deception too. Some research, when made public, could lead to saving lives, feeding the hungry, and protecting the environment. In cases like these, should the same ethical rules apply? Table 2.3 Negative effects of engaging in deception

Page 9 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Marzano (2007) conducted research on terminally ill people in a large hospital in Italy. The ethical codes followed in Italy are not the same as in the United States. Thus, Marzano did not violate any professional codes when he followed a senior doctor’s suggestion to wear a white coat and not tell patients that he was a researcher. Many patients did not seem to notice him lurking on the fringes. Marzano began to realize that his attempts to pass as a doctor were not needed, and he began to find the charade emotionally intolerable. He didn’t know how to act when a patient had to be naked for some procedure, and he couldn’t decide whether he should stay in the room with the doctor when a person died and family members were present. After three months of conducting research under the guise of being a doctor, he wrote, I’m sick of these visits because I can’t stand masquerading as a doctor any longer, watching the vivisection of these poor devils, forgoing any fully human relationship with the patients. Especially the ones I already knew. Yesterday I was terribly upset. I took off my white coat and ran away. I couldn’t stand the weight of the deception any longer. (p. 421) Still, he wanted to continue his research on terminally ill people, so he went to another hospital. At this hospital, they suggested that he be in the role of a hospital volunteer. It took him less than an hour to come to the conclusion that this form of deception was also wrong. He wrote in his field notes, I can’t do this thing (the voluntary work) because it’s my job to write books, not to keep up this fake cheeriness with the patients, poor wretches. No, I can’t think of forming such a false relationship that I worm information out of them on the pretense of being a voluntary worker (and then there’s my cowardice, my enormous fear of discovery, of being caught out in my disguise). . . . In my case, the thing won’t work because exploiting these poor people and their problems is unthinkable. (p. 222) He then got permission to conduct research in a palliative care unit, where he was told he should hide his identity as a researcher. He refused and was ultimately granted permission to conduct his research and inform patients of his role as a researcher. Marzano felt that his “playing the role” of researcher instead of physician or volunteer enhanced his data collection, and an excellent study resulted.

Confidentiality Another important ethical issue in field research is confidentiality. One of the requirements of informed consent is to let participants know whether the research is anonymous, confidential, or neither. Research is anonymous when the researcher is not able to identify the participants in the study. In a confidential study, the researcher knows or could know the identities of the participants but does not reveal this knowledge. Sometimes research participants agree to allow disclosure of their identities. For example, when Hamm (2003) conducted research on the Konnarock Training School, she received permission to use the women’s names and photographs in her dissertation. A great deal of fieldwork is conducted under conditions of confidentiality, and for the resulting research to be considered ethical, confidentiality must be strictly kept. Maintaining confidentiality is not always as easy as it sounds. While undertaking his dissertation research about African American urban males, Lewis (2005) worried about confidentiality issues. He interviewed men who lived in the same neighborhood and were fairly

Page 10 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

close friends. He could easily protect the identities of the men from those who did not live in the community, but he struggled with how to maintain the integrity of the men’s comments without them being able to identify each other. Clearly, violating confidentiality can cause harm to participants, but it is not always easy to keep it when the researcher is put under extreme pressure to break it. Maintaining confidentiality becomes particularly problematic when authorities think the researcher has knowledge that a law has been violated. This was the case for Scarce (1994) when he was a graduate student conducting research on animal liberation activists. Authorities contacted him in an attempt to obtain information about a suspect in a raid on a laboratory at Washington State University. Committed to his confidentiality agreements, Scarce refused to reveal to a federal grand jury the names of those he interviewed or the context of any interviews. As a result, he spent 159 days in jail. Scarce’s decisions not to break confidentiality is consistent with the American Sociological Association Code of Ethics. The code states that researchers have “an obligation to ensure that confidential information is protected” and confidential information should be treated as such by “sociologists even if there is no legal protection or privilege to do so” (1999, p. 9). For sociologists, confidentiality cannot be broken even after the death of the participant. At times, the need for protecting confidentiality is extraordinarily high. An example is Nordstrom’s (2004) research on violence, war, and profiteering, particularly illegal and international trading in weapons. In her book, she refrained from giving verbatim quotes and detailed descriptions, which are almost a requirement for field research, because these could have literally led to the death of her informants. She did not get signed informed consent or even oral consent in many cases. Personally, I think she made the right ethical and methodological decisions to protect the participants, but I am not suggesting my position is one you should hold. Prior to conducting research, carefully weigh your ability to guarantee confidentiality and inform participants of any limitations that you might have. If you think keeping the identities of the research participants confidential might be highly problematic—ethically, legally, morally, socially, or physically—then it is best not to undertake the research or make no promises of confidentiality. The following is a well-known example of a difficult ethical situation. In his ethnographic study of a U.S. police department, Van Maanen (1982) reported an incident in which two police officers, Barns and McGee, threw a suspect, Blazier, into a police van. Van Maanen wrote,

Page 11 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

From outside the van I can hear the distinct smack of wood meeting flesh and bone. After perhaps a half minute or so, Blazier, thoroughly dazed and maybe unconscious, is pulled from the wagon, bounced to the pavement, handcuffed, and tossed back in. . . . In the prowl car, Barns remarks: “What a place to try to put somebody out. It’s so f___ing cramped and dark in the van you don’t know what’s going on. I kept hitting something with my stick, but I didn’t know what it was until I heard the creep’s glasses shatter. Then I kept hitting the same spot unit I felt it got kind of squishy.” . . . This episode was neither the most violent nor the most blatantly questionable police incident I have observed in the course of my studies. (p. 137) Barns and McGee are aware that Van Maanen is a researcher. They also know that they had been promised confidentiality. However, a man’s life is possibly at stake. The police officers have broken laws. Should Van Maanen report this incident? If he tells anyone, he will probably not be able to continue his research. Is documenting the brutality and publishing the results more important than this one man? Should he have tried to intervene at the time of the incident? No easy answers to these questions exist. Like Scarce, Van Maanen (1982) later was subpoenaed to testify and turn over his field notes about the incident with Blazier. Van Maanen attended the hearing as required but refused either to testify or submit his notes. Shortly thereafter, the case was dropped, sparing Van Maanen the possible threats of jail. Part of the debate regarding confidentiality revolves around issues of power—the power of those doing the harm versus those being harmed. Some argue that it is unethical to break the confidentiality of the relatively powerless—prostitutes, low-wage service workers, and people living in abject poverty—but not unethical to break agreements with powerful groups or institutions acting as oppressors of such individuals. Bulmer (1982) took this position: Specifically social scientists are seen as having a responsibility to study those institutions or government agencies that are in a position to mistreat the disadvantaged, and if evidence of wrongdoing is discovered on the part of government officials or administrators, it should be publicly disclosed in an effort to discourage future wrongdoings—regardless of any promises made to the public officials to respect confidential information. (p. 21) Public ethnographers (Bailey, 2010), in particular, conduct research intended for an audience beyond just academics. Many have a commitment to eradicating social injustices. Without some level of deception, covert research, and at times breaking confidentiality, the horrors they document would remain uncovered. For ex-

Page 12 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ample, Scheper-Hughes (2004) conducted research on worldwide activities related to human trafficking in order to illegally obtain body parts for transplantation and the related economic, social, and human rights implications. One outlet for her findings was a report she gave on global trafficking in human organs to the U.S. Congress’s House Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights. Clearly, her research was not simply for publication in an obscure journal to enhance her vitae. Some IRBs and professional organizations grant exceptions to informed consent, approve covert research, and deception in cases such as hers.

Relationships Among other compelling reasons covert research and deception are unacceptable is that they can damage relationships in the field. One of the first rules of medicine is Primum non nocere, which roughly translates as “First, do no harm.” This precept could also be one of the first rules of ethical research. An ethical field researcher is one who does not (a) harm anyone involved with the research; (b) harm the setting; (c) harm the researcher himself or herself; (d) harm the discipline represented; or (e) harm the reciprocal relationships formed in the setting, except in limited circumstances. The processes and outcomes of field research are greatly affected by the reciprocal relationships that develop between you and those individuals you meet within the setting (Sieber, 1982). The participants might reveal their emotional pains, secrets, fears, insecurities, strengths, joys, and accomplishments. In return, you might offer support, compassion, encouragement, advice, and even deep friendship. Not causing harm to reciprocal relationships forms the moral basis of ethical decision making for some researchers, even more so than codes and IRB requirements (Sieber, 1982). However, prioritizing relationships and doing no harm to self and others is easier to discuss than to apply in the field. Utilitarian research relationships can turn into friendships over time; this is within ethical boundaries. Researchers often want to give back to people who are sharing their lives with them, and this is consistent with ethical norms as well. Sometimes, however, things can go astray, as was the case with Vanderstaay (2005), who struggled with the fact that his behavior during research for his dissertation may have led indirectly to a person being killed. In an article about his experiences, he wrote, In the course of ethnographic research, I inadvertently provided the funds a teenage cocaine dealer used to buy crack from his supplier. This may have begun a horrific sequence of events that included several drug deals, a murder, the arrest and imprisonment of my subject, and the ruin of his mother. Page 13 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

In fact, my subject shot two men in nearly as many weeks, wreaking havoc in several lives, including my own. (pp. 407–408) Elsewhere he asked questions about his behavior related to Serena who was the mother in the family that was central to his research. But was I wrong to have arranged Serena’s drug and alcohol rehabilitation? . . . (p. 406) Should I not have paid their water and electric bills? Should we not have exchanged Christmas gifts? (p. 407) At the time, Vanderstaay felt these activities were a way to reciprocate for letting him be such a huge part of their lives for the purposes of his research. A difficulty for field researchers is figuring out how to balance the fact that fieldwork is not social work (Vanderstaay, 2005) but neither is it a “justification for turning one’s back on the suffering of human beings” (Taylor, 1987, p. 299). Ultimately, Vanderstaay abandoned the dissertation he spent so much time and emotional energy on and completed one later on a different topic. Although I emphasize positive relationships in the field, there certainly are times when researchers find it difficult and repugnant to even pretend to get along. For example, Bourgois’s feelings changed as a result of a critical incident that threw him into an ethical quandary. Bourgois was aware that the individuals with whom he had become friends had engaged in multiple forms of illegal behavior, but these did not preclude him having some level of positive feelings for them. Things changed when he learned that some of the men had raped a woman. Research ethics of confidentiality and the ability to finish his research were considerations in whether to report the crime, but concerns about not harming the mutual relationships with the men were not. He ceased to want to be involved in these relationships.

Ethics in Virtual Field Research Being able to legally access something online does not excuse you from meeting the standards of research ethics on human subjects. When conducting virtual field research, you will need to meet many of the same ethical requirements that apply to face-to-face field research, but you will also have additional considerations with online research. One of the unique concerns for your online research is that you will have to determine whether you are studyPage 14 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ing individuals or only things they have produced—movie reviews, advice on how to make something, videos, blogs, video games, and so on. As these are not humans, you may not need IRB approval. However, because text and other online material were created by human subjects, you have to consider the creator of the data and the context in which it was produced and not just the data themselves when making ethical decisions. For example, a sexually explicit photo sent by text is not a human being, but a person took it. Research on images such as these could have long-term, unanticipated, negative consequences for senders if their identities became known as a result of your research. Just because someone might be naïve to think the images are private does not mean they are fair game for research. Research on nonhumans is not exempt from ethical concerns that apply to people. A basic element of field research is long-term engagement in the field and that means that unless you are a complete nonparticipant observer in a public online space you are going to interact, at least digitally, with people, Rather than assume you do not need IRB approval, you would be smart to assume you will until you are told otherwise.

Covert and Overt Research and Deception When you are studying people in the virtual field, you need to decide if your research will be overt or covert. Covert research and using deceit are not considered ethical except in limited circumstance, and this is the case for both face-to-face and online research. The concepts of overt and covert research do not apply in clearly identified public spaces, which online forums might be, but deception is still not allowed.

Distinctions Between Public and Private A difficult question related to conducting virtual field research is this: Is the online space public or private? Ethical concerns are different depending on the answer. Being able to access a particular site is not enough to define it as public, but sometimes determining if a site is public is fairly easy. For example, HolaSoyGeman and PewDiePie have millions of subscribers; they want to be watched. Their videos are created independent of your research, and you are not interacting with them as part of your research. Their channels meet all the requirements of a public space. Textual data, which you see on blogs, discussion boards, and websites, are generally for public consumption, and these typically would be defined as public sites. Even then, if you have Page 15 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

any interaction with others on these types of sites for purposes related to your research, you have to have IRB approval. One thing that can help you decide if a space is public or private is whether people have to be at least minimally vetted to join and how they expect their information is to be used. Certainly, people who post on moderated sites on a sensitive topic, such as a site for people who are grieving about their pets, expect to have others read their posts and respond, but they are not likely to expect their descriptions of pain analyzed for a class project or a master’s thesis (British Psychological Society, 2013, p. 6). The more sensitive the topic, the more likely people would not want their posts to be included in research, and, thus, the more important informed consent becomes. I suggest you treat sites as private online spaces when the topic is even minimally sensitive, for example, gender identity, caregivers for parents with dementia, bullying, dating, sex, and health.

Legal Restrictions Ignorance of the law does not protect you if you violate it. Even public sites can have copyright restrictions. The creator or the web-hosting company might hold the copyright for a webpage. Social media sites, including videos, links, and chats, have copyrights and restrictions by web services (British Psychological Society, 2013). In Britain, using online data for research without informed consent can be a violation of data protection legislation (British Psychological Society, 2013). On a legal note, should a person find out that their online posts or traces of activity have been accessed, stored and used as research data, they are likely to have rights under the Data Protection Act to stop these data being processed if they could be linked to them personally. (p. 13) Imagine how devastating it would be if someone invoked the Data Protection Act to stop your research.

Confidentiality and Anonymity For online research, you should consider not guaranteeing confidentiality or anonymity. You have a responsi-

Page 16 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

bility to try your best to protect people’s identities, but you would be lying to participants if you said that you can guarantee either, even if you correctly remove what you think is identifiable information. Target, Sony, Home Depot, JP Morgan, the U.S. Army, the Internal Revenue Service, and Homeland Security websites have all been hacked (Collins, 2015). If unauthorized personnel can hack these organizations, then any online communication you have or data storage you use is an open door for those who want to access it. If someone uses the data you have collected and determines someone’s identity, then you have effectively broken your commitment to your participants. None of this means you should avoid online research or not keep your work on your computer; it means that you have to be careful to not overstate your abilities to protect the data from others Although you need to remove identifying information, protecting participants’ identities is difficult because highly detailed, thick descriptions are a requirement for virtual field research, and such descriptions make it easier for participants to be identified. AOL released data from 657,001 of its users after removing names and what they thought was all other information that might make identification possible. In just a few days, a New York Times journalist was able to obtain the name of the person who had the user number of 4417749 by looking at her searches about dogs, people with her last name, homes sold in a town in a county in Georgia, and other information that she did not expect would lead to her identification (Barbaro & Zeller, 2006). An occupation, thinly veiled location of your research, thick description of a unique hobby, and verbatim quotes—information that is standard in virtual field research—can be the starting point for identification. Even when you use a public site for research purposes, try to maintain confidentiality. If someone signs a name to his or her post, do not include the name in your research. If they use a pseudonym, change it. Avoid giving the name of the list or how to locate it, unless these things are central to the research. If you feel that you have to reveal this information, have the IRB check your plans (British Psychological Society, 2013). If you are studying anything of interest to law enforcement or national security, your online research activities might be monitored, putting your participants—and possibly you—at risk. The best way to proceed is with honesty and to include information about the risks of identification on the informed consent form.

Informed Consent Warn participants on the informed consent form that hackers and others can access online communication Page 17 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

and ask if they understand this and are willing to participate anyway. In some instances, your IRB application will not be approved unless your procedures include data protection such as File Vault and Advanced Encryption Standard with 128-bit keys (Aycock, Buchanan, Dexter, & Dittrich, 2011, p. 4). Offering and getting informed consent, particularly signed forms, in the virtual field, is difficult. IRBs sometimes have specific requirements for informed consent when it is to be obtained via the Internet. For example, Virginia Tech requires that after reading the online consent form, participants must click “an ‘agreement’ button, which contains a message indicating that clicking the button means the subject has read the statement, printed a copy for their files, and agrees to participate in the study and accepts that personal information” such as their name and e-mail address will be given to the researcher (www.irb.vt.edu/pages/consent.htm). Researchers use portals or site information pages in which the participant agrees one section at a time. Documents can be sent by mail or e-mail to the participants and then they sign, scan, mail, e-mail, or fax the form back to you. Software is available for online signatures. All these ways of distributing and receiving informed consent have associated risks, and not all potential participants have the capabilities of following your recommended procedures. Different procedures may have to be used for people in different geographical locations. Research on minors requires assent and informed consent of parents even in public spaces, in many instances. Assent is when a minor is informed about the research in ways that he or she understands and agrees to participate. This requirement applies whether or not the research is conducted online or not online. Implementing ethical requirements for minors is more difficult for virtual field researchers than for field researchers. It is not easy to verify age. Minors can easily click “I am at least 18” even when this is not the truth. Thus, you might unintentionally be conducting research on minors without parental consent, and that is a violation of IRB regulations. The age at which a person can consent and rules for minors’ involvement in research vary across countries.

Conclusions I have only scratched the surface of ethical research in virtual spaces and the same with face-to-face field research. I highly recommend that you continue to learn about ethics before starting your research, during the time in the field, and when preparing your final paper. Just as there are divergent views about what field research is, the procedures to be used, and how it should be evaluated, there also are divergent views regardPage 18 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ing what makes—or does not make—research ethical. Because of the complexity and importance of ethics in field research, I include discussions about ethics in many places throughout this book. Another dictum of mine more easily written than followed is to seek the counsel of others prior to the research and throughout the process in order to anticipate and form possible resolutions to ethical problems. The goal is to get help as soon as you can whenever you are faced with ethical questions, before things spiral out of control.

Chapter Highlights • Ethical concerns in field research are often present and complex. • Codes of ethics developed by different disciplines provide guidelines for making ethical decisions. • Research using human subjects requires Institutional Review Board approval. • If you collect data through intervention or interaction, or use identifiable private information, then you must have the informed consent of participants. • Informed consent documents have strict requirements for what must be included on them. • Research can be overt or covert—with covert research being ethical only under extremely limited conditions. • Deception in field research is almost always considered unethical. • The reciprocal relationship between the researcher and members of the setting should be considered when making ethical decisions. • Virtual research has the same ethical requirements as other forms of research as well as additional ethical concerns.

Exercises 1. Imagine that you are conducting field research on a high school program designed to help students at risk of dropping out of high school. Your research shows that the program is highly effective. In Page 19 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the course of your research, you discover that one of three counselors has been spending money from the program for personal use. Your research is about program effectiveness, and nothing suggests that the misuse of funds affects the outcomes for the youth. You have promised confidentiality to the staff, students, and school administrators. Should you tell anyone? If yes, when, why, and to whom? If no, why not? Be sure to discuss the implications of the decisions that you make. 2. Complete the Human Subjects Protection Training through your university or at another website that offers it. You will receive a certificate of completion if you successfully pass the training. 3. Select a research topic and determine its purpose, such as to explore people’s views on a topic or to learn about how they engage in some activity. The purpose should be such that you will need to interview 25 people. Create an informed consent form. You should make up the rest of the information that you need for the form. You do not have to conduct any research but try to be as realistic as possible. 4. Find the code of ethics for your discipline. Summarize what it says about the issues of deception, confidentiality, and informed consent. If your discipline does not have one that addresses these issues, use the code of a related discipline.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and “ethically important moments” in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 261–280. Hemmings, A. (2006). Great ethical divides: Bridging the gap between institutional review boards and researchers. Educational Researcher, 35, 12–18. Roulet, T., Gill, M., Stenger, S., & Gill, D. (2017). Reconsidering the value of covert research: The role of ambiguous consent in participant observations. Organizational Research Methods, 20, 487–517.

Page 20 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Recommended Additional Reading Buchanan, E. (2013). Internet research ethics: Past, present, and future. In M. Consalvo & C. Ess (Eds.), The handbook of Internet studies (pp. 83–108).New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell. Hammersley, M. & Traianou, A. (2012). Ethics in qualitative research: Controversies and contexts. London, England: Sage Publications Ltd. Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M. & Jessop, J. (Eds.). (2012) Ethics in qualitative research (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage Publications Ltd. Tolich, M. (Ed.). (2016). Qualitative ethics in practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

• Informed consent • Fieldwork • Ethical codes https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 21 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 3: Topic, Purpose, and Research Questions Just another day as an outsider looking at life from the inside. —Venkatesh, 2008, xiv

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • select a site appropriate for addressing a research question of interest to you, • write a purpose of the research statement related to a topic of interest to you, • explain the role of research questions in the research process, and • write a research question that corresponds with the purpose of your research.

One of frustrating sentences that students sometimes hear is, Pick a topic and write about it. In response did you think There are a gazillion topics, but I cannot think of one? Alternatively, your professor might have assigned the topic. Possibly you were given an essay exam in which your purpose was to justify your position, to summarize your reading, or to answer a question asked by your professor. When conducting field research, you will encounter these same issues—selecting a topic, determining your purpose, and deciding what your research question will be. However, a major difference in the planning stage is that field researchers have to choose the location to go to get the information needed to complete their paper rather than using sources available at home. In this chapter, I make suggestions for how to go about selecting the topic of your research and location for your fieldwork, determining the specific purpose of your research, and creating research questions. The information in this chapter should be immediately applicable if you are in the early stages of planning your own field research.

Research Topic An obvious and unavoidable part of designing research is to have a research topic. You will most likely conduct research consistent with a broad area of interest to you, such as criminology, aging, health care, political Page 2 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

economy, education, decision making, social media, gender, public relations, tourism, purchasing practices, material culture, immigration, environment, social movements, and so on. However, the examples in this list are far too general for actually executing a particular research study. In fact, if you answer “criminology” when a faculty member asks for the topic of your proposed master’s thesis, the faculty member will conclude that you are miles away from having an idea to propose. Still, knowing what your general interests are gives you a starting point. An early step in designing your research is to narrow the broad general area of interest to a specific topic, which will continually be refined as the research proceeds. Many iterations of the topic are usually needed, each time making the topic more specific, until the precise purpose of the research and the research question to be answered by the research are determined. You will eventually be in the position to collect data on a small facet of your topic by observing a group of people in a particular place. Table 3.1 is a brief illustration of these points. You will want to consider many factors as you select a research topic. Smith (1984) suggests you ask questions. For example, Can you sustain interest in your topic for as long as it takes you to complete it? Will you be able to complete your research in the time you can devote to it? A project that has to be completed in a quarter or semester means your choices are highly restricted. Is the project practically possible? You might want to study the international trading of illegal weapons, but realistically, this is not something you could accomplish at this stage in your career. Is there more than a fair chance that your professor will approve the topic? Is the topic one that could enhance your graduate school application or help you prepare for the ideal job? Do you have a theoretical interest that makes this topic suitable? Table 3.1 From broad area of interest to fieldwork Broad area

Drug addiction

Topic

Social support for people who interact regularly with others addicted to drugs

Purpose

To examine how groups provide support for family members who have children addicted to drugs

Research

How do members of a church-sponsored group for parents with teenagers addicted to painkillers provide emotional support to

Page 3 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Question

Fieldwork

each other?

One year of observations of and participation in the weekly meetings of the support group sponsored by the Pearisburg United Methodist church for parents who have teenagers addicted to pain killers

Personal factors can be as important as academic factors. Bourgois (1995) explains some of the motivations for his research topic as follows: When I first moved to East Harlem—“El Barrio”—as a newlywed in the spring of 1985, I was looking for an inexpensive New York City apartment from which I could write a book on the experience of poverty and ethnic segregation in the heart of one of the most expensive cities in the world. On the level of theory, I was interested in the political economy of inner-city street culture. From a personal, political perspective, I wanted to probe the Achilles heel of the richest industrialized nation in the world by documenting how it imposes racial segregation and economic marginalization on so many of its Latino/a and African-American citizens. (p. 1) Thus far, I have suggested that you will start with broad concerns and arrive at a place to conduct the field research. In practice, sometimes the chicken comes first and sometimes the egg. A not uncommon experience is to start with a place where you want to conduct your research and then determine a purpose and research questions that will be suitable for engaging in fieldwork in that setting. I agree with Wolcott (2009): Over time, that reputation for openness to inquiry, to set one’s problem in the course of coming to know a field site, has remained one of the unique characteristics of ethnography. It is still okay to make a decision on the basis of where one will study, rather than having to specify exactly what one intends to study. (p. 21) Frankly, it doesn’t matter if the chicken or the egg comes first, as long as you eventually have both a chicken and an egg: a specific reason for conducting the research and a place to carry out your research or a group of interest to you. In Table 3.2, Powell explains how she ended up studying energy development in the Navajo Nation. Examples of projects undertaken by field researchers are shown in Table 3.3. Some of these refer to settings (biosphere), people (wives of athletes), activities (piercing), rituals (consuming the dead), cultures (college bound), organizations (orchestra), processes (becoming a glass blower), and artifacts (medium to create Page 4 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

avatars). In this book, I often use the terms topics, settings, group, or phenomena as a simple way to represent the larger list of possibilities that include rituals, activities, artifacts, cultures, and so on. Some of the examples are far-reaching in scope, even international in focus, and are suitable for some Ph.D. candidates or more advanced scholars. If you are assigned an undergraduate research project in a college course in the United States, you are not going to be expected to study a symphony orchestra in Japan or consuming-the-dead rituals in Asante, Ghana. As an undergraduate student, you will be pleased to know that your local community can offer rich resources for a field research project. In my undergraduate courses, students have examined employment at a sewage treatment facility, selecting a pet at an animal shelter, and gendered interactions among members of the university sky divers club. Prior to committing yourself to conducting research on a specific topic in a particular setting or with a social group, you should consider ethical issues related to your choice. Table 3.2 From activism to a research topic Powell (2010, pp. 12–13) shares four “arrival stories” about her early interactions with “the Navajo.” Then she describes how she came about to do anthropological research on energy development in the Navajo Nation. It should now be clear from these arrival stories that I did not come to “the Navajo” by way of anthropology; rather, I came to anthropology by way of my activism with Native communities. This is an important distinction for at least two reasons: first, given the fraught history of anthropology in Native America, opting to work on/with a Native Nation carries a politics of knowledge production and difference that shapes what is possible (knowable and actionable) in many encounters. Second, I formulated my sense of the problem of energy development in the Navaho Nation by way of a collective through my engagement in a diverse, national environmental/social justice movement. That is, I did not formulate the problem from an ethnological or area studies interest or even in ethnography, as a practice. Starting with the problem of energy development on the Navajo Nation rather than “the Navajo” as a population of inquiry, kept my compass set on the shared matter of concern amidst the shifting sands of collaborative engagements.

Ethical Issues One goal of your selection process is to focus on research that is ethically well grounded. Although you cannot predict all of the ethical issues that could possibly arise from your choice of a field research project, you can minimize such problems by asking yourself a series of questions before finalizing where you will conduct your research. First, can the research you are considering be completed without deception? Deception is tempting if you

Page 5 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

believe that participants in the setting will change their behavior enough to make the research meaningless. If you think this will be the case, you should select another project in order to avoid slipping into deceptive practices, unless you have been granted a rare exception. Second, how difficult will it be to keep promises of confidentiality? As discussed earlier, confidentiality issues are complex and particularly problematic for research on illegal, immoral, or unethical behaviors. Virtual field research has more issues related to confidentiality than might be readily apparent. Third, what are your chances of getting dirty hands during your fieldwork by participating in illegal behavior or behavior that is against your own moral standards? You need to be particularly careful about illegal behaviors because engaging in research cannot be used as a legal defense for breaking the law. Fourth, what are the chances that your research will harm someone in the setting? Even if you maintain confidentiality, can your presence in the setting be distressing to group members? For instance, if you decide to study mothers receiving Temporary Aid to Needy Families, would your research interest in them make these mothers feel somehow unfit or different despite your reassurances to the contrary? Might your final paper bring unintended, negative consequences to group members? Table 3.3 Examples of research topics • the Maya Biosphere Reserve in Guatemala (Sundberg, 2004) • the wives of professional athletes (Ortiz, 2004) • genital piercing, branding, burning, and cutting (Myers, 1994) • public school garden space (Sulsberger, 2014) • online electronic medium to create avatars for virtual worlds (Taylor, 1999) • two Native American social movement organizations challenging educational practices (Gongaware, 2003) • pregnant women’s under-utilization of clinic-based prenatal services in Mozambique (Chapman, 2003) • a food bank that distributes food to the needy in southern Canada (Tarasuk & Eakin, 2003) • mechanics of the participatory approach and claims of empowerment within the experience of a non-governmental organization based in Chiapas, Mexico (Mason, 2016) • online discussions among pedophiles (Durkin, 1996)

Page 6 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• improving teaching practices through action research (Brown, 2002) • process of becoming a glassblower (O’Connor, 2009) • consuming-the-dead rituals in Asante, Ghana (Bonsu & DeBerry-Spence, 2008) • women farmers in central Pennsylvania (Trauger, 2004) • a symphony orchestra in Soka Gakkai, Japan (McLaughlin, 2003) • long-distance hikers on the Appalachian Trail (Siudzinski, 2007) • perinatal loss support group (Drake, 2010) • online support groups for people with eating disorders (Walstrom, 2000) • terrorism trial in the United States (Hess, 2014) • communication and Pentecostal worship (Coats, 2009) • college-going culture in an urban high school (Govan, 2011) • high school wrestlers (Snyder, 2012) • intercultural wedding message boards (Nelson & Otnes, 2005) • hip hop artists and the Internet (Przybylski, 2015) • a bondage/discipline/sadomasochism community (Holt, 2015) • Venice Beach boardwalk artists (Deener, 2009) • farmer seed exchange practices (Aistara, 2011) • character creation in video games for the Elder Scrolls series (King, 2014) • interaction ritual theory and Pittsburgh Steeler fans (Cottingham, 2012)

Finally, could the project be harmful to your personal safety? Do the responses of others to your race, ethnicity, gender, age, or sexuality put you at risk? Simply being an outsider can increase your risk in some situations. For example, Macabuac (2005) elected to conduct her dissertation research in the Philippines. She had already written her proposal and received approval from her committee, but just as she was about to undertake the fieldwork portion of her research, violence in the area she wanted to study increased considerably. Although she is from the Philippines, Macabuac’s ethnic status made it unsafe for her to be in the region where she planned to collect her data. With her committee in total agreement, she selected another site, a decision that required modification of her research questions and a delay in her data collection. She made

Page 7 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the correct choice. As is often the case when field researchers have to deviate from their original design, the adjustments Macabuac made in her project resulted in an excellent dissertation. These questions cover just a few of the ethical issues you should ponder as you begin the process of selecting a topic. As with most aspects of field research, there is no complete list of ethical issues to consider—nor is there a rulebook on how to resolve ethical dilemmas in project selection. At this point in your determination of a research topic, you can now turn your attention to practical issues.

Practicality There are numerous practical issues to consider in selecting the setting or group appropriate for a research topic. One important issue is time. Field research requires long-term engagement with those being studied. Do you have enough time to commit to a project that interests you? Do you have the flexibility to make observations during different times of day and night? How long fieldwork takes varies greatly from project to project, but be warned that however long you think your particular project will take is probably an underestimation. Keep in mind that even fairly narrowly defined research topics undertaken by seasoned field researchers can take years to complete. Graduate students often need to consider whether their research can be completed before their funding runs out. Undergraduate researchers have less flexible time limits. Think about your level of commitment to your topic. Are you excited enough about it that you will be willing to play the video game hour after hour for your research when you are no good at it and find it tedious? Are you sufficiently committed to your proposed research that you will visit your site as often as you should, even if you have a long drive with horrible traffic? It is difficult to maintain motivation for research you are excited about and much harder when you feel so-so about it at the beginning. Consider your interpersonal skills. If you are extremely shy, you might want to avoid settings where interacting with strangers would be a frequent requirement. Field research is not for the fainthearted. Even a place where you have been numerous times can feel alien when you are there to conduct field research. In speaking of her experiences with women sales agents at a car dealership, Lawson (2000) noted that “I felt, much as other field workers before me, unfamiliar with the social world under investigation and a resulting sense of edginess, uncertainty, discomfort, and anxiety” (p. 135). Page 8 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Still, you need not always avoid settings in which you might feel ill at ease. Researchers who are not only uncomfortable but also downright miserable in a setting have done wonderful research. Miller (1986), for instance, wrote that overcoming her fear was part of her motivation to continue her research on women involved in crime. However, your ultimate goal is to complete the research, and you simply won’t be able to finish it if you end up in a setting that requires more investment in resources than you are willing or able to give.

Insider/Outsider Whether to undertake research in a familiar place is a common question students ask when they are considering conducting field research. Some researchers are more than just familiar with a setting; they are active members of the group they are studying. These individuals are considered insiders, versus outsiders who have little or no previous connections to the setting or participants. The distinction between insider and outsider status is somewhat false. For example, someone who started the research as an outsider may become so integrated into the setting that they take on the role of insider, and the insider always has some outsider status by virtue of the dual role as a researcher. The debate on the relative costs and benefits of insider/outsider status is longstanding. One position is that research in unfamiliar settings might be more fruitful than research conducted in familiar ones because cultural and social events in unfamiliar settings are easier to see (Neuman, 1991, p. 344). Researchers with outsider status might be less biased by their own view and less likely to ignore the perspectives of others if they do not have a history with the group under study. Another perspective is that being an insider provides a firm foundation on which to build. Those who are familiar with a setting may already have rapport with participants, understand the nuances of language and behavioral expectations, and possess analytic insights into the working of the setting. This was the case with Desmond (2006) who worked as a member of the Elk River Wildland Firefighting crew for 3 years prior to conducting his research. He felt that he had insights that he would not have had otherwise if he have not offered up his “mind and body, day and night, to practices, rituals, and thoughts of the crew” (p. 392). In some instances, the only person who has a chance of being allowed to conduct research is someone who is already known to the group. This was the case for Hopper and Moore (1994), who studied women in outlaw motorcycle gangs. Prior to their work, women’s involvement in motorcycle gangs was virtually ignored. HopPage 9 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

per and Moore’s research provided details about the place of women in biker culture, the rituals in which they engage, their role as moneymakers, and their motivations and backgrounds. They were able to conduct this study only because this was a familiar setting. They write, The main reason we were able to make contacts with bikers was the background of Johnny Moore, who was once a biker himself. During the 1960s, “Big John” was president of Satan’s Dead, an outlaw club on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. He participated in the rituals we describe, and his own experience and observations provided the details of initiation ceremonies that we related. As a former club president, Moore was able to get permission for us to visit biker clubhouses, a rare privilege for outsiders. (p. 391) An important contribution to our understanding of women’s participation in motorcycle gangs would have been lost had Hopper and Moore followed the advice not to study familiar settings.

Photo 3.1 Prior to and during my research about people who lived full time in their RVs and no longer had another home, I spent several months each year traveling in an RV with my husband and our dog Noell. Was I an insider or outsider? Figure 3

Source: Photograph © William Snizek. Page 10 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Another side in the debate is that treating insider/outsider status as a binary oversimplifies the complexity of the issue. Is it even possible to be exclusively one or the other? Insider/outsider status might be better conceptualized as a continuum—maybe even something multidimensional without the researcher being fixed in any one location. Things become even more complex when you consider whether “sameness” on race, gender, social class, education, sexualities, age, and so on affect your position as an insider or outsider. I like how Obasi (2014) reflected on this debate during her pilot study for her dissertation about deaf experiences even though she could hear. She writes, This article draws on the experiences of a black female hearing researcher conducting a PhD pilot study. It reports reflexively on epistemological dilemmas and challenges in conducting the research from both “insider” and “outsider” and “minority” and “majority” positions simultaneously. It demonstrates the ways in which the reflections on these dilemmas and challenges were used to come to the decision to redesign parts of the research in the main study. In so doing, it raises a number of questions that are relevant to current debates on insider/outsider positioning. To what extent and in what ways can hearing researchers contribute to understandings of culturally Deaf experiences? In what ways can “sameness” across “race” and “gender” have an impact on researcher/researched relationships? Can insider experiences in one “othered” group contribute to the understanding of another group from the outside? (pp. 61–62) My view is that field research can be more exciting if you engage in research in an unfamiliar setting. In fact, I encourage undergraduate students to push themselves to do research in places that are foreign to them. In contrast, I advise graduate students to conduct research in places where questions that are both of theoretical interest to them and substantively important can be answered. Then, throughout the research process, they should reflect on the possible implications of their insider/outsider positioning.

Purpose of Research The purpose of this section is to introduce you to the importance of having a clear statement of the purpose for your research. As I did in this paragraph, consider writing, “The purpose of my research is to ______” as the first sentence of a proposal that you submit to get approval to conduct your research. The purpose state-

Page 11 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ment might not actually be the first sentence; your professor will provide guidance as to where the purpose statement appears in your proposal. However, even if it is not the first sentence, thinking about it this way is a useful exercise. What matters is that you have a purpose for your research and having a purpose statement or something equivalent explicitly stated allows anyone reading your paper to know right away what you plan to do. If you cannot write the sentence, you may not be sure why you are conducting the research, which is not a good thing. Table 3.4 contains general purposes fairly common among field researchers.Researchers modify the general statements to fit their specific research interests. Table 3.5 provides examples of what purpose statements look like when applied to a particular topic. I selected these examples of purpose statements, primarily from undergraduate papers, master’s theses, and dissertations, to draw your attention to four things: (1) the present infinitive “to” followed in most cases by a verb; (2) page numbers showing that most were from the abstracts or first page, indicating their importance; (3) sentences written in such a way that the researcher takes ownership of the research: “my paper,” and “I”; and (4) the personal impetus for the research. These latter two are not consistent with the style often used in quantitative research but are appropriate for qualitative research and even encouraged. After the purpose is decided, the more specific and extremely important research questions are derived from and closely linked to the purpose. Table 3.4 General purpose statements In the first chapter of their book, Hammersley and Atkinson (2007) state several general purposes for conducting field research: • to “document and interpret their distinctive way of life, and the beliefs and values integral to it” (p. 1); • to understand the “meanings, functions, and consequences of human actions and institutional practices, and how these are implicated in local, and perhaps also wider, contexts” (p. 3); • to “investigate some aspect of the lives of the people who are being studied, and this includes finding out how these people view the situations they face, how they regard one another, and also how they see themselves” (p. 3); and • to “describe what happens, how the people involved see and talk about their own actions and those of others, the contexts in which the action takes place, and what follows from it” (p. 7).

Table 3.5 Examples of specific purpose of research statements

Page 12 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• “The purpose of this critical ethnography is to explore the support experiences of mothers who participate in the Mommies with Hope support group, a biblically-based perinatal loss support group” (Drake, 2010, p. vi). • “The purpose of this interpretive ethnography was to understand the experience of pregnant women viewing childbirth preparation videos in childbirth preparation classes” (Gibeau, 2008, p. viii). • “The purpose of this study is to examine an urban, public high school’s culture in the southeast region of the United States with a high population of African Americans and students living in poverty” (Govan, 2011, p. xi). • “The purpose of this dissertation study is to: 1) identify how and why FIU civically engages Cuban-American and non-Hispanic Whites at FIU . . .” (González, 2005, p. 1). • Because of the love for my rescue cat Bruno, I investigated why the animal shelter was so mismanaged, in the hopes that the results might be useful for improving conditions at the shelter (Jung, 2013, p. 1). • “My primary purpose in conducting this research was to document the factors that led to the university’s restructuring and some of the consequences of this particular action” (Kirk, 2004, p. 2). • “In particular, this study examines the complexity of care delivery on inpatient care units that have implemented the latest research recommendations regarding safe patient handling” (de Ruiter, 2008, p. iv). • “In this article, we report on a study that seeks to explore how the contested chronic condition myalgic encephalomyelitits (ME), one of the current medical diagnoses for medically unexplained long-term exhaustion, is negotiated within the context of Norwegian internet sites” (Lian & Nettleton, 2015, p. 1383). • “Drawing on the rich traditions of the sociology of deviance and symbolic interactionism, the specific aims of the inquiry are to . . . explicate how individuals create and maintain boundaries in order to engage in safe play” (Holt, 2015, p. 1).

Research Questions Some forms of stress relevant to graduate students’ experiences are recognized as such—taking preliminary or comprehensive exams. However, the large amount of anxiety associated with writing research questions is rarely discussed, as if it were some dirty secret. The experience of writing research questions for undergraduates might be even worse because of the lack of in-depth background in a topic area. Writing research questions is not easy, and having to respond to the question, What are your research questions? is nerve-racking if you don’t have them polished—and this might not be the case until you are in the middle of your fieldwork. The major purposes of this section include reducing your stress and helping you develop and clarify your own research questions. Further, it should reassure you that you are not alone; creating research questions is one of the most difficult parts of conducting research (Wolcott, 2008). Still, no need to worry. If everyone else can write them, you can too. Page 13 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Research is done to answer questions, whether it is one suitable for quantitative research—What percentage of people in the United States live below the poverty line?—or one appropriate for qualitative research—How do definitions of masculinity affect friendships among men? (Gill, 2008). The research question is the specific question that the research is intended to answer. To help you figure out your research question, ask yourself, What is one specific thing I want to know about my topic? Complete the following sentence: I want to know how/what/why ______. Then rewrite this as a question: My research question is as follows. How/what/why ______? You may want to know everything, but the research question should focus on a fairly small part of what you would like to learn. My experience is that the first, and often the second, third, and fourth, draft of a research question is usually too broad, and my advice is to narrow, narrow, narrow it so it asks something extremely specific. What seems like too narrow a research question to you at the start is soon to be found more difficult to answer than anticipated. Another important consideration when deciding on your research questions is whether answering the question is reasonably possible. A general research question such as In what ways does global capitalism cause poverty? is not likely to be answered in a semester—or 7 years. In contrast, this question probably is, How does the closing of a coal mine by Massey Energy Company affect the food bank in the small town of Melville, WV? The belief that the best dissertation is a done dissertation can help you persevere, but it will take you much longer to get to the done dissertation stage with an unanswerable research question. The same applies to you undergraduate researchers who have more restrictions on the time allowed to complete your research. A research question prior to starting the research is not a required component of field research, although fairly standard. One of the benefits of field research is that not every aspect of it has to be rigidly planned with no deviations from it. As noted elsewhere, the research questions can be developed while in the field and even changed during the course of the research. Field research allows for flexibility in its execution. In fact, some ethnographers try to avoid having formal, narrowly focused, research questions. Experienced researchers might conduct their fieldwork armed with their expertise in their discipline but not with a research question. However, in some cases, as a student, your chances of getting your research approved by your instructor or your committee, finishing in a timely fashion, and conducting valid research are enhanced when it is guided by a research question from the very beginning. I personally view research questions so important to the research process that I would feel like I was abdicating my professional responsibility if I did not stress them. For me, research questions are the anchors of Page 14 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the research process, to which all parts are attached. Every aspect of the research should be tightly linked so that one can easily follow the chain that connects the first page of the final document to the last. The research question is the strongest link in the chain and handles most of the load. Possibly a better way to conceive of the role of the research question is to think of it as the hub of a bicycle wheel to which all the spokes are connected. The spokes are connected to the rim and the rim to the tire. You can ride with a spoke or two missing or even a flat tire for awhile, but without the hub, nothing moves. The research question plays a similar central role. In my experience, students benefit by seeing models, so I provide a generous serving in Table 3.6 of research questions asked by field researchers. In this section, I answer some of the frequently asked questions about research questions. Table 3.6 Examples of research questions • “What is the experience of living with an autistic child, and what does that experience mean?” (Glass, 2001, p. 12) • “How is practical knowledge in glassblowing achieved?” (O’Connor, 2009, p. 12) • “How do tourism development, urbanization, and national parks affect Bedouin access to resources on the Gulf of Aqaba?” (Ali, 1998, p. 34) • “Does the culture at the police academy support the COPS [community-oriented policing] orientation?” (Chappell, 2005, p. 62) • “How do the students participate in and talk about the garden in their school and home lives?” (Sulsberger, 2014, p. 113) • “How do definitions of masculinity relate to these friendships and to the men’s everyday lives?” (Gill, 2008, p. 15). • “How do elders experience their daily life within the physical and social environment of two different types of [adult day services] centers in Taiwan?” (Liou, 2011, p. 8) • “How do preservice elementary teachers characterize relationships between teacher education program components and how do those characterizations vary or change?” (Spielman, 2006, p. 9) • “How is Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP) manifested in the pedagogical perspectives and practices of five African American women educators during their 1st year of teaching?” (Dunbar, 2009, p. 11)

What Are Research Questions? To answer the question What is a research question?, I repeat some of what is said above. Of all the possible questions that could be asked about a particular topic, the research question is the specific question that the Page 15 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

researcher wants answered. In effect, in selecting the research question, the researcher is saying, This is the most important thing I want to know by the completion of my research. The research is then designed to get an answer to a related question. Therefore, all parts of the research have to be connected to the question—the topic, purpose, ethical stance, theory, literature review, data collection, analysis, results, and final document. Repeatedly check to be sure that is the case.

What Is the Structure of a Research Question? Research questions often start with “how” or “what.” They are rarely stated in a way that could be answered “yes” or “no” or by anything other than a narrative. What accounts for ________? What are the mechanisms that ________? How are ________? In what ways do ________? Why are ________?

What Level of Abstraction Should Research Questions Be? The level of abstraction for research questions varies. Sometimes research questions include theoretical concepts; other times, they are more concrete. 1. What are the performative elements and nondiscursive practices that men use to express hegemonic masculinity in light of gender inequalities in the labor force? 2. How do men reaffirm their masculinity when working in a female-dominated occupation? (LoMascolo, 2008). Either of these is fine in the right circumstances. However, an easily understood question is preferred to one that is opaque, regardless of the level of abstraction.

Page 16 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

How Many Research Questions Should I Have? For an undergraduate paper, one or two research questions is probably sufficient. For a thesis or a dissertation, two to four is not atypical, but one is still okay. Although subresearch questions can be created, do not use these as a way to sneak in four or five more research questions. If you find yourself writing research question after research question, you may have drifted into interview questions. Research questions are not the same as interview questions—although there should be a close correspondence between the two sets of questions. Interview questions are what you are going to ask study participants so that you can answer your research questions. Interview questions are typically even more narrowly focused than research questions.

Where Do Research Questions Belong in My Final Paper? In proposals, I like to see research questions introduced early in the document—a somewhat arbitrary number is within the first two pages for undergraduates and not much further for graduate students. Where they are introduced in the final document is more variable—in the first chapter or possibly not until the methods section. Your instructor will indicate their preferences for both the proposal and final paper. Regardless of where you first state them, you will repeat them many times throughout the final document.

May I Change My Research Questions? Researchers sometimes change their research questions as their studies progress. Bourgois (1995) found the focus of his research in East Harlem (“El Barrio”) changing from the entire underground economy in the area to a focus on crack, a drug that he did not know about before 1985, when he began his 5-year study (p. 1). He did not abandon his interest in the underground economy, but rather modified his questions by considerably narrowing their focus. Keep in touch with your professor and possibly the Institutional Review Board (IRB), if you decide to change your research questions. Given the centrality of research questions, changing them is nontrivial. However,

Page 17 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

being able to revise your purpose, research questions, data collection strategy, and so on as you proceed is an advantage of field research over many other research designs. Making a research question narrower as you proceed can be a good strategy; not having one at all is not.

When in the Process Do I Write the Research Question? The earlier you have a research question, the easier it is to design and execute your research in a way that all parts are linked. You are more likely to collect useful data right away than if you are not sure what your focus should be. However, as long as you eventually have one, when you developed it might not affect the quality of your research, but may well make completing your research considerably more difficult. Not having one at the onset of your research is high risk because getting approval for conducting the research will be harder to get without at least one research question being proposed.

Putting It All Together The following example should further your understanding of how research can move from a broad topic to narrower research questions. This example is derived from Venkatesh’s (2008) research that focused on the underground economy of the urban poor. Step 1: State the broad area of interest. I had a burgeoning interest in young people, especially those at the margin. Step 2: Pick a topic with a narrower focus than the broad area of interest. I was particularly curious about the economic activities of the local gangs. Step 3: State the purpose of the research. I hope to understand why young people choose this risky path. Step 4: Write research questions that are even more specific than the purpose but are closely linked. I was interested in one small part of this history—namely, • how the organization came to develop and manage its lucrative drug-trafficking enterprise; Page 18 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• how they invested, saved, and spent the money they earned; • how a gang dealt with all the conflicts and problems that arise while running a business that was entirely illegal.

Conclusions “Broad to narrow” is one of the key phrases to remember as you start your research. You begin with a broad interest in some topic, then decide upon a more limited purpose, and finally arrive at a narrow, specific research question. I cannot overstate the importance of having good research questions because all parts of your research need to be linked to questions that your research is designed to answer. When faced with a decision about how to proceed, asking yourself, How does this relate to my research question? will help guide you to the next step. You might be thinking that you are now ready to go forth and collect data. Alas, considerably more work, as explained in the next two chapters, has to be done before the fieldwork portion of the research begins.

Chapter Highlights • Planning research often begins with a general topic of interest, and then the purpose of the research that frames the research is determined. • Myriad ethical and practical issues should be factored into the decision-making process about what to study. • Researchers can be insiders who are familiar with the research setting and group or outsiders who are unfamiliar. • Research questions are the specific questions that the researcher wants answered by the completion of the research. • All the parts of the research process, from the purpose of the research to the final document, have

Page 19 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

to be closely related.

Exercises 1. Imagine that you have been asked by your instructor to make a one-page, double-spaced handout about creating and using research questions. It should primarily be a bulleted list, although you might need to add some elaboration. The handout should be designed for someone who is about to conduct research but knows almost nothing about research questions. You can use some information from this book, but you will need three other sources. You can easily find lots of useful guidance for writing research questions through an online search. Remember to cite all your sources; you can have multiple sources for the same point. Only include information that pertains to field research or qualitative research more generally. Use quotes sparingly. Depending upon the information you are finding, you might want to organize your handout into sections. Be creative. 2. List two general areas of interest to you and two narrower topics related to each. Write a purpose statement for each topic and two research questions related to each purpose that could be answered by conducting field research. 3. Give two examples of research you could do as an insider. Explain what you see as the pros and cons of insider research for each. 4. Start planning your research by selecting a topic and writing a purpose and a research question. This should be for research that you might want to actually conduct. Explain why you are interested in this topic and question.

Page 20 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Labaree, R. (2002). The risk of ‘going observationalist’: Negotiating the hidden dilemmas of being an insider participant observer. Qualitative Research, 2, 97–122. Sandberg, J., & Alvesson, M. (2011). Ways of constructing research questions: Gap-spotting or problematization? Organization, 18, 23–44. Stamler, L. (2002). Developing and refining the research question: Step 1 in the research process. The Diabetes Educator, 28, 958–962.

Recommended Additional Reading Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2013). Constructing research questions: Doing interesting research. London, England: Sage Publications Ltd. Dwyer, S., & Buckle, J. (2009). The space between: On being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8, 54–63. Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Hayes, S. (2010). Proposing an argument for research questions that could create permeable boundaries within qualitative research. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 4, 114–124. Mantzoukas, S. (2008). Facilitating research students in formulating qualitative research questions. Nurse Education Today, 28, 371–377.

• Research questions Page 21 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• Fieldwork https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 22 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 4: Theory and Review of Literature It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. Sherlock Holmes (Doyle, 1891)

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • summarize different views on how theory is used in field research; • explain the relationship between concepts and research questions; • explain why a review of literature is needed for field research; • locate academic sources for a review of literature; and • write a well-organized review of literature.

Often universities offer a theory course and then another course in methods to allow for in-depth examination of both topics. However, in practice, research and theory are blended together. Although there are complicated and sometimes heated discussions about the relationship between theory and field research (see, for examples, Hammersley [1992] and Wacquant [2002]), the prevailing view is that research should have at least some theoretical grounding. Consequently, it is highly likely that you will have to use theory and include a review of other related research as part of your field research. My goal in this chapter is to help you understand what these mean and how they are accomplished. I once heard a sociologist say, “Qualitative research without theory is just words.” I no longer recall who said it or if it was meant literally, but it nicely captures the view that theory is essential to all types of field research. From this perspective, theory provides the guiding structure for data collection and analysis. Without theory, researchers would have to scoop up everything during data collection and toss it all into the final paper, a process that would result in nothing more than a literal “data dump,” impressive in volume but ultimately meaningless in terms of research value. In fact, Wolcott (1994) compares this technique to that of a student who writes everything he or she knows on an essay exam without ever answering the specific question. RePage 2 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

search not guided by theory, like the essay exam, might result in lots of information but still not be useful. What is theory? Are theories a set of interlinked propositions that attempt to explain some social phenomenon? Do analytical frameworks, conceptual lenses, causal models, disciplinary perspectives, and general and specific theories all count as theory? Is using theoretical or sensitizing concepts sufficient for claims that your research is theoretically informed? The simple answer to these questions is “yes.” I treat all of these as theory for the purposes of field research because providing a more complex answer to “What is theory?” is beyond the scope of this book. However, understanding what concepts are is important at this stage of your learning.

Concepts Theories are made up of concepts. To start to grasp what concepts are, think about them as “what we want to study”—not who we want to study, but what it is about the who that we are interested in. Concepts are typically abstract ideas that don’t exist in a tangible form: incentives, biodiversity, subcultures, resistance, masculinity, humorous interactions, identities, family stress, empowerment, eternal marriages, privacy, crime prevention behaviors, body image, self-discloser, habitus, material embeddedness, maternal thinking, and structures of influence. Concepts become the focus of your research. For example, if you are interested in studying crime, you might examine whether the concepts of social disorganization or strain are potential causes of crime. Once you have selected your concepts of interest, you cannot simply name them and then move on as if you and all the rest of us knew and agreed upon what social disorganization, empowerment, habitus, and maternal thinking mean. When using a concept, you will need to provide a conceptual definition. What is your definition of strain when used in your research on crime, returning veterans, or new fathers? How you define it is your conceptual definition. Typically you will not make up your own definition of a concept; you rely on the wisdom of others. When you conduct your literature review and sit attentively in class you will learn how others have defined the concept of interest to you. For example, Merton’s (1938) conceptual definition of strain was that it is failure to achieve positively valued goals. Ford and Schroeder (2009) conceptualized a particular type of strain, academic strain, as a disjunction between academic aspirations and outcome. Of course, if you wanted to build upon their research, you would also have to define academic aspirations. Having a concept that you want to explore is a minimum theoretical requirement for field research, but often you will utilize more than isolated concepts. When concepts are used in conjunction with each other as a possible explanation for a phenomenon, they form the basis of a theory. Page 3 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Theory Wacquant (2002) gives this advice about theory and field research: “far from being antithetical, vivid ethnography and powerful theory are complementary and . . . the best strategy to strengthen the former is to bolster the latter” (p. 1524). He argues that research that is primarily descriptive, which seems like it could potentially be atheoretical, needs the guiding hand of theory. Wacquant asserts that there is “no such thing as a description, thick or thin, that does not engage a theory, understood as a principle of pertinence and protomodel of the phenomenon at hand adumbrating its nature, constituents, and articulation” (p. 1524). Although Wacquant’s definition of what he means by theory is wonderfully dense for some of us, it does support the view of the importance of theory. One thing is certain about theory, you will need some. You might have a whole or large part of a chapter in your thesis or dissertation related to theory. As an undergraduate, your final paper will probably have less theory, but some will be expected. What type, the complexity, how and when it is used, and where it appears in the final paper vary, but theory will be an important part of your research. An undergraduate might start a field research project with a research question derived from a broad concept, such as gender inequality. In contrast, a Ph.D. student interested in gender could use Butler’s (1990) work on gender as a cultural performance as his theory, with a research focus on performativity in a particular context. The key point is that both the undergraduate and graduate student alike share some measure of theoretical interest, no matter how varied in degree. Table 4.1 lists theories used by recent graduates when studying a variety of topics. What is important to note in this table is the different categories of theories used. Social learning theory and symbolic interactionism are extremely broad theories that are probably familiar to many of you and have applicability across a large range of topics. Anthropological theories of state-making are related to a particular discipline and are macro-level theories. Environmental identity is a micro-level concept because of the emphasis on identities of individuals and is not likely to be useful to researchers other than those interested in the environment or identities. I use the research referred to in this table throughout the book. Table 4.1 Examples of theories, sensitizing concepts, and analytical lenses Author

Page 4 of 17

Topic

Theory

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chappell (2005)

Training police officers

Social learning theory

Coats (2010)

Pentecostal worship services

Philipsen’s speech codes theory

Govan (2011)

College-going culture at urban high school

College-going culture theory

Holt (2015)

Bondage/discipline/sadomasochism

Symbolic interactionism

Sulsberger (2014)

Elementary school garden

Environmental identity

Hess (2014)

Terrorism trial

Moral panic theory

Poole (2009)

Refugee resettlement policy

Anthropological theories of state-making

Cheanualt (2004)

Residential council in public housing

Critical race theory

Regardless of the type, theories are often important for selecting a topic, influencing the purpose, developing research questions, and collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data.

Uses of Theory If you were conducting quantitative research, you would start with a theory. You would derive a hypothesis from it and use data to test the hypothesis in order to conclude that you did or did not find support for your original theory. In contrast, there is more variety in field research about how theory is used. Field researchers generally begin with a theory or at least a theoretical concept in mind. It is nearly impossible to start the research tabula rasa, without any ideas, and the theory provides some direction for data collection. Still, field research is often inductive, meaning that the data are what are used to arrive at your final theoretical explanations. You might modify your original theoretical ideas or discover the importance of concepts that you did not have at the start during the course of your research. This contrasts with a more deductive approach in which testing a particular theory is the purpose of the research. You begin with a theory, and the purpose of the research is to determine whether the data provide supports for or refutes the theory. Page 5 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

The more inductive approach leads to the data being a catalyst for theoretical understandings. For example, Chenault (2004) began her research on the residential council in a public housing community from the lens of critical race theory. One of the tenets of critical race theory is that policies and laws create and reinforce inequality rather than eradicate it. She was particularly interested in why there was a disjunction between the activities of the resident council and the policies of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which articulated what the council should do. She collected data and analyzed it with a focus on data relevant to her theory. During this process she realized that critical race theory alone was insufficient for explaining some of what she found, and she called upon several other theories and concepts that helped make sense of the data. Like many field researchers, she was influenced by her theoretical perspective throughout her work, but she was open to other possibilities during data collection and not wedded to it during analysis.

Pictorial Representations of Theory Theories can be complex. They can require a considerable number of pages to explain. And, because of the complexity, it is sometimes difficult to stay focused during data collection so that you do not miss something that you should specifically observe or ask. Therefore, when it makes sense to do so, I recommend creating a drawing of the theory or model that you are using during your research, referring to it frequently, and also including it in your final paper. A pictorial representation can help you stay organized throughout and is valuable for helping your readers get and retain your major points. An example of one used by Darrow (2015, p. 193) in her research on refugee resettlement polices and how they affect street-level service-delivery is presented in Figure 4.1.

Page 6 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Figure 4.1 Pictorial representation of a theory Figure 1a

Source: Darrow (2015). The politics and implementation of U.S. refugee resettlement policy: A street-level analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.

Review of Literature You won’t be picking theory out of thin air. All your years of taking courses should pay off at this point. Reading the literature about your topic is extremely important for helping you figure out what theory might be relevant and how it has been used. And just as important, knowing how your research relates to other research is a requirement for field researchers. In contrast, a journalist can write an excellent piece about some event and is not required to talk about how the results of her investigation are similar to or different from other articles that may have been written on the topic. Unlike the journalist, your research has to be situated within the larger body of research done on the topic. Your credibility as a scholar will immediately be questioned, and you will have failed to meet the standards of valid research, if you do not have a comprehensive review of the literature. A review of literature, or literature review, is simply that: a review of what has been previously published on your topic. Etzler (personal communication, January 15, 2016,) reported a value she found from reviewing Page 7 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the literature. She wrote that “reviewing the literature helped to create a map of the explorations of others and suggested potential avenues to explore.” It is unlikely that you will not find any other useful studies; do not worry about having enough references because you will if you put in the effort. If you are having trouble finding research about your topic, change your search strategy. For graduate students, an excellent way to learn about your discipline and start finding literature is to begin reading articles as soon as you begin your program. One way to get you started is to identify the top-tier journals in your discipline and the journals that focus on your area of interest. Then sign up to have the table of contents (TOC) sent to you each time a new issue of the journal is available. JournalTOCs provides this service, and publishers such as Sage do as well. Now I turn to frequently asked questions about literature reviews.

What Sources Should I Use? Review academic journals, scholarly books, conference proceedings, and dissertations. Avoid magazines, blogs, and websites that have information that you cannot verify in a legitimate source. If you look at Wikipedia, and you probably cannot resist, look at the sources used and examine those—otherwise do not use the Wiki entry.

How Do I Find Articles? Although you can do a general Google or equivalent search, you will have to go a long way down the rabbit hole before you start finding journal articles. It is so inefficient searching that way that it will mostly be a useless and time-consuming activity. Furthermore, you might not be able to read academic articles you find through a general search without paying for them. You should never have to pay for an article. If you cannot access it for free, your library probably can through its interlibrary loan service. The preferred method is to use databases made available through your library that search a large number of academic journals. Academic Search Complete and ERIC are two you might know. Start with Academic Search and select the field that only searches for your key words in the title; then change the field so that you are searching abstracts; and later search through the full text. Once you have a collection of articles, look at

Page 8 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the studies these articles cite and track down any that are relevant to your work. Another helpful way to search is to use Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en). Google Scholar filters out a lot of the junk you find with a regular Google search, but the way you search is the same. One of the helpful features of Google Scholar is that it provides links from one article to others that cited it as well as other related articles. See Table 4.3 for an example.

What Is the Most Important Thing Related to a Review of Literature? Don’t plagiarize. I know you won’t, but I want to remind you that changing even a few words without attribution is still plagiarism. A rule contained in some style guides but not as well-known as it should be is that when something is not a direct quote, but only minor modifications are made, you still should provide a page number with the name and date; you just do not include the quotation marks. You must use quotation marks enclosing any direct quotes or indent quotes four lines or more and include the name, date, and page number with the quote. If you use your own words to convey someone else’s point, then you only have to include the name and date of any reference. When a review is organized by topic rather than by summarizing articles, you will find it easier to write using your own words. Refer to the style guide required by your instructor or discipline on how to cite sources. Using lots of different sources adds to your credibility as a scholar. Table 4.2 Google Scholar This is an example of a search result from Google Scholar. Notice at the bottom that the article has been cited in 62 other papers; this suggests that they have something in common. Google Scholar also provides links to related articles that might be useful. Follow these leads.

Page 9 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

What Should Be in a Review? What should be included and how it should be organized are right up there with other major questions such as “What is the meaning of life?” Below I provide a few suggestions for developing your review of literature. It is extremely easy to find all sorts of useful references online for more details. Be prepared: Even if you follow all the suggestions on what you should include, you will have to write, rewrite, outline what you have written, move things around, and write some more until your hard work results in a logical organization and a good review.

General instructions • Keep a focus on your purpose, your theory, and your research question. • Look at other papers, theses, and dissertations for good models. • Comprehensively review only literature closely related to your particular interests and questions, ideally if it includes your theory, and not literature related to your topic that is too far removed from your more narrow interest.

Page 10 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• Use current literature but make sure you include the classic important works. • Provide a historical background or set the context for your study as needed, but don’t let this substitute for the literature review. • Don’t go overboard with details about methods used in other studies, except when the details about samples, concepts, research design, and so on are central to the point you are trying to make. • Give little attention to gaps in the literature unless your work is designed to fill them. • Explain how what you are reviewing is related to your research.

Introduction • Begin with an introduction that explains how your review is organized.

Theory • Explain in detail what theory you are using, making sure you include the conceptual definitions or other key terms related to the theory. Justify why your theory is an appropriate theory, with less attention given to a large number of competing theories unless that is important to how you frame your research.

Empirical literature • Organize your review by topics, themes, concepts, chronology, and so on rather than simply summarizing articles as you would in an annotated bibliography. • Include summaries, analysis, critiques, and synthesis of research on a topic. • Connect your review to your research questions and purpose of your research. • Discuss similar findings and patterns across the various studies, paying attention to whether the same results were obtained for different samples, concepts, and methods. • Review articles that have findings that are different from the others and are not as you predicted, rather than cherry picking articles to support your views. Page 11 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of previous research.

Conclusion • End with a summary of your major points.

What Is a Common Mistake Made When Writing a Review? A common error is to write a review in a style that is more suited for an annotated bibliography than a review of literature. Arrange your review by theme or other organizational structure and not by author. If you find yourself starting paragraphs or sentences with the author’s name, you have probably slipped into annotated bibliography territory. Compare the two sections in Table 4.3. Table 4.3 Organizing literature reviews thematically Example 1: Review of literature incorrectly organized by summarizing each article A lot of research has looked at the consequences of sexual harassment. Stevens (2013) found that some women students said they avoided taking a class with certain professors because of the risk of harassment. The research was a survey of 1,000 women undergraduates. In another study, McIntire (2014) discovered many problems created by sexual harassment. Among the things they found were that women often suffered depression. Cropper (2000) gives a long list of difficulties that victims of harassment have suffered, such as lowered self-esteem. Example 2: Review of literature correctly organized by the central theme of negative consequences of sexual harassment Sexual harassment has many negative consequences. Among these were avoiding classes (Stevens, 2013), depression (McIntire 2014), and lowered self-esteem (Cropper, 2000).

When Do I Start Reading the Literature and When Do I Use It? There are many answers to the questions about when related research comes into play, but I believe you should start the review early and continue to develop it throughout the research. Given that you will need Page 12 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

some review of the literature for getting approval for your research, such as when you submit a proposal, it is difficult to follow the advice of some not to start it until your field research is well underway. I believe that the review can be helpful as you analyze your data. However, take care not to feel constrained by what others have found; rather, use their insights as launching pads for your own (Jorgensen, 1989). Your results will eventually have to be compared to what others have found. How and when this is best done varies When presenting your findings, you can embed the comparison to others’ research in with your results. Another model is to refer back to the literature review only in your final chapter.

Are Diagrams, Figures, and Charts Helpful for Presenting a Review of Literature? Creating drawings, figures, charts, and other pictorial representations can be useful to help you arrive at an organizational structure for a review. They also are greatly appreciated by those who read your work, as they make a lengthy review easier to follow. In Froggett’s (2007) dissertation on resistant behavior by adult learners in graduate education, she included a figure that summarized the major contributors to the literature that she discussed thoroughly in her 27-single-spaced-page literature review. Even though her review was well organized, having her figure to keep me oriented as I read was useful.

Putting It All Together As you will read again and again, all parts of your research need to be linked. Siudzinski’s research demonstrates this point. Siudzinski (2007) conducted research on how long-distance hikers learn to negotiate the Appalachian Trail (AT). One of his primary concepts was community of practice. Here are snippets from his work that show the connections among his purpose, research questions, the concept of community of practice, its conceptual definition, and previous research. The purpose of this research was to examine the situated and informal nature of individual knowledge construction within a community of practice. Guiding research questions included: (a) What factors help or hinder the learning processes of AT long-distance hikers? Page 13 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

(b) How are the AT long-distance hikers a community of practice, and what role does this community play in individual knowledge construction? (p. 8) He provides this conceptual definition of the concept and refers to other research. Community of practice. A group of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis (Wenger et al., 2002). (p, 6) Later, he expands his conceptual definition by explaining that a community of practice, such as the AT long-distance hikers, can be defined conceptually along three dimensions (Wenger, 1998) (p. 102) These dimensions included purpose, action, and outcomes. As an example, he defines outcomes in this way: Outcomes: What capability the community has produced – the shared repertoire of communal resources (e.g., hiking routines, outdoor sensibilities, shelter artifacts, AT vocabulary, packing styles, etc.) that members have developed over time. (p.102)

Conclusions In addition to the types of material I have said should be in a literature review, I think reading newspapers, autobiographies, nonfiction books on other topics, and even novels are worthwhile activities. Although no substitute for a firm grounding in the academic literature and theory related to your topic, these can be catalysts for all sorts of useful ideas, and they can help prepare you emotionally and intellectually for field research in a particular setting. Additionally, reading a lot can help with your writing, and you will be doing a lot of writing while conducting your field research You are now at the point where you are ready to plan how you will conduct your research. The next chapter gives you guidance on how to begin.

Page 14 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter Highlights • Theory and concepts are a requirement of field research. • Theories are made up of concepts that must have conceptual definitions to be useful. • There are different ways theory is used in field research. • Research questions are related to the theoretical concepts that are central to the research. • A review of literature is needed to situate one’s research into a larger body of literature because it helps guide the research, indicates why the research is important, allows for the comparison of one’s research with that done by others, and adds to the validity of the research. • Academic sources are used in the review of literature, and they should be closely related to your purpose and research question. • The review of literature is more than a summary of articles and books.

Exercises 1. Select a theory of your choice and summarize it in approximately a half page. Write a research question derived from the theory that is suitable for field research. You can find theories by reading journal articles, or you can use one you have learned about in class. 2. Locate five journal articles that use ethnography, virtual field research, netnography, or participant observation as the research design. Provide a few sentence summaries of the theories and/or concepts they used. You can find these articles in the same way that you would locate articles based on a topic. 3. Select a narrow topic of interest to you. Write a purpose statement. Find 10 articles that are related to your purpose and could be used in a review of literature. Give the full citation of each article followed by a few sentences that summarize it. 4. Pretend that you have been asked to create a handout about how to write a review of literature. Your Page 15 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

handout should be one page, almost totally consisting of bulleted points. Your handout should not include advice about how to find articles—only what you should do once you have them. Organize your lists by sections if you include advice on different features of a review (e.g., how to critique an article is different from how to organize a review). Do an online search for advice. You can use journal articles or other sources that seem credible. Do not use Wiki. You must have at least five sources. This book does not count as one of your sources, although you can use information in this chapter. If several authors make similar points, rewrite them in your own words and then list multiple citations. Remember that you have to use quotation marks for any direct quotes. At the bottom of the page, include the full citation for all your sources (author, title, journal, page, URL, date of download, and so on). Be creative. 5. For the proposal that you have started in earlier chapters, add a several-paragraph overview of the theory or concepts that you might use. Add a mini-review of literature that uses at least 10 sources, following the format of a good literature review as best you can with so few sources. The more articles you have the easier it is to write a well-organized review.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Pedersen, E. (2007). Theory is everywhere: A discourse on theory. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 25, 106–128. Rocco, T. & Plakhotnik, M. (2009). Literature reviews, conceptual frameworks, and theoretical frameworks: Terms, functions, and distinctions. Human Resource Development Review, 8, 120–130. Snow, D., Morrill, C., & Anderson,L. (2003). Elaborating analytic ethnography: Linking fieldwork and theory. Ethnography, 4, 181–200.

Page 16 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Recommended Additional Reading Anfara, V., & Mertz, N. (2015). Theoretical frameworks in qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ravitch, S., & Carl, N. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual theoretical and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ridley, D. (2012). The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage Publications Ltd. Torraco, R. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 356–367.

• critical race theory

• Hypothesis testing • Theory • Literature review https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 17 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 5: Paradigms, Research Design, and Introduction to Methodology

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • discuss the purpose of a research proposal; • explain how paradigms affect how field research is conducted; • compare the ontology, epistemology, and axiology of major paradigms used by qualitative researchers; • explain what research designs are; and • write the paradigm section of a proposal.

I start this chapter with a reminder attributed to the famous baseball player Yogi Berra: If you don’t know where you are going, you might wind up somewhere else. For your research, you need to heed Berra’s warning and create a map to follow to keep you from ending up far afield of your original purpose. Your map, referred to as your methodology, includes the steps you plan to take during the course of your research. Methodology is the focus of much of the remainder of this book. As you continue to read, you will understand that your map is more like the following quote from Larsen’s (2009) novel, The Selected Works of T. S. Spivet, than a map on the GPS on your dashboard: A map does not just chart, it unlocks and formulates meaning; it forms bridges between here and there, between disparate ideas that we did not know were previously connected. Even if your map is not a clear path from start to finish, you still need to have at least a tentative methodology you plan to follow. However, before you even start to design your map, you have to step back and figure out your paradigm and your research design that largely determine the appropriate methodology.

Page 2 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Proposal At this point, I want to remind you of what you have learned so far, foreshadow where we are heading, and show how the parts of the research process fit together. I am going to use a research proposal as a way to accomplish these things. Before you can conduct your research, you might be required to get the approval of your professor or committee members. Therefore, you will need a proposal that requires articulation of the major features of field research. To help you develop your proposal and design your research, I present, in Table 5.1, some of the elements that are often included in a proposal. Proposals are variable so not all of these may be needed in yours, and others that I have not listed may be. For example, a statement of the problem is not uncommon in proposals. Your professor, and/or committee members will guide you as to its contents. I use the list as a way to give you a broad idea of a proposal, which you will then tailor to your requirements. Do not be concerned that many of the elements and the brief keywords in the table make little sense to you now. By the end of the book, they will. Table 5.1 Parts of a research proposal Purpose—the reason for conducting the research Research questions—primary questions to be answered by the research Theory—theoretical framework, concepts, models Review of literature—summary and critique of journal articles related to research Paradigm—interpretive, critical, post-positivism Research design—field research, oral history, evaluation research Methodology—explanations of the following items Site selection—geographical space, people engaged in similar activities Ethics—informed consent, protecting confidentiality Gaining entrée—procedure used to get access to a setting Gatekeepers—people in formal and informal roles that control access Key actors—people who help facilitate the research

Page 3 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Insider/outsider status—previous involvement, no personal experience Relationships—trust and reciprocal relationships Data—observations, field notes, interviews Sample—critical case, typical Data collection procedures—participant observation, interview guides Field notes—jotted, transcribed Reflexivity—reflections on your role in the research Strategies to increase validity and trustworthiness—triangulation, member checks Coding—open, focused Analytical technique—themes, typologies, research story Final paper—class paper, traditional thesis, themes as chapters

Let’s assume you know your purpose, research questions, theoretical frame, the connection between your study and previous research, and how to treat research participants ethically. Therefore, you are off to a good start. Now it’s time to work on the paradigm section, research design, and their relationship to your methodology. In a proposal, paradigms and research designs are often discussed under the major heading of methodology, so again, you will want to seek direction on how to frame yours.

Paradigms Your paradigm plays an important role in the research process, although it might not be explicitly stated in published research or given attention in introductory methods textbooks. For a general idea of what a paradigm is, think about the “scientific method” you used in a high school biology or chemistry course. The scientific method is a paradigm, referred to as post-positivism or a post-positivist paradigm, and it has associated assumptions, rules, and procedures to follow. The data your research generated were probably numerical—you counted and measured things. You might have recorded the results of your experiments in lab notes and used equipment such as microscopes. There are other paradigms with which you are probably not familiar. There are an ever increasing number of paradigms that I could present; researchers speak of paradigm proliferation. However, to make things manageable, I am going to review only three paradigms: post-positivism,

Page 4 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

interpretive, and critical. Post-positivism is associated with quantitative research, although not always, and interpretive and critical with qualitative research, although not always. I am glad that the view that qualitative and quantitative research are two distinct camps, with one good and one bad, is starting to fade. Still, field researchers typically do not frame their research within the post-positivist tradition. However, some do, and even those who explicitly claim one of the other paradigms, elements of post-positivism are present from time to time as I point out later. Table 5.2 Paradigmatic beliefs Post-positivism

Interpretative

Critical

Multiple social realities; changing; relative to Ontology: nature of reality

One reality; can be dis-

people’s position in it

covered, although not necessarily perfectly

Social reality created by social, economic, political, and historical forces that seem im-

No universal truths; people socially construct

mutable but can be changed

their lives.

Knowledge is co-created during the research.

What is learned is not independent of the re-

Epistemology:

Knowledge exists inde-

What is learned is not independent of the re-

searcher and participants; values are key in

nature of

pendent of the re-

searcher and participants.

what is learned.

knowledge

searcher. Subjective

Subjective

No pretense of value neutrality; less concesAxiology: role

Research should be val-

No pretense of value neutrality; values affect

of values

ue free.

what is learned.

sion of value relativism Values drive the research.

Methodology:

Standardized proce-

research pro-

dures; replicable; hy-

cedures

pothesis tests

Interactive; flexible; emergent research de-

Interactive; designed to reveal oppression

signs

and show the possibility of change

Source: Adapted from Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1994:109) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In the Handbook of Qualitative Research, Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y (Eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. The paradigm that a researcher subscribes to affects far more than just selecting qualitative or quantitative research. The paradigm you select has implications for the purpose of your research, how you will collect your data, how you will assess the role of values and ethics in your work, how you treat your relationships with parPage 5 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ticipants in the setting, how your results will be presented, and many other aspects of the research process. I want to give you a heads up that this part of the book will be the one most foreign to you, particularly if you are an undergraduate or working on a master’s thesis. A beginning point is that a paradigm is a set of assumptions or beliefs that have implications for the very nature of research itself. A paradigm is sometimes referred to as a set of philosophical beliefs. I am hesitant to use the term philosophical beliefs because the way philosophers conceive of paradigms and their constituent parts are phenomenally more complex than how they are discussed and used by many of us who conduct our research within the framework of a particular paradigm. However, the good news is that mastery of the philosophical treatment of paradigms is not necessary for conducting research, nor is reconciling the various ways they are discussed within the research community. Unless you are an advanced student, as long as you have the basic idea, you are good to go. There are four major components in a paradigm. The first is ontology, which is the study of what things exist and what they are. Two basic ontological questions relevant to research are What is the nature reality? and What can be known about it? (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994). The second is epistemology, which is the study of the creation and nature of knowledge. The next is axiology, which is related to the study of values, morals, and ethics. The fourth is methodology, which is the study of how we go about acquiring knowledge (HesseBiber & Leavy, 2010). Table 5.2 contains a summary of the paradigmatic assumptions/beliefs associated with the three paradigms I review, with a focus on factors that have direct implications for your research. You might find it useful to repeatedly refer to the table as you read.

Post-Positivist Paradigm A post-positivist paradigm is associated with the dominant model of scientific research—what you learned in your science classes or possibly in other methods classes. When used by social scientists, the process of scientific discovery begins with a theory. Using deductive logic, the researcher derives a testable hypothesis from the theory. Then typically, quantitative data are collected to test the hypothesis. The data might be from a survey or social experiment. On the basis of the results of the data analysis, the researcher decides whether there is empirical support for the hypothesis. The implication of the ontological assumption associated with this paradigm is that things exist “out there,” which can be found through rigorous research. These things are real—and not a function of people’s percepPage 6 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

tions of them. To illustrate this point, let’s consider a line from a song by DiFranco, who gained popularity in the early 1990s and still has an illustrious career as a singer, songwriter, businessperson, and activist. (My apologies to DiFranco if I have misrepresented her views in the following discussion, which is designed to help you learn the importance of paradigms to the research process and not to review her music or summarize her views.) In “True Story of What Was,” DiFranco (2004) sings, “Real is real regardless of what you try to say, or say away, real is real relentless.” Although I am not implying that DiFranco would identify herself as a post-positivist, the sentiment that the “real is real regardless” is consistent with the underlying ontological assumption of post-positivism that an objective reality exists. A belief related to post-positivism is that social reality is stable and patterned. It can be known through rigorous investigation, conceding that maybe not perfectly, but the accumulated efforts of our research will move us toward discovering the “real,” essential, and unchanging Truth about the way the world works. In many cases, the overarching goal of this paradigm involves the search for probabilistic causal laws of social behavior. Miles and Huberman (1994) provide the following summary of ontological beliefs about social reality consistent with a post-positivist paradigm: That means we think that social phenomena exist not only in the minds but also in the objective world—and that some lawful and reasonably stable relationships are to be found among them. The lawfulness comes from the regularities and sequences that link together phenomena. From these patterns we can derive constructs that underline individual and social life. The fact that most of those constructs are invisible to the human eye does not make them invalid. After all, we all are surrounded by lawful physical mechanisms of which we’re, at most, remotely aware. In other words, social phenomena, such as language, decisions, conflicts, and hierarchies, exist objectively in the world and exert strong influences over human activities because people construe them in common ways. Things that are believed become real and can be inquired into. (p. 4) I finish, for now, the discussion of post-positivism with a quick overview of the other major elements in a paradigm. One of many implication of the epistemological position of post-positivism is that what can be learned about the social world exists independently of the researcher. That is, the researcher does not affect what is learned. The axiological stance regarding research conducted within this paradigm is that it should be value free. Methodologically, standardized procedures are used, such as participants are given surveys with multiple-choice answers. Qualitative researchers using this paradigm might ask all the participants the same quesPage 7 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

tions and have guides that specify what they should observe.

Interpretive Paradigm Now I turn to an interpretive paradigm that is frequently used, or one of its variants, by field researchers. If this were an advanced text, I would discuss differences, often subtle, among close cousins of an interpretive paradigm (Schwandt, 2001). For example, in what ways are constructivist and constructivist-interpretive paradigms the same or different? Right now the answer to this question is not important. Adherents of an interpretive paradigm hold a view of the social world different from that associated with postpositivism. Their ontological belief is that there is not some stable reality “out there” to be discovered but instead multiple realities. A lyric from DiFranco (1995) is consistent with the ontological perspective of multiple realities: “What might be justice to you, might not be justice to me.” Justice, in this case, is in the eye of the beholder. Even if we are in the same setting, our interpretation of events can be vastly different. Even more, the social world is not an entity in and of itself but is local, temporally and historically situated, fluid, context specific, and shaped in conjunction with the researcher (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 109). Because of these, the interpretive paradigm does not include a quest for monumental truths and universal laws that purportedly govern human behavior. Rather, they focus on people’s multiple interpretations of their social world, which then have to be interpreted by the researcher. Therefore, the name interpretive is apt. The goals of field researchers involve empathetic understanding of participants’ day-to-day experiences and an increased awareness of the multiple meanings given to the routine and problematic events by those in the setting. Although the notion of a stable social reality is inconsistent with an interpretive paradigm, they do not deny a physical reality. For example, it is doubtful that a field researcher would claim that a wall is a social rather than a physical construct, and then, to support the claim, attempt to walk through it. However, what is important to field researchers is the socially significant meanings attached to the physical world. Think of an American flag, for instance. Is it merely multicolored pieces of material sewn together in a consistent pattern, an object used to convey to others one’s country of identification, or a complex web of emotions, symbolism, and ideals? To fully grasp the implications of a setting and the individuals who inhabit it, the field researcher seeks to understand not the nature of the physical entity but that of the meanings the participants attach to things, like the flag, and to experiences they have. Page 8 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

One of the many outgrowths of the epistemological position of this paradigm is that what is learned in research does not exist independently of the researcher and the participants, including the relationships among them. The participants are seen as co-creators of knowledge. It follows, then, that objectivity is not emphasized. This does not mean, however, that the researcher can use the interpretive paradigm as an excuse for injecting personal bias into the project or for manipulating the data to demonstrate a point he or she wants to make. Still, adherents of an interpretive paradigm believe that what researchers learn from the participants depends, in part, on their own status characteristics, values, and behaviors and those of others in the setting. Although as researchers, we try to not influence what is happening in a setting and not let our personal predilections influence our research, it is hard to deny that it is nearly impossible not to have this happen; we are not objective observers removed from what we learn about the participants and setting. Adherents of an interpretive paradigm believe that they cannot totally leave behind their understanding of the social world and how they feel about it, nor should they in some situations. Thus, their axiological stance rejects the view that value neutrality is essential to the research process. Consequently, reflections are included in the final paper about the ways that their values possibly affected everything from the purpose of the research to the outcomes. For many topics, they do not pretend that values do not matter to the research process, nor do they feel compelled to hide theirs when reporting results while conceding that others might have different values. The methodology of an interpretive paradigm often includes interactions with and observations of participants in the setting, but in less structured ways than a post-positivist framework. As DiFranco suggests, “You got to look outside your eyes, you got to think outside your brain, you got to walk outside your life, to where the neighborhood changes” (DiFranco, 1993). Put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Understanding how people live and interpret their lives requires that researchers move, often literally, out of their own worlds and into the setting of the participants. By so doing, they believe that their research results are trustworthy, but still socially created. An interpretive paradigm allows for an interactive, flexible, and emergent methodology.

Critical Paradigm Another paradigm used by qualitative researchers is a critical paradigm. Its use may be accompanied by the goals of empowering people in a setting and working toward meaningful social change (Neuman, 1991, Page 9 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

p. 81). Field researchers guided by a critical paradigm might want to document, understand, and change the way that powerful groups oppress people with less power. Once again I turn to DiFranco as a means of exploring this paradigm. In “From Trickle Down” (1999) she sings, “And they explained about the cutbacks all with earnest frowns, but what they didn’t say was the plant was slowly shutting down, and they’re building condos down river from where the plant had been.” DiFranco’s lines exemplify the sorts of situations that spark researchers who use a critical paradigm to guide their work. Documenting, and at times reducing, the negative implications of unequal power relationships lie at the heart of much work undertaken within the critical paradigm. Researchers using this paradigm sometimes focus their attention on social institutions, such as education, medicine, economics, and law. Why is it that a college education is becoming increasingly hard for people with a low income to obtain? What accounts for environmental racism—toxic wastes being stored in areas inhabited by poor minorities? What are the implications of repressive immigration laws? Researchers using a critical paradigm examine the negative effects of racism, unequal gender relations, and social class. As a result, variants or subsets of this paradigm exist that focus specifically on studying a setting and its participants from a particular critical stance. For example, feminist researchers sometimes employ a critical paradigm.

Page 10 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Photo 5.1 A researcher who holds a critical paradigm might study the devastation to a small community caused by people with economic and political power shutting down the local power plant with no concern about the people affected. Figure 5

Source: Photograph © William Snizek. A critical paradigm is consistent with the interpretive ontological position that there is no single “reality out there.” Additionally, researchers who work within this paradigm stress that social reality is shaped by historical, social, political, cultural, and economic factors, as well as by ethnic, racial, and gendered structures, among others. Epistemologically, scholars who use a critical paradigm believe that the researcher is not independent from what is researched and that the findings of research are mediated through the researcher. Epistemologically, interpretive and critical paradigms have much in common. Within the critical paradigm, the axiological belief is that values are important to the research and should be clearly articulated in the work and to the participants. An important value that often accompanies this type of research is a desire to eradicate social injustices. Those anchored in the critical tradition might write passionately about how the lives of the participants are made worse by factors outside of their control and have few Page 11 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

qualms about saying that particular policies and practices they are studying are wrong or worse. Methodologically, the scholar who follows a critical paradigm often takes a macro approach to research. That is, he or she focuses on more than just individuals and looks at oppressive structures, such as laws and corporate practices. These researchers conduct interviews and engage in participant observations, but their research frequently includes analysis of historical, social, and cultural events that extend beyond the setting. Now I provide you with an example in Table 5.3 that shows how Govan (2011) explained her paradigm. Understanding paradigms can be a difficult task for the beginning researcher, yet an awareness of them is important because their underlying assumptions affect different aspects of research—how and what data are collected are major examples. But you will not jump from the paradigm that is consistent with your beliefs to collecting your data. In between the level of paradigms and methodology is a research design. It would make little sense to select a research design that is inconsistent with your paradigmatic beliefs, so congruence is important. Still, that raises the question, What is a research design? Table 5.3 Brief description of a critical paradigm In her dissertation, Govan (2011) wrote that ethnographic research is grounded in the paradigmatic belief that the social world is socially constructed and that individuals, as agents of this construction, have the power to change social conditions. . . . Within critical research, participants in studies are viewed as subjects rather than objects, and are placed at the center of discourse and examination on a given topic. The core objectives of critical research, and as such critical ethnography, are to engage subjects in active reflection on their social conditions in order to raise their consciousness about social inequities, and to actively encourage social change. (p. 57)

Research Design Before research proceeds, important decisions must be made about what research design will be used. A research design is a template, a series of methodological procedures that should be followed for different research purposes and research questions. That is, your purpose and questions determine what research design should be used, which in turn determines your methodology. For example, if your purpose is to understand people’s lives from their perspective, you could use the field research design described here. If you wanted to seek solutions to problem, an applied design would be appropriate. Each design has methodologPage 12 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ical implications, which affects most of the other parts of your research so using the right design is essential. As briefly mentioned, your methodology includes things such as how you go about getting permission to be in a setting and how long you should be in the setting. However, it is the research design that determines if you even need to be in a setting! Think of a research design as being more “powerful” than methodology because while methodology includes the procedures for obtaining data, the research design determines what types of data you need to obtain. An equally valid perspective is that methodology is the larger category, and research design is one of many elements included under the rubric of methodology. Regardless of where you stand on this issue, all that matters in practice is consistency between methodology and research design. Qualitative researchers use many different research designs: ethnographies, oral histories, clinical research, evaluation research, participatory action research, applied research, scholar activist approaches (Kershaw, 2003), and others. If you want to evaluate whether a program for increasing graduation rates in a high school is effective, you would follow the procedures for an evaluation research design. You would start with information about previous graduate rates, objectives, and plans for implication and then follow the path to determine if graduation rates improved. If you want to know what the experiences were like for Vietnam War veterans during their first weeks back in the United States, you would use a design called oral histories. You would have many hours of conversations and interviews with the veterans. If you wanted to help community members design and conduct research to bring about change in their neighborhood, you would follow the procedures for participatory action research. You would conduct research to determine the problem and possible solutions and then help those in the setting make changes. Some research designs are broken down into subtypes. For example, different types of evaluation research include formative and summative evaluations, responsive evaluation (Stake, 2004), and utilization-focused evaluation (Patton, 1997). Explaining and justifying the design you select is included early on in your proposal. Your chosen paradigm does not usually dictate which specific research design is adopted, although the paradigm might limit the available options and certainly influences how the research is conducted. Again, the research design is determined by which is the most appropriate one for your purpose and the research questions. Research designs are also called a strategy of inquiry, a research tradition, or a type of research. The specific field research design I mostly focus on is ethnography, although I use the general term field research to include related designs. Ethnography is a common type of field research and largely has its roots in anthropology. Plain old ethnography remains the standard, but variants of ethnographies seem to be breeding like rabbits. I have a list of 97 different types. Only a few of many are institutional ethnography, performance

Page 13 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ethnography, autoethnography, and the lesser known, spirit-centered ethnography. The most notable feature of designs that I include under the umbrella term of field research requires long-term engagement in the field with participants, although spending time in the field does not mean that one is by definition conducting field research as discussed here. Although this guide will be most useful to those who choose field research as their research design, much of the book is relevant to other designs that include fieldwork or other types of qualitative data.

Methodology Your methodology is the steps you are going to follow to conduct your research—your map, your plan. Many things influence your methodology. As already noted, your methodological choices are affected by your paradigm and research designs. Your research questions are a major factor in determining the methodology you will use. If you look at the items sometimes included in the proposal as listed in Table 5.1, you will see methodology includes site selection, gaining entrée, arrival in the field, key actors, relationships in the field, leaving the field, and much more. Even though field research is an emerging design and often requires deviation from the plan, you still have to have someplace to start. The methods used for collecting data, such as interviews and observations, are only one of the many parts of methodology. The specific ways that the researcher asks interview questions and observes are considered techniques used for data collection. Although many of us use methodology as the umbrella term for all the parts just mentioned, it is common practice to use the term methods interchangeably with methodology as a chapter heading in your final paper.

Conclusions As you know, to conduct your research you must have a clear purpose and specific research questions, and your research needs to be ethical. Your research needs to be conceptually grounded and situated within a larger body of research. Knowing the paradigm that guides your research is important and using the appropriate research design is essential. You also have an introduction to methodology. With this background, you are probably anxious to jump into the field, but, before you can, you need to gain entrée into the setting and that requires getting approval from the gatekeepers in the setting—a topic of the next chapter.

Page 14 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter Highlights • A research proposal includes a description of the procedures to be used during the research. • Paradigms consist of beliefs that guide many aspects of field research. • Paradigms consist of ontological, epistemological, axiological, and methodological beliefs. • Post-positivism, interpretive, and critical are three paradigms frequently used by field researchers; each has its own methodological requirements. • A research design is a template for how the research should be conducted, and the design is determined by the purpose of the research and research questions. • Field research is one of many research designs used by qualitative researchers.

Exercises 1. Review the ontological, epistemological, axiological, and methodological assumptions of post-positivism, interpretive, and critical paradigms. Which of these is most consistent with your beliefs? Explain why. 2. Do you believe one can include values in the research process and still conduct unbiased research? Which paradigm(s) are consistent with your view? Justify your answers. 3. There are many types of ethnography. Use Google Scholar to find 10 different types and list them. The types usually have an adjective as part of their names, such as post-modern ethnography. (Post-modern ethnography cannot count as 1 of your 10.) An ethnography of some phenomenon is not the same thing as a type of ethnography. 4. Write the paradigm section and the research design section of a proposal for research that you might actually conduct. You can build upon what you have already completed for other chapters.

Page 15 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Broussard, L. (2006). Understanding qualitative research: A school nurse perspective. The Journal of School Nursing, 22, 212–218. Fossey, E., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36, 717–732. Haverkamp, B., & Young, R. (2007). Paradigms, purpose, and the role of the literature: Formulating a rationale for qualitative investigations. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 265–294.

Recommended Additional Reading Kozinets, R. (2015). Netnography: Redefined (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage Publications Ltd. Lincoln, Y., Lynham, S., & Guba, E. (2013). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisted. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research (4th ed. pp. 199–266). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Malterud, K. (2016). Theory and interpretation in qualitative studies from general practice: Why and how? Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 44, 120–129. Prasad, P. (2005). Crafting qualitative research: Working in the postpositivist traditions. London, England: Routledge.

• proposals

Page 16 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• Oral history research • Paradigms • Research design https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 17 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 6: From Gaining Entrée to Exiting the Field

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • discuss the difficulties of gaining entrée in a setting and provide ways to increase the likelihood of gaining entrée; • compare the role of a gatekeeper and a key actor; • articulate the costs and benefits of working closely with a key actor; and • explain why rapport is important, factors that can hinder or help its development, and ways to increase it.

Once committee or instructor approval of the proposal is obtained, you might feel confident and excited to dive into your fieldwork with gusto. However, upon arrival in the field, the realization can soon follow that you are less ready to overcome all obstacles than you are like Jane Eyre, a character in a novel by Charlotte Bronte (1847), who has just arrived at her job as a governess: It is a very strange sensation to inexperienced youth to feel itself quite alone in the world, cut adrift from every connection, uncertain whether the port to which it is bound can be reached, and prevented by many impediments from returning to that it has quitted. The charm of adventure sweetens that sensation, the glow of pride warms it; but then the throb of fear disturbs it; and fear with me became predominant when half-an-hour elapsed and still I was alone. Fortunately, there are steps that can be taken to make your emotional response in the field less dramatic than Eyre’s, but there is no guarantee that fear will not be at least part of your experience for a while. The first step is to seek permission prior to your arrival to conduct your research; unless the site is public, permission is absolutely required. The process of gaining permission to conduct research is referred to as gaining entrée. Once in the field, you’ll have to build and maintain relationships with individuals, and eventually you’ll need to make decisions about how long your fieldwork will continue. Obviously, observations and interactions occur Page 2 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

between entering and leaving, but you’ll need at least an initial plan for the two critical steps, which will need to be explained in detail in a formal research proposal. I start this chapter with a discussion of gaining entrée.

Gaining Entrée and Gatekeepers After a site or population is selected, you’ll probably need permission to conduct the research, as not all settings are open to everyone; some require that you gain permission before entering. Sites range from open (requiring no permission to enter) to closed (requiring permission to enter), with a gray area in between. Permission is not always easy to obtain. Being denied access to the setting or people of interest can be a deal breaker because in many cases, you should not proceed without it. Except in extremely rare cases, ethical researchers do not sneak into nonpublic settings to conduct covert research. Gaining entrée is a complicated process, and the particular route you will take to gain entrée affects the rest of the research. The individuals who play a key role in granting or denying access are referred to in field research literature as gatekeepers. In addition to controlling access, gatekeepers control the flow of interactions within a setting (Burgess, 1991). Because gatekeepers can dictate when the researcher gets to come and go, whom he or she talks to and for how long, and what can be observed, they effectively dictate what kinds of data and information are available. Consequently, the gatekeeper can wield a great deal of power over a study’s outcomes. Throughout the research process, gaining access is usually negotiated and renegotiated (Burgess, 1991). Johnson (1975) aptly describes the process of gaining entrée as a continuing, “progressive series of negotiations rather than a one-shot agreement” (p. 176). Gaining access is made more difficult if you cannot determine the gatekeeper. Once you know who this person is, you have to find a way to contact him or her. If you can get over these two hurdles, then you can move to the all-important task of actually getting permission. The process is made more complicated by the fact that both formal and informal gatekeepers may be part of the equation. A formal gatekeeper may be a club president, gang leader, or school principal. But club members, gang members, and teachers and students may serve as informal gatekeepers—without their permission, your study will not succeed. To facilitate gaining entrée, explain who you are and why you are conducting the research. Depending on the setting or group, be prepared to discuss issues of informed consent, confidentiality, the use of pseudonyms, procedures for observing and interviewing, and who has control over the content of the final paper. Sometimes simply sharing your research questions is sufficient. You might have to reassure the gatekeeper Page 3 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

that your goals of wanting to understand the day-to-day interactions in a setting are different from wanting to evaluate or judge the setting or people in it. Remember that similar information must be provided to both the formal and informal gatekeepers, and be aware that each person in your chosen setting is “to a greater or lesser degree a gatekeeper” (Burgess, 1991, p. 48). In some settings, gaining access is extremely difficult but still possible. Although the practical advice above may be helpful, sometimes hard work, luck, creativity, and persistence also are needed. Becker (2010) gained access by volunteering approximately five hours a week for 3 years at an alternative high school in exchange for being allowed to conduct her research. It took over 5 months for Barley (1990) to be able to begin his research with radiologists and technologists in a hospital setting. He was not aware at the time of requesting entrée that the hospital had been reprimanded a year earlier for not following procedures, a journalist had posed as a researcher and wrote a scathing article about the hospital, and two radiologists had been indicted for selling silver from x-ray film. No wonder the hospital did not welcome him with open arms! Fearing he would never be able to conduct research at the hospital, he decided to observe at a medical school. Learning of his plight, a radiologist at the medical school talked to the hospital administrators on his behalf, and Barley was allowed entrée to the original setting he wanted. Duneier (1999) gained access to sidewalk magazine vendors in Greenwich Village by volunteering to help Marvin, who was one of the vendors. Duneier explains that Marvin lamented that his business partner, Ron, was going through a stage of being unreliable. Every time Marvin left the table to place bets at Off-Track Betting, he had to depend on Ron to remain by the table; if Ron was drunk or high, he might abandon the table, and it would be taken by the police. A thought occurred to me. I could work for Marvin during the coming summer. I would learn a lot more about the sidewalk, if I worked as a vendor myself, than I would by merely observing or doing interviews, and he would have his table covered. So I proposed that I work at this table for three months and give him the money I made. Page 4 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

“What will the fellas think when I have a white guy working for me all summer?” he asked. We decided he should just tell them the truth—I was there to do research on a book about the block—and he said he would think about it. (p. 334) Although it took some time for Duneier to be generally accepted by the other vendors, he at least had a place to be, something to do, and permission to be on the scene from one of the informal gatekeepers on the street. Gatekeepers sometimes provide conditional access. As an extreme example, before agreeing to participate, police officers Van Maanen (1982) wished to study required him to pass several tests—not all of which were legal—demonstrating his loyalty and trustworthiness. If the conditions set by the gatekeeper are accepted, then the researcher is ethically bound to keep them. Liebow’s (1994) research provides a good example of how informal gatekeepers set limits on what he could do. Liebow volunteered at a soup kitchen and shelter for women without homes and then decided he wanted to write a book about the women. He first obtained permission from the formal gatekeeper, the shelter director. However, this was only one level of gatekeeping that he needed to address. He knew that informal gatekeepers, specifically key shelter residents, also controlled access. In the preface of his book, Liebow recounts his experience: “Listen,” I said at the dinner table one evening, after getting permission to do a study from the shelter director. “I want your permission to take notes. I want to go home at night and write down what I can remember about the things you say and do. Maybe I’ll write a book about homeless women.” Most of the dozen or so women there nodded their heads or simply shrugged. All except Regina. Her acceptance was conditional. “Only if you promise not to publish before I do,” she said. Believing that neither one of us, for different reasons, would ever publish anything in the future, I readily agreed. (p. ix) Page 5 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

This informal agreement over dinner permitted the study to continue, but it carried a prohibition of sorts: It essentially established the rules or ethical guidelines by which Liebow could publish his results. Fortunately, Liebow eventually received Regina’s permission to publish; otherwise, according to the ethical standards established in the field, he would have been bound by their earlier agreement. Then additional limits were set, illustrating that access can be given and withdrawn at any stage. Some women agreed to participate in his research project but then changed their minds, one at an extremely late date in the process. Liebow (1994) writes, Originally, I had asked three homeless women and the director of a shelter to write comments on the manuscript. One of the women, after reading a draft of the manuscript, and for reasons not clear to me, angrily decided she did not want to be in the book at all. She did agree to allow herself to be quoted (but not described) in a couple of places. All other references to her were deleted at her request. Similarly, in the second year one of the more distinctive and more troubled women told me she wanted nothing to do with me or anything I might write. We had gotten along well until the day she saw me in earnest conversation with a woman who had become her enemy. On the theory that “the friend of my enemy is my enemy,” she refused to talk to me thereafter (as she had refused to talk to some of the women as well). Also, from that day on, to her I was no longer “Elliot” but “Idiot,” as in “Here comes Idiot again to seduce all the women.” (p. xvii) Numerous factors can affect the researcher’s chances of gaining access to a setting. Your gender, race, ethnicity, age, sexuality, social class, religion, accent, country of origin, educational level, and other personal characteristics can work for or against you in complicated ways. As noted above, Marvin, who helped Duneier (1999) get access to the street vendors, worried that the researcher’s race might present a problem. Remember, too, that people often react to the intersection of different characteristics. For example, because Golde Page 6 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

(1986) was a woman, she was not accepted in the world of men during her study of the Nahua Indians of Mexico. In addition, the fact that she was unmarried and childless prevented her from being fully accepted by the adult women. Because so many settings impose unexpected restrictions on the sorts of information one might be able to gather or observe firsthand, being an insider in a setting can avoid some of the problems or limits an outsider might face. Gaining entrée to online settings can be easier if they are clearly public sites without gatekeepers, which can increase access to some populations. For example, Przybylski (2015) needed to contact urban indigenous hip hop artists in the United States and Canada online. She noted that because there were no online gatekeepers preventing access, she was able to complete her research on an otherwise difficult population to reach. Still, in some cases, informal gatekeepers can pose problems in online environments. For example, the increased number of women playing video games has generated a hostile backlash from some male gamers, making it more difficult for females to conduct research on some types of online gaming, although excellent research by women is being done. Shay (2015), for example, conducted research on a new online gaming group. To gain permission to conduct her research, she attended the group’s first meeting. The likelihood of her being allowed to be involved was greatly enhanced by informing the group that she had played roleplaying games for 12 years. She was given permission to do the research under the condition that she fully participated. Online sites also can have formal gatekeepers. If you are conducting virtual field research that includes moderated sites, the moderator first needs to grant permission for you to conduct research and then members of the site do as well. LeBesco (2004) conducted research on a “fat positive” online discussion group and got permission from the moderators and the individuals who took part in the discussions. She writes, I gained entree, organizational and individual, to these sites as a researcher, partly, I suspect, because I committed early on to a fat-positive perspective. Part of my introduction, aside from my academic credentials, explained my interest in studying online conversations about fat as stemming from my personal experience of corpulence. (p. 66) Because of the types of problems discussed here, start the process of gaining entrée as early as you can so that you can begin your work in the field consistent with your proposed or required timeline.

Page 7 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Preparations When explaining to students the importance of preparing for the field, I use the example of Herbie Goldfarb, one of the characters in the book The Milagro Beanfield War (Nichols, 1974). Herbie arrived in Milagro as a VISTA volunteer without sufficiently preparing for the task: He did not speak Spanish (the language of Milagro); he failed to bring warm clothes because he thought the Southwest would be hot all the time (there are snow-capped mountains in the Southwest); and he had to share a one-room “house” with snakes, skunks, and black widow spiders because he thought living arrangements had been made for him (they had not). In order to avoid becoming a Herbie Goldfarb during your field research, you need to prepare. Conducting fieldwork in a culture or subculture extremely different from your own requires levels of preparation beyond what this book can cover. However, one suggestion for preparation is worth mentioning. Having a contact person in the place you plan to conduct your fieldwork is priceless. Although you might be brave and adventurous enough simply to show up in a location where you do not speak the language and have made no advance plans, your fieldwork will be exponentially more difficult should you choose this route. Additionally, you may have to have IRB (institutional review board) approval both from your institution and in the country where your research takes place. You might have a long wait for a visa, yet another reason to get started early. Conducting fieldwork closer to your home requires less advance preparation but still demands some measure of planning. It can be as simple as making sure you wear appropriate clothing and have all your technological devices fully charged. Even little things can lead to major regrets, so plan accordingly. A last note about preparation: Field researchers know they must prepare themselves mentally and otherwise for things to go awry. You must be willing to be flexible, to adjust, and to make compromises in your original plans. Be aware that Murphy’s Law frequently operates in field research: If something can go wrong, it probably will. Things that can go wrong range from multiple interviewees failing to show up, as was the case with Arnado’s (2002) dissertation research on domestic maids in the Philippines, to war breaking out, which made it too dangerous for Macabuac (2005) to do an ethnography for her dissertation as she originally had planned. Field researchers benefit by subscribing to the German expression “Glück im Unglück,” which roughly translates to “fortune in misfortune.” A good researcher can turn unfortunate events into advantages, as was the case for the researchers just mentioned. Both of them adjusted to their misfortunes and completed excellent research. Page 8 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

I am pointing out some of these small and not so small practical issues because they affect field research in ways they might not affect other types of research. If you get cold or hungry and your feet hurt while you are sitting at your computer running crosstabs with variables from a national dataset, you can simply stop, put on a sweater, grab a snack, and kick off your shoes. The data will still be there, and it will remain unchanged. If, however, you leave the room, the building, the ceremony, or the street when doing observations to get a jacket or because you are hungry and your feet hurt, things will not be the same when you return, and you will not know what happened in the meantime. Field research is time sensitive—the data unfold in real time. If you are not there as the researcher to see it, gather it, or hear it, it moves on without you. Being prepared will help you be part of the experience.

Arrival in the Field Upon arrival in the field, researchers can find themselves in unexpected situations. Venkatesh (2008) conducted research in what he called one of the worst areas in the United States. On his first day of observations, he entered the tall building in the project he had selected for his research, but he didn’t get much farther. He found an elevator but could not find the button. He writes, Then I started looking for the stairwell, but I couldn’t find that either. To my left was a large barrier of some kind, but I was too nervous to go around it. To my right was a corridor. I decided to go that way, figuring I’d come across a stairwell or at least a door to knock on. As I turned, a hand grabbed my shoulder. A young male told me, “No one lives here.” (p. 11) Things got rapidly worse: Venkatesh was threatened with a knife, and other men discussed whether they should kill him. J. T. was the person, the gatekeeper, who was going to determine his fate. While he waited for J. T., his mind worked in a surprising way. He writes, Random thoughts entered my mind, but, oddly, none of them concerned my personal safety: What the hell is Bill Wilson going Page 9 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

to do if he finds out about this? . . . Did every Ph.D. student have to go through this? Can I go to the bathroom? (p. 17) This example shows how dissertation research can dominate the lives of graduate students. Although rarely as dramatic as what Venkatesh encountered, Wax (1971) suggests that smooth early interactions in a setting are not only rare, but also suspect (p. 17). Wax knows from firsthand experience how difficult arrival in a setting can be. For the first 6 weeks she was at a Japanese American relocation camp, and she felt as though she were losing her mind because no one would talk to her. During the early days of their research, other researchers have described feeling “stupid, clumsy, and less than human” and “full of disorientation, shock, and disequilibrium” (Wax, 1971, 19). The following selection from Tanggaad’s (2014) field notes describes the stress she felt upon arrival in the field: I have this feeling of too many eyes upon me. It takes a while to become a fly on the wall—if ever. Right know [sic], I feel much too visible. After a short conversation and a cup of coffee, I arrange my laptop in the corner. I need to just concentrate a few minutes to write this text, reconstructing my first impressions from the short walk down here. I have only been here for two hours, but I am already exhausted from trying to grasp as much information as possible and from the general stresses of the situation. (p. 170) Sometimes the best way to approach early days in a setting is with a good sense of humor. When I am in an extremely uncomfortable situation, for example, I try to reassure myself that the experience will someday make an entertaining story at a party. Wax (1971) provides similar advice: “Painful and humiliating experiences are easier to talk about if one does not take them too seriously, and it is less distressing to picture oneself as a clown or figure of fun than as a dolt or a neurotic” (p. 19). Regardless of how you handle the situation, you should be emotionally ready in case you feel out of place Page 10 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

or even worse when you first begin your fieldwork. Such feelings are quite common. Don’t let this scare you away from field research, just use it to be prepared to deal with the potential stresses such an endeavor might bring. The initial period of immersion in the setting is extremely important. It lays the groundwork for the rest of a field research project. A statement or summary about arriving in the field may need to be in the final paper, particularly if things do not go smoothly. Everything that follows is affected by these early interactions, particularly as they hold the potential for introducing to you the people who will play key roles in your project.

Key Actors One factor that can help you move beyond the awkward and uncomfortable early days of field research is the assistance of one or more members in the setting. If you can make a quick connection and procure the cooperation of at least one member of the setting, you have a better chance of proceeding with the types of interactions and observations necessary for a successful project. Field researchers sometimes refer to the person who rescues and assists them as a key actor or key insider, a member of the setting who is willing to act as a guide and assistant. This person is also referred to in the literature as an informant, but some of us prefer to move away from this term because of its negative connotations. A key actor might be someone the researcher knows prior to undertaking the research or one of the formal or informal gatekeepers with whom a relationship has been developed during the gaining entrée stages of the project. Usually, the key insider is someone the researcher met in the early days of the research, who, for often-unknown reasons, is willing to “adopt” the researcher and become her or his mentor and guide. Interactions with others in the setting are often easier to establish if the key actor makes introductions. This person can help the researcher gain entrée, establish rapport, provide explanations, and perform a host of other useful tasks. The key actor might also tell the researcher when he or she has committed a social faux pas or is in potential danger (Wax, 1971). The key insider helps socialize the field researcher to the ways of the members in the setting. Although key actors provide a valuable service, costs also are involved with relying on insiders as your guides. One drawback is that key actors have their own perspectives, biographies, and agendas that influence what Page 11 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

they see, think, and feel. Although important, the perspectives of the insider could potentially run counter to those of most members of the setting. Consequently, the insider’s understanding of the setting should be considered only one of many perspectives and not taken as representative of the group as a whole. Another disadvantage of working with an insider is that by doing so the researcher runs the risk of isolating himself or herself from some members of the setting. The example from Duneier’s work illustrates how messy things can get associating with a key actor. Hakim Hasam, an important key actor in Duneier’s (1999) work on street vendors, was well respected by other vendors except Muhammad. Thus, although Hasam was an extremely valuable resource, Duneier had to be “less than sincere” from time to time about his relationship to Hasam if he wanted to have access to all the vendors, including Muhammad (p. 336). As a result, Duneier struggled with the recognition that his presentation of self led him into that gray area where fieldwork at times becomes a “morally ambiguous enterprise” (p. 336). If you learn too late that the key actor with whom you have connected actually impedes, rather than helps, ethical issues can arise, as Duneier noted above. Most of us know the pain of trying to disentangle ourselves from a relationship that is no longer desired. Because of the risks, as well as the benefits, of the participation of key actors, researchers are usually cautious about letting these individuals have too much input into the parameters of the study. At the same time, fieldwork is often a cooperative venture undertaken with participants in a setting, rather than a hierarchical activity with the researcher wielding all power. In fact, researchers are sometimes the least powerful persons in a setting because their research depends upon the willingness of others to be part of it. Thus, as a member of the setting, the key actor possesses a perspective that is as important as but not superior to any other. Through careful and continual study of field notes and persistent reflection on the research process as it unfolds, you can keep tabs on whether you are unwittingly permitting the key actor to unduly influence the direction of the project. In addition to gaining entrée, entering a new environment, and finding a key actor, field relationships concerns are ever present.

Field Relationships Unless we live in total isolation, much of our everyday lives is deeply affected by our relationships. Think of different types of relationships you have with friends, roommates, romantic partners, parents, study partners, faculty members, and the guy that delivers your pizza. No doubt the dynamics of your many relationships Page 12 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

occasionally change and greatly affect how you perceive the quality of your day-to-day life. Just as your relationships are deeply embedded in your college experiences, a variety of relationships also arises in field research and affects the field research process. Participating in relationships with members of the setting provides the basis for the interpretive process considered so central to field research. These relationships supply the foundation for what field researchers come to know in the setting. Formation of relationships begins as early as the moment you try to gain entrée to a setting. A song by the artist Ferron (1980) contains the line “Life don’t go clickity-clack along a straight-lined track, it comes together, and it comes apart.” This description captures the unexpected and decidedly nonlinear nature of field research, including the relationships the researcher establishes with the participants. The life of the field researcher and the lives of those in the setting under study repeatedly come together and come apart—not fully merging, yet never fully independent. Field research hinges on personal relationships, in some cases, and preferably on ones that are egalitarian and not hierarchical, although this might be more of an ideal than a practical reality. In her field study of the daily lives of two families, Stacey (1991) illustrates this precept: Choosing my next major research project, I was eager for a “hands-on” engagement in the field. Unschooled in fieldwork research as I was, I did not anticipate the depth or the complexity of the emotional experiences I was about to undergo. My heart, much more than my hands, has been engaged with the people portrayed in this book who so generously agreed to subject their families to my impertinent sociological scrutiny. (p. ix) Liebow (1994) further illustrates how field researchers conceptualize members in a setting as collaborators, not merely subjects to be conned into cooperating: I think of Betty and Louise and many of the other women as friends. As a friend, I owe them friendship. Perhaps I also owe them something because I have so much and they have so little, but I do not feel under Page 13 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

any special obligation to them as research subjects. Indeed, I do not think of them as “research subjects.” Since they knew what I was trying to do and allowed me to do it, they could just as well be considered collaborators in what might fairly be seen as a cooperative enterprise. (p. xvi) As noted in earlier chapters, the issue of trust in field research is not unidirectional. The field researcher strives for trusting relationships that are reciprocal. Therefore, the onus is placed on you to be worthy of the trust, respect, and goodwill of those encountered in the setting. Returning to Venkatesh (2008), he writes about the second time he met J. T., one of the leaders of the group of young men he interacted with: “I felt a strange kind of intimacy with J. T., unlike the bond I’d felt even with good friends. It would have been hard to explain then and is just as hard now, but we had somehow connected in an instant, and deeply” (p. 12). Still, things can go seriously awry when trying to nurture reciprocal relationships. Vanderstaay’s (2005) field relationships became so complex that he worried that his actions may have contributed to the death of the young man who was the primary focus of his research. Developing rapport with people one encounters during field research is touted as the most important route to having good relationships in the field. Rapport is achieved when trusting relationships between the researcher and participant in a setting are formed. Establishing rapport is often more easily said than done. Developing rapport requires the same skills you use for making friends, but when we seek new friends, we often gravitate toward those who are a lot like us. Building rapport with participants in the field is more complex because they may be considerably different from you; they may be suspicious of your presence; they may be unpleasant to the point of being disgusting; they may use verbal and nonverbal language different from yours; they may be incredibly brilliant, beautiful, talented, and well known; and they may range from boring to fascinating. Your particular configuration of personality styles also will influence your efforts to engage with the potential participants in your research. Further, characteristics such as gender and race of all individuals involved affect relationships and rapport in the field—often in very unpredictable ways. Other features also affect the research process: physical attractiveness, neatness habits, standards of time, communication skills, physical health, table manners, hair color and style, level of expertise, musical taste, and abilities are just a few of the many potential factors that affect field relationships in complex and often unknown ways. Building good field relationships should start with the initial request for entrée into a setting. Honesty, open-

Page 14 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ness, friendliness, and a willingness to get along are usually the best qualities to exhibit when you first undertake contact with participants in the field, and with time, most people will respond positively to genuine concern and interest in them (Neuman, 1991, p. 349). However, remember that building rapport is a process that requires constant attention. Neuman warns us that “rapport is easier to lose once it has been built up than to gain in the first place” (p. 349)

Figure 6.1 Who you are and how you request entrée make a big difference in whether you will be given access. Figure 2a

Source: Original art by Chad Seymour Although the goal of field research is to understand the everyday lives of those in a setting, this understanding is a negotiated process, affected by the interactions between the researcher and the members. The status characteristics and other personal characteristics of all involved influence the nature of the interactions. The inevitable personal and emotional reactions between the researcher and the members in the setting shape the character of the transactions and their interpretations (Emerson, 1988, p. 176).

Time in the Field One of the distinguishing characteristics of field research, particularly ethnographies, is long-term engage-

Page 15 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ment in the field. Now the question is How long do I need to stay in the field? I cannot answer this question definitively because of all the factors that affect the fieldwork portion of your research. Your research design and having sufficient information to answer the research question are key to determining the length of time you will need to conduct your fieldwork. Familiarity with the setting, length of time to gain access and develop relationships with key actors, disciplinary expectations, ethical concerns, and your primary form of data collection all have a strong influence on how much time you should spend. When you are drawing fewer and fewer analytic insights from active participation in the setting, you might decide to attempt closure. The conclusion that collecting more data in the field is not necessary because one is not getting additional information to answer the research question is referred to as saturation, or more specifically data saturation. Particularly in the case of interviews, data saturation is associated with sample size. At the point that data saturation is reached, no more interviews are deemed necessary. One problem that occurs if you stop too soon, when the first 10 interviews are finished, for example, you cannot know with certainty, that the next 10 are not going to yield different insights. It is much harder to determine saturation from data collected in the field. In my experience, students stop their fieldwork for factors mentioned above and not because the feel that they have reached a saturation point. Undergraduates may only have a few days, weeks, or the amount of time they are enrolled in a methods course to be in the field. Students working on their master’s thesis usually have fairly tight restrictions too, although longer than undergraduates. Consequently, the information in the table below is geared more toward Ph.D. students. I suggest to graduate students that they plan on at least one year, and then adjust the expected time as they continue to develop their ideas for their dissertations. Throughout this book, I use examples from a small group of ethnographic dissertations, theses, undergraduate papers, and published articles. The time required for the fieldwork for some of these is shown in Table 6.1. Table 6.1 Examples of time in the field Researcher

Observation

Time in the Field

de Ruiter (2008)

patient handling practices

128 hours

Wynn (2006)

walking tour guides

138 hours

Page 16 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Holt (2015)

bondage/sadomasochism activities

150 hours

Gibeau (2008)

childbirth preparation classes

7 months

González, (2005)

Florida International University

8 months

Comfort (2002)

visitors at San Quentin

9 months

Snyder (2012)

high school wrestlers

10 months

Garrett-Peters (2009)

displaced workers

1 year

Copeland (2007)

Mayan neo-authoritarianism

14 months

Poole (2009)

refugee resettlement

15 months

Shay (2015)

online gaming-group

19 months

Fletcher (2010)

guided rafting trips

2 years

Fisher (2007)

a university business school

2 years

Chappell (2005)

recruit training at a police academy

3 years

Becker (2010)

alternative high school

3 years

Leaving the Field At some point, you will need to decide that it is time to end the fieldwork portion of your research. Although research related factors, such as those mentioned above, are key considerations, so too are more personal ones. Certainly, you should leave if the participants in the setting no longer want you there. Your safety may Page 17 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

be a factor in rare cases. If so, you should leave the field immediately. This is true whether you have just arrived in a setting or have been there for months. Do note that emotional discomfort is part and parcel of field research, so you may have to deal with that and not leave as a result, but don’t go beyond the point that it is harmful to your psychological well-being. Practical matters can influence the decision to leave the field. Simply having no more time to devote to field research is a major reason, particularly for you undergraduates. The wish to graduate by a particular deadline is a common reason to conclude fieldwork for graduate students. Running out of money is another reason field researchers leave the field—a condition that graduate students often experience. Health concerns, homesickness, and family demands can pull you out of the field. Regardless of what motivated the decision to terminate the fieldwork portion of your research, concern for the relationships formed in the setting should be primary while exiting. Think about not only your needs but also those of the individuals you have met in the setting. By now, you probably have become close friends with several people. Some may have come to depend upon your friendship and advice. One way of caring for these relationships is to discuss and plan your leaving with the participants. Make sure that you have done all the things that you said you would. Consider whether future contact with the participants is appropriate. A frequent reason for contact with the participants after leaving the field is to allow them to respond to a draft of the completed paper. This practice is called a member check; more about this later in this guide. When social activism is central to the research, as it often is for research using feminist and critical frameworks, relationships continue long after the fieldwork portion of the research is completed. Although you do not have to bid adieu to everyone, simply disappearing one day is not a good way to handle the exit from the field.

Conclusions Although the time in the field varies, fieldwork might not be the best methodology if you want to complete your undergraduate research for a campus competition, thesis, or dissertation quickly. When writing your proposal, do not underestimate the time it will take to prepare for the fieldwork, gain entrée, and establish relationships in the field. If you do, you may miss your deadline or leave before you should—and neither of these is good. Now let’s turn to what your activities will be after gaining entrée and before leaving. From the beginning to the end of your fieldwork, you will be observing and interacting with people in the field; these are the sine qua non of field research. Procedures for collecting detailed observations are presented in the next chapter. Page 18 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter Highlights • Gaining entrée is negotiated and renegotiated throughout the research process. • Formal and informal gatekeepers control access to a setting and the availability of data within the setting. • Key actors serve an important function in facilitating the research, but there are costs and benefits of working closely with them. • Arrival in a field is often filled with stress, fear, mistakes, and insecurities. • Trusting, reciprocal relationships are features of good field research and should be consider when entering and exiting the field.

Exercises 1. Pretend that your research goal is to understand the experiences of employees at the funeral home directed by Mr. Harold Burkhart. The eight employees engage in a range of activities, such as transporting bodies to the home, embalming the deceased, helping families plan funerals, and directing where families sit during services and at the grave site. You need permission to conduct your research. The formal gatekeeper requires a letter before he will decide whether he will grant you entrée. He wants to know, in detail, what type of research you plan to conduct, what your research question is, what activities you want to observe, what you plan to do to get the permission of the employees to participate, how you will or will not identify yourself and get permission from family members of the deceased, how you will respond if some employees do not want to take part in your research, how long you plan to stay, what your exit strategy might be, and if you have any particular concerns about the research. You might have to justify several of your answers because he will decide whether to grant you entrée solely on the details in your letter. Base your answers on what you have learned thus far and not just the information in this chapter. You should write your answers in the form of a formal letter. It should be sufficiently detailed to be at least two pages. Page 19 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

2. Some field researchers strive for nonhierarchical relationships with participants, and deep friendships can develop, as explained in this chapter. Researchers who adhere to some paradigms view the researcher and participants as partners in the research. Do you think there are any circumstances when it is appropriate for a field researcher to engage in a romantic relationship with a participant in the field? If the researcher was a regular member in the setting prior to the research, would that make a difference in whether a romance is acceptable? Would romantic attachments be appropriate if they started after the fieldwork portion of the research is completed? Defend your answers. 3. Go alone to a place that is radically different from places you have gone before and where you know no one in the setting. Where you go cannot be a variation of similar places you have been before. Restaurants, for example, do not meet the criteria for this exercise, nor do places with large crowds such as football games. In contrast, events such as a square dance, walking garden tour, or meeting of a local political party would be OK. A Web search for events being held in your area might yield ideas. This is not research, so you will not have to get formal informed consent or IRB approval, but you might need to explain your presence to formal and informal gatekeepers. Spend at least 20 minutes at the site. You must talk to at least five people, which can include gatekeepers if any. Describe where you went, with whom you spoke, what you said or did to initiate contact with them, and at least part of the conversations you had with others. Then explain how you felt about entering the field, approaching strangers, and participating in activities if you did. 4. Continue building the research proposal that you completed for previous chapters. Add how you would address issues discussed in this chapter.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Bondy, C. (2012). How did I get here? The social process of accessing field sites. Qualitative Research, 13, 578–590.

Page 20 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Cunliffe, A., & Alcadipani, R. (2016). The politics of access in fieldwork: Immersion, backstage dramas, and deception. Organizational Research Methods,19, 535–561. Monahan, T., & Fisher, J. (2015). Strategies for obtaining access to secretive or guarded organizations, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 44, 709–736.

Recommended Additional Reading Alcadipani, R., & Hodgson, D. (2009). By any means necessary? Ethnographic access, ethics and the critical researcher. Tamara Journal of Critical Organisation Inquiry, 7, 127–146. Blix, S., & Wettergren, Å. (2015). The emotional labour of gaining and maintaining access to the field. Qualitative Research, 15, 688–704. Reeves, C. (2010). A difficult negotiation: Fieldwork relations with gatekeepers. Qualitative Research, 10, 315–331. Reich, J. (2015). Old methods and new technologies: Social media and shifts in power in qualitative research. Ethnography, 16, 394–415.

• gatekeepers • hospitals

• Research questions • Gatekeepers • Access https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614 Page 21 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 7: Observations

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • compare structured, semi-structured, and unstructured observations; • compare the roles of a participant observer and nonparticipant observer, including why using these two labels are problematic; • articulate strategies that help ensure that observations are related to the research questions; • write a detailed descriptions of a setting, group, and activities; • explain how the unit of analysis affects what is observed; • apply techniques that can be used to improve observations; and • create an observation guide.

Yogi Berra, a gifted professional baseball player, once said, “You can observe a lot by watching.” Field researchers agree, at least with the spirit of the statement. Observing and interacting with people in the setting and participating in some of the activities under study are the most common ways field researchers collect data. The topic of this chapter is observations. Other ways of collecting data that I discuss in other chapters rely on observations, and I have chapters on how to analyze observational data. Consequently, this chapter is just an introduction to conducting observations, and you will learn more as you progress through the book. The emphasis in this chapter is on how and what types of things to observe. Later chapters discuss how the written accounts created while observing are analyzed using different techniques. The last chapter includes advice on how observational data, once analyzed, are presented in the final paper. You will have no reprieve from learning about observational data. Observing in a setting is a major form of data collection for field researchers. Both what you see and hear are considered observational data. To be a good observer you should avoid being like a voice-activated or motion-activated video recorder that turns on only when someone is speaking or moving. The idiom “not talking speaks volumes” applies here. No one talking is sometimes worth noting, and what seems like nonaction can be as important as action. Good data collection also requires the researcher to use other senses—touch,

Page 2 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

taste, and smell. Field researchers can obtain participants’ accounts by asking them during interviews about their experiences and perceptions. However, this is not the same as you seeing the activities with your own eyes and actively participating in the setting or group events. Of course, because researchers cannot always see everything in a setting, determine what is important to notice, and know the meanings of what they observe, even their observations based on firsthand experiences will be partial and filtered. Still, observations, interactions, and participation in the field are fundamental features of fieldwork. Observations, as with other parts of field research, require careful planning. When planning observations, field researchers consider several important questions (Flick, 2002): • Will the observations be covert or overt? • Will observations be conducted with only minimal interactions in the setting or with considerably more participation in the field? • Where will the observations occur? • Will the observations be structured or unstructured? • What will be the focus of the observations? (pp. 137–149) The answers to these questions might change during the time in the field. For example, unexpected ethical or safety concerns or modification of the research questions might arise that will require carefully made plans to be jettisoned. Nevertheless, you will need to have these questions at least tentatively answered before your field observations begin.

Should I Conduct Covert or Overt Observations? The first question you should answer when planning your observations is whether the observations will be covert or overt. This is one of the easier decisions to make when planning field research. The answer should almost always be “overt.” I hope I made clear in Chapter 2 that, for all intents and purposes, professional associations prohibit covert research. Institutional Review Boards have extremely strict limits on when it would be allowed; trying to get approval for covert, long-term engagement with people in a setting would have a low probability of success for a lot of students. Remember that research in clearly identified public places is not classified as covert research, but even in these places, deception is still unethical.

Page 3 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Of course, even a commitment to overt research is not easy to fulfill because it is difficult to inform everyone in a setting. As explained in Chapter 2, frequent participants in a setting are fairly easily informed about the research, but it is harder to inform people that they are being observed when they enter and leave the scene fairly quickly. Because of the ethical concerns attached to covert research, this chapter focuses only on observations made during overt research.

Should I Only Observe or Participate Fully When Observing? A second question you will face when you plan your observations involves whether you will participate in the setting, merely observe, or perhaps do a bit of both. At the extremes, the participant observer takes part in activities while observing; the nonparticipant observer does so with as minimal interaction as possible. A researcher studying how science is taught to third graders might sit at the back of the room and attentively observe without participating otherwise. Online researchers are nonparticipants if they observe by lurking, but if this is your plan, remember the ethical issues related to covert research and private/public online settings and plan accordingly (Garcia, Standlee, Bechkoff, & Cui, 2009). In contrast, someone who is already a member of the group being studied might engage fully in the setting while also wearing the metaphorical observer hat. It is not atypical for researchers to locate themselves between the two. Most likely you will travel back and forth between the two ends of the continuum. The decision about how much to participate can be affected by the paradigm. A researcher who employs a post-positivist paradigm might be more inclined than researchers using other paradigms toward merely observing. Your research design, research questions, and the phenomenon of interest also will have a large influence on the level of participation. For example, a researcher who engages in an ethnographic study is more likely to participate in a setting than one conducting evaluation research. One of the traditional ways of labeling the level of involvement is determining where you fit in a four-celled table; see Table 7.1 (Gold, 1969; Junker, 1960). The primary role researchers play at any point in their research determines their location within the table.Even though the below is a classic classification system and useful as a heuristic device, it is difficult to use when applied to real research situations. Far too much ambiguity and fluidity exist in what is considered what during any point in the research. Behaviors can change almost moment to moment. Further, if you participate in the field by interacting with those in the setting but never participate in the central activity under study, which trumps?

Page 4 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Table 7.1 Researcher’s role as observer and participant Observer

Participant

complete observer

observer as participant

participant as observer

complete participant

The classification system also fails to capture the role of online researchers. Walstrom (2004) argues that the term participant-experiencer is more accurate than participant-observer. The researcher is not able to directly observe the participants in an online support group, but he or she can experience what it is like to be a member of the group through reading and making posts. Another problem with most classification systems is that what researchers think they are doing does not necessarily mesh with how people in the setting interpret their activities (Warren & Karner, 2005). For example, as part of his research on the police, Van Maanen (1988) attended the police academy, but because he was never a police officer, he could not officially participate in law enforcement activities. Yet some of the officers gave him responsibilities that only police officers should perform. The officers expected him to “watch their backs,” as other officers would have done. Also, members of the public often assumed he was a plain-clothes detective (Van Maanen, 1988). Field researchers observe people’s behaviors in ways that require interaction and participation at least at some level for at least some of the time, so situating yourself on the observation/participation continuum is nearly impossible for most researchers. I suggest you describe in detail what you did or did not do at various times and forgo assigning a label to your role. If you have to select one label, then choose based on your best judgment of how much your involvement might have affected what you observed. One of the advantages of participating in the setting is that it can improve your observations. Participating can allow researchers to observe, in minute detail, things in places that might not be possible without participating. You also can observe your own behavior while experiencing an activity first hand, which can provide insight. In this case, you need to be careful not to assume your experiences are the same as that of others. A danger of participating in major activities while observing is that it can be difficult to both observe and participate. Also, some activities are best not participated in, such as illegal, unethical, and harmful ones. Still,

Page 5 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

I think that participating, when possible, generally leads to better observations, and observing and talking to people in the setting are just short of essential for field research.

Where Should I Observe? A third decision you will make involves where the observations will be conducted. Setting aside, for now, ethical and sampling issues, the answer to this question is both simple and complex. Your research proposal must explain where the research will take place and why it was chosen. Although the location may change over the course of your research, you still need to have an idea about where to begin. Observations might take place on a rooftop from which pigeons are flown as a hobby, at the monthly meetings of the local Democratic party, at an RV park, at places where vampires drink each others’ blood, or at other locations where the setting of interest has reasonably clear boundaries that limit where observations will occur. However, the boundaries of a setting are not always distinct; in fact, when a social group crosses many settings, the lines of demarcation for observing can be highly amorphous. A beginning researcher is often enthusiastic and wants to extend the area of observations beyond what is needed for the central focus of the research. In some cases, observing in places other than where first planned is good, but things can spread too far if limits are not set. For example, when Duneier (1999) studied the men and women who were street vendors on Sixth Avenue, his observations were not confined to one place. He spent a great deal of time with them while they sold books and magazines, and even did this himself. He also observed the men as they salvaged for magazines. However, he drew a limit and did not observe the men when they were doing things in other places that were mostly unrelated to their activities as street vendors. Ask yourself whether observing at a place not originally planned could help answer your research questions. If no, then stay put. If yes, ask yourself whether the additional information is worth the effort. Not all places or people who could be helpful need to be included.

Page 6 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Photos 7.1–7.3 Observations from different places and different distances tell a different story. Figure 6

Source: Photos courtesy of the author. Think about a camera lens that can take everything from a panoramic view to a close up. Take some observations using a wide-angle lens and then continue to zoom in for increasing details. If you only observe using one lens, you might miss something important. Also, move around while you observe, unlike when taking photos while you are standing in the same spot.

Should My Observations Be Structured or Unstructured? Fourth, you must decide if your observations will be structured, unstructured, or a combination of both.

Structured and Semi-Structured Observations For structured observations, and to a lesser degree for semi-structured observations, the focus, time, and location of the observations are predetermined. Sampling procedures might be used to determine which people and specific events are to be observed. A highly structured approach to observations usually includes an ob-

Page 7 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

servation guide. If you engage in structured observations, remember to not ignore important events outside the realm of your guide; however, concentrate on predetermined areas of interest during the observations. The format, purpose, and structure of observation guides vary. As shown in Table 7.2, Wilson (2005) created a semi-structured guide for observing special and general education co-teachers in a general education class that included students with disabilities. Wilson’s guide directed the observations in three major domains of interest—meaningful roles for each teacher, strategies of each student, and indicators of success. Within each domain, a series of questions guided the observations. Wilson knew in advance what and how many classes would be observed. A guide of the length of Wilson’s would primarily serve to keep the observations focused on her three key interests, without expectations that she will have notes for each question during any given observational period. Her observations would be written on something other than her guide. For Drake’s (2010) study of how mothers receive support through a biblically based perinatal loss support group, she designed her guide such that she could write her observations on it during each meeting of the support group. Field research requires that activities related to the research be carefully documented and shared with those who will read the work so that they will be in a better position to judge the quality of the research. In keeping with this imperative, Drake included multiple samples of completed guides in an appendix of her dissertation.

Unstructured Observations Unstructured observations, in contrast, are more flexible. Field researchers engage in more unstructured observations than structured ones. That is, they observe whatever they think is important, and then some. This does not mean that unstructured observations are haphazard with no forethought. For example, you might make sure that you observe at different times and locations for some fieldwork. The importance of this should be obvious; making donuts early in the morning before the store opens is different from the activities of employees selling the donuts at the end of the day. For your unstructured observations, you are less likely to have an observation guide, concentrating instead on what is deemed relevant as events unfold. You can mix the types of observations throughout your time in the field. Even for unstructured observations you can have a general guide, even if only in your head, and observations become focused on particular targets over time. Page 8 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Table 7.2 Wilson’s semistructured observation guide How can I determine if a co-taught collaborative inclusion class is being taught as effectively as possible? Questions I should be asking myself as I observe . . .

I. The Basics: Meaningful Roles for Each Teacher

1. Can the role of each teacher be defined at any given point in the lesson? 2. Is each role meaningful? Does each role enhance the learning process? 3. Do the teachers vary their roles during the course of the lesson? 4. Is each teacher well suited to the role(s) he or she is assuming? 5. Are both teachers comfortable with process AND content? 6. Is the special education teacher working with all students?

II. Strategies to Promote Success for ALL Students

1. What evidence is there that teachers engaged in co-planning the lesson? 2. Are the teachers focusing on process as well as content? Are they reinforcing important skills? 3. Are directions clear? 4. What strategies/modifications are being employed to assist struggling students? 5. What adaptations were made to materials in order to help struggling students complete tasks? 6. What strategies are being used to actively engage students? 7. How are students being grouped? Does it fit the task? Is it purposeful? 8. What reinforcement strategies are being employed?

III. Evidence of Success

1. Are struggling students answering/asking questions? 2. Are students engaged in meaningful work throughout the period?

Page 9 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

3. How are teachers assessing the learning of each student? 4. What evidence is there that all students have been appropriately challenged?

Source: From Wilson, G., (2005). This doesn’t look familiar! A supervisor’s guide for observing co-teachers. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40, 273. Reprinted with permission of Pro-Ed, Inc.

What Should I Observe? A crucial question when planning observations is, What should I observe? In the early days of fieldwork, the answer to this question is everything—an answer that is somewhat overstated. Because the task can be so daunting, you might be tempted into selectivity. Remember, however, that assuming you will know what is important to observe and what can be ignored is risky, particularly at the beginning of your research. Always err on the side of documenting more than what you think is relevant. But also guard against going absurdly overboard—I provide more guidance on this below. As the research questions and interest in a setting become clearer, researchers narrow their focus. Toward the end of the time in the field, you might engage in highly selective observations, although I encourage you to remain open to other possibly salient events (Flick, 2002, p. 140). The general categories of observations include the setting, people, and behaviors. Talking to people about things that cannot be directly observed, such as beliefs, values, meanings, justifications, feelings, and so on are typically equally important. The analysis of the observational data should be occurring throughout the data collection process because so often preliminary analysis identifies areas that need further observations. Regardless of the foci of your observations, it is extremely important that you write down what you are observing because just observing without having a written account will not result in a rigorous analysis—more on this in another chapter. I suggest that you limit your interactions and observations to no more than 3-hour blocks. It is difficult to pay close attention for more time than that, and we can retain only a limited amount of detailed information. This will vary for different researchers. If you feel yourself losing focus after only 2 hours of observation, then that should be your limit. Ethnographers may find themselves in situations where observations from dawn to dusk

Page 10 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

are ideal. Another piece of advice for improving the quality of your observations is to ask yourself questions. If you are seeking a stolen Picasso painting, your broad question is, Where is it? In an effort to answer this question, you would look carefully in places that clues suggest; you would not look everywhere for it. In the same way, if you ask this question, Is this related to my research? you are more likely to concentrate on the task at hand rather than being distracted when observing. The observations and insights that will occur from focused attention will be superior to those gleaned from general observations. This is particularly the case when you use your research question to guide your observations. The advice to ask questions does not preclude observing in others ways; it is simply a mechanism to help.

Observations of the Setting One of the first things to observe is the setting. In addition to trying to understand what occurs in a setting, you need a detailed description of the place itself. Fieldwork is done in a place, whether real or virtual. Virtual researchers can have a difficult time determining what counts as the place to observe. Given the fundamental importance of the setting in which the research is being done, an easy way to start your observations is paying close attention to the field so that you will have detailed descriptions that you may use in your analysis and include in your final paper. Ultimately, it may be the case that social implications of the physical surroundings, rather than the surroundings themselves, are the primary interest of the field researcher, but you still have to know the setting before inferences about its effect can be drawn. Physical surroundings are less apt to change than the participants, but your reactions to the setting can. It is important to record your early impressions before elements become so familiar you cease to notice them. You still will need to watch for changes in the setting that might occur over time. Table 7.3 Examples of characteristics to be observed Characteristics of Settings

Size

Cleanliness

Temperature

Texture

Sounds

Weather

Page 11 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Location

Objects

Speed

Lighting

Smells

Time

Color

Taste

Air

Race

Hair

Teeth

Class

Clothes

Skin

Gender

Glasses

Intonation

Age

Jewelry

Facial expression

Body language

Physical disabilities

Weight and height

Movement speed

Dialect

Ethnicity

Characteristics of People

When observing the setting, ask yourself questions about its characteristics. For example, What objects are in the room? In Table 7.3, I list a series of items that you can use as the basis of questions about the setting. Not everything in this list will be relevant to each setting, and the list will have to be modified for your research setting, particularly studies in the virtual field. All the details about a setting will not be used, but which ones end up on the cutting room floor is not always clear in advance, so write down as many of these as you can. Ask yourself, How big is the room? How many females and how many males are in the room? How close is the room to the bathrooms? What things are on the tables? What are people sitting on? What colors are the chairs? What objects are near the plastic chairs and what ones by the upholstered chairs? and so on and so on. The answers to many of these questions will later be combined into a detailed description that might be used in the final paper.

Observations of People You will spend a major portion of your time as a field researcher observing the people in the setting, witnessing their interactions with each other and the physical world, and joining them in a variety of activities. Although

Page 12 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

each setting might contain a core set of participants, your observations might need to include nonmembers who might only briefly enter the scene or interact with the regular participants. Observations of the physical characteristics of people are fairly easily turned into descriptions of them. These are often included in the final paper because doing so recognizes that real people are the sources of the data, and the descriptions might also be useful for analytical reasons. The physical descriptions of people are important, but they typically do not answer your research questions. Thus, do not let observations of the people and setting take precedence over the more difficult, but more analytically important parts of your observations. At the same time, it might very well be the physical descriptions, such as people’s weight that are central to understanding what is occurring in a setting. The key is to figure out what is important and what is not. Items that can be used to generate questions for focusing your attention on small details are in Table 7.3. The questions that result are easy to construct. For example, What is the condition of the person’s teeth? What kind of shoes is he wearing? Be aware that your observations might not be accurate. During my travels in Nicaragua, I consistently thought the children were younger and adults older than they actually were. Verification of some observations by participants in the setting can be useful in some cases.

Observations of Activities in the Setting Observing activities is more difficult than observing people and places. Most observations are of behaviors: who arrives, who goes, and who does what with whom, when, and how. What is the response of one person’s behavior to another’s? Routine activities, special events, random behaviors, and unanticipated happenings are carefully observed and documented. Once again, asking questions can help you observe. One way that you might consider developing questions to keep you focused during your observations is to use the categories suggested by Spradley. Spradley (1980) says that there are nine features of almost all social situations: 1. Spaces: the physical places 2. Objects: the physical things that are present 3. Actors: the people involved 4. Act: single actions that people do Page 13 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

5. Activity: a set of related acts people do 6. Event: a set of related activities that people carry out 7. Time: the sequencing that takes place over time 8. Goals: the things people are trying to accomplish 9. Feelings: the emotions felt and expressed. (p. 78) Building on Spradley’s (1980) suggestions, you would ask, What event is occurring? What is one activity that is part of the event? What is one act that contributes to this activity? What is another act that contributes to this activity? In what order are the acts occurring? Who is engaging in each act? What are the observers of the acts or activities doing? Observations should also focus on the intersection of these features. For example, you should be able to describe how participants change over time, which people are involved in activities, what goals are associated with various events, and so on (p. 83). Observing using these categories seems daunting, and it is. However, don’t stress about what is considered an act versus an activity or event. The purpose of having these categories is to help you observe how things are related to form a big picture, rather than treating each thing someone does as isolated behavior not connected to what else is occurring. You might find the nine categories useful when analyzing the data from your observations and less so if you are frantically trying to organize your observations into the different categories while observing. Some of you might remember these few lines of a poem by Rudyard Kipling (1999) you may have heard in your youth: I keep six honest serving-men (They taught me all I knew) Their names are What and Why and When And How and Where and Who. It could be useful for the rest of you to memorize it so that you will remember when observing to ask the basic reporters’ questions referenced in the poem: what, why, when, how, where, and who. What happened? What led to the situation? Why did it happen? Who acted and what was said? What preceded this event? How were things resolved? What was the level of emotional engagement in the interaction? What were the consequences of this activity or interaction? (Flick, 2002, p. 186) Who was affected by whom and to what effect? Page 14 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

These same questions should be asked when analyzing your data.

Research Questions The most important question to ask when observing is, Is this related to my research question? Most of what you see will not be. If you filter your observations through this question, it will help keep you from writing down one hundred pages of observation that are worthless. You may have hundreds of pages of observations that are potentially relevant. Why have more? Observations should be related to your purpose, research question, sensitizing concepts, and other things closely connected to your research. Although it is logical that this should be case, it is easy to get lost. With all that might be going on, you can feel overwhelmed and easily distracted from your main task. Observing is also fun. Some of you already have the skills to be good observers, and you all will soon. Still, I want to remind you again to always keep an eye out for observations related to your question; it is awfully easy to get totally captivated by shiny objects that are not relevant for your research. It is often the case that you will need to “observe” things you cannot see. If we are interested in the culture of a particular setting, then we would be interested in the norms, values, beliefs, subcultures, roles, role conflict and strain, social control, and so on. We cannot see these things, but we can observe behavior from which we infer their existence. Thus, during observations you would ask, Could this be an example of role strain? If you think this might be the case, then you might observe an action more carefully and follow up with questions. You would observe specifically looking for examples of role strain. You would engage in targeted observations based on the concepts of interest to you. What really enhances your observational powers is having clear conceptual definitions of the concepts you are using and being grounded in the research and theories that are related to the research questions. For example, one of González’s (2005) research questions included identifying successful and nonsuccessful civic engagement practices at Florida International University. One of his observational screening questions could be, Is this an example of civic engagement? His observations were enhanced because his conceptual definition of civic engagement included several components, such as socialization strategies that allow for personal connections, possibly leading him to ask questions during his observations such as What is being done to try

Page 15 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

and develop personal connections? Who is involved in it? You have a better chance of finding the conceptual prize you seek if you know what it looks like, and the conceptual definitions of the concepts in the research questions are an important part of that.

Unit of Analysis When observing, it is important to keep the unit of analysis in mind. The unit of analysis is who or what is being studied, which is not the same as what you want to know about them. The following are examples of different units of analysis: • individuals (recent graduates) • social groups (intramural soccer team) • organizations (the local Red Cross) • families (of children with a particular disease) • rituals (wedding ceremonies) • artifacts (graffiti) Once the unit of analysis is determined, observe accordingly. If I were seeking answers to Venkatesh’s (2008) research question—How a gang dealt with all the conflicts and problems that arise while running a business that was entirely illegal—I would do so using the gang as the unit of analysis. The question is about the gang as a social group and is not about behavior of individual gang members, although the two are obviously related. Information about the gang would be obtained by talking to and watching individuals. Still, I would not focus my observations on individual level problems—separation from spouses, being beaten by parents, health concerns—nor on how gang members individually responded to these. Rather, I would specifically look for gang problems—the logistics of obtaining and selling drugs, interactions with nongang members in the neighborhood, police and the criminal justice system, and competition from other gangs. Acts by individuals related to each problem would be observed, but then these would be used to form a bigger picture that showed the collective responses of the gang. A clear idea of the unit of analysis can prevent you from targeting the wrong one. Keeping the unit of analysis in mind is equally important during interviews and in the analysis phase.

Page 16 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Ethics As with the other aspects of field research, you need to be aware of potential ethical breeches. Private behaviors, places, or things within a setting can still be off limits even if you have been given permission to be in a place. For example, if you are observing the secretarial staff in a department and have been told that you could have “full access,” common sense tells you that it is unacceptable for you to go through their desk drawers. What is and is not off limits is not always as clear in research situations as in this example. Thus, you have to reflect carefully so as to avoid observing in private places within a larger space to which you have been given access. Informed consent forms typically state that participation in a study will involve no more than “minimal risk,” so observations should be done in a way that does not exceed that. If your observation is causing distress, then stop. Always be cognizant of other ethical issues discussed in this guide and elsewhere.

Conclusions I end this introduction to collecting observational data by adding and reviewing advice I think helps improve the quality of such data: • Spend a lot of time in the setting and with the people of interest. • Develop good relationships, which can lead to better observations. • Observe more than you think you will need, but remember that not everything is important. • Observe what is going on behind the scenes and not just what is center stage. • Keep your research questions in the forefront of your mind as you observe. • Ask yourself and others questions. • Participate in the setting. • Observe small details, not just those more easily noticed. • Practice mindfulness, which is active, open attention on the present. • Avoid using your cell phone because it prevents you being in the moment. This last piece of advice might be the hardest of all my suggestions for you to follow, but it ranks right up there with the most important. Because you use your phone while simultaneously doing other things, you might think it will not interfere with your observations. It will. All the traffic accidents that happen when people are using their phones attest to the fact that phones are distracting. Please put your phones away when observPage 17 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ing and get out your field journal that you will use to document your observations. Later, I will modify my view of phones in the field and talk about how they can be a useful tool for collecting data. For now, I am turning your attention to interviews, another major way field researchers collect data.

Chapter Highlights • Researchers need to decide where to observe and what objects, people, and events should be included in the observations. • Observations can be highly structured, with observation guides and predetermined schedules for observing, semi-structured, and unstructured. • Field researchers use all their senses during observations. • Field researchers observe the physical surroundings, the people, and the verbal and nonverbal behaviors that occur in a setting. • Asking questions of yourself when observing can lead to particularly useful data. • Increasingly over time, the research questions and theoretical concepts determine the focus of the observations. • Knowing the unit of analysis can help prevent focusing your attention on the wrong things.

Exercises 1. Go to a public setting of your choice. Write a research question that is suitable for this setting. The research question can be broad, simple, or narrow, but it needs to start with how or what. Conduct unstructured observations for 30 minutes. Use multiple senses during the interview—hearing, smell, touch, and so on. Take notes while you are observing. Type your notes and add anything else you remember into your notes. Turn in your typed notes with the rest of this exercise. Write a detailed answer to your research question. Explain how you observed and your reactions to conducting unstructured observations. Page 18 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

2. Go to a public setting of your choice. Write a research question that is suitable for this setting. The research question can be broad, simple, or narrow, but it needs to start with how or what. Create a structured observation guide before you go to the setting. Observe for 30 minutes using the guide. Remember to include categories in your guide related to your research question. Type your notes and add anything you remember. Turn in your typed notes with this exercise. Write a detailed answer to your research question. Explain how you observed and your reactions to conducting structured observations. Discuss the pros and cons of using a structured observation guide. You should not use the same setting for Exercises 1 and 2 3. Have a person pose for you for 10 minutes. They can choose to sit or stand, but otherwise they should not move away from where they are. Take detailed notes about the person; the categories in Table 7.3 can be a useful starting point. Type your notes and turn them in with this exercise. Write a highly detailed description of the person based on your observations. Your description has to be at least one, double-spaced page. 4. Pick a topic. Write three research questions related to it with each one having a unit of analysis that is different from the others. 5. Select a YouTube video. It must be at least 3 minutes long. Observe all the features of the video—setting, people, what is being said and done, and so on. Watch the video as many times as you need to obtain your data. Take notes and type them afterward adding anything you can remember. Turn the notes in with this assignment. Write a detailed description of the video. Explain how you observed, how many times you watched, and your reactions to observing the video. 6. Continue developing the proposal that you have written for the other chapters. Explain in detail your plans for observing.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Harvey, S., Olórtegui, M., Leontsini, E., & Winch, P. (2009). “They’ll change what they’re doing if they know that you’re watching”: Measuring reactivity in health behavior because of an observer’s presPage 19 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ence—A case from the Peruvian Amazon. Field Methods, 21, 3–25. Johnson, J., Avenarius, C., & Weatherford, J. (2006). The active participant-observer: Applying social role analysis to participant observation. Field Methods, 18, 111–134. Repp, A., Nieminen, G., Olinger, E. & Brusca, R. (1988). Direct observation: Factors affecting the accuracy of observers. Exceptional Children, 55, 29–36.

Recommended Additional Reading Angrosino, M. (2007). Naturalistic observation. New York, NY: Routledge DeWalt, K. & DeWalt, B. (2011). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press Mulhall, A. (2003). In the field: Notes on observation in qualitative research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41, 306–313. Musante, (DeWalt) K. (2015). Participant observation. In H. R. Bernard & C. Gravlee (Eds.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (2nd ed., pp. 251–292). Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield.

• observer

• Observational research • Fieldwork • Participant observation https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 20 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 8: Interviews

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • compare structured, unstructured, and semi-structured interviews; • compare the costs and benefits of face-to-face with alternative ways of interviewing; • write questions that follow the rules of good question construction; • create an interview guide; and • conduct an interview.

The play, “She Stoops to Conquer,” written by Oliver Goldsmith (1771), contains the proverb, “Ask me no questions, and I’ll tell you no fibs.” What a nightmare this conjures up for the field researcher. Although it is unreasonable to expect people to tell you the whole truth and nothing but the truth, you certainly hope they won’t fib in response to your questions, and you are going to ask questions! In fact, sometimes you might want to formally interview the participants. The focus of this chapter is on interviews as a form of data collection. Interviews conducted for the purposes of field research require careful planning and practice, as well as the ability to adapt to changing settings and situations. Please keep in mind that the advice I offer in this chapter might not apply to countries other than the United States. As Kvale (1996) reminds us, “In other cultures, different norms may hold for interactions with strangers concerning initiative, directness, openness, and the like” (p. 127). Even within the United States, the advice offered here might have to be modified depending on the individuals you choose to study. For example, interviewing elites, people in high status positions, requires different approaches. Field researchers generally conduct face-to-face interviews; virtual ethnographers are less likely to be in the same physical location as the interviewee. Still, field researchers sometimes conduct interviews via telephone, Skype, or different forms of social media, and virtual researchers might meet interviewees. Thus, this chapter will discuss face-to-face interviews as well as interviews using digital devices.

Page 2 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Types of Interviews The three types of interviews most often used by field researchers are unstructured, structured, and semistructured. A fourth type, not as often used by field researchers, is a focus group interview.

Unstructured Interviews Unstructured interviews or informal interviews are similar to conversations but not quite the same thing. Researchers are often given the advice to make an unstructured interview like a conversation, and certainly one can morph into the other. One distinction is that during an unstructured interview, interaction between the participant and the field researcher targets primarily the interests of the researcher; this is not necessarily the case during a conversation. Unstructured interviews involve little standardization. The questions you ask during multiple interviews will rarely be the same. You might ask one participant a single question and ask another person many questions. Some participants might be interviewed several times, others only once, and some participants not at all. Sometimes an unstructured interview begins between just the field researcher and one participant, but then others join in. The interviews can last from a few minutes to a few hours—and rarely will you be able to estimate the time in advance. You might have your best unstructured interviews when you are walking or riding with a participant. Rather than being planned, an unstructured interview evolves. During an unstructured interview, give the interviewee fairly free rein to talk about anything related to the broad interests of you, as long as he or she does not stray too long or too far from the research topic. Because researchers often come to understand what is useful to them only during analysis, letting your participants have wide latitude can result in very fruitful caches of information. An unstructured interview can be a reciprocal process, with you and the participant engaging in a dialogue. In such a situation, you might be expected not only to ask questions, but also to answer them, sharing feelings, impressions, ideas, and information.

Structured Interviews Structured interviews also play important roles in field research. Unlike unstructured interviews, the rePage 3 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

searcher conducting a structured interview asks, in specific order, precise questions of interest to him or her. The list of all the questions and the order in which they appear is called an interview guide. During a structured interview, take care to ask each question of each interviewee in the same way. If you were conducting the interview, you would determine the questions, control their order and pace, and try to keep the respondent on track; otherwise, you would not actively participate. Additionally, structured interviews usually are scheduled for a particular time and place and are expected to take a specific amount of time. People can usually stay engaged in a 90-minute interview. When I was trained to conduct structured interviews, I was given a series of “don’ts”—for example: don’t deviate from the sequence of questions or question wording; don’t clarify questions; don’t give an answer if people ask your opinion (Fontana & Frey, 1994, p. 362). Despite my best efforts, I found following these rules nearly impossible. Even during structured interviews, you cannot simply dissociate yourself and forget that maintaining good social relationships plays an important role. Interviewees often ask, Is that all right? or say, I hope I’m giving you what you want. Reassuring them about their helpfulness and encouraging them to answer however they want is important. Just because interviews are structured does not mean that as interviewers we must become machines that simply ask questions and record responses.

Semi-Structured Interviews Field researchers who want some level of flexibility regarding how an interview is administered but who wish to maintain some structure over its parameters might prefer a semi-structured interview. You would use an interview guide with specific questions that are organized by topics, but questions are not necessarily asked in a specified order. The flow of the interview, rather than the order in a guide, determines when and how a question is asked. Depending on how the interview progresses, a question previously planned for late in the interview might be asked earlier. Additionally, interviewees often answer a question before it is asked. If so, the question is skipped. Think of a semi-structured interview guide as a living document rather than a static entity. Semi-structured interviews are usually scheduled in advance and expected to last a certain amount of time, and the less restrictive nature of them allows for longer interviews. Etzler (personal communication, January 15, 2016) described her interviews in this way: “As a licensed, experienced psychotherapist, building Page 4 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

rapport, asking opened-ended questions, and following the lead of clients was a given mindset.” However, in contrast to 50-minute, multiple sessions she was used to, Etzler’s interviews were one-shot, 2- to 3-hour sessions, in which she had to navigate between questions that she wanted answered and the more free-flowing exploration that allowed the couples to direct the conversation.

Focus Groups Occasionally, researchers find a focus group useful. There are multiple types and structures of focus groups. In this discussion, I concentrate on a type of focus group that is different from interviewing individual participants that are in the same place at the same time. My discussion is based on interviewing the group. I like the name focus group because it highlights two things. First, a focus group prioritizes—focuses on—just a few questions. Second, the emphasis is on interviewing the group and not the individuals in the group. Here’s what a focus group should not be. “Let’s start with you Nicole. What do you think is the major problem on your campus.” Nicole answers. “Graham, what do you think it is.” Graham answers. With this format, each person’s answers will tend to become more like the ones before them as time goes on: “As Nicole already said . . .” or “Building off of what Nicole said . . .” An interview that prioritizes the group would be something like this. “I’d like you to talk to each other and decide what you think are the two most important problems on your campus. I am just going to sit back and listen while you talk.” During this discussion you will hear individual positions, but when done well, the result will be the group’s shared, collective view. This is good because ideally you will hold multiple focus groups, and you will analyze group differences and similarities. A focus group typically has from around 6 to 10 members. An important feature of a focus group is that the participants be homogeneous; that is, they are the same on some important characteristics, such as gender or job category. You will learn what the females on the campus think and then from another focus group the males’ views. When members are considerably different, the higher status, the sickest person, or the most experienced will predominant. For example, it is difficult for a faculty member to say in a focus group that the biggest problem is the administration if the dean is part of the group. Thus, an important problem might not be mentioned. It is best if the members of the group do not know each other. How many focus groups you have will depend upon what you think are the salient characteristic for your research question. If you think political party and gender are important then what kinds of groups will you have? Page 5 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

One for males, one for females, one for Democrats, one for Independents and so on, or will you have one for female Democrats, one for male Democrats and so on? They answer is, It depends. Based on your research questions, which configuration of groups is most relevant? The less that you are involved in the discussion the better. You might have to jump in occasionally, but wait a long time before you leap because otherwise they will start talking to you. A word of warning: It is smart to tape record the group, but transcription can be a nightmare. You will want to use pseudonyms so keeping track of who said what is difficult. Interviewing a small group of people at the same time can be an efficient way to conduct several interviews at once, but remember this is something different than the kind of focus group where you are much less involved.

Selecting the Appropriate Type of Interview Paradigms, research designs, research questions, purpose of research, analytic strategy, and a host of other factors all help determine which interview type you should use. One of the most contentious issues during proposal defenses can be what type of interview the graduate student should use. If the student has not clearly established the paradigm, the research questions, and the analytical strategy, or if a committee member refuses to accept any paradigm other than his or her own, an academic struggle ensues. One professor might ask, How are you going to compare answers if not everyone is asked the same question? In contrast, the question from another could be, How can you say that your work is based on the perspectives of the participants in the setting when you limit what can be said by using such highly structured questions? If you are conducting field research for a graduate degree, ask yourself how you would answer these two questions before you select the type of interview you will use. If you are conducting interviews as an undergraduate student, your worries in this arena are fewer; your instructor can help guide you toward the most appropriate interview type. Choosing the type of interview you conduct is simply the first step in the process. Good interviews require practice and training (Roulston, deMarrais, & Lewis, 2003). Before undertaking your first real interview, enlist your friends, roommates, family members, or neighbors as interviewees. Seek feedback. Then hold a pilot interview. A pilot interview is an interview conducted with someone who is part of the study and is done, in part, to receive feedback about the interview itself. Although memorizing your questions is not necessary, you Page 6 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

should be able to ask them with only minimal glancing at the interview guide. Remember that the more you make eye contact with the respondent, the better. Rather than becoming obsessed with your next question, try to engage with the person across from you.

Question Construction Like research questions, interview questions often begin with what and how: What happened after you left the classroom? How did you find out? How do you decide who gets to attend? What was the most important reason for wanting to leave? How did you feel when that happened? “What” and “how” questions are often easy and interesting for the participants to answer and frequently are useful for eliciting detailed responses (Kvale, 1996). These types of questions are open-ended questions because they allow the respondent the opportunity to answer them in detail. A close-ended question is one in which single words or short answers are desired: Where were you living at the time? and Did you call the police about your car? The query words “have” and “do” tend to elicit a short answer, often “yes” or “no.” At the same time, these words can be used for open-ended questions when the respondent knows you want more than the minimum answer. A question starting with why is acceptable as long as it is not asked in a way that gets interpreted as the judgmental question, Why in the world would you do that?!? Even though you might be seeking “stories” from respondents, it is less contrived to ask them to give an example rather than to use the prompt, Tell me a story about . . . When creating questions, researchers also think about how much they want to constrain the range of possible answers (Flick, 2002). Compare the leeway the respondent would have with these three questions: What was your childhood like? What do you recall about moving to Ellicott City? What was more important to you at the time, the approval of your peers or of your parents? Interviews usually move from questions that impose few restrictions on the respondent to ones that require specific information (Flick, 2002). Probes are another type of question often used by interviewers. Probe questions can encourage the interviewee to expand on an answer, to say more in response to the original question. A common probe question is, Can you tell me more about that? Probes can be used to ask the interviewee to clarify something the interviewer does not understand. I am unsure what you mean; can you say it another way? Probes are used to

Page 7 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

redirect the conversation if it gets off track: That was really useful. I would like to change the subject just a bit and ask about something else. Probes are included on structured interview guides, so they should be as carefully planned as the original questions (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). A follow-up question is not preplanned, but the astute researcher hears the need for it. Although such questions are used more sparingly in structured interviews, active engagement allows researchers to ask follow-up questions that might end up being as important as an original question on the interview guide. A follow-up question that generated useful information might be added to the interview guide for subsequent interviews. Because of the importance of questions to a successful interview, there is no end to the useful advice that can be offered related to them. Good interview questions should be short and easily understood and should not contain multiple parts. Shorter questions lead to longer answers. You know you are in trouble during an interview if your questions are longer than the answers (Kvale, 1996). However, very short questions can also be vague, which can in turn lead to poor responses. Avoid the urge to end a question with the phrase “if so, why?” Let the respondent answer one question at a time. Any question that has the word and in it should be reviewed to ensure that it is not a “two-parter.” What influenced your decision to adopt a cat from the shelter and was it as rewarding as you expected? The second half of the question isn’t all that clear, but it is made worse by trying to combine it with the first part. Another common problem is suggesting answers as part of the question. How did you feel when you learned the news that you were accepted into college? Were you excited? A little scared? Worried about being so far from home? The probability is high that the answer will contain the words excited, scared, or worried, which reduces the chances of you learning anything other than one of those three. Avoid beginning an interview with demographic questions, such as How old are you? These might seem like safe questions for beginning an interview, but they are uninteresting to the respondent and lead to short answers—a pattern that then might be continued through the remainder of the interview. Finally, remember that one way to help determine if you have good questions is to practice asking them and getting feedback.

Interview Questions and Research Questions The most important advice I can offer you is to make sure your interview questions are linked to your research questions. A carefully crafted interview can be worthless if you fail to ask yourself and answer “yes” to one important question: Will the interview questions elicit useful information for answering my research questions? Page 8 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

When creating interview questions, look at each research question and design corresponding questions. If you find yourself wanting to ask a question just because the answer could be interesting, then you might be heading into trouble. Indeed, you can ask all sorts of things, but without a clear link to your research questions, it is a waste of your time and, more importantly, a waste of the respondent’s time. To help ensure that your research questions and interview questions are linked, engage in one last activity before considering your interview guide final. Look again at each interview question to see if is related to at least one of your research questions. I routinely have graduate students engage in this activity. After one such session, a student realized she had three questions nicely linked to her research questions and 10 more that were unrelated. After this exercise, she created a new interview guide. The lack of congruence between interview questions and research questions is common on early drafts, so I strongly recommend actively checking multiple times for correspondence before conducting any interviews. Unlike research questions, interview questions should not contain academic jargon—phrases like hegemonic masculinity, social capital, and alienation that sound right at home in the former are definitely not in the latter. Thus, you probably will not ask research questions directly during the interview. You usually have to ask several questions that address some aspect of the research question. Recall the discussion of unit of analysis in the last chapter: individuals, groups, organizations, families, rituals, and artifacts. Make sure that you are asking the right questions for your interest. If you are studying a small business to determine how it responds to sexual harassment, your questions should relate to the business. The question, How did you deal with working with Dan after the harassment? could be potentially important as a preface to other questions. However, a question consistent with business as your unit of analysis would be: Were the procedures followed that you were led to believe would help you? How many questions should be asked? The answer to that is related to the number of research questions. For each research question, a rough ballpark figure is 4 or 5 or 10 questions. It is difficult to say what the right number is. If you end up with 25 questions, then review them carefully. A few, broad, open-ended questions will probably get you better information than a lot of questions that are focused more narrowly. Ten questions on an interview guide does not mean only 10 will ultimately be asked, as you’ll have follow-up questions that occur to you during the interview. If you have more questions than you need, you may find yourself rushing through the guide with little time for the last few questions, which leads to shorter and shorter answers. Tables 8.1 and 8.2 provide examples of interview guides that have questions carefully linked to the Ph.D. students’ research questions. Notice that Glass’s interview guide is a series of requests and not questions.

Page 9 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Table 8.1 Interview guide from Glass’s dissertation on families with children with autism Glass’s (2001) dissertation research focused on how having a child with autism might affect the experiences of family members. During the interview, he used the child’s name, rather than “autistic child” as he has on his guide. 1. Describe yesterday in complete detail from the time you woke up until you went to bed. 2. Describe a joyous experience involving your autistic child. 3. Describe an experience involving your autistic child that produced sorrowful emotions. 4. Describe an experience involving your autistic child that made you angry. 5. Describe an embarrassing experience involving your autistic child. 6. Describe your last social outing as a family. 7. Talk about the last visit with extended family. 8. Is there anything you wish to add that I have omitted? (p. 151)

Source: Glass, P. (2001). Autism and the family: A qualitative perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Table 8.2 Interview guide from Darrow’s dissertation on refugee resettlement policies As a part of her research, Darrow (2015) conducted interviews with Congressional staff who participated in the creation of refugee resettlement policies: Background 1. Can you tell me about your job? 2. Can you tell me about how you came to this work? 3. Where does your Congressional/Senate office stand on the expansion/retraction/maintenance of the refugee resettlement program in the United States? 4. There has been a lot of discussion about the death of Senator Kennedy and what impact his loss might have on refugee resettlement in the United States. What do you think the impact might be? The role of Congressional/Senate staff in policy formation 5. Does your office have a strategic plan around advocating for new/amended policies around refugee resettlement? 6. How was this plan developed? 7. What are the steps you will take to pursue this policy development?

Page 10 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Policy Changes 8. What recent or pending policy changes do you think I should know about in resettlement assistance? 9. Did your Senate office place a part in this policy change? 10. How did this work? (p. 193)

Source: Darrow, J. (2015). The politics and implementation of U.S. refugee resettlement policy: A street-level analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.

Location of the Interview When and where an interview is held can affect its quality. The location should be convenient and comfortable for the interviewee, but letting participants decide where it is conducted is not always a good idea. For example, they might have become so attuned to the noises and activities of their daily lives that they no longer consider them potentially intrusive. As a result, they could select locations with too many distractions—a busy coffee shop or at home with children, phones, and televisions. The process of transcribing tapes—already time consuming—becomes a nightmare when background noises obscure the participants’ voices and make their statements unintelligible. If possible, prescreen locations to determine the level of activity and noise. By agreeing to the interview, some interviewees face tangible risks—emotional, economic, social, or physical—so you should take extreme care in selecting a location that will provide both comfort and safety. An interviewee might have reservations about talking to a stranger in anything other than a public place. In practice, you might have to take what you can get as far as the location. For example, to maximize the number of interviews, Snyder (2012) had to conduct interviews with high school wrestlers on school buses while traveling to and from competitions. Indeed, an unstructured interview is often held while the participant is going about his or her daily tasks, as it then occurs naturally and does not impinge greatly upon the interviewee’s time.

Rapport Rapport is an important ingredient for conducting good interviews, and fieldwork more generally. Your opening

Page 11 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

remarks are the first step toward making the interviewee feel comfortable and willing to help. Introduce yourself and engage in the small talk that one would use when meeting any new person. Show your appreciation for them helping you. Provide one or two sentences about the purpose of your research. Be patient if they have questions about informed consent. Seek permission to record. These sorts of things will get you off to a good start. I agree, up to a point, with Fontana and Frey (1994) that interviews are shaped more by give and take and empathic understanding than by a series of rules that must be followed. They argue that a reciprocal interview is more “honest, morally sound, and reliable, because it treats the respondent as an equal, allows him or her to express personal feelings, and therefore presents a more ‘realistic’ picture than can be uncovered using traditional interview methods” (p. 371). This notion of mutual discovery is consistent with the epistemological belief of an interpretive paradigm. At the same time, I know that this view is idealistic. In reality, a give-and-take interview style does not guarantee fruitful information. The person being interviewed may hold such offensive views that the researcher does not even want to fake empathic understanding. A honest expression of personal feelings about a topic is not relevant for lots of interviews. Although slightly less so for unstructured interviews than others, researchers try to control the focus (Kvale, 2006). Further, the researcher needs the information that interviewees provide, which makes the interview utilitarian at its core and not necessarily a shared encounter between two equals involved in the production of knowledge (Kvale, 2006). People sometimes perceive the academic researcher as having more power, authority, and status and act accordingly. Nurturing a social relationship for the sake of a good interview is advised but avoid the ethical gray area of being more manipulative than you would be in other settings (Fontana & Frey, 1994; Oakley, 1981). Alas, interviews do not always lead to analytical insights and profound truths. Sometimes, in fact, interview responses will not even make sense. We can’t always be sure why that is the case. Maybe we missed the point because we were not paying attention, or we are unfamiliar with the argot being used; maybe the speaker communicated the point badly; perhaps the speaker isn’t sure what the point is. An interviewee can be unsure, equivocal, ambiguous, confused, or unaware of how, when, where, and why things happened. Van Maanen (1982) warns us that it is fairly routine for interviews to be obscured in some “existential fog” (p. 141). At the same time, take care not to dismiss too soon talk that seems irrelevant. For example, in the early days of their research experiences, graduate students often claim that their interviewee did not tell them what they wanted to know. Of course, I remind them that if they already know it, then their research is not necessary, Page 12 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

and they should search for another topic. In most cases, students get the not-so-subtle hint and work harder to remain open during future interviews. Still, field researchers probably have as many interviews that fall flat as they have successful ones. For example, Van Maanen (1982) relates the response he received when he attempted to talk with one police officer in the field: I don’t have nothing to say to you and you don’t have nothing to say to me, I’m putting in my time. I’ve got a year to go until I pull the pin and I don’t want any trouble. I don’t know what you want and I wouldn’t give a s___ even if I did. You mind your business and I’ll mind mine. (p. 111) Although this response might sound rather hostile, he said it was one of his friendlier rejections. Be prepared for such rebuffs, and try to steel yourself not to take them personally. Simply respect people’s wishes not to be interviewed and move on. If carefully defined and executed, interviews can provide you with a great deal of useful data for your fieldwork. What is said can be fascinating, surprising, funny, and crucial to your work. When things go less smoothly than you expect, it may not be your fault—it is just one of the hazards of fieldwork.

Ethics Previous chapters have already discussed numerous ethical issues, many of which are relevant to the interviewing process. Informed consent is obviously an important one, which has to be obtained before the start of the interview. Tape recording interviews without explicit permission is unethical. It is not enough to inform a participant that you are going to record and let them protest if they do not want to be recorded. I want to remind you again that great care has to be taken to protect the confidentiality of interviewees if you have promised them you will. A particularly compelling example of what can go wrong when confidentiality is breeched is Stein’s (2010) ethnographic research on a small town that was divided about a ballot initiative against gay and lesbian civil rights. At that time, Stein had incorrectly thought that masking the name of the town and using pseudonyms for her interviewees would be sufficient to protect them from identification. Unfortunately, a state newspaper figured out and published the name of the town. A resident got a copy of her book, crossed out the pseudonyms, added the real names, and circulated the book. In many cases, people were easily identified by the details Stein included, such as the color of one women’s house and her hobby of Page 13 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

making slipcovers. Prior to the book, community members were generally unaware that the assistant school superintendent was a lesbian. One right-wing activist was so incensed by her portrayal and that of the town that she tried to get the city council to condemn the book. It is not necessarily unethical for you to ask for personal information or for a participant to disclose it. As always, you need to exercise care when when asking about sensitive topics, and the location of the interview is particularly relevant in these circumstances. Unfortunately, you often won’t know whether an issue will be painful or sensitive for someone until it is too late. For example, I conducted an interview with a college student that included questions on family violence and eating disorders. The interview had lasted about an hour and had gone smoothly right up to the point at the end when I asked her how many sisters she had. She broke into tears and cried for several minutes before regaining composure. Although she reassured me that all she needed was a few tissues, I gave her the number of the campus counseling center and the number for a 24-hour crisis center. I never was able to figure out the source of her distress and knew I should not ask. As a field researcher, you need to be prepared for the unexpected and know when to back off. Be careful not to promise, even if only implicitly, more than we can deliver. For example, most of us do not have the skills to be counselors, and we should avoid taking on that role (Fetterman, 1989). While we are collecting data in the field, we need to think carefully about the ethical implications of helping people explore problems—for example, family violence—and then leaving them without support once our research is completed. Prior to conducting interviews on sensitive topics, talk to your peers, instructors, experts, and anyone else you think can provide sound advice to help you avoid ethical mistakes. Further, for all interviews about topics that might be potentially distressful, you should have a list of resources on a handout to give to all respondents with numbers they can call or places to go if they want support.

Status Characteristics One of the challenges you might face involves interviewing someone who is essentially different from you—different gender, race, ethnicity, economic status, educational status, religion, and so on. Most likely, an interviewee’s status characteristics will differ from yours not just in one way but also in many ways. Faced with an awareness of the difficulties such interviews might bring, undergraduate and graduate students often ask, Should I interview someone different from me? Of course. Will the interviews be any good? Of course, or at least as good as one can expect from other interviews if you have done all you could to prepare. Will what

Page 14 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

I learn in an interview be different from what someone else might learn who is more like the interviewee? Of course, and this is not necessarily a problem. Might I have difficulties that someone else might not have? Of course, but you cannot expect any interviewer not to have difficulties. Here is an example. Daisy, a young, White graduate student, had trouble scheduling interviews with elderly Black males. In contrast, when an older Black woman, who was also working on the project, made the initial phone calls on Daisy’s behalf, the men were quite agreeable. When Daisy arrived to conduct the interviews, the men talked at length about their experiences. The nature of interviews is such that most likely the men would have told their stories differently had a Black male of their generation conducted the interviews, and the dynamics between yet another Black male and interviewees also would have resulted in different accounts. It would be difficult to predict in advance which of these interviews would result in the richer, more detailed interview, as similarities in race, gender, and age do not in and of themselves guarantee positive social interaction. Rest assured, for successful research to occur, researcher and respondents need not match on key characteristics. If this were not the case, much important research would remain undone. Liebow (1994), for example, was a middle-aged, White, male academic and not a woman without a home, yet his book provided valuable insights into their lives. Newman’s (1999) study of teenagers who work at “burger barns” in urban centers is another example of the lack of congruence between researcher and those in the setting.

Alternatives to Face-to-Face Interviews Most interviews that field researchers conduct are done in the field, either during everyday interactions or at times set aside for more formal interviews. On occasion, there is reason for field researchers to conduct interviews using some form of information and communication technology, such as cell phones, iPads, and computers (Salmons, 2015). For virtual field researchers, this is certainly the case. Most of what I have covered in this chapter also applies to interviews that are not face-to-face, but there are other issues related to conducting interviews in alternative ways. One consideration for conducting alternatives to face-to-face interviewing is whether the interview should be synchronous, near synchronous, or asynchronous. Face-to-face interviewing requires that the interviewer and interviewee are taking part in the interview at the same time at the same place. This is referred to as a synchronous interview. An interview of this type could be conducted via Skype or a telephone. Interviews Page 15 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

using chat are examples of synchronous interviews because there is little time between the question and response. You could design an interview to be near synchronous (Salmons, 2015). For these, a question is posed and an answer is expected fairly soon afterward, but not necessarily immediately. Think about texting. If you check for texts often, your friends will expect a quick response, but they also know you might not be able to answer within seconds after they send it. A third alternative is an asynchronous interview, for which a longer time is projected between the posting of a question and the response. This type of interview might be completed via e-mail. Many online classes are asynchronous; students can log on when convenient rather than at specific times. How to decide which to choose depends upon a host of things: who is being interviewed, the technology available, how long the interview will be, and the purpose of the research. Another related issue for an online interview is whether the interview should be audio, text based, video, or a combination of these. Phones are everywhere, and what they can do is growing exponentially. But should they be used for interviews? Not all that long ago, the answer to this question was “no.” Times have changed. Rather than being considered only as a last resort, conducting interviews by phone is simply another tool in the box, with advantages and disadvantages. One of the biggest benefits of using phones is that of reaching people who would otherwise not be accessible, often because of the geographical distance between the interviewer and the interviewee. Phones are reliable and require fewer technical skills than interviews conducted using computers or other digital devices. Research questions that include sensitive, embarrassing, and emotional topics can be easier for both you and interviewee when conducted by phone (Sturges & Hanrahan, 2004). Phone interviews are preferred if the interview would otherwise have to take place in an area not safe for you, and talking over the phone can cost less because no travel is involved. It should go without saying never to conduct an interview while driving. A problem with phone interviews is that even though the researcher has a singular focus on the interview, the person being interviewed may not. Thus, the quality of the interview might be lower than in a face-to-face interview in which a person is less distracted. It is recommended that phone interviews be about half the time as face-to-face interviews, which helps account for the fact that in most cases less data are gathered by interviewing using phones. Answers also may be briefer because people are engaged in other activities and so are less attentive. A greater difficulty in establishing rapport is often mentioned as a drawback to phone interviews, but some people are more comfortable talking to strangers on the phone than face-to-face. Another concern is the inPage 16 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ability to see body language, facial expression, and other physical features of the interviewee, but in some cases this information might not be useful (Irvine, Drew, & Sainsbury, 2012). Novick (2008) and others call into question the assumption that data loss or distortion results from not seeing the respondent. Nonverbal techniques used to encourage talking in face-to-face interactions are not possible, but phone interviewers still can use small sounds to indicate they are listening and the speaker should continue to talk by saying “uh huh,” “mm mh,” and “go on” during small pauses. Before you too quickly assume lack of rapport and eye contact are limitations, reflect on whether that is actually the case.

Photo 8.1 Will you repeat that question? I am sorry that I have been so distracted. I am trying to find my wallet and worried because I do not see it. Figure 9

Source: Photo courtesy of the author. E-mail, online chat, and instant messaging are text-based options for conducting interviews. In the case of e-mail, the interviews are asynchronous, which makes it easy to schedule, as those involved in the interview do not have to select a convenient time for both. Many interviewees are able to use e-mail with little difficulty, and they do not require purchasing software. E-mail gives people time for thoughtful responses and documents can be attached. As with other interviews, the use of e-mail requires careful planning. Should only one or two questions be asked in an e-mail or should all questions be asked in the same e-mail? Should a time limit between e-mails be agreed upon? Can something be done to overcome people’s hesitancy to put things in writing? Anything sent over the internet is easily intercepted by outside parties, which raises privacy conPage 17 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

cerns. Written communication skills are widely variable, and written responses may be open to considerable interpretation. In addition, one cannot assume that the interviewee has the same degree of mastery over the language of e-mail and other forms of digital communication. AM I YELLING? Am I :-|| ? Would a cute little emoji help clarify one’s intent or create confusion? TTYL. Chat, instant messaging, tweets, and the like are other ways to conduct text-based interviews, with many of the strengths and weaknesses of e-mail. Instant messaging software, such as MSN Messenger, Yahoo Messenger, and Google’s Gmail chat, are generally free. Still, not everyone has software for chat, and some training time might be needed for people to use it. Chats can take much longer than face-to-face interviews. For example, Jowett, Peel, and Shaw (2011) found that their online interview via chat took, in one case, 3 hours for what would have been 1 hour offline and generated considerably less text: 6,000 words for the chat interview and 12,000 for a similar face-to-face interview. Similarly, Davis, Bolding, Hart, Sherr, and Elford (2004) reported that a 120 minutes online to produce seven pages of text compared to a 90-minute face-to-face interview that resulted in over 30 pages. One solution to getting through the interview guide in a way that does not overtax the respondent is to break it up over several days (Jowett, Peel, & Shaw, 2011). Another way to conduct online interviews is to use video interviews, video conferencing, and video calls. These allow you and interviewee to see each other. Skype is often used for video interviews. Skype is a free download and allows for the interviewee and interviewer to see and hear each other if both have a webcam. FaceTime, Google Hangouts, ooVoo, and VSee have features similar to Skype. A drawback to video interviews is that they are at risk for technical failure. If the interviewee is not familiar with videos, training prior to the interview will be needed. Appropriate eye contact is an extremely important part of a successful video interview, so trial interviews should be done to figure out how best this can be done prior to the interview (Salmons, 2015). Web conferencing meeting spaces, virtual worlds or games, Facebook, and Twitter can be used to ask questions and get responses (Salmons, 2015). However, using Twitter is not going to result in in-depth answers that field researchers often seek. Although face-to-face interviewing is still the gold standard for field researchers, virtual field researchers have a host of options that they can use to collect high quality data. The challenge for the virtual field researcher is to keep abreast of the rapidly changing technological advancements that might be better than those currently available.

Page 18 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

After the Interview Just as you must prepare for the beginning of an interview, you have to decide how to conclude it. With any luck, the process of ending an interview is the reverse of starting it. You turn off the tape, give your thanks, and possibly provide more details about the research. Sometimes, however, the situation becomes more complicated. After the termination of the interview, some respondents continue to talk about things related or unrelated to the research topic. The interviewee might be lonely or eager to please; he or she might have found the experience highly pleasurable and doesn’t want it to end. An ethical question researchers face involves determining whether things said after the tape is stopped can be considered part of the interview. As with many aspects of the interview process, be prepared: Have a courteous strategy planned for declining requests to talk further. If an interview is not recorded, it is particularly important to enter the interview data into the field notes as soon as possible. Some of the alternatives to face-to-face interviews already mentioned provide a written record. Apps such as AudioNote, OneNote, Evernote, Voice2Note, and Audio Notes Recorder are potentially useful. If you transcribe an audio recording yourself, which is ideal, set aside a lot of time. A 1-hour interview might take you several hours to transcribe. A well-done interview could result in 20 to 40 or more single-spaced pages (Pope, Ziebland, & Mays, 2000). Avoid having a bunch of tapes from interviews pile up. Too often when this happens, careful transcription of each word ceases, and only things found interesting at the time get typed—if anything. Valuable data are lost and results become less credible. A verbatim transcript should be just that: every word. Find shortcut ways of including fillers such as “I mean,” “like,” and “you know.” You will probably include quotes in your final product, and if these fillers are excluded, then you are misrepresenting the way the person speaks.

Sampling Mary Shelley (1818) wrote in her book, Frankenstein, that “[n]othing is so painful to the human mind as a great and sudden change.” I hope not because I am making a quick switch from interviews to sampling, and it might seem out of place. If you are going to conduct interviews, you have to decide whom to interview. As a field researcher, you will be engaged in a setting over a long period of time, and you will learn through your interactions whom you need to interview. If you are interested in the effect of a coal mine closing on a small town in Wyoming, then you know to interview the mayor, the owner of the café, and the president of the local Page 19 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

union in addition to having casual conversations with them. You do not have to be concerned about sampling in the way that a quantitative researcher would for this key group. In contrast, sampling would be an issue if you decide to interview miners, and there are 242 of them. Sampling is used to select a subset of people, sites, groups, observation times, objects, and so on from a larger population of these that are of interest to you. Two major types of sampling are probability sampling and purposeful sampling. You might be familiar with probability sampling, which includes such types as random, systematic, and stratified sampling. These sampling methods are used to select a sample from a larger population in such a way that the sample is representative of the population from which it was drawn. A primary purpose of using probability sampling is to be able to statistically generalize the results from the sample to the population. Statistical generalization is not a goal of field researchers, so probability sampling tends not to be used as often as purposeful sampling, although probability sampling can be used when the number of people in a setting is large and for determining times and places for observing. The key to purposeful sampling is to select cases for systematic study that are information rich (Patton, 1990). As with probability sampling, there are different types of purposeful sampling. I find Patton’s explanations of different types of purposeful sampling particularly informative, so I have modified one of his summary tables and present it in Table 8.3. The types of sampling he describes can be used for sampling settings or groups, individuals, observation times, documents, other artifacts, and so on. Different sampling procedures can be combined. There is a misconception that field researchers primarily rely on convenience sampling. To the contrary, convenience sampling is the weakest form of sampling and is not used when there are better alternatives. Although snowball sampling is included in the list of types of samples, this type of sampling is often only the first step in the sampling process. The researcher does not interview everyone referred to by others simply because they were referred. Rather, the researcher decides if the person referred is appropriate for the study based on other forms of sampling. In sample selection, return once again to your research questions. It makes sense that you would want to engage in intensity sampling—selecting information-rich cases. Your key actor could be one of these people. You might want to seek out people to interview who could potentially disconfirm your potential findings. Maybe you will want to interview typical cases. If there are many of them, you might want to use a probability sample to identify potential interviewees. Still, you need an answer to the question, How many people should I interview? Page 20 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Table 8.3 Sampling procedures used by field researchers Extreme or deviant case: Selecting cases that have unusual manifestations

Theory based: Selecting cases that manifest theoretical con-

of the phenomenon of interest

structs of interest

Intensity: Selecting information-rich cases that manifest the phenomenon in-

Theoretical sampling: Sample selected based on findings

tensely, but not extremely

from analysis of previous cases

Maximum variation: Selecting cases that are considerably different on the

Confirming and disconfirming: Selecting cases that have po-

dimensions of interest

tential for supporting or refuting initial analysis

Homogeneous: Selecting cases that are similar to each other

Typical case: Selecting cases that are typical, normal, average

Opportunistic/emergent: Selecting cases that are unexpectedly available

Random: Selecting a relatively small number of cases using a probability sampling procedure

Stratified: Selecting cases from different subgroups

Political: Selecting or avoiding politically sensitive cases

Critical case: Selecting cases that have potential for logical generalizations

Convenience: Selecting cases that require little effort or fore-

and maximum application of information to other cases

thought

Snowball, chain: Selecting cases from referrals by participants who might

Combination: Selecting cases by mixing purposeful sampling

otherwise be difficult to find

with probability sampling

Criterion: Selecting cases based on them meeting some criterion of interest

Source: Modification of Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.) I cannot tell you how many people to interview as there are too many factors that affect the answer—the purpose of the research, the research questions, the number of participants available, and the time and resources you have (Patton, 1990). I can, however, provide a few examples in Table 8.4 of the number of semi-structured interviews conducted by graduate field researchers. None of these are out of range of what is expected. You are probably incorrect if you think you will need or be required to conduct 200 interviews. During field research, your interviews are primarily a compliment to collecting data through observations and Page 21 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

interactions. Because semi-structured and structured interviews require participants to set aside specific times to be interviewed, the question becomes, Should I offer compensation? I mention compensation in the sampling section because the number of people involved can make a huge difference for your decisions about compensation. Keep in mind that you have to have your IRB approve your recruitment procedures and compensation you offer, if any. It is acceptable and even good to compensate participants as a thank you gesture. However, if you give so much that the compensation is the primary, if only, reason an interviewee agrees to take part, then it will probably not be approved by an IRB. The IRB also has rules that restrict what can be said about compensation on recruitment material (Wright & Robertson, 2014). Barrow (2013) correctly used this statement in her informed consent: “You will receive the [$20] gift card even if you decide to withdraw at some point during the interview, or if you choose to not provide answers for some of the questions.” She interviewed 15 people. During her field research, Sierra (2013) interviewed 24 people and also thanked the participants with $20; de Ruter gave $75 to the interviewees. Compensations can be expensive! That is why a chance to win a raffle is a common alternative. Compensation is not a requirement of ethical field research. However, something as simple as a cup of coffee can be a nice way of showing appreciation for a brief interview. Table 8.4 Number of interviews conducted during field research Researcher

Topic

Number of interviews

Gibeau (2008)

childbirth preparation classes

11

Desmond (2006)

firefighters

14

González (2005)

Florida International University

29

Comfort (2002)

women whose partners were in prison

50

Sarfaty (2011)

World Bank

70+

Wynn (2006)

walking tour guides

78

Page 22 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Conclusions During the course of your field research, you may find that you need to conduct interviews in addition to the conversations, observations, and other forms of interactions you are having. Open-ended questions, such as Is there anything you like to talk about we haven’t covered?, can direct you toward new areas of interactions and observations. After more time in the setting you might discover more interviews are needed. Very little about field research is a one-shot deal and the process is always reciprocal. You are now familiar with generating a lot of data from your observations, interactions, and interviews. The next critical question is, How am I going to keep track of all the information I’m gathering? The answer is write field notes, which is the topic of the next chapter.

Chapter Highlights • Interviews can be unstructured, semi-structured, or structured. • Structured interviews have predetermined questions and an interview guide that is closely followed. • Semi-structured interviews incorporate some predetermined questions while still allowing for considerable flexibility. • Unstructured interviews resemble conversations with little standardization of format and questions, with both the researcher and the participants engaging in dialogue. • Good interview questions often start with how and what. • Questions can be open-ended, which allow for longer answers than close-ended questions. • Interviewers should make sure that they ask questions relevant for addressing their research questions. • Online and phone interviews are similar to other ways of conducting interviews but have different costs and benefits.

Page 23 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Exercises 1. Conduct a semi-structured interview with a friend. You will need to select a topic of interest and related research question that is suitable for interviewing your friend. Prepare an interview guide that has questions about this topic, being sure to follow the rules for good interview questions. The interview should be approximately 10 minutes. Because this is a class assignment, you do not need IRB approval. However, try to complete this exercise as if it was real research. Take notes; do not record it. Create a written transcript of the interview. When finished, explain your process in detail, from selecting the location through the completion of the final transcript. Discuss what went well about the interview, what did not, and what were the pros and cons of conducting an interview when taking notes. Describe how you felt throughout the process. Turn in your interview guide and typed transcript with this exercise. 2. Repeat Exercise 1, but in this case, you should record the interview and transcribe it. 3. Find five academic journal articles, master’s theses, or dissertations that used interviewing as a method of data collection. In a few sentences, summarize each article. Note for each article whether the interviews were unstructured, structured, or semi-structured. Make a list of the questions asked. What was the most common first word in the questions? For example, how many questions started with the word how? 4. Continue developing the research proposal you have written for earlier chapters by adding your interview questions if you plan to use them.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Deakin, H., & Wakefield, K. (2014) Skype interviewing: Reflections of two PhD researchers. Qualitative Research, 14, 603–616. Fritz, R., & Vandermause, R. (2017, January 17). Data collection via in-depth email interviewing. Qual-

Page 24 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

itative Health Research. doi:10.1177/1049732316689067 Harvey, W. (2011). Strategies for conducting elite interviews. Qualitative Research, 11, 431–441.

Recommended Additional Reading Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Salmons, J. (2015). Qualitative online interviews (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Weller, S. (2015). Structured interviewing and questionnaire construction. In H. R. Bernard & C. Gravlee (Eds.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (2nd ed., pp. 343–390). Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield.

• Qualitative interviewing • Focus groups • Fieldwork https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 25 of 25

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 9: Field Notes

Objectives By the end of the chapter, you will be able to • discuss the many purposes of field notes; • compare the pros and cons of paper journals versus smart phones, iPads, and other digital devices for writing field notes; • explain the differences among mental notes, jotted notes, fuller jottings, and full field notes; • take detailed field notes and expand them into a set of full field notes; and • describe the different types of material that are typically included in field notes.

Have you ever kept a diary? Have you ever been required to write reading reflections in a journal for a class? Imagine being told that you have to write in a journal every day for the next year and that those entries should include detailed descriptions, paraphrased quotations, self-reflections, and analytical insights. You will also need to type what you have written every night and keep your entries organized for easy retrieval. Welcome to field notes! The major purpose of writing field notes is to have a detailed, written record of observations and interactions in the field that you can use to conduct a rigorous analysis. I can easily summarize my view of the importance of field notes to field research: If you are not writing field notes, then you are not conducting field research.

Purposes of Field Notes I like how a character in Larsen’s (2009) novel, The Selected Works of T. S. Spivet, expressed this sentiment about listening to adults [I]t was as if their language poured into my ears only to drain right out a little spigot in the back of my head. Metaphorically this can happen to field researchers—all that we’ve heard and seen will drain right out of the Page 2 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

spigot in our heads unless we have detailed notes about what has occurred in the field. These notes are called field notes. One way of thinking about field notes is that data are collected by observing and interacting, and field notes are the written accounts of these experiences. An alternative way of thinking about field notes is that their purpose is to create data based on observations and interactions in the field. The use of the term create stresses that there are no data previously collected, but only data generated through the act of writing about experiences in the field. To complicate things a tad more, it has become acceptable to speak of field notes themselves as a form of data collection in addition to other ways of collecting data. For example, field researchers write statements such as “My data come from field notes, observations, and interviews.” Combining these views in a sentence, the purpose of field notes is to document data already collected, to create data through writing, and to use field notes to collect data. Regardless of how the purpose of field notes is expressed, what matters is the close congruence between experiences in the field and what is written. Also important is an awareness that you decide what is ultimately selected for inclusion in field notes about what you hear, see, and do during the time in the field. Different perspectives on field notes all lead to the same conclusion that memories of experiences become increasingly unreliable over time and are not amenable to systemic analysis. In contrast, field notes can be rigorously analyzed. Field notes, also referred to as fieldnotes, serve all sorts of other purposes. For example, field notes play a key role in ensuring, and convincing others, that the data are of sufficient quality for the research to be credible. Which of the following do you think would lead to more valid research: “The data used to support my results are my memories of my observations during three months in the field” or “The data used to support my results come from field notes written every day based on my observations during three months in the field”? Field note entries also can help refine research questions. Methodological decisions are made when writing field notes, and writing them also is a way to process strong emotions that can be present during fieldwork. When writing and reading field notes, you may realize that there are questions that should be asked to get a better understanding of the group under study but have not yet been asked (Neimark, 2012). The notes also may include tentative insights related to theory. Field notes are amenable to a variety of different types of analysis, from creating themes to causal analysis (Katz, 2015). Inevitably, pieces of field notes will find their way into the final paper. For example, verbatim quotations documented in field notes often are used to support conclusions, and thick descriptions, extremely detailed descriptions, from field notes allow the readers

Page 3 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

to understand the context of social processes being explained in your final paper. There is a difference between field notes taken in the field and a fuller set of field notes, which contain considerably more than what was written in the field. The notes taken in the field are raw field notes, and as soon as possible after taking them, the researcher expands them by inserting more details and thoughts. Then more is added yet again, and entries that extend beyond the descriptions of the observations and interactions start to appear. Like the notes scribbled in the field, the more extensive or fuller set are not polished, and they are rarely seen by anyone other than the researcher, although carefully selected parts of them might be shared with trusted others. Unfortunately, both these expanded notes and the notes taken in the field are called field notes. Fortunately, the context usually helps decide which is being discussed in this book. To help avoid confusion, I sometimes use “fuller field notes” to refer to the field notes developed when not in the field.

Taking Field Notes The notes taken while observing in the field are typically handwritten. Traditionally, these notes are written in a field journal, possibly multiple journals. The journal can be a small tablet or notebook. Your journal should be your constant companion during all stages of your research, not just when in the field. I recommend that you choose a journal that is spiral bound or that folds flat so that you do not have to hold it open with one hand as you frantically jot notes with the other. It should be small enough to be put in a purse or pocket. If you are without your trusty journal, napkins, the back of checks, a grocery receipt, or your hand will do. The key is to write things down. Smartphones, iPads, laptops, digital pens and paper, blogs, tweets, and such have expanded our options for writing field notes. Whether these are preferable to, used in conjunction with, or replace a hard copy journal depends on such things as your expertise with the technology and the sophistication of the apps you have on these devices. How quickly can you type? Will you be able to carry your laptop with you as you move from place to place? Is the setting one in which you can record your voice as you observe? How easy is it to combine small chunks of text that you might write during different times of day into one document? Does your phone have the capability of turning speech to text? How long will your battery stay charged? Can you find an app that will work for note taking that is not too expensive? Will you be able to return to what you have written and expand on it later in the day or the next week? How easy is it to transfer what you might have on your smartphone or iPad to your computer?

Page 4 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

One advantage of a smartphone over a journal is that you are more likely to have your phone with you at all times than you are to carry a journal. Another is that many people are more used to seeing others texting than seeing others take field notes, and given its small size, a phone is less obtrusive than a journal. Taking field notes, whether texting or voice-to-text, would be barely noticed in a lot of settings, whereas writing in a journal might seem odd and even difficult. (A word of warning: As noted in the previous chapter, phones can interfere with your observations. If you use these technical devices, make sure you use them only for the purposes of your fieldwork when in the field.) A phone or iPad also may have capabilities that a traditional journal does not, such as taking photographs. As you are leaving the field for the day, recording your thoughts on your phone is a highly efficient way to continue to take notes as you approach your vehicle. A growing number of apps are available for smartphones, iPads, and so on that allow you to make notes that you can later transfer and expand to create a full set of field notes to use on your computer. Some of these are useful for transcribing audio to text, combining a large number of notes, taking brief notes, including photos and video, scanning documents, and processing handwriting. The technology is increasing so rapidly that any list I included here would probably be outdated by the time you are reading this book. Reviews of these and others are easily found online. Despite technological advances, handwritten notes are still the norm, and I recommend them. The first rule of field notes is to start writing them as soon as you have even a vague idea of a research topic. Writing and reading your field notes can help you generate ideas for a topic, purpose, and research question—they are not just a way of recording what has happened in the field. Chenault’s experience illustrates the usefulness of starting field notes early. Chenault (2004) knew she wanted to conduct research in a public housing community. She had been involved with mediations in the community, so she felt that she would have a certain level of access. Beyond that, she was unsure what the focus of her research might be. After receiving institutional review board (IRB) approval, she began talking to managers in several communities to see if that would help her generate ideas. Rather than wait to start her field notes until she was certain of her research questions, she correctly started writing them during her decision-making process. The following excerpt from her field notes represents an informal conversation with Tyler, a manager in one of the communities, during the time when she was still trying to figure out the purpose of her dissertation research: While Tyler provided useful information regarding several areas of investigation, he repeatedly returned our conversation to the topic of “site-based meetings,” saying such things as the following: “At site-based meetings . . . you know and see what our community wants.” Page 5 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

“Site-based means everything is done.” “Site-based meetings have full control over our properties.” “You need to come to a site-based meeting.” That man gave me a headache; I didn’t get the response I wanted, and he kept talking about sitebased meetings. Almost every other word was site-based meetings. I asked about a shooting death that happened in the community and he talked about the resident council. (pp. 7–8) You should not be surprised to learn that, after reading her field notes a few days later, she followed Tyler’s suggestion and decided to explore the site-based meetings about which he was so enthusiastic. After attending several such meetings, she became interested in the resident council who also attended these meetings. Ultimately, the resident council became the focus of her study. In the process of reviewing a discussion captured in field notes—recorded well before she had settled upon a particular focus—she was led to explore a group that she might have overlooked otherwise. Once she had settled on the group, she could then proceed to establishing research goals and questions. Early in the research process, writing field notes often leads to frustration. It might help you feel more comfortable as you undertake a research project if you are aware that not knowing whether you are taking field notes “right” is a common worry. After all, the better the field notes, the better the final product so it is reasonable to want to take good ones. Do not, however, let this fear stymie your note-taking efforts. Your notes will improve and become more narrowly focused as you continue to keep them, because it is through writing that you discover important things to say. Trust the process and just keep writing. It is difficult to stay sufficiently focused to take detailed notes in a setting for a long period of time. You might begin with interacting and observing for 3 hours. You will soon know if more or less works for you.

Page 6 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Photo 9.1 It is crucial that you expand your field notes shortly after taking them. Figure 10

Source: Photo courtesy of the author. Write your fuller field notes as soon as possible after each observational period. The more time that elapses, the less you will remember. If you conduct an interview with a participant in the morning, try to write your fuller field notes in the afternoon. However, if you conduct your observations in the evening, you usually can wait until early the next morning to record your notes, as during sleep you retain fairly detailed memory (Lofland & Lofland, 1984). The worst situation for retention occurs when you attempt to create field notes for two observational periods or interviews simultaneously. You may forget many of the events and the analytical insights you experienced during the first encounter, and you will remember far less from the second than you might imagine. The number of pages of field notes generated per observational period varies greatly, and certainly the total number of pages written by different researchers is highly dependent on the amount of time in the field. Tanggaard’s (2014) research on apprenticeship learning resulted in more than 100 pages of field notes from two observational periods of 3 months each. Coy (2001) had approximately 400 pages of notes from slightly over 3 months from his research on the Peace Brigades International NGO. Lofland and Lofland (1984, p. 67) suggest that approximately 13 pages of field notes should result from each hour’s observation. Set aside a lot of time for transcribing. It will take you at least as long to type your field notes when you leave Page 7 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the field as it took to observe—in most cases, probably twice as long. Some researchers find that they spend 3 to 4 hours typing field notes for every hour of field observations. Although you record on-the-spot notes in your field journal, I want to remind you yet again that the data contained in it should be typed as soon as possible. It is fairly obvious that you should have typed transcripts of interviews, but it is as important that you have typed field notes on your computer, with details added that you were unable to record while observing. Otherwise, you might end up focusing your analysis on interviews and observations from memory giving short shrift to the journal notes, which contain the data that are required for field research and might include some of your keenest insights. Find a way to keep your notes organized, and if you make any changes or move material, make sure you create a formal log to explain what you have done. Do not trust your memory. Keep one copy as a master that is never touched. Cut, paste, and play with duplicates. And need I say back up all computer files regularly? You will no doubt have multiple copies on your hard drive, but I suggest that you back up all files daily on a removable device, such as a flash drive, that is accessible without a Wi-Fi connection, and also have copies that you can access from remote locations, such as Google Docs and Dropbox. Remember to consider ethical issues related to privacy and confidentiality when making decisions about where you keep field notes. If you think writing field notes sounds tedious, you are right. Much of the writing and typing is not particularly fun and a lot of the creation of field notes is hard work. You will be tempted to put it off, but persevere. Once you form the habit of routinely writing field notes, the task will become easier and more enjoyable (Lofland & Lofland, 1984). Regardless, remind yourself that what is not written in the field notes that day will be lost forever. Although it might not be necessary to prevent others from seeing you take notes during overt research, making a big production of it can be disconcerting to the participants. In order to maintain the natural flow of the interaction or interview and keep participants at ease, it is usually best if you scribble them quickly and then add more details at inconspicuous moments. Sometimes, however, people will expect that you take notes assiduously during your interviews or observations; otherwise they think you are not really interested in what they are saying or doing. A participant in Harrison’s (2009) research on hip-hop looked at what Harrison had written in his field notes and corrected him. Barley’s (1990) observation of radiologists and technologists in a hospital illustrates both open note taking and more private ways of taking notes. Barley openly took notes while observing and interacting with hospital

Page 8 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

personnel. Although they were uncomfortable about his note taking in the early stages of the research, they became used to his presence and note taking, in part because of his willingness to help them with their work. Some of the radiologists asked to see what he was writing but then lost interest by what they perceived to be the mundane nature of his notes. Sometimes they would tell him what to write if they felt he had missed something important, and, on occasion, they wrote entries in his journal themselves. When there was a tense interaction among the hospital staff, Barley (1990) stopped taking notes publically, and as soon as he could wrote a summary of the event while in a bathroom stall. He wrote nothing that he was not willing to share if asked; it was simply a matter of feeling it inappropriate to be writing about this event as it was occurring. Later, he expanded on all entries. In contrast to Barley’s experience, participants in the research typically do not read field notes. Field notes can contain negative assessments and theoretical ideas that might be hurtful, and this can change the dynamics between participants and researcher. Because of this risk, you should take care to prevent others from seeing your notes while the notes are being taken, or you should not include potentially problematic sections in the field journal. Details can be added to the full set of field notes later, which participants are unable to access. The full notes are written by and for you only and thus might contain material that does not reflect your beliefs, opinions, or intentions to act but is simply a part of your natural reflections on the events that have unfolded before you. You will probably share some of your field notes with trusted others, possibly your instructor or thesis chair, but you can redact some parts that are too personal for even them to read. All this does not mean that the field notes never see the light of day. Books sometimes contain multiple pages of raw field notes. Certainly, large portions of both verbatim and paraphrased quotations from interviews, carefully documented in field notes, are included in final papers. Descriptions and other sections from field notes also may appear in publications. For example, the first paragraph of Lanier’s (2008) master’s thesis immediately hooked me because it was a moving paragraph taken directly from her field notes. Mostly, however, only a small part of the voluminous coded, combined, rewritten, transformed, analyzed, interpreted, and highly polished field notes you write end up being read by others. Still, you will need to give details about your process of turning raw field notes into the final paper so that your readers can see how the results are linked to the original field notes. Even though access to a journal should be handy, realistically it is not uncommon to observe and interact in the field without taking notes. You can hardly be writing notes while serving food at a soup kitchen, working on a fire line, hiking on a trail, or otherwise being an active participant in a setting. In many cases, then, if one

Page 9 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

tries to remember what is being said without writing things down, the field researcher is keeping mental notes or headnotes (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Lofland & Lofland, 1984). As you know from years in college, mental notes do not result in the level of detail that can be obtained from notes taken in real time. However, if written down as quickly as possible, preferably the same day, mental notes can allow you to remember a considerable amount from a period of fieldwork. What can help improve the quality of your field notes in situations where taking detailed notes is not advisable or possible is to find a way to jot down at least some key words, brief phrases, initials, symbols, drawings, mnemonics, and so on to jog your memory for when the opportunity arises to expand the notes. In the parlance of field research, these are referred to as jotted notes (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Lofland & Lofland, 1984) or scratch notes (Sanjek, 1990). A problem with jotted notes is that if they are not quickly elaborated into fuller notes, their usefulness diminishes. Think about the case when you copy down bulleted points from a PowerPoint presentation. Your notes might read like this: Attributes are (a) mutually exclusive and (b) exhaustive. Although you have perfectly copied the items from the slide, you may not remember 3 weeks later what these concepts mean. However, if you expand on your notes fairly soon after class, you will have what you need for studying later. The same with jotted notes in field research—they are most useful if expanded soon after taking them, and potentially useless if not. You probably are skilled at writing down as much as you can while your instructor is talking in class. Lofland and Lofland (1984) refer to this type of note taking during fieldwork as fuller jottings, which eventually turn into full field notes when they are rewritten with more detail later. Fuller jottings are much more useful than mental notes or jottings. Write down as much detail as possible. Notice that mental notes, jotted notes, and fuller notes should all be fleshed out later and additional thoughts related to the research added as they occur. Don’t forget that all notes include the date, time, location, names/ pseudonyms, and other information of this type. Also, you may end up with multiple journals, so remember to number them and include the date range. Even though you will add to the descriptions of the data taken during observations and interviews, always keep the original versions as well.

Field Note Content In addition to documenting experiences in the field, field notes incorporate other types of material. Not all of the categories of notes described below have to be included in every, or even most, of your entries. Further, Page 10 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

you may find a better way to organize your notes than what I present here; use what works for you and do not feel constrained by my suggestions. Table 9.1 lists seven categories included in field notes that some find useful. You might want to refer to this table as you read this section.

Detailed Descriptions The first, and most important, category of material contained in field notes is detailed descriptions of observations and interactions, including conversations and interviews, in the field. The descriptions are kept as a chronological log, with exact or approximate times of observations routinely included (Lofland & Lofland, 1984). Such running descriptions should be concrete and replete with tangible details. Focus, as best you can, on what Lofland (1971) calls the “raw behavior.” The line spoken by Sergeant Joe Friday in the old television show Dragnet applies when writing descriptions: “Just the facts, ma’am.” Concentrate on who, what, where, when, and how. You might have the occasional opportunity to weave in conjectures about why something occurred, but when you are in the field, entries in the journal will primarily be descriptive. If you try to write more during the time you are observing or interviewing, you may find your descriptions too superficial or be distracted by your own thoughts and fail to record what is happening in front of you. In later stages of your fieldwork, you will increasingly add your own thoughts as you observe. Detailed accounts of conversations, informal interviews, and formal interviews that occur should be included in your notes. In a useful document, Case Study Evaluations (General Accounting Office, 1990), particularly for individuals wishing to learn more about case studies, the General Accounting Office provides examples of two sets of notes based on an interview with a director of a small grant program who was asked how the program informed colleges about the grants. The first example is referred to as a thin note because it lacks detail: Table 9.1 Suggested categories for field note content 1. Detailed descriptions 2. Things previously forgotten 3. Analytic ideas and insights 4. Memos

Page 11 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

5. Personal feelings 6. Things to think about and do 7. Reflexive thoughts

The current system is to mail copies of the announcements to the chairs of relevant science departments, such as chemistry, biology, physics, and computer science. (p. 53) The second example, based on the same interview, is a thick description because of the amount of detail: The Director indicated that procedures had changed three times since the inception of the program. In the first 4 years, announcements were mailed to the individual named as president in the listing, for the same year, of the American Association of Small Colleges. Because applications were very sparse, with about 30% of eligible colleges applying, the procedure was changed to a two-stage mailing, first to the president to find out the name of the official in charge of federal programs and then to the official. This worked well for a 5-year period, in terms of receipt of applications from over 80% of the eligible colleges, but when overall federal funding for research was reduced, the positions of federal program coordinators were abolished and applications fell to about 40% of eligible institutions responding. Two years ago, the decision was made to mail copies to the persons listed as chairs of the relevant science college in appropriate professional association listings. This has increased the cost of outreach by about $15,000 or about 25% more than the prior system. To date, returns are at the 80% rate again. (p. 53) Practice can help develop skills required for taking the kind of notes exemplified in this second example. I suspect that a description with this kind of detail started by taking as many notes as possible, listening very carefully, and writing jotted notes—key words and numerical information written down as memory cues—and fuller jottings. Then, as quickly as possible, the notes taken were probably translated into even more detailed notes; this might have been done immediately after the interview while sitting in a lobby or parked car, for example. While expanding what was written, the researcher’s memory would be triggered and even more details from the interview would be added to the notes. Smartphones and other recording devices are useful for

Page 12 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

recording thoughts as you leave the setting. Still, as soon as possible, the notes and any recording should be typed to be suitable for analysis. Each time the notes are expanded, other elements of good field notes are incorporated. Descriptions also include dialogue (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995), whether informal conversations or interviews. You should develop a system by which you can differentiate in your notes among verbatim quotes, close paraphrases, and general recall. You might put double quotation marks around verbatim material, single quotation marks around paraphrasing, and no quotation marks when you think you have captured the gist of someone’s statement but not using his or her words. The following is a snippet from field notes written by Harrison in 2001 when he was studying the hip-hop scene in San Francisco. The use of quotation marks indicates exactly what Harrison and the participant said. As I explained to GB “I have never worked at a job where the workers are actually most happy when the owners and managers are present.” ML, one owner, responded to this by saying, “I think when we’re not around people think they have to be serious, but then when we show up and act goofy people say, oh good, now we can be goofy.” When Harrison (2009) was writing his dissertation and later his book, he did not have to recall what was said versus what he summarized. Field notes will include your own descriptions of the setting and events, but they also might include descriptions and explanation from participants in the research. Here too, you need to make clear whether the description is yours based on what you are seeing and hearing or whether you are writing about the description of others. For example, you observe how Sae and Nicolai interact when they play Grand Theft Auto V. You document what you see. If Nicolai and Sae each describe later how they interact, include this too. Make clear which is which, because most likely all three descriptions will be slightly different, and a comparison might be important for your analysis. For interviews and conversations that are recorded, be sure to have them transcribed, ideally by you, and soon after the interview. The transcribed interviews can be kept separately from the field notes. The informal interviews, the notes you may have taken during an interview, and conversations, in contrast, do all belong in your field notes.

Page 13 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Field researchers sometimes supplement the running description with visual aids, such as maps, diagrams, and photographs. Often, they collect objects—programs, newspaper articles, menus, and brochures—that can be included with the field notes. Again, smartphones and other forms of technology can make the inclusion of visual material into field notes considerably easier than in the past. In some cases, researchers have a template for taking notes, even if the template is a mental one rather than on a form. A section on the template might read, “Who was present?” In this section would be a detailed sketch (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995) of a person; this includes a description of the person’s physical appearance and what the person is doing as the sketch is being written. Another way that descriptions might be organized is by concentrating on capturing what Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (1995) call episodes and field note tales. Episodes are brief incidents carefully documented, and field note tales are descriptions of a series of episodes that follow one another, but might not necessarily be causally related.

Things Previously Forgotten A second category of material in the field notes includes things previously forgotten and now remembered (Lofland, 1971). Sometimes, days later, something is recalled from an interview or observation. For example, you might finally remember what a key word from a jotted note meant. Occasionally, a behavior is recalled that had previously seemed insignificant and now seems worthy of noting, possibly because a similar behavior appeared again. Such recollections get integrated into the field notes on the day they are recalled, with the time, date, and context of the original experience included, or they can be added to the notes on the day the event occurred.

Analytic Ideas and Inferences The third type of material in the field notes consists of your analytic ideas and inferences (Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw, 1995; Lofland, 1971). You will find that you write these more frequently as your fieldwork progresses. This process of creating complete field notes constitutes part of your analysis. The more analysis that occurs in conjunction with the writing of field notes, the easier the project will be to complete (Lofland, 1971).

Page 14 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

You might have some preliminary ideas about the social meanings of particular events or notice patterns that seem to fit a conceptual category that later is useful theoretically. Write down your interpretations of interactions. Think routinely about your research questions and write down any potential insights you have about them. Put all ideas—good, bad, trivial, obvious, far-fetched, and those about which you’re uncertain or even embarrassed—in the field notes. Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (1995) refer to this type of writing as asides or commentaries that may occur as one is writing the notes in the field. Headnotes might be included in this section. The term headnotes also is used to refer to understandings, interpretations, and insights that a researcher might have from participating in the field. I think of these as interpretive ruminations. This section might be a good place to keep track of these evolving, swirling, sense-making ideas (Sanjek, 1990).

Memos The fourth category, memos, is extremely important for some research designs and less so for field research. When the primary focus of the writing is about analyzing the data, transforming the descriptive data into conceptual categories, and turning the conceptual categories into theory, the process is referred to in some cases as creating memos—memoing. Memos contain tentative and concrete strategies for the data analysis and interpretation. You start writing memos early in the research process, but they become increasingly important as the analysis of the data proceeds. Some researchers prefer to keep memos as independent files and not part of the field notes. Other researchers do not even use the term memos.

Personal Feelings The fifth type of material in the field notes involves your personal feelings (Lofland, 1971). If in the setting you were scared, happy, bored, or frustrated, write it down. What person did you like—and what person did you not? Did you think an interaction went well or did you feel completely stupid? Although feelings and impressions might not seem relevant to your rigorous research, they are, in fact, often a rich source of analytic insights. Personal feelings have their roots in social events. If you are feeling a certain way, others might be too, so this feeling might be a worthy avenue to explore. Also, your emotional reactions to people and events affect them and shape your interpretation of them. If you keep a record of your emotions, you will find yourself in a better position to analyze the dynamics of your interactions (Lofland & Lofland, 1984). Your feelings about Page 15 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

how you acted when faced with an ethical dilemma can prove useful later. In your final project, it might be important to share with your readers how your emotional responses affected what you included and did not include. These feelings are best recoded in real time, rather than trying to remember what they were afterward. Although writing field notes can be therapeutic, you should not feel compelled to emote and write down dark secrets and repressed feelings from childhood. After all, a field journal is not a personal diary.

Things to Think About and Do The sixth element in field notes is things to think about and do (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Lofland, 1971). If you need to go back and collect a missing detail, write down what it is. If you have ideas that you want to follow up on, write these down (Lofland & Lofland, 1984). What questions might be good to ask? Did you fail to talk to someone today whom you would like to see tomorrow? Before each observational period, review your to-do list from the previous day. Forward items not completed onto the next day’s notes.

Reflexive Thoughts The seventh type of material contained in field notes is your reflexive thoughts. This category overlaps with the others, particularly personal feelings. The role of reflexivity has become so important since the 1960s that there was said to be a “reflexive turn” in qualitative research (Altheide & Johnson, 1994, p. 85). Although varied and complicated definitions of reflexivity exist, I define the concept as the researcher’s active consideration of his or her place in the research. Reflexivity is, in part, critically thinking about how your status characteristics, values, and history, as well as the numerous choices you have made during the research, affect the results. Although field research is not singularly about you as the researcher, you are “part and parcel of the setting, context, and culture” you are trying to understand (Altheide & Johnson, 1994, p. 486). You are the instrument of data collection; you analyze and interpret the data; you write the final product. This is why so many final papers are written in an active voice in the first person; you are always unavoidably present and necessary

Page 16 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

in field research, and masking the fact by writing in the third person is confusing and misleading. Field notes provide you with an excellent location in which to struggle with how you and your decisions are embedded in the research. What you learn from the experience of reflexive writing can be incorporated into the final paper. Whether you include them is often dependent on the paradigm that guides your research. Including your reflections provide readers with additional details that can be used when evaluating your research. The following is an excellent example from Bourgois’s book. Early in his book about residents of East Harlem, Bourgois (1995) wrote that in his case “self-conscious reflexivity was especially necessary and useful” because he was “an outsider from the larger society’s dominant class, ethnicity, and gender categories who was attempting to study the experience of inner-city poverty among Puerto Ricans” (p. 13). His goal was to convey the “individual experience of social structural oppression,” including racial segregation and economic marginalization; yet to do so—analytically, theoretically, and ethically—he would have to include “even the goriest details” of the lives of people he had befriended, details that he knew could be used to justify further oppression (pp. 15–18). Bourgois tells his readers the struggles he underwent as he attempted to decide what information to include from thousands of pages of recorded conversations. In one instance, for example, he had to determine whether to include the details of a conversation between two men about a rape. He shares his reflections about how the rape had shaken some of the social relationships formed during his fieldwork: Despite the almost three years that I had already spent on the street at the time of this particular conversation, I was unprepared to face this dimension of gendered brutality. I kept asking myself how it was possible that I had invested so much energy into taking these “psychopaths” seriously. On a more personal level, I was confused because the rapists had already become my friends. With notable individual exceptions, I had grown to like most of these veteran rapists. I was living with the enemy; it had become my social network. They had engulfed me in the common sense of street culture until their rape accounts forced me to draw the line. (p. 207) As a result of the reflections, sometimes the researcher takes action, including asking for assistance with some parts of the research or changing a facet of the research design. Then, in order to provide readers with information that can help them judge the quality of the final paper, researchers include relevant parts of the reflections. Other authors suggest different categories for organizing field notes, such as logs and methodological notes. Page 17 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

You will learn what works for you through trial and error. There is not only one right way to write field notes. In contrast, I believe there is a wrong way to write field notes—and that is writing only a few, superficial notes.

Putting It All Together The examples in Table 9.2 from field notes written by Harrison during his 2001 research on hip-hop, pulls together much of what has been presented in this chapter. In addition to sharing his raw field notes, Harrison includes his current reflections on his own field notes that were written over a decade ago and adds his keen insights about the field note process. One of many important things that these notes illustrate is the length of the notes generated by observations and interactions that took place only for a brief amount of time. But even then, Harrison critiques himself for not having written even more. For more of Harrison’s field notes excerpts and reflections, visit study.sagepub.com/bailey3e. Table 9.2 Example of Harrison’s field notes with reflections From April 2000 through May 2001, I conducted field research on the independent (i.e., Do-it-Yourself) hip-hop scene in the San Francisco Bay Area. What follows are some of my current reflections on my original field notes. Novice researchers rarely have an opportunity to read actual field notes before creating their own (Lederman, 1990). I therefore share these with the hope that they will help demystify field notes as texts. Although field note writing guidelines are incredibly useful in terms of developing systematic approaches and assuring beginning field researchers that they are doing it “right,” actual field notes are typically less spectacular than we imagine. As Bailey notes, field note writing is often tedious and mundane. While extended narrative passages are written, by and large field notes appear as series of fragmented observations and thoughts, often mashed together on a single page. They are repositories for information, yet they frequently reveal the limits of understanding. The second excerpt included here especially illustrates how the process of writing field notes—being forced to articulate what you know and do not know—can be as valuable to the ongoing research project as the written record that is produced. Following what has been presented in this book thus far, I want to draw attention to the way that my approach to crafting field notes hints at my paradigmatic investments in dialogic and/or collaborative research relationships. While reviewing the corpus of my Bay Area field notes for examples to include, I realized that even the more descriptive notes tend to focus on individual people and social interactions—which to me suggests a shift from viewing persons as observable objects to engaging with them as collaborative subjects. A good deal of this collaboration is presented as a general recall of discussions, thus illustrating the blurred line between conversations and ethnographic interviews (O’Reilly, 2012). Excerpt 1: Visibility of Research and Collaborative Understandings This field note excerpt is largely reflexive in that it situates me, as a researcher, in relation to one of my key interlocutors (it also includes personal feelings and a brief note about things to do). In the first part of the excerpt, I reflect on how my zealousness as a researcher had the detrimental effect of making my interlocutor acutely conscious of the fact that he was part of a study, or “being studied.” In the second part, I describe how we were able to arrive at collaborative understandings of key issues—specifically, (a) the Living Legends’ position/role in the re-emergence of hip-hop

Page 18 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

as a DiY music and (b) the difficulties of having an independent hip-hop career. The MJs (Mystik Journeymen) are one of several hip-hop acts who make up the Living Legends collective; Mystik-Access was the website through which fans could order Legends’ music. Field Note 1 MO and I got into a discussion of Mystik-Access orders. I asked him about his largest order ever and he said “you mean not to a store?” which of course leads me to believe that other than the MJs distribution contract he handles all Legends distribution. Remember to check this out. But MO said that it would have to be a $400 order to Japan, which he immediately started to pull up on his computer. Soon my over enthusiasm led me to ask him to print it up. When he asked why, I said “data.” “But I don’t want to be data” were the words that came out of his mouth. Our relationship immediately regressed back to our debate over social science research. I realized that I had made a mistake that it was too late to correct. With neither of us knowing how to proceed, there were several seconds of awkward silence. With it being just the two of us—no TV, no Radio, there was nothing to bail us out. He could lose himself within his computer monitor which was about five inches away from his face. But I had nothing. Just to look at him and wish I hadn’t said what I had said . . . But we reconstructed the moment, the conversation, the relationship. As I spoke to him about my project, which after debating several points I think he got, he kept saying how it would have been more ideal for me to be out there five years ago. I kept saying that this was a very great time too. I really liked how MO placed the Legends in a crucial point between hip hop’s South Bronx origins and what was going on now. More than being his placement, he was following my model and realizing that in it, the Legends hold a crucial place: as one of the first groups to sell (or give away) their tapes not their demos and inspiring others to do the same. MO says that he frequently gets emails and notes (w/orders) from people discussing how inspirational the Legends have been to their music making development. MO challenged my point about alternatives to the traditional industry routes by pointing out that to be doing this independent thing enough to pay the bills is extremely difficult. A number of people are doing it more like a hobby but they have other jobs that support them in their lives—which makes them very different from artists that are signed to major labels and going about things that way. So to say they are doing an alternative to the music industry (majors) really isn’t accurate. MO said “it was probably easier to start up an independent label 3 or 4 decades ago, versus today.” Excerpt 2: Visibility of Research/description/interpretations As opposed to the first field note excerpt, in this excerpt reminding the participant of my role as a researcher was not an issue. He was happy to be quoted. The majority of the text features my initial descriptions of a home recording-studio apartment. This was both my first visit to the apartment and, I believe, my first time in a home recording studio. I am not particularly happy with the quality of my descriptions. The excerpt does an adequate job characterizing first impressions and personal feelings, but my comment about “earlier this week” indicates that I didn’t write these field notes “as soon as possible” after the observation period as Bailey suggests. Letting the time lapse is a good example of what not to do—for the descriptions are quite thin. However, trying to describe the space and realizing how difficult it was pushed me to start paying more attention to descriptive details. For instance, I include a memo to ask about a piece of recording equipment. Looking back on these descriptions, I realize that I was more concerned with the general layout and feel of the apartment (something that I soon came to know by heart) than specifics regarding such things as technologies of recording. Bailey reminds us that field note writing serves as a way for field researchers to orient themselves. As I became more accustomed to recording studios and began partaking in recording myself, the particular equipment used became much more important to me. Yet initially, my inability to articulate any details about these means of recording signaled a perceptual oversight—something to start noting. Finally, the last paragraph of the excerpt concerns my (academic) interpretation of the meaning of a song. When I asked the artist about it, the explanation he gave me was a lot simpler. This is a pattern I noticed. Listeners often find more social-commentary in a song than the artists themselves will (at least) admit to. Field Note 2

Page 19 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Just after my arrival at work [Amoeba Music] FQ said to me: “we were listening to our old four-track tapes last night, and that’s the most underground shit ever.” When I asked him if I could quote him on this, he consented and even went so far as to look over my shoulder as I wrote it down, interjecting to make sure that I quoted him correctly. Earlier this week I went to FQ’s apartment. Actually a spot that he shares with EV. So together it makes [the hip-hop group] the Latter’s home base. Downstairs was a sparse kitchen that much resembled college student housing. A life sized Manute Bol poster to the left of the refrigerator. Various empty beer bottles and cans. Little in the way of [kitchen] accessories—spice rack, etc. Looked like it was used for the bare minimum. EV’s room was the recording headquarters. Computer, monitor and hard drive, various computer accessories, a microphone with a spit screen (ask about this) next to it. Turntables and a mixer along with multiple records and good large speakers. This was the right side of the room—equipment with two chairs—while the left side more resembled a traditional bedroom, Bed, dresser, etc. The room was very large. From this room FQ pulled up a bunch of music files which made up the Latter’s latest music . . . these new tracks sounded awesome. I was really moved thinking that this duo and particularly this lyricist mark high evolution of hip hop—making much of the stuff that was on the market now look simple in comparison. He helped to cultivate this belief by guiding me through each track but still I couldn’t help but think that these guys were really on to something. In terms of beats but especially in terms of rhyming. QUESTION – How much does equipment affect what you are able to do? In terms of putting songs together? Do you feel limited? There was one particular song about FQ over indulging himself and running to the bathroom only to realize he was dreaming. I understood the song as a well-crafted tale dealing with the degree to which health risks of various foods and substances are marketed in order to sustain industries of health consciousness. To my disappointment, FQ told me that it was just about a dream he had about getting all this food for X-Mas—thinking it was great but then suffering after he had eaten it—and then realizing that it was a dream. And there was some significance of wheat-bread in the whole explanation. References Lederman, R. (1990). Pretexts for ethnography: On reading fieldnotes. In R. Sanjek (Ed.), Fieldnotes: The makings of anthropology (pp. 71–91). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. O’Reilly, K. (2012). Ethnographic methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Source: Anthony Kwame Harrison.

Conclusions The most crucial thing to know about field notes is that you have to take them. The way you organize your notes, the type of journal you use, and whether you take them in public or private all pale in comparison to the need to write them. The bottom line is take lots of notes, every day, type them, expand them, and analyze their contents. I have suggested multiple ways to help ensure your research is well done. In the next chapter, I present an Page 20 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

overview of how your work will be judged and strategies for improving your results.

Chapter Highlights • Writing field notes is a requirement of valid field research. • Field notes are continually expanded and contain more than notes about what was observed. • Field notes contain detailed descriptions, things previously forgotten, analytic ideas and inferences, personal feelings, things to think about and do, and reflexive thoughts. • Field notes should be completed soon after each observational period, and they may take twice as long to write as the time spent observing. • Notes taken in the field should be typed so as to make them amenable for analysis on a computer.

Exercises 1. Go to a public setting where you have never been. Observe this setting for 15 minutes without taking any field notes. Wait 24 hours and then create a full set of field notes from your memory. Part of observing is listening so try to remember what was being said. Write a description using your field notes and anything else you can remember. On another day, go to another public setting where you have never been. Observe this setting for 15 minutes, taking highly detailed field notes about your observations, including as much as you can about what was said. Try to write verbatim quotes. As soon as possible, create a full set of field notes. Write a description using your field notes and anything else you can remember. Turn in your two sets of full field notes with this exercise. Compare your two descriptions in terms of the quality. 2. Keep field notes from as soon as you get up until you go to bed of what you are doing, where you are, and how you are feeling. That is, observe yourself. Using the field notes, type a detailed description of your day. Also write about the process of taking field notes while you were simultaneously engaging in the activities that you had to write about. At a minimum you need to explain the kinds of field notes you used—jotted, full, and so on. You can include such things as, but not limited to, Page 21 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

how often you wrote, how difficult it was to organize the notes into a description, and so on. You can choose to describe your experience with writing field notes about yourself in any way you want as long as it is detailed and reflective. 3. Select a public place where there is a lot of activity (e.g., a crowded party in your friend’s apartment, a restaurant, a bowling alley, a shopping mall, or a weight room), and spend 1 hour observing and writing field notes. Part of observing is listening, so be sure to take good field notes on what is being said. Type a set of full field notes. Then write a detailed description of what you observed. Your description should not be a chronological log, but rather it should be organized in other ways. You might, for example, describe the activities of the people who were always in the setting and another section about those who entered and left. You might have a section on how different small acts get combined into larger activities that then result in a final event. You might have a section that focuses on what people were saying about a topic or activity. You decide how you want to organize your descriptions into a coherent narrative. Then explain how you took your notes: privately, jotted or full, journal or phone, and so on. 4. Use your smartphone, iPad, or other digital device, that will allow you to take notes while in the field. Do not use a computer or write them out on paper. Select a public setting where you have not been before and observe for 15 minutes. Make a typed copy of your notes. Write a detailed description of what you observed. What are the pros and cons of taking notes in this way? 5. Take field notes as you conduct a 10-minute interview with a friend on a topic that requires him or her to talk at length. For example, ask broad questions, such as asking your friend to talk about as many high school experiences as he or she can. As you take notes, use quotation marks when you are able to write down exactly what was said. Do not ask your friend to slow down and repeat things. Type fuller field notes as soon after the interview as you can. Write as close to a verbatim transcript of what was said during the interview and turn this in. Then write a reflection about taking and transcribing the content of an interview.

Page 22 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Harrison, A. (2016). Example field notes. Phillippi, J., & Lauderdale, J. (2017). A guide to field notes for qualitative research: Context and conversation. Qualitative Health Research, DOI: 10.49732317697102. 1–8. First published date: April-05-2017. Tjora, A. (2006). Writing small discoveries: An exploration of fresh observers’ observations. Qualitative Research, 6, 429–451. Wolfinger, N. (2002). On writing fieldnotes: Collection strategies and background expectancies. Qualitative Research, 2. 85–95.

Recommended Additional Reading de Laine, M. (2000) Field notes: Ethics and the emotional self. In M. de Laine Fieldwork, participation and practice: Ethics and dilemmas in qualitative research (pp. 146–176). London, England: Sage Publications Ltd. Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Sanjek, R. (Ed.). (1990). Fieldnotes: The makings of anthropology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Walford, G. (2009). The practice of writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Ethnography and Education, 4, 117–130.

Page 23 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• journals

• Field notes • Fieldwork • Observational research https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 24 of 24

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 10: Procedures for Increasing Validity and Trustworthiness

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • discuss validity and reliability and ways to achieve them; • discuss trustworthiness, credibility, dependability, transferability, and confirmability and ways to achieve them; • compare different types of generalization; • explain the purposes and types of triangulation; and • use member checks, audit trails, peer debriefing, and expert reviews.

I start this chapter with a discussion of standards used to evaluate field research. Good research should have high validity and/or trustworthiness. Notice the “and/or” in the sentence. Are validity and trustworthiness the same things but with different names? Shakespeare (1597) said, “That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Or are the two evaluative standards different, with some researchers saying we should strive for validity and others saying trustworthiness? This would mean Gertrude Stein (1922) got it wrong when she wrote a “rose is a rose is a rose.” We are going to explore the different perspectives in this chapter. Also, I present strategies for enhancing the likelihood of achieving validity and/or trustworthiness.

Validity and Trustworthiness Researchers strive to have their research meet high standards of excellence. If they accomplish this goal, some qualitative researchers refer to their research as having validity, sometimes also referred to as rigor. Others researchers, instead of focusing on validity, say they want their research to be trustworthy. The goal associated with both validity and trustworthiness is to produce high-quality research that accurately reflects the participants’ experiences in the setting. The requirements for judging whether researchers have achieved this goal vary for the two criteria, but the objectives are the same. In this paragraph, I only introduce some of the concepts associated with evaluation, with more details to folPage 2 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

low. For validity to be achieved, the research must have internal validity and be reliable, generalizable, objective, and value free. For those who focus on trustworthiness as the overarching standard, the research has to be conducted and presented in such a way that others believe, or trust, the results and find the research worthy of attention (Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Trustworthiness includes credibility, dependability, transferability, and confirmability. These are elaborated upon below. Qualitative researchers may differ on whether we should strive for validity or trustworthiness. The problem arises because validity, reliability, generalizability, and objectivity are fundamental requirements for quantitative research, and some qualitative researchers feel that this set of criteria does not apply to the paradigmatic assumptions, research designs, methodology, and types of analysis and presentations style related to qualitative research. They use an alternative set of criteria associated with trustworthiness. Others believe the standards associated with validity are appropriate and should be used for judging qualitative research, although they meet them and define them in somewhat different ways (Golafshani, 2003; Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, & Spiers, 2002). I am going to make comparisons among different standards used by qualitative researchers, with only occasional references to evaluation standards used by quantitative researchers. To aid your learning, I have organized the criteria into two sets, but in practice, they are not mutually exclusive or exhaustive. Comparing the two sets as if the elements in one are alternatives to elements in the other is a common simplification that should serve as an introduction to the criteria. Further, as you continue to learn about qualitative methodology, you will find variations of the definitions and more criteria than given here. Table 10.1 includes brief definitions of the criteria that you can refer to as you continue to read. You can see from this table why I said that the criteria are not mutually exclusive. As one example, researchers who want their research to be reliable would also want their research to be dependable.

Internal Validity and Credibility Validity is a complex concept because there are many types of validity—internal, external, construct, and criterion, to name a few. Internal validity is studying (measuring) what you intend to study in ways that determine how things really are in your setting. This is a primary concern for some qualitative researchers. If you want to learn about people’s views about the president, for example, a question asking about political party affiliation is not directly asking what you want to know and thus lacks internal validity. To achieve internal vaPage 3 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

lidity, the findings should be the true and accurate representation of the phenomenon of interest to you. The quest for internal validity is consistent with the ontological perspective associated with a post-positivist paradigm that there is a social reality—a way things really are—that with appropriate methods can be discovered. The goal is to find the “right answer,” while knowing that it can never be known with certainty. Table 10.1 Evaluative criteria for field research Set One

Set Two

Internal validity: Studying what you intended to in order to accurate-

Credibility: Findings are believable, authentic, and plausible as judged by

ly represent the phenomenon of interest

the participants and others (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Reliability: Consistency of findings if repeated

Dependability: Conclusions seem logical based on detailed descriptions of procedures (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Generalizability: Results from the sample apply to the larger popu-

Transferability: Results provide insights useful in other settings and make

lation from which the sample was drawn.

theoretical contributions (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Objectivity and value free: The results are independent of the re-

Confirmability: The findings are firmly linked to the data (Lincoln & Guba,

searcher, and researcher’s values are not relevant.

1985).

The issue of internal validity is somewhat problematic for researchers who adhere to paradigms other than post-positivism. If the ontological position of the researcher is that a stable, single, social reality does not exist, then the concept of internal validity cannot be applied in the same manner. As a way to avoid this ontological conundrum, some researchers mostly ignore concerns about internal validity and emphasize the criterion of credibility. Credibility implies believability, authenticity, and plausibility of results (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Participants in the setting are key to determining whether your results are accurate representations of their experiences and, therefore, whether your work is credible (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Miles & Huberman, 1994). In addition to participants, others who read your work must also conclude that your research is believable, seems right, and is trustworthy.

Page 4 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

A credible rendering does not mean you got “the right answer” but rather that it seems accurate based on how you conducted your research. Thus, making decisions about credibility is highly dependent upon the procedures you employ, and others need to know what these are to be able to judge your research. Therefore, you must provide in-depth details about your methodology, from gaining entrée to how you collected and analyzed your data, and show how your conclusions were derived from the data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Patton, 1999). You cannot establish credibility without this.

Reliability and Dependability Some qualitative researchers believe that for research to be valid the results must be reliable, which implies consistency. For example, reliable questions are those that, if asked again at another time, by you or someone else, elicit the same or close responses from interviewees. Conclusions are reliable if different researchers draw similar ones from the same setting when the research is conducted in a similar way. If not, this suggests that at least some findings are wrong and therefore not reliable and thus not valid. Some researchers say reliability is not obtainable and not a major concern. Given that findings are affected by the relationship between the researcher and participants, there is not an expectation that the relationships would be similar for all researchers. Consequently, the results are not going to be the same, not even for you if you were to explore the same phenomena at different times. In lieu of reliability, researchers use the criterion of dependability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). If your research is dependable, then someone reading your results should conclude that your findings seem logical based on how you conducted your research. Once your procedures are known, others will have the context for understanding any lack of traditional reliability. It should be clear why one researcher’s findings differ from the findings of another if he or she conducted similar research in the setting. Different results are not enough to suggest that one of the researchers is wrong. Similar to credibility, being able to determine whether your conclusions seem logical requires that you document the procedures you used from start to finish in great detail. You are more apt to have your work judged as dependable if there are close linkages among the core elements of your research—research questions, data collection, analysis, and findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). This point has been stressed in multiple places in this book.

Page 5 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Generalizability and Transferability Generalizability, also called external validity, is another evaluative criterion for field researchers. Generalizability means that what was learned from the sample studied also applies to the larger population from which the sample was drawn. In quantitative research, statistical criteria are the basis for deciding if results are generalizable. Qualitative data does not lend itself to statistical analysis, so decisions about generalizations cannot be made in the same way as when using quantitative data. Some researchers assert that striving for generalization is not a concern and may in fact be counterproductive to their efforts (Hoepfl, 1997). One of the strengths of field research is its focus on local conditions, specialized knowledge, in-depth accounts, and a highly contextualized understanding of a particular setting, all of which decrease the likelihood of generalization. The lack of comparable settings and small, nonprobability samples further erode generalizability of some field research results. Knowing that generalizability often is problematic for field research, some researchers reach for a substitute goal: transferability, a criterion that refers to the applicability of findings beyond the setting, situations, and participants included in the research (Stake, 1995). One type of transferability is known as naturalistic generalizability (Stake, 1995). Naturalistic generalization does not mean that the results would be the same for other similar groups or settings. Rather, it means that the findings might provide insights for understanding other settings. Liebow (1994) indicated that he felt his research had naturalistic generalizability. He wrote, “[t]here is no claim that the women or the shelters here are representative of homeless women and shelters elsewhere” (p. 1). Then he qualifies the statement by adding, “I do believe, however, that the problems the women face, and the dynamics of their relationships with one another and with others, do have relevance for other homeless women and for homeless men as well” (p. 1).

Page 6 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Photo 10.1 A researcher studying day trading in stocks might find Rosecrance’s (1990) research at race tracks provides insights into day traders. Figure 11

Source: © iStockphoto.com/Drazen Statistical generalization is a static characteristic of quantitative research. But with naturalistic generalizations, each reader determines whether the research findings are transferable. Thus, the degree of transferability varies with the experience, expertise, and knowledge of the reader. For example, if an expert in the field and someone new to the discipline each read a research report, the expert might find it highly transferable, whereas the novice might find it low in transferability. The importance of the reader in the evaluative process does not mean, however, that you as researcher cannot affect the degree of transferability of your research. On the contrary, the more details about a setting that you provide and the higher the quality of the research overall, the more apt others are to find your results useful when studying different settings (Hoepfl, 1997). You can increase transferability by explaining how and why the research has implications beyond just the setting or group under study. A second type of transferability involves analytic generalization, which is generalizing to a theory instead of to a larger population (Yin, 1994). Such generalizations occur when the researcher identifies concepts and social processes that have theoretical implications or significance beyond a specific setting. Locating one’s

Page 7 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

research within an explicit conceptual and theoretical framework increases the likelihood of analytic generalizations. Pershing’s (2001) study of alleged honor code violations among women “midshipmen” at the Naval Academy provides an example of analytic generalization. Pershing discovered three distinct factors that have implications for Kanter’s (1977) theory of gender integration. Kanter’s theory focused on the entry of women into male-dominated civilian corporations. In the study of “midshipmen,” Pershing identified the women’s high visibility, perceptions of them as subperformers, and their lack of male friendship networks as contributing to the women’s overrepresentation as violators. The concepts derived from Pershing’s work supports Kanter’s theory. They also have applicability to settings beyond the military and corporate world. Thus, Pershing’s work has analytic generalizations from a specific setting to other settings.

Objectivity, Value Neutrality, and Confirmability Particularly among researchers who adhere to a post-positivist paradigm, objectivity and value neutrality are important evaluative criteria. To achieve objectivity, they strive to have as little influence on the research results as an astronomer has on stars. Value neutral researchers think that their values should play no role in the research process. These researchers try to make sure that their values, opinions, prejudices, hopes, and beliefs do not affect their research. Otherwise, the research is biased. In contrast, researchers operating within other paradigms assert that the lack of objectivity and value neutrality are inevitable and even occasionally desirable. These researchers are not as concerned about objectivity and value neutrality as they are confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). For confirmability to be achieved, the researcher needs to demonstrate that the findings are closely linked to the data. The researcher does not engage in the pretense of objectivity or value neutrality, but this is not the same as arguing for the legitimacy of biased work. On the contrary, because confirmability requires showing the tight congruence between the data and the findings and being open about possible influences, the likelihood of bias is reduced. As a researcher, you have to reflect upon and document the ways in which you may have affected the results. The research is not about you, but you are centrally located in it. Thus you need to be aware of the ways that your values might drive your research, particularly if you adhere to a critical paradigm. As is the case for all the requirements for trustworthiness, the more details you can provide about your research, the better able others will Page 8 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

be able to judge its confirmability.

Summary The above do not exhaust the major evaluative criteria used to judge qualitative research, and the list continues to expand and diversify. For example, Guba and Lincoln (2005), pioneers in the area of alternative ways of evaluating research, include different types of authenticity as important criteria. Tracy (2010) suggests we should consider resonance, worthy topic, sincerity, substantive contribution, ethics, and expression of a reality when determining the quality of qualitative research. Obviously, discussing all the criteria used to judge research is beyond the scope of this book. Rather than summarize more criteria, I turn to some of the ways to help you achieve the criteria already discussed and others. The procedures you should follow to produce high-quality research have been stressed in many of the previous chapters. What follows are a few more.

Strategies for Enhancing Validity and Trustworthiness In this section, I discuss six of many strategies for making your work valid and trustworthy: member checks, audit trails, peer debriefing, expert reviews, triangulation, and mixed methods. Some of the strategies I discuss can meet multiple evaluative criteria. For example, a procedure that enhances credibility simultaneously helps establish internal validity, transferability, and confirmability.

Member Checks Member checks help to increase validity and trustworthiness. Member checking is when you ask the participants (the members) to review your research and provide feedback. Member checking allows participants a chance to add, confirm, refute, and/or clarify what they have said. I think of the quote by Yogi Berra, a famous baseball player: “I didn’t really say everything I said.” Member checks help you determine, from the members’ perspective, whether they really did say what they said. Member checks are not always useful, desirable, or possible. Still, your research will be more positively evaluated if participants in the setting assess your research as an accurate reflection of the phenomenon you are studying (Fetterman, 1989, p. 21). Page 9 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

It’s worth cautioning you that participants may not be happy about the way you present them and about your conclusions; this is not the same as participants telling you they think descriptions and comments attributed to them are incorrect (Fetterman, 1989, pp. 21–22). When you ask participants in the setting to review a draft of the final paper, preferably in time to make changes, stress that what you’re interested in is whether you accurately present what they said to you during interviews or other interactions. Hopefully, the participants will say, “What I said is consistent with what you said I said, and your interpretations of what I said seem right.” Stacey (1991) used member checking in her study of two families. Two members objected to what she had written. She notes, In the interval since we had spoken last, Pam and Dotty both had been reading drafts of the chapters I had written about their respective families. Neither was entirely pleased with what she had read. Dotty wished that I had not portrayed her family’s plight in such disheartening terms. It was a depressing story, she agreed, but she would have given it a “more Pollyannaish” cast. However, Dotty observed, “It’s your book, not mine.” Pam had a comparable response. She had not yet finished reading all of the chapters, in part because she was finding doing so such an uncomfortable experience. Pam had detected a number of minor factual errors in my portrait of her family. . . . Like Dotty, however, Pam had concluded that my textual errors were not her business. “After all,” she reminded me, the book “is really not my baby; it’s yours.” (pp. xiii–xiv) In this short paragraph, Stacey conveys several important points. First, Pam and Dotty did not totally agree with what she had written; such disagreement is not necessarily a problem, nor is it particularly uncommon. Second, neither Dotty nor Pam claimed ownership of the final project, which suggests that perhaps they felt less like collaborators in the project and more like individuals to be written “about,” despite Stacey’s efforts for it to be otherwise. Whether this represents a concern would depend on the researcher’s paradigm. Third, we learn that Stacey stayed in contact with these women after she left the field. Fourth, because Stacey shared these comments with her readers, her work gains a measure of credibility. Finally, the report made Pam uncomfortable, a fact that reminds us that the way we write and share our work involves serious ethical issues. How you should respond if you discover that participants dispute the quotes you attribute to them or disagree with the way you present certain episodes? It is important to tell participants ahead of time how their input will be used. If you plan to give the participants opportunities to give you feedback, it’s a good idea to include this in your informed consent document. Remember that participants have to be able to withdraw from the Page 10 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

research at any time. Accordingly, this means that they can take away your right to use information from and about them. Still, there are limits as to when they can invoke that right and how much control they have over what you ultimately write. You are not obligated to respond to requested changes, unless you have told the participants otherwise.

Photo 10.2 Asking participants to respond to drafts can help improve the quality of your research. Figure 12

Source: Photo courtesy of the author. Often, however, researchers feel compelled to take some sort of action if a participant responds negatively. You might consider including the members’ reactions as footnotes in the final version of your paper. In his study of homeless women, for example, Liebow (1994) asked two homeless women and the director of a shelter to write comments on his draft document. He edited their comments for length but changed none of their language. In italicized footnotes on the relevant pages, he included some of the comments that confirmed his viewpoints and all of the comments that disagreed with what he had written, that were inconsistent with each other, or that offered an alternative interpretation (p. xvii). One such footnote, proffered by Grace, responds to a passage that states, “Many staff persons also offered consolation, encouragement, advice when asked, and a sympathetic ear” (p. 160). The footnote on that page, attributed to Grace, reads,

Page 11 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Elliot lives in a dream world. He thinks all those staff people and volunteers were around to give love and help. I found some folks sincere in their efforts to help, others it seemed were there to be congratulated for being a volunteer. . . . The way people in authority treated you sometimes, I thought they were just out to rob me of what little I had left of my self-esteem. Bourgois (1995) also used member checks, in part because of ethical concerns. He writes, I also wanted to avoid excessively invading the privacy of the major characters in the book, and I discussed these issues at length with all of them. Only one person actually asked me to delete some material from the epilogue, which, of course, I did. The problems of selection, editing, and censorship have tremendous political, ethical, and personal ramifications that ethnographers must continually confront, without ever being confident of resolving them. (p. 342) Jordal (2011) used member checking with the 14 couples he interviewed for his dissertation research. He accomplished this by sending them a copy of one of his coding schemes (preliminary results of his analysis) with details about the categories he assigned to them. Only four of the couples responded. Three couples felt his coding reflected their situation, but one couple gave detailed feedback about what codes they felt fit and did not fit with their experiences. Several things are important about this example. First, even when given the opportunity, less than half of the participants responded. This is not uncommon. Second, rather than just having them review a final draft of the results, Jordal had participants respond to how he coded their interviews early in the process, which improved additional rounds of coding and thus the analysis and eventual results. Third, he included details about the member checks in his dissertation. The combination of the items just mentioned contributed to the trustworthiness of his research. Regardless of the fact that many researchers have encouraged participants to read and comment on their final product, this procedure is not always possible or advisable (Stake, 1995). In some situations, once a study is completed, the participants might not be accessible; in others, continued interaction is highly problematic. For example, in my evaluation of a business that provides services to seriously mentally ill youth and their families, contact with the clients after the completion of the program would have been inappropriate. Interviewing participants about the services after they were discharged might have prompted some of them to ask my advice regarding current problems they were experiencing, and my refusal to help could have been misinterpreted. I could not even refer them to the professionals from the company that provided the service because they no longer had the required authorization to be in contact with the families. Page 12 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Seeking feedback is often easier said than done. Mitch Duneier (1999) encountered some resistance when he attempted to read relevant parts of his book to the street vendors he studied. When he approached Keith, one of the vendors, he was unable to complete even a single sentence before Keith attempted to terminate the conversation. Further efforts only made Keith increasingly uninterested (Duneier, 1999): Keith: Man, do me a favor. Open the beer . . . Keith: Give me the damn paper and damn pen and let me sign . . . Mitch: First, you gotta hear what the books says. Keith: Oh, my God. Open the beer, please. This is getting on my nerves. Mitch: First we gotta finish our work. Keith: Damn that! I’m not signing nothing without no beer. (pp. 349–350) When Keith becomes inebriated, Duneier (1999) terminates the session, and only after contacting him three more times is Duneier able to read to him all relevant sections of the manuscript. Why was it so important for Duneier to seek Keith’s input, particularly when he was so resistant? Duneier made multiple attempts to get Keith’s response because he believes that he shouldn’t publish something about someone that he “cannot look him or her in the eye and read” (p. 351). Conducting member checks is only one of many ways to increase the validity and trustworthiness of your research. Creating an audit trail is another.

Audit Trail Recall that trustworthiness is partly judged by whether your conclusions seem accurate based on the methodology you employed. Thus, you need to create an audit trail that consists of detailed recordkeeping about the entire research process. The audit trail begins when you first start to think about your research, continues with specifics about the procedures you used, and documents how your process led to your final conclusions. Reflexive writings are also part of the audit trail. The audit trail is vital to the process of evaluating your research. Audit trails are so important for establishing dependability that in some contexts they are referred to Page 13 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

as dependability audits. Audits are used during peer debriefing and expert reviews (Creswell, 1998).

Peer Debriefing and Expert Reviews Although most researchers find fieldwork a solitary pursuit, this does not negate the importance of seeking help from others. Frequent discussions with your professor, committee members, and fellow students are part of the process known as peer debriefing. A peer debriefing should begin early and occur frequently. Sharing your work with others may result in useful feedback and give you new ideas and includes checking for consistency among all features of the research—from the purpose to the conclusion and all parts in between. Expert reviews involve seeking input from someone with expertise in your particular research topic, which can include someone not working directly with you. Often expert reviews occur in the later stages of research. For undergraduates, the expert to be relied upon is typically the faculty member overseeing the research, and for graduate students, their committee chair usually holds this role or someone well known in the field. Jordal (2011) believes working closely with his dissertation advisor, Katherine Allen, contributed to the quality of his research. She independently coded his data and had many discussions with him about it. (Jordal asked if I would specifically mention her name as a way of passing on his gratitude, and I am happy to oblige.) He also used an external auditor familiar with his research as his expert reviewer. The better your audit trail, the more helpful peer debriefing and expert reviews will be. At least three problems related to peer debriefing and expert reviews are worth mentioning. One is that it is difficult to find people to take on these time-consuming tasks. A second is that an expert review often occurs too late in the process to fix fundamental problems (Morse, 2015). I recommend frequent and early interactions with your committee or your instructor to prevent that. A third problem is that you may find that you do not agree with the input from others and will have to resolve the conflict. Even in the case of disagreement, having someone who knows the area working with you throughout the process is extremely valuable. You will need to explain in your final paper whether and how you used peer and expert reviews.

Page 14 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Triangulation Triangulation is another way to increase the validity and trustworthiness of your research. To triangulate means conducting your research in multiple ways to determine whether results are consistent and/or to obtain a more comprehensive and deeper understanding of the participants and the setting. Triangulation comes in many colors. Table 10.2 provides a brief summary. Table 10.2 Forms of triangulation • Multiple methods for collecting qualitative data ○ Collecting data by interviewing and observing ○ Collecting data using variations of the same method, such as unstructured and structured interviewing • Multiple data sources ○ Participants with different characteristics, statuses, roles, and social locations ○ Different types of data (e.g., observations, documents, speeches, and memes) • Multiple theories and concepts • Multiple ways of analyzing the data • Multiple researchers • Mixed methods ○ Using quantitative and qualitative data in the same study

Triangulation can be completed by using data from a variety of sources and types and employing multiple methods to collect data. Multiple methods, or multimethods, can include different ways of collecting data. An example is holding structured and unstructured interviews, observing, and participating in the setting to gain insights. Multiple data sources can be used to triangulate, such as interviewing both children and adults. Videos, speeches, documents, drawings, and people all can be data sources used in the same study. During Chenault’s (2004) research on a public housing community, she engaged in triangulation when she interviewed multiple members of the resident council, representatives of the housing authority, and HUD officials. In addition, she observed and interacted with members of the resident council, participated in the events they planned, and performed a content analysis of HUD documents. Collecting data in different ways from a variPage 15 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ety of sources is common for student researchers. Approaching problems using different theoretical frames is another form of triangulation. My experiences indicate that this is not easily accomplished by beginning researchers, who may not have a strong background in theory. Multiple researchers independently analyzing the data and comparing results is also a form of triangulation but having multiple researchers involved in student research is rare, other than for advisory and teaching purposes. You also engage in triangulation when you analyze your data using more than one technique. It can be reassuring when triangulation leads to corroboration, but it is not the kiss of death when this is not the case (Creswell, 1998, p. 202). I caution against rejecting data and conclusions just because triangulation identifies inconsistencies. After all, reliability is not a major concern for a lot of field researchers. The benefit of triangulation is that a more thorough, robust, nuanced, and in-depth understanding of a complex phenomenon may be obtained by approaching it in multiple ways. Triangulation can be useful for establishing the validity and trustworthiness of your research, but using it to try to determine “truth” runs counter to some of the paradigmatic assumptions that underpin qualitative research framed within an interpretative or critical paradigm. What might ultimately lead to insights into a setting is understanding why different participants give different accounts, different types of data lead to different conclusions, and multiple researchers disagree with each other. Table 10.3 Questions researchers need to answer when using mixed methods • How will you reconcile the paradigmatic assumptions of quantitative and qualitative methodologies that are in opposition (i.e., objectivity is paramount for post-positivist research and not seen as obtainable for other paradigms)? • Will the data be used to address similar research questions and purposes or different ones? • What evaluative standards will be used—validity or trustworthiness? • Is the primary purpose of the qualitative portion to generate ideas for the quantitative (or vice versa)? • Does the research consist of a primary study that uses one type of data, with the other data supplemental, or are both types of data equally important? • Will the final paper integrate and merge the results or will the two sets of results be presented separately? (Creswell, Klassen, Piano Clark, & Smith, 2011; Morse & Cheek, 2014; Padgett, 2012)

Page 16 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Mixed Methods Researchers sometimes use mixed methods as a way to engage in triangulation and enhance the validity and trustworthiness of their research. Mixed methods can also be a research design in and of itself. The term mixed methods is used to describe research that uses both quantitative and qualitative data. Using mixed methods requires researchers to ask questions as they design their research that are not as relevant as when using multiple methods. Some of these are listed in Table 10.3. As noted, mixed-methods research can use both qualitative data and quantitative. An interesting variant is to make textual data amenable to statistical analysis. An analytical strategy that is gaining prominence is qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). When using QCA, the researcher transforms qualitative data into numerical data in order to explore complex connections within the data. Sedgwick’s (2016) article included in the online supplement is an excellent review of QCA. Mixed methods are becoming increasingly popular but in my experience still rare for undergraduate student researchers.

Conclusions I have treated validity and trustworthiness as belonging to two separate camps. In practice, the criteria and how they are used have morphed over time, and some scholars mix and match them. You may have noticed that I write validity and trustworthiness rather than validity or trustworthiness. This is because achieving either depends upon you conducting high-quality research, and many of the requirements are the same regardless of the evaluative criteria you use. To review, I list some of the factors in Table 10.4 that can help achieve the goals of validity and trustworthiness. By now, many of them should be familiar to you. Table 10.4 Factors that contribute to validity and trustworthiness Field research should • have a topic and purpose worthy of the effort required to conduct the research; • have all the parts of the research linked with the research questions and one another; • meet ethical standards;

Page 17 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• include theoretical concepts and comparisons with previous research; • be designed to be flexible enough to adapt to unforeseen circumstances; • be consistent with paradigmatic assumptions and a field research design; • consist of prolonged engagement and interactions in the field; • have data collected through observations, interviews, field notes, interactions, and participation in the field; • be reflexive and recognize the values and the role of the researcher in what is learned; • be concerned with field relationships; • be transparent about the methods, challenges, and other factors that affect the findings; • use member checks, audit trails, peer debriefing, expert reviewers, and triangulation; • have the data coded multiple times using rigorous coding strategies; • have the data analyzed using techniques appropriate for the research question; • have results that are substantiated by presenting the original data upon which the conclusions are based; • have results that include thick descriptions, patterns, divergent viewpoints and perspectives, and attention to context and setting; and • have a final paper that is written in a way appropriate for the design and audience and engages the reader.

At this point in your research, you will have collected data by observing, interacting, and interviewing. You will have kept copious field notes. Ideally, member checks, peer and expert reviews, some form of triangulation, and mixed methods were used to help ensure the quality of your research. It is now time to introduce you to procedures for making sense out of all that data. The first step is coding your data.

Chapter Highlights • Field researchers strive to engage in research that is valid and trustworthy. • Not all researchers agree on the criteria to be used to evaluate field research. • Some researchers prioritize validity, generalizability, and reliability as standards for evaluation. • Trustworthiness, credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability are used as evaluative

Page 18 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

standards by some researchers. • Member checks are done to seek feedback from participants about the research. • Audit trails, peer debriefing, and expert reviews can help ensure the validity and trustworthiness of field research. • Different types of triangulation can be useful for establishing a deep understanding of a complex phenomenon of interest.

Exercises 1. Field researchers debate about which set of evaluative standards is appropriate for judging field research. Indicate whether you think validity, reliability, and generalizability or trustworthiness, credibility, dependability, transferability, and confirmability are more appropriate. Justify your answer. 2. Imagine that you are required to give a lecture in your class about the strategies presented in this chapter on how to produce high-quality research. Create a PowerPoint lecture, or the equivalent, that you would use. You should have a minimum of 20 slides but not more than 30. Your slides should be written in your own words and not sentences copied from the book. If you were giving your presentation, you would discuss what is on the slides. Therefore, you do not have to have a lot of details on them. Your slides should have a sentence or two that states the major point of each slide and related key words or phrases that you would elaborate verbally. In other words, avoid slides that are full of complete sentences that you would just stand and read to your peers. You can assume others in the class have read the chapter. Your task is to review the major points. 3. Pretend that you are conducting research, and you want to engage in triangulation. Your purpose is to explore how living in poverty affects children. Write a narrow research question related to this purpose. Make up any details you need for your imaginary research that are appropriate for your research question, such as the names of organizations, locations, people’s roles, and so on. For example, you could pretend your research setting is Martel, a small community in rural Ohio, or an after-school program for disadvantaged youth. Discuss four different ways you will collect data to answer this question and three different types or sources of data you will use. Be creative! Page 19 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

4. Explain why detailed field notes, reflexive writing, and other written records about your procedures are important for establishing validity and trustworthiness. 5. Explain what member checks are, how they are completed, and their pros and cons.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C. & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26. 1802–1811. Morse, J. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25, 1212–1222. Sedgwick, D. (2016). Using qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): A way to explore complex connections. Tracy, S. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 837–851.

Recommended Additional Reading Chenail, R. (2010). Getting specific about qualitative research generalizability. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 5, 1–11. Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2014). Evaluating qualitative research. In P. Leavy (Ed.) The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 677–696). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Horsburgh, D. (2003). Evaluation of qualitative research. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12, 307–312.

Page 20 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Koelsch, L. (2013). Reconceptualizing the member check interview. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12, 168–179.

• credibility • standards

• Validity • Internal validity • Credibility https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 21 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 11: Introduction to Analysis and Coding

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • explain what it means to analyze data; • explain how to code data; • explain the differences among open codes, categories, and concepts; and • code data.

We now move from data collection to analyzing data. The multipronged process of analysis requires the researcher to wave a magic wand over massive amounts of data while sprinkling fairy dust, until such time as the answers to research questions appear. It isn’t quite like that, but I am reluctant to start this chapter by telling you that analyzing data is extremely time-consuming and difficult work. I promise this: It will also be enjoyable, interesting, and rewarding. An essential first step when analyzing your data is coding. In this chapter, I provide an overview of analysis and then focus on how to code your data.

Analysis Analyzing data is the process of searching for meaning within the data. It is the analysis of the data from which the final results are created. Hatch (2002) provides an excellent explanation of analysis: Analysis means organizing and interrogating data in ways that allow researchers to see patterns, identify themes, discover relationships, develop explanations, make interpretations, mount critiques, or generate theories. It often involves synthesis, evaluation, interpreting, categorization, hypothesizing, comparison, and pattern findings. (p. 148) You might think that analysis starts after all the data has been collected, but it should actually begin at the moment you start to think about conducting a field research project. It continues during each stage of the research process, including gaining entrée, building relationships, observing and interacting in the field, inPage 2 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

terviewing, and writing field notes. Nonetheless, much of it is completed after your fieldwork is finished. You should expect to devote a greater amount of time to analysis than you spent in the field. In fact, Lofland and Lofland (1984) estimate that data analysis takes two to five times longer than data collection. This means that it’s a bad idea to procrastinate—start your fieldwork as soon as you can. Some of the procedures for analyzing qualitative data parallel those used for quantitative data, with which you might be more familiar. At first just a “bunch of numbers,” quantitative data become meaningful only after researchers use specific techniques to compile and organize it. First, the raw data are entered into a software program such as SPSS or STATA. Then researchers use the statistical tests and procedures that are appropriate for testing their hypotheses: cross-tabulations, t-tests, analysis of variance, multiple regression, logit, and hierarchical linear models are just a few of the many options. Sometimes more than one statistical technique is used. After finishing the statistical analysis, researchers draw conclusions about the substantive significance of their findings. Similar to their quantitative counterparts, qualitative researchers gather data. At first, the data are just a “bunch of words” that becomes meaningful for understanding the phenomenon of interest only after being compiled and organized. On the basis of their research questions, qualitative researchers apply the analytical strategies that best serve their purposes. They might use NVivo, Microsoft Word, or other computer programs when performing the appropriate analytical techniques, such as creating typologies, themes, and research stories. This rigorous process is repeated until the researcher has sufficiently analyzed the data to be able to answer the research questions. Regardless of the general similarities between the analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, the process of analyzing qualitative data is less formulaic and messier. When I think about data analysis, I am reminded of the words of the English writer, Margery Allingham (1889–1966): He did not arrive at this conclusion by the decent process of quiet, logical deduction, nor yet by the blinding flash of glorious intuition, but by the shoddy, untidy process halfway between the two by which one usually gets to know things. (ThinkExist.com, 2005) What analysis strategy to use largely depends upon the same factors that affect other parts of the research: research design, research question, purpose, theory, and so on. It is easy to feel overwhelmed when planning and executing the analysis of your data. One student reported to me that her head contained so many different options for analyzing her data that she feared the weight of the decisions would make her topple over. Her

Page 3 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

fear never became a reality, of course, but she nonetheless felt the stress of the choices with which she was faced. To help you avoid a fear of toppling, in this and later chapters, I present a few of the commonly used techniques for analyzing field research data. You already know that massive amounts of data are generated during fieldwork. For example, Bourgois (1995) reported that he analyzed thousands of pages of transcriptions. Regardless of how many pages of text you have, an essential component of field research requires that you become so familiar with the data that it feels like a really good friend—admittedly one who sometimes frustrates you. There is simply no escaping repeated reading of and cognitively interacting with your data. Without these, a rigorous analysis of your data is not possible, and your results will fail to meet even minimal standards of quality. One of the most important ways to immerse yourself in, organize, and analyze your data is through coding. In fact, it is difficult for me to conceive of anything close to valid field research without at least some systematic coding.

Coding Codes are labels, keywords, or brief summaries of each statement or larger chunks of data. Coding is the process of reading a copious amount of raw data, assigning descriptive labels—codes—to most lines of text, grouping the data based on relevant characteristics, and eliminating the chaff until the remaining portions are organized in such a way as to be useful for generating analytic insights. The same data are coded multiple times, ignoring what ceases to be useful and adding and refining the codes until the difficult activity of trying to figure out what it all means in relationship to the research question is completed. In the beginning, coding is somewhat of a mechanical process but with each iteration, it becomes more and more a way of analyzing data. Because coding is essential for other analytical techniques, it is an important skill for you to develop. You probably engage in coding without realizing it. Think of a code as a label. Imagine you have a large stack of paper and assorted stuff piled on your desk. To get organized, you identify each item. Some you put in a stack that you label “bills.” You put all your class material together and put junk mail in another pile and label (code) them accordingly. Then you look at items within each category and sort further. The bills might be subdivided into “bills to pay” and “bills paid.” You organize your class material into “assignments” and “class notes.” The junk mail you ignore. Then you examine it all again. You notice a similarity across your original categories and subcategories. You realize that your “bills to pay” and “assignments” categories both have Page 4 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

concrete deadlines. You combine them into one larger category that you label “things to do.” You look at the size of the “to-do” category and conclude that others are expecting you to complete a lot of tasks in a short period of time. You have just coded the items on your desk. The steps you have taken are central to the coding process: reading the data, labeling, repeating the process, breaking down, and combining in different ways until a conclusion is reached. An extremely important element related to coding is missing from my simple analogy. I failed to say anything about a research question. Not surprisingly, a research question should always be at the forefront when coding. There are different types of coding, and different names may be used for the same type, including initial, open, substantive, axial, selective, theoretical, and focused coding. What type or name you use depends upon your research design, your purpose for coding, your training, and even your personal preference. I am discussing only what I refer to as open and focused coding and doing so in a way that encapsulates some of the others while ignoring variations that are not relevant at this point in your learning.

Open Coding The first pass through the data is often referred to as open or initial coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1990), in which codes are assigned to the text—interview transcripts, field notes, and observations. Each line of text is read, and many are given one or more codes. Codes are assigned through an iterative process—read, code, reread, and code again. Codes are mostly descriptive at the start. You might code people’s activities and what was actually said. Is the person whining, bragging, or explaining, and if so, about what? Who talked to whom to get information after the boss left? How did the cashier respond to the request? Although codes are close to the original words used, and some can be exactly the same words, codes tend to be slightly more general. A common procedure used for classifying data is assigning a code to each line of text. This is referred to as line-by-line coding. Line-by-line coding is frequently used for analyzing interview data, but it is used for other types as well, including observations, videos, e-mail messages, text, tweets, and field notes about your interactions with participants. For some purposes, line-by-line coding is not used. Rather, a paragraph or even an entire interview might be the unit that is the focus of coding.

Page 5 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

The examples in Table 11.1 illustrate bad and good ways of line-by-line coding. You will note that in the lineby-line coding, more than one code was given to some sentences. There are considerable differences between the two examples in Table 11.1. More codes are appropriately assigned in the second example, and they are superior to the first. For example, “marital tension” in the first example is too broad for line-by-line coding of this text. Even worse, the code is not consistent with what is being said. The code reflects assumptions by the coder about a cause of marital tension, even though the wife does not say anything that asserts they are having marital tension. If the disappearing husband is assumed to create marital tension, then why wouldn’t the coder also assume the wife’s inability to “function emotionally and physically” is a source of marital tension? It would be okay to write a footnote entry that reads, “Could disappearing husband cause marital tensions?” However, a question to consider is not the same as the assignment of a code. Notice too, in the second example, how verbs ending in “ing” are used to indicate what the coder thinks the person is saying: she is accounting for, questioning, and explaining. These codes are primarily descriptive, closely associated with what is being said. Much later in the coding process, more general codes will be assigned and small sections of the data will be combined, but not until line-by-line coding is completed multiple times. Once you have coded and recoded the first interview, referred to as a case, you proceed to the second one. After you have finished coding the second case, compare it with the first case. Notice similarities and differences and recode the first as needed. Proceed to the third case, code it, and compare it with the first two. Follow this same procedure with each subsequent case. This process is sometimes referred to as the constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). As you code, are you seeing general patterns or frequent topics? If yes, you may have to return once again to cases that you coded because you may not have noticed them in earlier rounds. Keep your original code, but assign an additional one if needed as a result of the comparisons. Write notes to yourself during this process because you will even code these later, although not necessarily line-by-line. Table 11.1 Line-by-line open coding The following are two modified examples created by Charmaz (2008) to illustrate line-by-line coding. The first is not line-by-line coding; the second is line-by-line open coding. Example One: Not line-by-line open coding

Page 6 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Transcript

Codes

Marital tensions My ex-husband had kind of a double life going on as it turns out; he would disappear for two or three days at a time which became increasingly worse. He had colitis . . . part of it was his colitis but part of it, it turned out, was a hidden cocaine addiction so I couldn’t continue to—in my chronic pain condition and his behavior, just kept me so stressed out where I couldn’t function emotionally and physically to a point. That’s why I say my survival was at stake . . . it hurt me.

Ex-husband’s illness Ex-husband’s addiction Stress

The following is an example of good line-by-line coding. Example Two: Line-by-line open coding

Transcript

Codes

Explaining exhusband’s double life Disappearing husband Escalating disappearances My ex-husband had kind of a double life going on as it turns out; he would disappear for two or three days at a time which be-

Accounting for

came increasingly worse. He had colitis . . . part of it was his colitis but part of it, [as] it turned out was a hidden cocaine ad-

husband’s be-

diction so I couldn’t continue to—in my chronic pain condition and his behavior, just kept me so stressed out where I couldn’t

havior

function emotionally and physically to a point. That’s why I say my survival was at stake . . . it hurt me.

Defining hidden addiction Alluding to limits for self Identifying her pain Explaining stress

Page 7 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Being unable to function Questioning survival of self

Source: Charmaz, K. (2008). Grounded Theory as an Emergent Method. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds), Handbook of Emergent Methods (pp. 155-172). New York: The Guilford Press. Reprinted with permission. After repeated line-by-line coding, start combining similar codes into larger categories, which are then identified by new codes. A category is a general term used to represent a variety of ways of grouping data. A category might be created from all the participants’ explanations of a particular behavior. You could put instances of participants seeking help from others into one category. Hostile statements directed toward others playing a video game could be a category. Physical descriptions of the people in your setting might comprise a category. You could create a category based on a sequence of interactions. An important reminder: Data that does not fit into a category may still be important. As you continue to code, make sure you highlight lines that seem relevant even if they are not yet in a category. You want to avoid losing these when you turn your attention to analyzing your data. Think of your early efforts as creating preliminary categories, as most likely some will change. Once you have categories, decide whether dividing them into subcategories makes sense. The following example illustrates the steps McGuire (1998) followed during coding: (1) line-by-line coding, (2) combing codes to create categories, (3) creating subcategories, and (4) adding an additional category with subcategories. McGuire (1998) wanted to understand at-risk, first-year college students’ perceptions of their academic performance activities. These students were enrolled in an academic intervention program. During her open-coding stage, McGuire coded all the student comments and behaviors that related to their performance activities. Examples are “working at the library” and “talking about a faculty member as a mentor.” Subsequently, during later rounds of coding, McGuire organized the relevant codes into four larger categories: “studying activities,” “interactions with faculty,” “perceptions of grades,” and “mental engagement in academic work.” She then recoded her data to identify variations, or subcategories, within each of the larger categories. For example, for “studying activities” she created the subcategories “perceptions of the need to study” and “preferred style of Page 8 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

studying.” She followed this by recoding the data yet again, adding another category, “expectations for studying.” This category had two subcategories that she labeled “clear expectations” and “unclear expectations.” Table 11.2 illustrates how Jordal (2011) started with codes and then created categories and subcategories. Open codes and categories are at a low level of abstraction: mostly descriptive. As you continue to code, you turn your codes and categories into concepts. Using the term concept to represent the higher level of abstraction is consistent with the fact that theories are made up of concepts. In contrast, some researchers say that open codes are used to create concepts and then relevant concepts combine to form categories, sometimes referred to as conceptual categories. In some ways, it does not matter what the results of the steps are called. What matters is that you move from descriptions to higher level abstractions. Focused coding is the next step you use to create concepts from your data.

Focused Coding During focused coding, or selective coding, you continue the process that you began in open coding, but you hone in even more on what seems to be relevant for your purposes. Only a small portion of the codes you so religiously assigned and categories you created are going to be useful. Focused coding is when you make the major decisions about what is relevant and what is not. Table 11.2 Codes, categories, and subcategories Jordal (2011) conducted his dissertation research on the processes of commitment among married couples in which one partner identified as bisexual. He held 14 in-depth interviews with married couples. His initial round of open coding resulted in 1,687 open codes. As he continued to code using the constant comparative method, he created 12 categories, each with subcategories. One of his categories was marital commitment. It had 24 subcategories with associated codes. Martial Commitment

Subcategories of marital commitment

Open Codes

Coming back home to History Commitment developed early

Page 9 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Strong bonds Shared history Fitting well from the beginning Working together well from the beginning

Secret that binds Secrets Secret “galvanizes” us

Considering separation Leaving is the easy way out Stay or leave Promising not to leave Not quitting on marriage

His other 21 subcategories of martial commitment were compatibility, communication, intentional commitment, questioning, working at it, letting go, being realistic, prioritizing the marriage, separating sex from love, affection/sex, empathy, decision making, shared activities, new (?) realizations, oath/loyalty, risks, struggling, taking stock, support, love, and trust. Each of these had varying number of open codes. For example, communication had 32 and affection/sex had 2. In addition to using a large variety of other coding schemes and analytical techniques, he engaged in five rounds of focused coding, His efforts resulted in a typology and three overarching themes; these types of outcomes are discussed in following chapters.

Like Emeril Lagasse, a master chef and television personality who “kicks” his dishes “up a notch” by adding additional garlic, hot peppers, or other strong seasonings, focused coding involves kicking the open codes and largely descriptive categories up to the conceptual level. It is these more abstract concepts that facilitate your ability to reach analytical insights about the setting or people in it. For example, concepts such as social marginalization, political efficacy, informal social control, knowledge evolution, development of a subculture, identity politics, lifting practices, stress, interaction rituals, counter-culture, grief, participatory democracy, hegemonic masculinity, boundary negotiations, and so on begin to appear. You are going to be coding with your research question in mind, and most likely you will have preconceived ideas and concepts you are looking for during your coding. This is generally OK, as long as you also code so as to allow the possibility of finding things not predicted. This was the case for Chenault (2004). She conPage 10 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ducted research in a low-income housing community. She was particularly interested in the residential council and the disconnect between what they wanted to achieve and what was accomplished. She had several key concepts of interest at the start, but communication was not one of them. When she was nearly finished with her multiple rounds of coding, she realized that she had not coded several examples that suggested a lack of communication between representatives of the housing authority, members of the resident council, and residents. Excited by the thought of this unexpected finding but distraught over the extra work it would require, Chenault appropriately followed the procedures for coding and returned to the data that she had coded previously, searching each line for references that might relate to communication. Concepts, independent of their place in a larger theory, can be useful for understanding the phenomena of interest to you. Still, finding relationships among them can be even better. A bunch of concepts without knowing how they fit together is like having a bunch of logs sitting side by side. Although you might benefit from having this stack of logs, it is safe to assume that you will be better off having the completed cabin if you wanted a place to live. Conceptual cabin building means that you should look for relationships among your concepts. Does one of the concepts lead to the second? Are both equally important in explaining an activity in the setting? Open and focused coding can help you answer questions such as these. However, coding typically is the basis of other analytical techniques used to generate understanding in a setting rather than being a stand-alone process. Thus, you’ve done nothing wrong if you fail to have your research questions answered before you finish your focused coding.

Practical Aspects of Coding Given how much data you’ll have, it follows that you are going to have many codes— possibly hundreds. Figuring out how to keep track of all your codes is one of the more time-consuming parts of coding. Researchers create elaborate and highly individualized systems for handling the practical aspects of coding. Print the transcripts and write codes in a wide left margin. Number the lines for easy reference later. Print the text and highlight related sections with markers. Print, cut, and sort the text into piles. You may use similar techniques with computer files rather than hard copies. Coding is complicated because the same section of text might fit in more than one category, and one sentence might have more than one code. You will have to have multiple copies when sorting, and you need to figure Page 11 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

out how to handle it when the same section requires different colors if you code using colored fonts. Most likely you already have software that is not specifically designed for qualitative data analysis but can serve the purpose of managing the nuts and bolts of coding. Microsoft Word has many features that are useful for coding and analysis—copy and paste into different documents, columns, line numbers, colors, track changes, comments, table of contents, bold, underline, numbered lists, graphics, search, font types and sizes, folders within folders, text to tables conversion, and so on. Some researchers like to use footnotes that they later transfer to end notes for later rounds of coding. If you used a format for coding similar to the one in Table 11.1, you would keep adding columns as you assigned more codes. In Table 11.3, I provide a small portion of a table that Jordal used for managing the practical aspects of coding. Table 11.3 Keeping track of codes, categories, and subcategories The following is an example of one of the methods Jordal (2011) used during coding. Jordal numbered each code and used the numbers during multiple iterations of coding as a way to keep track, which was faster than writing out the name of a code every time it was used. I only included one of many rows he used to code important categories for each respondent and only some of his columns. The numbers on the top of the columns represent different rounds of his focused coding. Notice that for each round, some of the codes were always included and some of the other codes were added or dropped. The last column is his record of codes that he thought were possibly connected.

1st

2nd

4th

5th

Connections

103 & 205 103 & 206 103 & 301 103, 202, & 206 101, 203 208,

101, 106, 100, 201, 203, 204, 207,

101, 103, 105, 201, 203,

101, 103, 105, 106, 201, 203,

401, 501, 502

200, 301, 302, 303, 300

204, 205, 301, 300

204, 205, 301, 300

105, 106, & 301 106, 202, & 205 202 & 205 202 & 301

Regardless of your procedures, never touch the original text other than for making multiple copies that you never use and other copies that you will. Once you decide the practical aspects of coding, you will be free to Page 12 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

focus on the rewarding intellectual work.

Coding and Grounded Theory I need to add a word of caution about grounded theory, even though I am not going to teach you about grounded theory. The purpose of classic grounded theory, as it was originally articulated by Glaser and Strauss (1967), is generating a theory from data. Grounded theorists use data from fieldwork, but grounded theory research is different from a field research design as I describe it here. The results of grounded theory are “probability statements about the relationship between concepts and conceptual hypotheses” and not descriptions and interpretations, as is the case with field research (Holton & Walsh, 2017, p. 10). Also, grounded theory has methodological procedures that differentiate it from field research. As one of many examples, grounded theory methods include using theoretical sampling to collect more data at specific points in the analysis. The purpose of theoretical sampling is for theoretical development and refinement and not for purposes related to the sample itself, such as increasing sample size or diversity. I mention grounded theory for the reason that too often students incorrectly say that because they are coding they are, by default, conducting grounded theory or using grounded theory methods. Grounded theory has a huge footprint on our current thinking about coding. If otherwise, I would not be adding this caveat. Still, grounded theory does not own coding. Coding is an important part of grounded theory methods, but field research, evaluation research, oral history research, and other research designs also require coding. Various articulations of grounded theory have some agreement about core methodological features of grounded theory (see, for example, Charmaz [2014], Corbin & Strauss [2015], and Glaser & Strauss [1967]), but still there are so many different versions that have changed over time that there is no one “grounded theory method of coding.” This is why I made clear that I am referring to classic grounded theory and not others. Grounded theorists are not always in agreement about what grounded theory is, let alone how it should be conducted. Spend some time reading about axial coding, and my point will be clear. Can some of the procedures of grounded theory methods be used for field research? Absolutely. For example, the methodology of constructivist grounded theory as articulated by Charmaz (2014) is consistent with much that has been written in this guide. Many books and articles written by grounded theorist provide excellent guidance about how to code (see, for example, Charmaz [2014], Corbin & Strauss [2015] and Holton & Walsh [2017, p. 10]). However, before you claim to be conducting grounded theory, make sure your goal is to genPage 13 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

erate theory and that you use other methodological procedures that are core features of grounded theory. If you want to conduct grounded theory, you will need to spend a lot of time reading primary and not just secondary sources about it. You want to make sure you are well versed so as not to “skip-and-dip,” a critique used to describe the practice of erroneously combining selective parts from different versions of grounded theory (Gynnild, 2011, p. 64).

Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software Using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) can make some of the tasks associated with coding easier. Using CAQDAS is becoming increasingly common but still the exception and not the norm for qualitative researchers (Gibbs, 2014). Such programs can help you find keywords in context, retrieve segments of data, search for links among categories, create higher order concepts, organize conceptual categories hierarchically, make graphical representations of relationships among concepts, and work with digital video, audio, still image data, and more (Weitzman, 1999). What they cannot do is analyze the data for you. Avoid succumbing to letting the advanced features of the software lead the analysis. You have a lot of program choices. The students with whom I have worked mostly used NVivo and slightly less so ATALIS.ti. Some of the other options are CDC EX-test, C-I-SAID, Ethnograph, FrameWork, HyperRESEARCH, HyperTranscribe, innerClipper, MAXqda1, QDA Miner, Qualrus, TAMS Analzer, fsQCA, and Transana. A few of these are free; others are expensive. The learning curve can be high for some programs, so you might want to take that into consideration if you decide to use CAQDAS. A larger list, developer links, estimated prices, and comparisons of different programs easily can be found online. CAQDAS have capabilities that can enhance your analytic efforts, so there is much to recommend it. At the same time, these programs are by no means necessary for the completion of a successful analysis. Many of the bells and whistles are not useful and may distract you from using basic features that are. The biggest danger is that if you want to use a specialized program primarily to make your analysis easier, you are potentially substituting time and effort saved for a rigorous, high-quality analysis. Unless you have previous experience with coding, I recommend that you analyze your data without specialized software specifically designed for the analysis of qualitative data. In your next research project, you will have a clearer sense of the strengths and weaknesses of using them.

Page 14 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Putting It All Together In this section, I give a simplified example of coding inspired by and loosely based on Hirschi’s social bond theory (1969). The example illustrates how Harold, an imaginary researcher, moved from data to descriptive line-by-line codes, to categories, to concepts, to relationships, and to a theoretical understanding of his data. Harold started with line-by-line coding and then proceeded through multiple and overlapping steps. Step One: Line-by-Line Coding In his field notes, Harold wrote a sentence about a participant telling a friend that he was not going to sell drugs because getting into college would be harder if he got arrested. During his line-by-line coding, Harold assigned two codes: Code: wanting to attend college

Code: not selling drugs

He also had written about a teenager saying that it was his desire to graduate from high school that stopped him from buying an iPad stolen by a neighbor. Harold’s line-by-line coding resulted in two codes: Code: wanting to graduate high school

Code: not buying stolen property

He coded yet another line in his notes about a teen that said it was important he finish community college and mentioned that as motivation for not breaking into the warehouse as his friends did. Harold assigned two codes: Code: wanting to finish college

Code: not breaking into warehouse

Step Two: Creating Categories As he was coding, Harold kept asking himself, Are there similarities and differences among these codes? He concluded there were. Wanting to go to college, finishing high school, and getting a degree are all examples of wanting an education. He put the statements with the three codes into the same category. He created another category based on the codes not selling drugs, not buying stolen property, and not committing burglary. He has two categories now. Category: wanting education

Category: not engaging in crime

Notice how the categories are consistent with the data but slightly more general; the specific levels of educaPage 15 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

tion are combined, as are types of crime. Step Three: Relationships Between Categories These separate categories are not yet useful for explaining the behavior of the youth. Harold needed to determine whether the categories were related. As he was reading and coding his data multiple times, he asked himself, Are these categories related? When looking at them in combination, he found this relationship between them: Relationship between categories: wanting an education prevents engaging in crime During the entire time, Harold kept his research question in mind, Why do teens commit crimes? As he looked at the possible relationship among his categories, he noted that his preliminary findings were not insights to why youth committed crime but rather a potential reason for why they did not. Step Four: More Line-by-Line Coding, Categories, and Relationships Harold coded numerous statements the teens made about wanting to get, preparing them for, or keeping a good job. These same teens said they were not participating in various crimes because it would negatively affect their job opportunities. Following the procedures he used with education, he coded these data, combined them into categories, and then looked for a relationship between the categories. He saw the following as a potential relationship: Relationship between categories: wanting a good job prevents engaging in crime Step Five: Concepts As he read his field notes again and continued to code, he kept thinking about whether there were similarities or differences in the categories he used in the relationships he had found. At this point, he returned to comparing categories and stepped back from thinking about the relationships he had as two different ones. Coding is typically back and forth and not linear. He asked himself, Is wanting an education and wanting a good job similar? He decided they were. Both indicated the teens were committed to obtaining a valued goal. Therefore, he combined them to create a concept, which is considerably more abstract and general than his original codes. He retained the category of crime, which he now considered a concept. Concept: Being committed to a valued goal

Page 16 of 20

Concept: not engaging in crime

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Step Six: Theory Harold once again focused on relationships. Building upon the previous work, he posited a new relationship between the concepts. Theories are made up of concepts that are related in various ways, so Harold had now reached the level of theory. Theoretical relationship: Being committed to a valued goal prevents engaging in crime Step Seven: Research Question, Theory, and Review of the Literature Harold’s research question was not answered. His research failed to explain why youth commit crimes, but he did find a possible explanation for why youth refrain from engaging in crime. Harold did not have to view his work as a failure; the flexibility of field research allows for answering questions not originally asked, yet related and important. Harold’s thinking about the relationships was influenced by his awareness of an existing theory, social bond theory (Hirschi, 1969), that explained why youth do not engage in deviance and by his review of literature that focused on youth and crime. Harold continued to code the rest of his data and eventually used social bond theory to explain his findings. Of course, Harold made clear in the final paper the back and forth nature of his process. In my example of Harold’s coding, I have Harold starting from line-to-line coding and arriving at a theoretical insight. Such a thing can happen. However, typically you have to use other analytical techniques to get to the point of conceptual relationships such as Harold found.

Conclusions This chapter and the remainder of the book only scratch the surface of how to code your data. Coding can be incredible complex. Regardless of how you code, many hours of hard work are unavoidable. There is no magic wand. However, do not despair. You will be rewarded for all the time, effort, and contemplation you put into coding because the coding process is a major part of finding the answers to your research question. And finding answers to research questions is the purpose of conducting research. The importance of coding cannot be exaggerated. It provides the basis for the many other techniques used to analyze your data. The following chapters discuss various techniques, and the issue of coding will be ever present. Page 17 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter Highlights • Analysis is not distinct from the other parts of conducting field research. • Coding is an iterative process of identifying and organizing portions of the data to gain analytic insights that address the research questions. • Open coding requires coding each line of data. • During open coding, codes are largely descriptive. • Open coding starts the process of organizing the data into relevant categories. • Categories can include topics, events, processes, concepts, and descriptions of people and places. • During focused coding, the researcher hones in on the most relevant categories for the analysis. • Focused coding prioritizes the coding of concepts.

Exercises 1. Reread this chapter and code every instance where I directly addressed you, the reader of this book. Only code sentences with the words you or your in them. Ignore everything else. After coding each line with the word you or your, create general categories based on your coding. Your research question is, What rhetorical strategies did she use to teach me about coding? The emphasis should be on “how I wrote” and not on “what I was trying to teach you.” The following should give you ideas of categories you might use—some of these are fairly easily divided into subcategories. Did I “give general advice”? If yes, you should be able to identify lines that you consider giving general advice. Did I “emphasize major points through repetition”? If yes, you should be able to identify lines where I repeated an important point. Did I “give specific instructions on how to code”? Did I “use examples or metaphors”? Did I “discuss any emotional aspects of coding”? Did I “refer to things you already know”? You do not have to use any of my suggestions; they Page 18 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

are only to generate ideas. You need at least four categories, one of which should have two or more subcategories. Remember that something that you first thought was a subcategory might end up being its own category and that the same sentence can be used as an example for more than one category. Give two example sentences for each category or its related subcategories. Part of the challenge of this exercise is the practical aspects associated with coding. For example, you might not want to write on your book as you would on a printed transcript, so you will need an alternative method. 2. Pretend you have been hired to create a one-page handout of the main points in this chapter. It should primarily be bulleted lists or tables with enough explanation that someone reading your handout could use it as a study guide. Simply repeating the chapter highlights is not sufficient. Be creative. 3. Select a YouTube video and code it. Code the video until you arrive at a total of two categories. Label the categories and give two examples from the video for each category. Try your best to do the online equivalent of line-by-line coding. If you did this correctly, you should have a product that resembles detailed field notes about the video, which you will then use when coding. Your field notes should be typed and coded. Create two categories based on your codes. Indicate the category names and the sentences from your field notes that you think belong in each category. Turn in your coded field notes with your categories and supporting sentences. Explain in detail how you coded. For example, discuss such things as how many times you watched the video, the difficulties of coding, and so on. 4. Continue developing the proposal that you have written thus far. Explain in detail your plans for coding your data.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Hennink, M., Kaiser, B., & Marconi, V. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many Page 19 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

interviews are enough? Qualitative Health Research, 27, 591–608. La Pelle, N. (2004). Simplifying qualitative data analysis using general purpose software tools. Field Methods, 16, 85–108. Morse, J. (2004). Constructing qualitatively derived theory: Concepts construction and concept typologies. Qualitative Health Research, 14, 1387–1395.

Recommended Additional Reading Auerbach, C. & Silverstein, L. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York, NY: NYU Press. Miles, M, Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014) Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Silver, C., & Lewins, A. (2014). Using software in qualitative research: A step-by-step guide (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage Publications Ltd. Saldaña, J. (2016) The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). London, England: Sage Publications Ltd.

• Hierarchical linear models • Coding • Fieldwork https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 20 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 12: Descriptions and Typologies

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • explain why descriptions are important, • write a thick description, • explain what a typology is and how to make one, and • create a typology.

Has a friend ever described a place to you in such detail that you almost felt you were there? If so, you are familiar with detailed descriptions, the first analytical technique discussed in this chapter. Are your cabinets arranged with your food organized by the type of packaging and content: cans of vegetables grouped together and cereal boxes side by side? This is analogous to a typology, the second analytical technique presented.

Descriptions Let’s continue our discussion about analyzing data by talking about descriptions. You know what it means to describe something so grasping how it is done in the research context should be relatively easy. For field researchers, the process of creating detailed descriptions based on the data is a form of analysis. Descriptions of the setting and people and your interactions and observations are so important that not including them in your final paper is like making chocolate chip cookies without chocolate chips—an essential ingredient is missing. A good final paper engages the reader, and such engagement is less likely to happen if we don’t “know” the participants—if we can’t see and hear them and feel their emotions. Further, the setting is inextricably linked to the results. After all, if where the research takes place were not important, you would not have to go anywhere to conduct your field research. Your readers need to know the social and physical context for what people say and how they act. We learn about these through detailed descriptions of the setting. This also

Page 2 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

applies to the virtual world, which is particularly challenging to describe.

Photo 12.1 A good description does not give equal treatment to all that is occurring in a setting. Rather, it foregrounds who or what is most important. Figure 13

Source: © iStockphoto.com/gmcoop Those of you who have memorized this book will recall the sentence from the chapter on field notes that said that the most important category of material contained in field notes is detailed descriptions of observations and interactions, including conversations and interviews, in the field. Smells, sounds, and offhand comments may seem superfluous, but religiously documenting them in your field notes provides you with data that may turn out to be important for describing an activity in a setting. When you are coding your data, you will realize that the quality of your descriptions largely depends upon the quality of your observations and related field notes. One of the reasons you start your analysis while your work in the field is still underway is that it lets you know whether your field notes are sufficiently detailed. Considering what to include in your descriptions is part of the analytical process. Incorporating descriptions into your final paper requires you to make many choices. Think about what is needed to answer or lay the foundations for answering questions such as who, what, where, when, how, and why (Sandelowski, 2010; Wolcott, 1994). Theoretical considerations, disciplinary foci, and research questions are all part of coding data relevant for descriptions.

Page 3 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

What Emerson (1988) wrote decades ago remains true: What is included or excluded . . . is not determined randomly; rather, the process of looking and reporting are guided by the observer’s implicit or explicit concepts that make some details more important and relevant than others. Thus, what is selected for observations and recording reflects the working theories or conceptual assumptions employed, however implicitly, by the ethnographer. To insist on a sharp polarity between description and analysis is thus misleading; description is necessarily analytic. (p. 20) Although generous portions of descriptions are generally included in your final paper, readers will not need or even want to know everything. As Wolcott (1994) said, “I don’t want the ‘raw’ data, I want it ‘cooked’” (p. 13). Readers will not need to know about every object in the room—the pencil on the desk was a standard #2, yellow, with an eraser on one end. As you continue your analysis, you will learn to select portions of what you saw and experienced, present them in a way that highlights important items relevant to your findings, and omit irrelevant ones. When you seek to understand and describe a setting, part of the analytical work involves your ability to decide what to include and how much detail to provide.

Photo 12.2 A thick description is like a close-up photograph—details are seen that are not visible if the photo is taken from a distance. Figure 14

Source: © iStockphoto.com/Zocha_K

Page 4 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Thick Descriptions Highly detailed, or thick, descriptions (Geertz, 1973) are almost a requirement for field research—although you might never know with certainty what is “thick enough,” and in some instances a broad, but still detailed, overview will suffice. I included examples of draft thick and thin descriptions in the chapter on field notes and now present you with an example of a finished description. In Russell’s (1991) study of homeless women, she provided thick descriptions of the residents: Ada, for example, is between 55 and 65. Her head seems grotesquely misshapen on one side because of the huge mass of her grey-white hair, which she tries to cover with a scarf. Many of her teeth are missing and her face is deeply lined. Even in the warmth of a May evening she wears layers of clothes. Her legs are swollen and ulcerated, and her bare feet, propped on a box, are black with grime. Henrietta, with an ill-fitting golden brown wig sitting somewhat askew on her head, her face heavily lined for a woman just turned 51, sits in the day shelter and tries to hide the fact that she has no upper teeth. She says, “I’m fifty-one already. I didn’t realize it. I didn’t get any cards or anything.” (pp. 1–2) These descriptions provide strong visual images, particularly because in Western culture one’s hair is often a clue about the self. Both women have missing teeth, a condition associated with poverty. A “thinner” description, such as “one woman had grey-white hair, and another woman who is 51 wore a brown wig,” falls flat in comparison. Knowing that Ada wore layers of clothes during the warmth of May also is an important detail. However, if Russell had described the color of Ada’s outer layer of clothes, then the next, and the next, I’m not sure these details would have provided any added value. On the other hand, if Ada’s coat, sweater, shirt, skirt, and shoes were all in the same shade of red, that detail might be worth sharing with readers. If you find that you have difficulty articulating, at least to yourself, your reasons for including particular details, then maybe you should omit that portion of the description or dig deeper to determine its value. For example, Chenault (2004) once learned that a resident in the community she was studying had been seen multiple times having sex in the laundromat. Chenault had this detail in a draft of her dissertation. When I pressed her to tell me why she included this information, the best response she could offer is that she thought it was

Page 5 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

“pretty wild.” Realizing this incident was not relevant for her research purposes, she deleted it from the next draft. Details that are sexy, either literally or metaphorically, do not always belong in a final paper. It can be useful to ask yourself why you include some information and then explicitly communicate that to the reader (Wolcott, 1994, p. 14). Researchers use descriptions to illuminate or underscore their key questions. Russell (1991), for example, begins her book about homeless women with a detailed description of one woman, and her next paragraph explicitly connects this description to a central question of her book. Russell writes, She sat in the corner of the large room, staring into space. Suddenly, her arms began to wave wildly and her face contorted and twisted into spasms. After 30 seconds or so, she again became still and resumed her trance-like state. I asked who she was. “She was a teacher in Baltimore City, her name is Betty, and she has recently been released from Springfield [a state mental hospital],” explained the woman in charge of the day shelter. (p. 1) I teach in Baltimore County, and my name is Betty Russell. In my search for who the homeless women of Baltimore are, I found the answer on the first day I visited a shelter for homeless women: the homeless can be anyone. By describing the homeless women about whom she writes, Russell makes them come alive for the reader. They are not insignificant informants, but rather women who shared their lives with her, often on a daily basis. As a result, she appropriately spends a great deal of time describing them to us. Through her descriptions, we learn of their resiliency, their will to survive, their support for each other, and many of their other positive attributes that too often are unknown about people who are homeless. Detailed and carefully selected descriptions are the windows that allow those of us on the outside to safely peek into and see important parts of a world mostly foreign to us. Corman (2016) provided such a description in his research about paramedics: Suddenly I am jolted out of my seat by a loud alarm known as the “tones.” The tones, activated by the Dispatch Centre, signify that there is a medical emergency and that our crew is likely the closest unit to the scene. I stand

Page 6 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

up and nearly fall over; it’s the middle of the night and I was asleep in the station. The paramedics, Jake and Julie, also seem a bit dazed but I get the sense they are experts at this. They quickly put on their jackets and boots and head out the door to the garage where the ambulance is located. Tired, a bit dizzy, and a few steps behind the paramedics, I hop into the back of the ambulance and sit behind the driver seats. Jake and Julie hop into the front seats. Located on the dashboard between the two paramedics is what looks like a laptop computer, known as the CAD (Computer-Aided Dispatch). This technology is used to pass information about calls from the Dispatch Centre to paramedics on the streets. Julie opens the CAD, reads the notes from the Dispatch Centre that appear on the screen, turns to Jake and says, “26 alpha.” Institutionally, 26 alpha is the classification of “sick person.” Upon hearing this from Julie, Jake responds, “Oh, this is going to suck.” (p. 2) Sometimes when students are having trouble writing drafts of their research papers, I suggest that they begin by writing a chapter devoted solely to introducing the participants in the setting. Detailed descriptions of the participants can be an important feature of the final paper and are relatively easy and usually enjoyable to write. However, a separate section or chapter of a paper that introduces the participants is not always warranted or even appropriate. You can let your readers get to know the people and the place by integrating the descriptions throughout your final paper.

Page 7 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Ethics Please be extremely careful as you describe people in the setting and the setting itself if you have promised confidentiality. As stressed in the chapter on ethics, virtual field researchers have to be as careful as face-toface field researchers. What reads like an interesting but harmless detail or reference, mentioning the paint scheme on a motorcycle, describing the veterinarian as one of the few in Virginia that has the additional status of diplomate, or stressing the microbiological expertise of a respondent, may be sufficient for individuals thousands of miles from the research setting to identify a participant in your research. Liebow (1994) was rightfully concerned about confidentiality because Elsie, one of the homeless women he studied, could be identified easily from her physical description—“only one external ear, no ear canals, and a weight of over 300 pounds” (p. xviii). Rather than risk violating confidentiality, he sought and received permission to identify her. If he had not received Elsie’s permission, he would not have included descriptions of her. Identification of participants have become so easy that the journal Qualitative Health Research will not publish any tables that list participants’ demographic information, such as age, gender, occupation, disease, and so on, for each person (Morse & Coulehan, 2015). The same caveat about protecting the confidentiality of participants applies to settings. Reflect carefully about what you include, particularly if readers’ knowledge of the setting could cause study participants any harm. At times, the fake name of a setting is so obvious that it defeats the purpose of assigning them: My research took place at the Ahigho State University. Your institutional affiliation also may give away the location of a research setting, as students tend to choose sites close to home. Even anthropologists who travel far from their home country are not exempt from having the setting known even if they try to prevent this. Be certain your descriptions are correct. Careful notes and long-term observations help ensure accuracy; still, it is easy to slip into making assertions without evidence to substantiate them. Would it be okay for you to say that Rylee does not care about her appearance based only on seeing her twice at Tractor Supply looking totally disheveled? Of course, you know that it would not be and unethical to characterize her in this way in your final paper. We need to be careful not to say things in our descriptions that might unintentionally misrepresent the people and setting In addition, you should consider whether what you describe might affect people negatively beyond just those in a setting. Bourgois (1995), for example, was so worried that his portrayal of the poor might reinforce negaPage 8 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

tive stereotypes that he explained his rationale for including in his book what he referred to as “the dark side of poverty” (p. 11). Although researchers should not feel compelled to sugarcoat reality or paint a positive image of participants by excluding descriptions that cast participants in a negative light, they should consider the ethical implications of their choices. Knowing that you have avoided the types of errors described above, you can safely include in-depth descriptions of the details in a setting that can make it come alive. The following is a perfect example of how this is done. Switzer (2005) wrote the following thick and powerful description of milk she tasted during her field research with the Maasai: Maasai milk is really more like drinkable yogurt. Startlingly white—almost shiny in the perpetually dark interior of the boma—and smooth, like white wall paint. When Maasai girls milk the cows, they collect the fresh milk in hollowed-out gourds (called a “calabash”) and set them aside for a few days. The collection gourds are dried in the sun, and then the remaining seeds and inner flesh are burned away with fine embers. The gourds give the milk the distinctive smoky aroma that characterizes life in the boma. That smell—of wood smoke, fermented milk, cow urine and dung, permeates everything—air, human skin, cloth. That smell becomes the taste of the milk, and it’s a tricky one to get used to. The beauty of Switzer’s description rests with her attention not only to the things she sees but also to the things she smells and tastes. As a researcher, Switzer clearly realized that presenting one dimension of the description alone—how the milk was made—would leave her readers with an incomplete understanding of its nature. Descriptive data are used when analyzing your data in other ways. One of these is creating typologies.

Typologies Similar to descriptions, you probably have encountered typologies, even if you do not know that is what they are called. A typology is the classification of data (for example, people and activities) into groups based on one or more characteristics. Groups are sometimes referred to as types or categories. You are familiar with typologies if your high school had stoners, skaters, preppies, gangbangers, wannabes, jocks, and nerds. There Page 9 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

might have been subcategories—band nerds, debate nerds, computer nerds, and science fiction nerds. Field researchers also create typologies as a way of analyzing their data. Typologies help researchers make sense of a large amount of data by grouping them into similar categories based on relevant characteristics. They use long-term interactions and observations, coding, descriptive accounts, and the results of rigorous analyses before they make group assignments. Each group is given a label to aid in discussion. When creating a typology, one of the first steps is to determine your interest. What is it that you want to classify? Are you interested in creating a typology of different kinds of people, reasons for doing something, behaviors, roles, musical tastes, or views? Or do you want to identify different types of settings based on the level of formal social control, how much a college is integrated, or the amount of violence in a video game? Rosecrance’s (1990) research on men who bet on horses at racetracks is a good example of a typology. Rosecrance was interested in types of gamblers. After a full year of observing, Rosecrance created this typology of gamblers: 1. Pros—the professional handicappers, reserved for the small percentage who have proven they can win consistently. 2. Serious players—those who have made a definite and demonstrable commitment to earn their livelihood from wagering on horses. They quit their regular jobs and begin playing the horses as a fulltime endeavor. 3. Bustouts—the individuals who exist in a continuing state of poverty. In racing argot they are “permanent residents of tap city.” 4. Regulars—their employment situation allows them to attend the races during the week because they are either retired or flexibly employed. 5. Part-time players—players who are unable to attend regularly. Most of them have traditional weekly employment; they envision that after they retire they will become regulars. (pp. 359–365) The different types that make up the typology should be mutually exclusive, meaning that if you classify a person, for example, as a particular type then this person cannot also be included in another type. To use the metaphor at the start of this chapter, a can of vegetables cannot be grouped with the other vegetables and with the cereals. Typologies should be exhaustive, which means there should be a category for everyone. Realistically, this is rarely possible with field research, nor is it always needed. After you have decided what it is you want to study, you move to the difficult second step. Part of the hard Page 10 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

work of a making a typology is deciding what characteristics you are going to use to create your types. Building upon my original example, are you going to organize your cabinets by the kind of food (rice, popcorn, olive oil, vegetables, or cereal), the kind of package (can, bottle, bag, or box), or by both the kind of food and kind of package (rice in a bag would not be in the same group as rice in a box)? In some cases, you will know in advance what characteristics you are going to use to create your typology. Your research question might dictate the characteristics you will use, or when reviewing the literature, you may have found a typology to use as a model. When you know the typology you want to use in advance, you will make observations and ask questions from the start that will elicit the needed information for creating types. In other instances, you might determine what is important for your typology halfway through collecting your data, and thereafter you will direct more of your attention to the relevant characteristics. It is not uncommon to figure out during your coding what should be used. This is one of the reasons it is important to start coding and analyzing your data early in the research process because you will still have time to collect data you discover you need. Please look again at Rosecrance’s typology presented above. Rosecrance (1990) coded by looking for characteristics that distinguished different types of gamblers. In several cases, he considered the intersection of three characteristics to create his typology: (1) success at winning, (2) frequency of attending, and (3) employment. Notice, however, that he does not mention employment and attendance for “bustouts.” The fact that they are consistent losers is sufficient for classifying them as a distinct type. In gambling, the bottom line is win/lose. Rosecrance’s typology illustrates a key point: You do not always have to make decisions about your categories based on a clearly defined set of common characteristics. Some people might have features that make them so different from others that you can create a type based on those characteristics even if not a consideration for the other types. Particularly when relying on observations, informal interviews, and other forms of nonstandardized data, you might use a more global assessment of participants or setting to determine your types rather than side-byside comparisons on more specific criteria. You will probably find that different people share characteristics associated with more than one type; your decision might end up being made based on the most salient characteristic. As noted, sometimes the characteristics that should be used are determined during the coding process. This

Page 11 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

was the case for Sierra (2013), who conducted research on anger in heterosexual relationships. To create her typology, she first had to determine the characteristics she was going to use. It took many rounds of coding until she identified the five characteristics she would use as the basis of her categories. Once satisfied with the characteristics, she coded each interview several times more and only then started putting the women into different types. Table 12.1 includes some of the details of how she created her typology. Typologies require considerable conceptual thinking. For example, if you want to create a typology that includes encounters with police, you first must create a conceptual definition of “encounter.” What counts as an encounter? Is saying hello enough to be considered an encounter or only being arrested? You also have to decide what other characteristics you think are important for your typology. Will it matter for your typology if someone is alone or with others? If you think race and gender may affect interactions, then your typology should include these. At the same time, your conceptual definition does not have to be precise in the way that it would be for quantitative research, although it can be. Rosecrance (1990) says that part-time players are not able to attend regularly. He does not have to provide the number of times one has to be at the track to be a regular. After a year of careful observations and interactions at the racetrack, he “knows” what the gamblers mean when they use the term regulars even though they do not define it either. Table 12.1 Creating a typology from 5 characteristics and 16 codes Sierra’s (2013) research was about how young women deal with anger in heterosexual romantic relationships. In order to help her answer her research question, Sierra created a typology. She realized after coding the data multiple times that she needed to use 5 characteristics related to women’s expression of anger with 16 associated codes to create her typology. Because of space limitations, I list the characteristics and code names without explanation. In contrast, Sierra describes each of these in detail.

Characteristics

Codes

1. I share power, consistent 2. I share power, inconsistent 1. Women’s power 3. I have too much power, inconsistent 4. I don’t have enough power, inconsistent

Page 12 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

5. Accepting anger 2. Relation to anger

6. Distancing from anger 7. Denying anger

8. Mostly nongendered triggers 3. Triggers for anger

9. Gendered and nongendered triggers 10. Mostly gendered triggers

Characteristics

Codes

11. Shared responsibility 12. Ambivalence 4. Meaning making of anger 13. His fault 14. My fault

15. Kept in or expressed indirectly 5. Anger expression 16. Expressed outwardly and directly

Now that she had her five categories, she began to look at which codes each woman had across the five categories. After additional rounds of coding, she discovered that some of the women had the same configuration of codes, others had another set, and so on for each of the five categories. For example, four of the women were coded as “sharing power consistent,” “accepting anger,” “became anger nongendered,” “shared responsibility,” and “expressed outward and directly.” This combination formed the basis of the first type in her typology, and she labeled it “undoing gender,” as shown in the last column of the first row in the table below. Then she found that 14 women shared another unique set of codes, and this set became her second type—the last column of the second row. What resulted was a typology of four different ways women dealt with anger in relationships, and she used “doing” and “undoing” gender in the names she created for her types. Notice how she has her 5 categories as her column headings and the associated set of codes that different women had for each category on the rows. The last column is the types in her typology.

Women’s Power

Share power consis-

Page 13 of 17

Relation to Anger

Accepting anger

Triggers for Anger

Nongendered

Anger Meaning Making

Shared re-

Anger Expres-

Final Categories in

sion

the Typology

Expressed out-

=

1. Undoing gender

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

tent

Share power inconsis-

Distancing from anger

tent or not enough

or denying anger

Too much power inconsistent

Share power consistent

Varied

sponsibility

ward and directly

Ambivalence

Inward or indirect

=

His fault

Varied

=

Mostly gendered triggers

Varied

Gendered Distancing from anger

and nongen-

Ambivalence

dered

Kept in or expressed indirectly

=

2. Doing gender but not completely

3. Struggling with undoing gender

4. Mixing undoing and doing gender

The presentation of a typology in the final paper, at a minimum, includes a description of each category, comparison across groups, and implications of the categories for understanding the participants and setting. The different types in a typology are given short names to facilitate the discussion of the categories in your typology, such as Rosecrance’s (1990) use of “pros” and “regulars.” In addition to having written descriptions of your typology, you might find that making tables, figures, Venn diagrams, models, conceptual maps, word clouds, matrices, and so on can help you code and create your typology. You can then include a polished version in your final paper. Although typologies are not theories, they can be used in the development and testing of theories and have other purposes as well. For example, a service provider who wants to create a program to prevent gambling might be aided by considering the diversity expressed in Rosecrance’s (1990) typology. Also, because his typology was compared with typologies of other kinds of gamblers, Rosecrance’s work at race tracks contributed to a larger body of research on gambling. Typologies are useful, but simply putting activities, events, or individuals in boxes with snappy labels and interesting descriptions will not necessarily produce anything new, illuminating, or otherwise useful about the setting or participants. Lofland and Lofland (1984) warn us: We must caution you . . . that typology construction can easily become a sterile exercise. Unless you perform it within the context of full and extensive knowledge of, and sensitivity to, the actual setting, it will reveal little or nothing. Arbitrary box building is not a substitute for a close feel for the actual

Page 14 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

circumstances. (p. 96)

Conclusions Although I provided some potential problems with writing descriptions and creating typologies, these techniques are the appropriate choices for many research questions, and descriptions are almost always a part of any final paper. Another function of the analytical techniques discussed in this chapter is that they can be a starting point for other forms of analyses. In the next chapter, you will learn about thematic analysis, which is another common procedure for making sense out of the vast amount of data you have collected to answer your research question.

Chapter Highlights • Field researchers use the construction of descriptions and typologies as analytical techniques, to answer research questions, and to make the people and setting “visible” to the readers. • Detailed descriptions are important to include in final papers. • Typologies organize data into categories, also referred to as types, based on one or more key characteristics.

Exercises 1. Select a public setting where no informed consent is required and observe for at least 15 minutes. Write a detailed description of the setting and individuals in it. At a minimum, make sure that your descriptions answer the questions, Whom did you observe? What was occurring? What did the setting look like? Your descriptions should be at least three pages, so make sure you take lots of notes. 2. Read the front page of the same newspaper five days in a row. Create a typology based on the content of the articles. You should assign one or more codes to each article. Describe each category in your typology and explain in detail the procedures you used to create it. Discuss what you learned Page 15 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

about the priorities in the news after creating your typology. 3. Interview at least five people about their opinions about the president of the United States or the leader of another country. Create a typology of opinions. The typology should have a minimum of three types of opinions. Each type must be based on at least two characteristics. You will need to ask quite a few interview questions with lots of follow-up questions to do well on this exercise. Describe each type in your typology and explain the procedures you used to code and create your typology.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Gilgun, J. (2015). Beyond description to interpretation and theory in qualitative social work research. Qualitative Social Work, 14, 741–752. Keleman, M., Mangan, A., & Moffat, S. (2017). More than a ‘little act of kindness’? Towards a typology of volunteering as unpaid work. Sociology. 1–18. First Published 1 Feb 2017. DOI: 10.1177/ 0038038517692512. Wynn, J. (2011). The Hobo to Doormen: The characters of qualitative analysis, past and present. Ethnography, 12, 518–542.

Recommended Additional Reading Griffiths, M. (2011). A typology of UK slot machine gamblers: A longitudinal observational and interview study. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 9, 606–626. Kahlke, R. (2014). Generic qualitative approaches: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology.

Page 16 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13, 37–52. Neergaard, M., Olesen, F., Andersen, R. & Sondergaard, J. (2009). Qualitative description—the poor cousinof health research? BMC Medical Research Methodology. DOI:10.1186/1471-2288-9-52. Sandelowski, M. (2010). What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing & Health, 33, 77–84.

• Field notes • Thick description • Fieldwork https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 17 of 17

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 13: Thematic Analysis

Objectives By the end of the chapter, you will be able to • compare the similarities and differences between topical themes and overarching themes, • explain how the two types of themes are identified, and • conduct a thematic analysis.

Do you remember the theme of your high school prom? Was it Paris, carnival, casino, or zombies? A prom theme is typically obvious the moment you arrive, with decorations that reflect a place, time, movie, or event. The ever popular “under the sea” theme, for example, uses decorations that create the illusion of being under water: sea horses, shells, coral reefs, and mermaids. Although you would not be able to point to the theme under the sea, you’d be able to identify specific decorations whose presence provides validity to the inference that the theme is under the sea. Similarly, field researchers identify themes based on an accumulation of such “decorations.” This type of theme I call an overarching theme. Another type of theme is what I refer to as a topical theme. For these, you and the field researcher would look at the decorations, or data, to determine which are most often seen, what one seems to be most important, or how they are grouped into a pattern. In this chapter, you will learn about thematic analysis, which is an analytical technique used to identify both type of themes. Fortunately, you have already learned in previous chapters much of what you will need to successfully conduct a thematic analysis.

Purposes of a Thematic Analysis Thematic analysis is so widely used in qualitative research that analyzing data for themes is a fundamental skill that is important for you to master (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 4). A thematic analysis can serve multiple purposes, such as generating theories and discovering patterned behavior. A partial list of purposes for conducting a thematic analysis is presented in Table 13.1. A thematic analysis can answer the how, why, what, where, who, and when types of research questions that are of interest to field researchers. It can achieve all Page 2 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the above, and more, while still providing a naturalistic, contextual, holistic, and complex understanding of a setting or group (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2007). Table 13.1 Purposes of a thematic analysis • Summarize key features of lots of data. • Show realistic, concrete, and accurate representations of a setting or group. • Produce a thick description. • Inform policy decisions. • Generate theories. • Make research accessible to a lay public. • Discover relationships. • Search for meaning. • Create conceptual definitions. • Reveal unanticipated insights. • Develop models. • Identify patterns, similarities and differences. • Answer research questions.

Source: Adapted from Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, p. 40..

What Are Themes? Field researchers use the term theme in two different ways. The first type of theme, which I call topical themes, is a pattern in the data, reoccurring event, and topic that multiple participants discuss. I want to quickly note that topical is not the ideal word. Possibly more accurate would be “conceptual themes.” However, the second type of themes, which I call overarching themes, is also conceptual. Thus, I default to using the terms topic and overarching to make a distinction, although the names and the distinction itself, aren’t quite right—more about this later. However, I have found that starting with thinking about two types helps with learning the basics, and then you will be ready to move on to a less simplified presentation. To explain the first type of theme, I return briefly to the decorations in my prom metaphor. If there are a lot of sea horses swimming about the room, they would be a theme; the shells would be another theme. However, unlike at a prom, most of what occurs in the field and is reflected in the data—the metaphorical decorations—is not related to the theme, and identifying themes can be difficult. You will need to identify themes by analyzing a massive amount of data, most of it useless for answering your research questions. The identification of a theme requires more than you counting how often similar things appear in the data. Still, you Page 3 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

would first suspect a theme during the coding process when you notice the same codes appearing multiple times and then see patterns as you combine these into conceptual categories through multiple rounds of coding. Topical themes are closely related to what people explicitly said and did. In the final paper, the themes are described, support for the themes are presented using quotations from interviews or selections from your field notes, and their conceptual importance is explained. Braun and Clarke (2006), often referenced in this chapter, refer to this type of theme as a semantic theme. The second use of the term theme is that they are the overarching unifying threads or underlying insights that capture the essences of what is being studied—the equivalent of the under-the-sea theme. My friend Lisa provided me with the following example of how she explains this type of theme in her college writing courses (Norris, personal communication, September 15, 2016). The subject of a book might be wild horses, abortion, or a presidential candidate. In contrast, a theme is more of the subtext that pervades a story, the overarching abstract idea, or the primary insights it offers into human experience. For example, Flannery O’Connor’s story “A Good Man Is Hard to Find” includes themes having to do with grace, forgiveness, and redemption. For overarching themes, you will code for the “underlying ideas, assumptions, and conceptualisations” and even ideologies behind what people say (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 13). Thus, this type of theme is inferred from the systematic analysis of the corpus of the data rather than more directly using codes attached to smaller segments of the data. Although you have to justify your overarching theme by providing examples from the data, your theme probably will not be as closely connected to specific codes and categories. This type of theme is similar to what Braun and Clarke (2006) call a latent theme. Which you use will depend upon your research design, purpose, research question, experience with qualitative research, disciplinary perspective, theoretical concepts, and so on. You may include both kinds in your final paper. As noted, to aid your learning, I use the short-cut terms of topical themes and overarching themes, but this is not the convention in field research. If you use a thematic analysis, you will most likely use the term theme without an adjective. The type you are using should be clear from the context.

Identifying Versus Emerging Themes A thematic analysis is often defined as a search for themes that emerge from the data. Final papers often Page 4 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

have a phrase like this: Three themes emerged from the data. DeSantis and Ugarriza (2000) write, “There is uniform agreement in the literature that themes emerge from the data, that is, from analysis of interviews and/ or recurrent behavior or events in observational and experiential activities” (p. 355). Notice that they add the important clarification that the themes result from the analysis of the data. Too often the role of analysis gets lost when simply stating that themes emerge. In a sense, you create the themes; they are not lying dormant, like spring flowers, until they emerge so you can see them. Certainly the inductive nature of an interpretive paradigm rightfully prioritizes the data, so I do not mean to suggest otherwise when I say you create them. At the same time, the etiological assumption of an interpretive paradigm is that what is known is not independent of the knower. You collected the data through days of observations and interactions, wrote the field notes, read the literature, and coded the data. You struggled with analyzing the data such that your results answer a particular research question. The use of the phrase “themes emerge” hides the active role you have in the process (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 7). I prefer to say, “I identified themes” rather than “themes emerged” because the former, while not ideal, at least acknowledges my role in the research process. Using the phrase “themes emerge” is standard and just fine. My hope, though, is that you will be careful not to imply that your findings are independent of your efforts, while at the same time recognizing that your results are firmly grounded in the data.

Overarching Themes If you have seen any of the Star Wars movies, you know they are not just about things that Darth Vader, Han Solo, and R2-D2 said and did. The movies have themes of good versus evil, respect for elders, people with different backgrounds working together, not over relying on technology, and believing what you cannot see (Zehr, 2015). The movie Revenant was not about ways of dealing with the cold, which was a frequent activity in the film; it was about family bonds and revenge. In these examples, my use of the term theme probably makes intuitive sense. Themes, when used in this way, are overarching structures within which the plot unfolds the movies’ underlying messages and the central meanings behind the action. A theme is not what happened. A theme is not what a lot of people said. A thematic analysis is used to identify the overarching concept, unifying threads, or underlying meanings that captures the essence of a setting or group. As Morse and Field (1995) explain, a thematic analysis is difficult because overarching themes are abstract, not easy to identify, beneath the surface, indicated by the data and

Page 5 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

not explicitly stated (pp. 139–140). I do not want to mislead you into thinking that overarching themes have to be at a grand scale—good versus evil, the insignificance of life, and individuals versus the collective. The most likely themes that you will identify will be concepts related to your discipline and not universal themes. Chenault’s (2004) research about the residential council in a housing community illustrates this point. In her case, the overarching theme that affected many facets of the lives of individuals was the almost total lack of communication at every level in the community. No one said, “Communication among the residents, HUD, and the residential council is the major problem that negatively affects our quality of life.” In fact, the code “communication” appeared only in a couple of places in her many pages of field notes. Rather, the people talked about such problems as the mess from fliers blowing around in their yards. The first time Chenault coded her data, she did not code the fliers as being related to communication. However, as Chenault coded her data in multiple ways, reread her field notes, and jotted ideas, she started to identify many examples of the lack of communication. She returned to her data yet again to see if lack of communication was occasional or pervasive and found that communication was one of the threads that connected otherwise seemingly unrelated events. For example, because the fliers ended up being blown away, rather than being delivered or posted appropriately, people were unaware of organized events that might have benefited them. This lack of communication led to low attendance. Similarly, what she first coded as insufficient budget, she later determined was not insufficient but rather only perceived to be because of poor communication between the housing authority and the residential council about how to obtain access to funds that were available. Once she determined poor communication was one of the overarching themes, she was able to make recommendations for change to members of the community. Saatcioglu (2009) provides us with another example of overarching themes, which she refers to as macrothemes. In her ethnography of mobile home park residents who live in marginal poverty, her themes were the social construction of poverty, stigmatization, and agency. Assuliman (2007) found that institutional arrangements, social construction of the university, and a rentier mentality were overarching themes that explained the disconnect between nationally produced science and national needs in Saudi Arabia. Any one of these might have been topical themes, but it was their pervasiveness across all the different types of data he collected that indicated these were at the heart of the disconnect. By way of contrast, one of William’s topical themes in his research on students’ bullying experiences was the students’ definition of bullying. This topic was discussed by many students but was not a thread that connected a large portion of his data. Page 6 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

How Do I Identify an Overarching Theme? Determining overarching themes is difficult, as is trying to explain a process that can help you identify them (Morse, 2008). Fortunately, much of what I suggest already will be familiar to you. 1. Make sure that a thematic analysis is appropriate for your research question. Because thematic analysis is ubiquitous, it is too easy to make it the default rather than determining whether another technique is better suited for finding answers to your questions. 2. Conduct valid and trustworthy research. The quality of your observations, interactions, and field notes radically affects your ability to identify themes. 3. Read related literature and be attentive to major concepts and theories in your discipline. 4. Repeatedly read your field notes and transcripts, write regularly in your field journal, read your field notes and what you have written again, and write more. The process of writing can help you generate ideas. 5. Engage in rigorous coding. Coding is a way of immersing yourself in the data, and the results of open, focused, and other forms of coding give you insights that you might not have otherwise. Revise categories and the tentative themes that derive from other rounds of coding and repeat the process. It might help to reread the chapter on coding and follow the sorts of procedures laid out there. Because overarching themes require inferences based on data, codes become less closely related to specific parts of the data during each iteration of coding. You need to code larger chunks of the data and not just those derived from line-by-line coding or the categories that result. When deciding upon an overarching theme, try to figure out the message conveyed by an entire interview or the possible shared purpose of multiple events, rather than only coding constituent parts like sentences or specific things people did during an activity. 6. Ask yourself questions: If I had to assign only one code to this interview, what would it be? If I could only give two codes to the entire set of interviews, what would they be? What does the totality of what I am observing, hearing, and reading in my field notes indicate? What are the participants really trying to communicate? What is the larger meaning behind of lot of events that on the surface seem unrelated? 7. Draw and redraw diagrams, tables, pie charts, and other visual representation looking for overlap and connections. 8. After you identify what you think are your overarching themes, return to your data—interviews, field notes, earlier written ideas—and see if the themes seem to hold up. You may find that you inferred Page 7 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

so much that you are beyond what you can defend (Braun & Clarke, 2006). 9. Explain your research to your professor and to others. You may hear yourself say the theme as you try to summarize your research for another person. 10. Continue to read as much as you can about your topic. The more you know about your area the easier it will be to identify overarching themes. I strongly encourage you to read ethnographies and other research that use thematic analysis. They can be models that you follow. In some cases, determining overarching themes is not difficult. The participants might state the theme explicitly. They might say “the most important thing that affects all of us and almost everything we do is. . . .” Don’t ignore them and reject what they are telling you because you have the misconception that an overarching theme has to be determined by you. Still, you need to conduct rigorous research in order to determine if you agree with their assessment.

Should I Have Preconceived Overarching Themes? As you read the literature and think about your research, you might have some ideas about possible themes. However, the goal is for you to identify themes from the data and not usually to test whether your expectations are correct. Thus, attempt to keep your ideas in the background so as to be more open to what you are learning. Given your disciplinary training, the themes you identify may well be major concerns and concepts in your area of study, but you will not know the themes until you have “read” your data over and over again.

How Many Overarching Themes Should I Have? The number of overarching themes in any one study is affected by such things as the amount of time in the field, the kind of data being collected, and the preferences of your professor. Are you spending one year participating in face-to-face relationships and activities in a setting, or are you collecting data online in the virtual world during a 2-week period? The former might have three themes and the latter only one. The research questions also affect the number of themes. You will probably have one overarching theme that reflects the essence of a setting and group during a semester-long project. In contrast, you might have three or four topical themes related to your interactions during the same amount of time. Page 8 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

How Should I Present Overarching Themes in My Final Paper? There is not one standard way to discuss overarching themes in a final paper, but there are some common features. Overarching themes require inferences from the data, and the link between the data and the theme is not always easily apparent to readers. Therefore, you will have to help your reader understand your logic for how you got from your concrete observations and the words of the participants to your conclusion of an overarching theme. You’ll need to include a considerable amount of data to support your claim of an overarching theme, with narrative that explains why you think these pieces of data support your theme. You will need to explain, define, and interpret your theme, so that your reader will know what it is and why is it important to the purpose of your research and research question. More details are presented later about how researchers who collect data during long-term engagement in the field blend overarching themes into a larger narrative, research story. Because an overarching theme is the connecting thread among a vast amount of data, it is not easily explained and documented in a few pages, as can be the case with a typology or a topical theme. An overarching theme might require an entire chapter or multiple chapters for its presentation and explanation. Duneier (1999, p. 54) has 74 pages in his book devoted to what could be called an overarching theme, “The Limits of Informal Social Control.” He uses four lengthy and detailed examples, each a chapter, to illustrate this theme—“Sidewalk Sleeping,” “When You Gotta Go,” “Talking to Women,” and “Accusations: Caveat Vendor?” In Powell’s (2010, p. 267) dissertation about energy development in the Diné Nation, she identified three broad themes for understanding the colonial conditions facing the Diné people and the Diné’s Nation today: (1) sovereignty and its interdependencies; (2) Diné landscapes, bodies, and futures as seen through new cultural production; and (3) contesting modes of knowledge and expertise. She spends an entire chapter on each one, ranging in length from 56 to 79 pages. For a class project that can be no longer than 25 pages, of course, you will be limited in how many pages you have to discuss your theme, and how much space can be devoted to your theme depends upon how much data you have in the first place. Focusing on an overarching theme does not preclude including topical themes in the same paper, and topical themes can be presented without an overarching theme.

Page 9 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Topical Themes Topical themes are patterns, reoccurring topics, shared meanings, repetitions, regularities, similarities, common words, and so on in your data that are relevant to your research question. A theme can be different subjects people are discussing—difficulties of working for wages while being a student, social anxiety, future plans, and group dynamics. A theme might be similar answers made by multiple respondents to a broad interview question. A theme might be an activity that routinely follows another one. The same types of behaviors could be the basis of a theme. Interview data is particularly amenable to thematic analysis, but observational data and field notes can be analyzed thematically as well. Instead of being an overarching abstract idea that is inferred from the data, topical themes are closely related to what people actually said and did. Table 13.2 provides examples of topical themes.

Photo 13.1 You might have a theme when you see or hear the same or similar things multiple times. Figure 15

Source: © iStockphoto.com/mtlapcevic As shown in Table 13.2, the number of themes ranges from three to six. You might find that the difficulty is not finding enough themes, but rather too many to do justice to them. Etzler (personal communication, October 2, 2016) said that learning about limiting the number of themes for her was parallel to learning how to herd cattle. She stated that her many attempts to try to force 200 cows into one corral created endless frustrations. Page 10 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

She recalled that her advisor told her: “Only fifty cows should be in your corral, even though I know you want all 200 because they are meaningful to you; but, start with 50 and then identify the 5 to 10 most valuable.” Etzler eventually limited herself to her dominant core themes, and not 200 or 50, and completed an excellent dissertation. Your final paper should include rich, detailed descriptions of the themes, and explanations of why they are important, accompanied by illustrative quotations and data from your field notes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Given that a theme might be something you heard multiple times in different conversations in the field, it is best to use parts of several conservations rather than one longer one. The supporting data provide the reader with a greater understanding of the setting and participants than summaries written by you. The original data you include also are used to evaluate whether your claim of a theme is justified. Typically, several themes are presented.

How Do I Code for Topical Themes? The procedures for creating topical themes follow many of the same steps already discussed. However, a difference is that you will specifically code for patterns, repetitions, routine events and behaviors, and commonalities. Searching for the same or similar codes you have assigned is an important part of the process for identifying topical themes. You can even count the number of times a code appears to get some indication of whether the codes suggest a theme. However, looking for similar codes is far from sufficient. A thematic analysis that focuses on patterns does not preclude consideration of aberrant behavior, different views, and one-time events. Given your goal to understand a setting, avoid automatically excluding nonpatterned data in your search for similarities. Table 13.2 Examples of topical themes • students’ definitions of bullying • the role appearance plays in bullying Perceptions of bullying in K–12 schooling (Williams, 2008) • students’ perceptions of how to prevent bullying • students’ reflections on past experiences and regrets with bullying

Adolescents’ self-disclosing on Facebook when distressed (Wise, 2013)

Page 11 of 21

• decision-making process in posting statuses

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• concerns of privacy • impacts on peer relationships • perceptions and feelings of others • sense of community • support systems

• the forum is a source of invaluable information • the forum is a source for emotional support and hope Online cancer support group (Xenakis, 2009) • members share a unique bond often resulting in friendship • members’ involvement changes over time

• pressure to marry Latter-Day Saint Couples’ Experience as Newlyweds (Alder, 2005)

• process of discovering sexual intimacy • overall evaluation of expectations and experience

When coding, keep in mind the differences among topics, codes, and topical themes. People might frequently bring up the same subject, or topic, but if subject is not relevant to your research, it is not a topical theme for your purposes. If you too quickly identify themes based on how often a topic occurs, you may have themes that ultimately are useless. Be careful not to equate a code attached to some topic frequently mentioned as a theme in and of itself. Although closely related to the data, a theme is what we learn about and from people and not simply common things they said. Table 13.3 contains an example of confusing a frequent topic, codes, and a theme. As you code, think about how your themes might fit together to provide a fuller, holistic understanding of your setting and group. Themes can be unconnected entities, but they often are not. If they all are relevant to your research question, then it is likely that at least some of them might be connected to each other in some way. Are they in a hierarchical relationship? Does one precede another? Certainly, review your theory to see how your themes are associated with the concepts in the theory. You will recall that theories are made up of concepts, and your thematic analysis is strongest when your themes are conceptual categories that are related to one another. Creating a pictorial model can help you determine whether the themes are related; make tables, Page 12 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

diagrams, charts, or other visuals. Table 13.3 Example of confusing topics and codes with a theme Graham conducted an ethnography for the purpose of understanding the office culture among 14 employees at Accountants-R-Us Corporation. His field notes contained eight comments made by women related to lunch: “The men always go to lunch together, but I have never asked to be included.” “I like to eat lunch in the stairwell because it is quieter there.” “I went to lunch only once with the men because all they talked about was sex in a way that made me uncomfortable.” “I like to eat healthy so I bring my own food.” “I bring my lunch to work each day because I got tired of eating out.” “The guys go out to lunch but we women in sales generally eat at our desks.” “If I bring my own lunch then I can eat things that are better for me than fast-food.” “I prefer to talk to the women while having lunch rather than talking to the men.” In the first round of coding, Graham assigned the code “lunch” to these statements. He was certain that lunch was a theme. During his second round of coding, he looked for subthemes but decided he had insufficient data to support a subtheme. Based on only two rounds of coding, he planned to include lunch as a topical theme in his final paper, create a table that shows how many women discussed lunch, and select a few of the quotations to justify his claim that lunch was a theme. This would be a mistake. Graham relied too much on simple, low-level codes. Lunch was not a theme. Rather, lunch was simply a topic that the women frequently discussed. Lunch is a topic and not a theme because lunch tells us little about the corporate culture, which was the focus of his research. A more careful analysis might have revealed that it is not lunch per se that gives insight to the office culture but rather who eats lunch with whom. Notice that several quotations mentioned men and women not eating together. Men and women not eating together is an example of gender segregation in the workplace, which could be a topical theme and an important concept in the study of gender in relationship to office culture. Unlike Graham, avoid being misled into thinking you have a theme just because you assigned the same code multiple times. Similar codes might reveal a frequent topic but not necessarily a theme.

When you examine possible ways your themes work together, you can further refine your analysis. You may realize, for example, that some themes are so close to being the same they can be combined or that a theme you previously thought important contributes little to the overall picture, so you can ignore it. Looking at possible arrangements among themes can help you with determining the context in which the themes arise and the scope and diversity within and across themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Ryan & Bernard, 2003). You might find that a potential theme is missing from your model and return again to the data to be sure you haven’t overlooked it. The bottom line is that as you develop your themes think about the connections among them. Page 13 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

How Many Instances Are Needed to Be a Theme? A key question is, How often does something have to occur to be a theme? As I’ve answered so many questions, It depends. If only three people out of twenty discuss the same topic, does that mean the theme does not exist? Maybe yes; maybe no. The comments of three people might be insufficient data to convince yourself or others there is a theme, but there are circumstances in which those comments could support a theme. Are the three people in a position to know more than everyone else? Did they give detailed explanations and examples based on what others have told them? Did they say something that was particularly insightful and could make a big contribution to the field? Did your field notes contain things consistent with what the three people said? If 26 people say the same thing, is that automatically a theme? No. Is 20 out of 26 enough? 23? Does a pattern that appears multiple times during one day of observing carry the same weight as a pattern that occurs once per day across several days (Braun & Clarke, 2006)? I cannot give you a specific number, but I can strongly suggest that you not use numbers alone as the deciding factors in whether you have a theme that is useful for your research.

Should I Have Preconceived Topical Themes? There are two general approaches related to preconceived themes. If you are conducting a thematic analysis to identify topical themes, then technically you should not have preconceived themes. Thematic analysis is the process of identifying themes during coding and analyzing the data. The themes are “data-driven,” “bottom up,” “grounded in the data,” and “inductive.” Alternatively, you can have themes you wish to explore that are derived from your particular theoretical perspective, review of the literature, and concepts of interest to you, and even commonsense can suggest a theme worthy of attention (Ryan & Bernard, 2003). If you already know what the themes are, and are looking for instances of them, then you are taking a more “top-down,” or “theory-driven,” approach (Braun &Clarke, 2006). This example illustrates the difference. You might find through your coding and analysis that people frequently said things related to the concept of family support. If relevant for your research question, then family support would be a theme you identified in the data. If you start with family support being a theme of interest to you, Page 14 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

and you coded looking for specific instances of it, then you cannot claim that family support was a “theme that emerged from the data” or a theme that “you identified while analyzing your data,” although what you learned about the theme is grounded in the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006) and useful for answering your question. There is no problem with having preconceived themes or concepts that guide your coding and analysis. Possibly you became interested in a theme that you read about in previous research and want to learn more about through your research. When using this approach, you might have a coding guide in which you have defined your preconceived themes and possibly refined your definition during your analysis, and then you see if you can identify data that meet your criteria (Attride-Stirling, 2001). For example, you might have a coding guide, or at least a good conceptual definition, that specifies what would be considered family support, and you code for instances of it. Your findings are still grounded in the data because it is how the theme manifests itself that matters. Being attentive to your interview questions can help you distinguish between identifying themes during data analysis and being interested in a specific theme at the start of your research. If you ask the question, In what ways were your family supportive of your career as a magician? then you cannot say that family support was a theme that emerged or that you identified. Of course, family support will be discussed because you specifically asked about it. If you ask the question, Why do you think you were able to have a career as a magician when others have given up? and family support is a frequent answer, then you identified this theme. Making a distinction between having and not having preconceived themes is somewhat misleading. In practice, it is difficult to try to analyze the data without some expectations of what you might find; after all, you will have read a lot about your topic, and you will be aware of themes others have identified. For example, if you are a sociologist it would be surprising if you didn’t expect inequality to be a potential theme. In a similar vein, a researcher that intends to focus the analysis on only some particular theme may well expand or change his or her focus in light of other important themes that are identified during analysis but were not expected.

How Do I Present My Themes in My Final Paper? One difficulty in presenting themes is determining how much and what type of data you should include to provide support for your conclusions. Frequency tables are often included that show the number of and which people expressed the theme. Be careful that you do not give demographic or other information in such a Page 15 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

table that could lead to the identification of the participants. A frequency table may be illuminating, but it is not sufficient evidence for defending the presence of a theme, because there is no set number of how many is enough. When deciding how much and what kinds of data you will include in your final paper, ask yourself questions. How important is the theme conceptually? How complex is the theme? How many themes are you including in your final paper? Was the theme discussed in an interview, something that you heard in naturally occurring conversations, or a pattern of events you observed? Do you need quotations that show diversity within a theme or are most the same? Did you decide to use quotations that support a theme from participants who have different roles in the setting? Are a few quotations enough to make your case, or do more need to be included because they are more indirect statements? Will you need lengthy sections from your field notes or will a few thick descriptions suffice? How you answer these questions will guide how much supporting data you need. Themes identified during interviews might need less space to illustrate than themes that focus on how events unfold over time. Although a theme is a recurring subject, there may be important variations of it, and you would be remiss not to provide evidence of this. One common method is to describe the theme and then provide verbatim quotations or sections from your field notes that illustrate the theme. Researchers frequently use this presentation style for data collected through interviews. When you use quotations, make sure you identify the speaker with a pseudonym, possibly set off by parentheses at the end of the quotation, or include it just prior to the quotation. If “knowing” the people in the setting is important, then it is helpful to attach their pseudonyms to quotations rather than using the general term “Respondent.” Attaching a pseudonym also lets the reader know how many different people you are quoting. Another advantage of using pseudonyms is that they are easier for the reader to remember than generic labels, such as “Respondent 1.” Unless it is relevant, do not add information to the pseudonym that adds little value. Is “Nic, 47, engineer” important to the theme being discussed or is it just as good to refer to him as “Nic”? In a study of how Vietnamese American adolescents perceived themselves in relation to their families, Phan (2005) described her participants in a previous section of her paper and then used their pseudonyms and quotations from six of them. One topical theme presented was “family ties.” Phan began the discussion of family ties with a brief summary of previous research on family ties and then continued with quotations, some Page 16 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

only a sentence and others longer. For example, she provides this brief excerpt from Don. We have a close relationship; my dad and I are really close. (p. 431) Phan continues with a longer statement from Quan: My parents are very important to me. I appreciate their guidance and their disciplines. I really appreciate their advice. I love both of them equally. I feel obligated to do well for them and for our honor, as well as for myself. My family is the main motivator along with our Vietnamese history. I like to learn Vietnamese history.” (p. 431) She had more quotations from other participants. In so doing, she not only provided additional evidence for her theme but also demonstrated that the importance of family ties was shared by more than two of the participants. At the same time, she did not overwhelm her readers with quoting too many people. Finding this balance is not always easy. In the final paper, you can use a polished version of any tables, diagrams, charts, or other visual representations that you created when you were trying to determine whether and how your themes are related. Such pictures serve the same purpose as models of theoretical relationships, as were discussed in the theory and review of literature chapter.

Interpretation Describing themes and interpreting them are not the same things. Simply reporting topical themes and overarching themes and illuminating them with thick descriptions and participants’ quotations are not sufficient, although necessary. Your reader needs to know the conceptual importance of the themes and how they relate to your research question, theory, and literature. Interpretation of topical themes requires inference, although not to the same degree as with overarching themes. Asking yourself questions can help you move beyond presenting illustrative data and descriptions of your themes to interpreting them, theorizing patterns, explaining the conceptual importance of a theme, relating them to the literature, and discussing their implications (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Braun and Clarke suggest the following questions can help you when interpreting your themes: Page 17 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• What does this theme mean? • What are the assumptions underpinning it? • What are the implications of this theme? • What conditions are likely to have given rise to it? • Why do people talk about this thing in this particular way (as opposed to other ways)? • What is the overall story the different themes reveal about the topic? (p. 23) As part of the interpretive process, you move from relatively lower level themes to those that are conceptually stronger. Frith and Gleesons’ (2004) study of men and clothing illustrates this point. Some of their original themes were (1) practicality of clothing choices, (2) lack of concern about appearance, (3) use of clothing to conceal or reveal the body, and (4) use of clothing to fit cultural ideals. During the interpretative phase, their themes became more conceptual. Three of them were (1) gender stereotypes; (2) body image as fluid, contradictory, and constantly renegotiated; and (3) dressing as an embodied practice. Even though none of the men said the words “fluid,” “contradictory,” and “constantly renegotiated,” their explanations and supporting quotations showed how they got from the original data to conceptually strong themes of theoretical importance beyond just their research.

Conclusions A theme can be the overarching thread that captures the essence of the setting. Alternatively, it can reflect specific patterns and reoccurring events in the setting. Thematic analysis is more than counting codes and claiming themes exist based on frequency. When your goal is to identify topical themes, it is particularly easy to slip into the incorrect practice of arguing that you have a theme based solely on common topics or events. Your themes have to be defined, described, interpreted, and justified with selected data from your time in the field. They must be conceptually relevant and answer your research question. Braun and Clarke (2006) say, “As well as identifying the ‘story’ that each theme tells, it is important to consider how it fits into the broader overall ‘story’ that you are telling about your data, in relation to your research question or questions” (p. 22). This notion that themes are part of a “story” about your data is further elaborated in the next chapter, which provides guidance on how to write a research story.

Page 18 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter Highlights • Themes can be overarching unifying threads or underlying insights that capture the essence of what is being studied. • Themes can be patterns, reoccurring topics and events, and similarities that you identify from the data. • Thematic analysis requires considerably more work than counting codes. • A thematic analysis is strongest when the themes are conceptual categories and relationships among themes are explored. • Themes have to be defined, described, interpreted, illustrated, and justified with selected data. • Themes have to be conceptually relevant and have to answer a research question.

Exercises 1. Watch a movie that you have not seen before and identify and justify an overarching theme. Keep field notes while watching. Justify your conclusion by using data from the movie. Take detailed field notes, expand on them, and use these to help you make your decision. You have to give details about three examples that led you to your overarching theme. You will need to refer to specific scenes, quotations, and paraphrases from the movie. As is the case when observing in the field, you cannot look at the movie more than once. That is why it is important that you get as much in your field notes as you can. Remember that an overarching theme is rarely specifically stated, so you will have to explain how and why you inferred your theme from the data. 2. Watch a movie you have not seen before and identify two topical themes. Keep field notes while watching. Justify your conclusion by using data from the movie—paraphrases, quotations, detailed descriptions. You will need to present at least three examples to support each of your themes. Given that you are without a research question, do not be concerned too much about the conceptual importance of your themes, but the themes should not be something trivial (for example, indicating that Page 19 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

the detectives wore suits in most of the scenes is trivial). Justify why you think the themes are an important component of the film. As is the case when observing in the field, you cannot look at the movie more than once. 3. Write a letter to a high school senior explaining the content of this chapter in a way that the student can understand it. The letter should be approximately two pages. 4. Keep field notes about your interactions and observations during one or more days. Your research question is, what are major topics of conversation among college students? Using these data, conduct a thematic analysis. Find one overarching theme and two topical themes. Turn in your field notes with this exercise. Explain the procedures used to arrive at your conclusions and provide data to justify why you think these are themes.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1, 385–405. Ryan, G., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15, 85–109. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2003). Classifying the findings in qualitative studies. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 905–923.

Recommended Additional Reading Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 77–101. DeSantis, L., & Ugarriza, D. N. (2000). The concept of theme as used in qualitative nursing research. Page 20 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Western Journal of Nursing Research, 22(3), 351–372. Guest, G., MacQueen, K., & Namey, E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tuckett, A. G. (2005). Applying thematic analysis theory to practice: A researcher’s experience. Contemporary Nurse, 19, 75–87.

• Thematic analysis • Field notes • Fieldwork https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 21 of 21

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 14: Research Stories and Critical Events and Cases

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • explain the role of plots, characters, place, time, summaries, scenes, dialogue, point of view, and themes in a research story; • explain what makes a research story approach a valid way of analyzing data and presenting results; • write a research story; and • explain the purposes of and differences between critical events and critical cases.

Do you remember these short stories: “Hansel and Gretel” (Grimm & Grimm, 1955) and “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” (Townsend, 1867)? Along with being entertaining, stories such as these brief fables convey important moral lessons—“never cry wolf.” It might surprise you that you also can tell stories, based on your research, that convey important findings. By using elements of fiction to analyze and present your result, you will have a research story that meets all the criteria that make for valid research. In this chapter, I explain how a research story can be an analytical aid for understanding the daily lives of people in a setting and a way to present your results that engages your readers. I end with a discussion of critical events and critical cases. After months in a setting conducting research, you will have lots of experiences that you can use to regale your friends with stories. These same experiences can be the basis of a research story designed for an academic audience. Instead of a final paper with a part devoted to methods, another to descriptions, another to themes, and so on, you can weave these together into a coherent narrative, without sacrificing any of the rigor expected when using other analytic techniques and styles of presentation.

Elements in a Research Story One approach to writing a research story is incorporating the elements that are used when writing fictional stories. Stories written by creative writers require the following:

Page 2 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• plot • characters • place • time • summaries • scenes • dialogue • point of view • themes These too are elements needed for a research story. In addition, a research story requires you to rigorously code your data; focus on your research questions and over-arching purpose; create an audit trail; use thick descriptions generated from your field notes and observations; maintain the integrity of the participants’ voices; incorporate theoretical concepts; be attentive to who, what, why, how, when, where, and whom was affected; stay focused on the data; connect your research to your literature review; be consistent with your paradigmatic assumptions; and more. Further, a research story can incorporate the results from other forms of analyzes, such as typologies and thick descriptions. All these are blended together so that your final document reads more like a story than a dry academic document. If you are concerned that a “story approach” somehow makes your research seem less legitimate, have no worries. Although not typically referred to as a research story, using the story genre when coding and analyzing data and writing the final document is a common practice among field researchers, particularly those who write books based on their research. Using the elements of fiction and storytelling is a way to make sense out of the huge amount of data collected during fieldwork, as is the case with other analytical techniques. However, the elements are integrated in such a way that a compelling research story results that pulls together many different facets of the setting rather than focusing on one or two. Although I refer to story in the singular, you may have many stories of various lengths in the same document. A research story might be only a small part of your final paper and the rest of the paper follows other presentation styles. I use the term story in a way that is different from its meaning in other research designs. I will sometimes substitute “narrative” for story, but this is not to be confused with a narrative analysis. I do not mean the analysis of stories told by participants, as might be the case if one were conducting a narrative analysis. I do not mean a focus on the analysis of how the participants told stories, which might be done if one were conducting dis-

Page 3 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

course analysis. I mean that you, as the researcher, write a story based on the rigorous analysis of your data.

Photo 14.1 A research story based on data from long-term engagement in an unfamiliar place is ideal for conveying the complexity of a setting. Figure 16

Source: © iStockphoto.com/kiankhoon A major difference between a fictional short story and a field research story is that the former has its roots in the writer’s imagination, whereas the latter has its genesis in the lives of the participants in the setting. When crafting your research story from weeks of observations and interactions with participants, you will analyze and organize the data such that it includes a plot, characters, a place, time, summaries, scenes, dialogue, point of view, and themes and weave these together for a narrative firmly grounded in the data. These elements so overlap that it is somewhat misleading to treat them as separate entities, but students have found it helpful when presented in this way.

Plot As you observe, write field notes, conduct interviews, and code, look for the plot that is unfolding. Every story requires a plot, and a plot requires actions. Unlike the action in a movie—which might focus on car chases, bear attacks, being trapped on Mars, fights, love triangles, super heroes saving the world, and lots of explosions—the action for field researchers does not have to be dramatic, although at times it is. Field stories can Page 4 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

have action that is quite subtle, just as long as something transpires, unfolds, occurs, or happens that provides insights into the setting. Otherwise, no story exists, because no “forward movement” occurs. However, actions or events in and of themselves do not make a plot, nor does simply listing a bunch of unrelated things that occurred count as results of field research. Indeed, your field notes should contain details about activities in the setting, but simply reporting that this happened and then another thing happened and another is not a plot. A plot includes arranging a series of events such that they reveal the what, how, why, to whom with what effect, and so on (Burroway, 2003, p. 45). You should remember the importance of key questions such as these from the chapter on observations. A creative writer might craft a story so that the plot answers the question, How did the detective find the murderer? The plot you write based on your research should answer your research question, for example, How do the men’s definitions of masculinity manifest themselves in the interactions with each other in the nursing home? The plot is the connecting thread that leads to the answers to the research questions. The observations, interviews, field notes, coding, and different types of analysis are the material you use to write the plot for your story. Table 14.1 Development of characters Burroway (2003) gives suggestions for characterization in a short story analysis, and by extension, in a research story. 1. Know the characters’ appearance and body language, and where they are and what is around them. 2. Know the details of the characters’ lives—their routine and not so routine behaviors. 3. Identify inconsistencies and patterns in their talk, appearance, and behaviors. 4. Examine their speech—not just content but how and when it is said and the meanings behind it. (p. 180)

Characters Stories cannot exist without characters. In field research, characters come in many shapes and forms. They are the participants in the setting, gatekeepers, and others talked about by participants. Even the researcher can be a character, particularly in fieldwork guided by interpretive and critical paradigms. A common goal of field research is to understand a setting from the perspectives of the participants (or characters, in the parPage 5 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

lance of creative writing). This goal is largely unobtainable if the researcher and eventually the readers of the final paper do not know the participants (Burroway, 2003, p. 157). As you read Table 14.1, notice how Burroway’s suggestions for developing characters for a creative story parallel strategies discussed elsewhere in this book. If you have observed and recorded detailed descriptions, you’ll have the information you need to make the characters come alive. You might draw upon typologies you have created for providing insight into the characters If you are telling a research story about tourism and tourists, for example, you might have a chapter that tells the stories of the different types of tourists that you found through creating your typology—adventure tourists, religious tourists, health tourists, extreme tourists, death tourists, or cultural tourists.

Place Place is an essential elements of a creative story and a field research story. After all, you may have selected the place for your research long before you knew what the purpose of your research would be. The story’s setting is so infused with the plot and characters that to talk about them separately is misleading. Two of my favorite authors, Lisa Norris and Arundhati Roy, start their stories by establishing elements of place and time. Norris (2000) begins When they first walked in, the emptiness of the place made sense to Cory. After all, it was late September in Alaska. Winter could begin anytime. (p. 9) Roy’s (1997) first line is May in Ayemenem is a hot, brooding month. The days are long and humid. (p. 3) Would the characters that inhabit Norris’s story have the same experiences if they were suddenly transported from Alaska to Ayemenem? We can turn to Eudora Welty (1994), a well-known Southern writer, for the answer to my question. Every story would be another story, and unrecognizable if it took up its characters and plot and happened somewhere else. . . . Fiction depends for its life on place. Place is the crossroads of circumstance, the proving ground of, What happened? Who’s here? Who’s coming?

Page 6 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Settings matter a great deal in field research, whether El Barrio, Diamond City in the game Fallout 4, a motorcycle rally in Sturgis, South Dakota, a discussion board for people with muscular dystrophy, or a commune in Poland. As Welty suggests, your setting is not only where something happens, but it also can be the driving force behind what, how, why, and what events occur. You know the importance of describing your setting, but when you are coding and writing your story, carefully reflect on to what degree the setting is a primary actor along with the participants in it. Yet not everything about the setting is crucial for our understanding. Thus, part of the analytical task is to determine which features of the setting are integral to what happens versus simply where it took place.

Time Reread the first lines written by Norris and Roy. They indicate right away that time of year is important to their stories. Likewise, the time of day, day of the week, month, and year matter to what occurs in a setting. That is another reason why it is crucial that you observe and interact over a long period of time. Like place, time can be not only when something happened but also the prime mover and shaker behind why, how, and what things happened. In some instances, though, time might not be a significant factor; routines can be the same regardless of when they occur. Your job is to keep high-quality field notes, rigorously code and analyze your data, and spend considerable energy reflecting on the implications of time for your results. Time is also important in other ways. Although you will be observing and interacting in real time, the way people explain things to you might not start with a point in the past and proceed in chronological order. People tend to jump back and forth in time when talking about events in their lives. Thus, you will need to reconstruct the temporal order of events in order to understand them clearly. In your final paper, you can decide if you want to treat time as a descriptive detail and move on, tell your story in chronological order, or integrate it into the story when it is as important as the participants and place for answering your research question.

Summaries and Scenes Summaries and scenes are important elements of a creative story and a field research story. Scenes, in particular, are the centerpiece of a good story. An extremely important decision is to what degree you will write Page 7 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

summaries or present scenes. A summary might condense events that took place over a long period of time into a few paragraphs (Burroway, 2003). In contrast, a scene is a relatively lengthy account of what happened in a short amount of time. A summary is a broad overview of the context for a particular section of the results. A scene would provide considerably more detail. Summaries are necessarily included or both the big picture and the important small details would be lost. They are essential because these are how the connections to the research question and other parts of the research are made. For example, a summary is where the link to the review of literature or theory is explained. But scenes are needed too because they are used to support your research conclusions. Without scenes, there is no story (Burroway, 2003). Without scenes, your readers are unable to judge whether your conclusions are derived from the data The goal of writing a scene is to put the readers in the setting with the participants—in “real” time—as the events unfold (Burroway, 2003). Readers’ responses to a scene should be the feeling of being there, of listening, and of observing in ways that allow them to understand the research-related reasons behind including the scene. In contrast, the response to a summary is that someone else is providing a valuable synopsis of events for you. Notice how the level of intimacy changes in the following summary and scene. Duneier (1999) provides this summary: Several other elements serve to make Greenwich Village a sustaining habitat that is ideal for magazine scavenging and vending. The neighborhood is the home of many people who are sympathetic to unhoused people and are willing to give money and food to them. (p. 147) Contrast that with the following scene. Duneier (1999) begins by telling us that Ellen, a 50-year-old White woman, wanted to donate magazines to a vendor in exchange for a discount on a magazine she wanted: “You know I gotta charge full price,” Marvin told her in a defiant but joking manner. “But I’m going to give you a lot of magazines!” she told him, smiling. “So you want me to take out your garbage and give you a discount?” Marvin retorted. “It gotta be good magazines. I gotta have an eye for them. I can’t just take a whole bunch of average stuff and put it on my table.” “No!” she responded. “They’re all good ones. They’re all ones I got from you!” (p. 147)

Page 8 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

The summary was written from Duneier’s perspective. In contrast, in the scene, he allows the vendor and the woman to speak for themselves. Duneier had earlier explained why this scene and its dialogue were important to his research.

Dialogue Dialogue is another essential feature of a story. Once again, a difference between fiction and research is that in the former the writer invents dialogue and in the latter, the researcher carefully records participants’ dialogue. The field researcher plays a role by establishing rapport, asking the right questions, taping and transcribing interviews, coding, and presenting dialogue in meaningful ways. But the dialogue included in a final document is not a figment of the researcher’s imagination. A major part of the coding process and intellectual work is deciding what dialogue is relevant. The bulk of what is said over a 6-month period of interaction will have little relevancy to the point you are trying to make. The coding process is used to determine what talk is important. During the coding process, your categories, themes, and so on become more conceptual with each round so make sure you keep a way to link them to the verbatim comments that you will need when incorporating dialogue into your research story. How much dialogue is needed to support your claims is yet another question. There are no rules to say how much or how little will suffice to advance your field research story. Book-length ethnographies often have multiple pages of dialogue with no authorial commentary. Quotations are often richer than paraphrases. This is why it is essential that you be able to distinguish among direct quotations, paraphrases, and your notes on what was said in your field notes—you learned techniques for doing this in the chapter on field notes. Hearing people’s own voices as they describe their experiences is closer to the data, which gives your work more veracity, than a summary you might make without the participants’ voices. Summarized and paraphrased accounts of conversations save time and space, and certainly are needed, but using the original words of participants helps bring them to life for readers. The dialogue in this excerpt from Jeeves, Jeeves, Jeeves, written by P. G. Wodehouse (1976), shows how Bertram Wooster, a young man of privilege, and his butler, Jeeves, express essentially the same thought while saying something radically different about themselves.

Page 9 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Bertram: I’ve seldom had a sharper attack of euphoria. I feel full to the brim of Vitamin B. Mind you, don’t know how long it will last. It’s often when one’s feelin’ good that the storm clouds begin doing their stuff. Jeeves: Very true, sir. Full many a glorious morning have I seen flatter the mountain tops with sovereign eye, kissing with golden face the meadows green, gilding pale streams with heavenly alchemy, Anon permit the basest clouds to ride with ugly rack on his celestial face and from the forlorn world his visage hide, stealing unseen to west with this disgrace. (p. 404) If I had been present as a field researcher listening to this conversation, I could have summarized it in my final paper by saying that Jeeves and Bertram talked about how things can go from good to bad when least expected. Although this summary is technically correct, it does not capture the essence of this exchange with regard to language and style, which tell us much about the two men. To understand these two men, one must hear them speak directly. The same holds true for representations in field research documents. Be forewarned, however: You will not find retaining the speakers’ dialogue an easy task. You have to be careful that quoting someone does not lead to any ethical violations. You will often find yourself troubled by the syntactically twisted and grammatically skewed manner in which people often speak. We talk in incomplete sentences, we halt in mid-sentence to reframe the same idea in different words, we trail off and leave thoughts uncompleted, we “hmmm,” “ahem,” and “uh” our way through conversations. Our speech is filled with many “you knows,” “like,” and “I mean.” As a researcher, you will struggle with wanting to include exactly what was said and how it was said—and also wanting to edit it for clarity. When you do edit dialogue, which should be extremely rare, you should explicitly explain this action in your methods section, prior to or after the dialogue, or in a footnote. Preferably, you present it as is. You should not edit dialogue to make the person “look good” by changing what they say or how they said it.

Point of View Stories are told from a point of view, possibly even multiple points of view. In the field of creative writing, the novelist or short-story writer creates point of view at will. He or she might choose the first-person narrative approach, the omniscient narrative stance, or any one of numerous other options—whichever best serves the narrative flow at any one time. You have choices as well.

Page 10 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Although the pieces of the research story already exist in field notes and in the transcripts of others’ spoken words, rather than being drawn from the imagination, the field researcher decides whose point(s) of view the story will reflect, a choice shaped in part by the paradigm he or she selects. This includes deciding to what degree his or her voice will be heard. A researcher using a post-positivist paradigm strives for objectivity and value neutrality. Thus, from this perspective, you would most likely tell the story mostly as an invisible, neutral, and objective narrator. Few reflexive statements would be included in the final manuscript. In contrast, interpretive and critical paradigms have an explicit epistemological assumption regarding the role of the researcher: What is learned about a setting and its participants is not independent of the researcher. Because of this epistemological assumption, you would be present in the text of the final document—often as a central character in the story, possibly comparing your perspectives with those of the participants. In the final document, “I” statements occur frequently. In fact, because the researcher decides what to observe, what to ask, what to record, what to code, and what to conclude, I think that not owning up to this by avoiding the words “I” and “me” misrepresents the results and is inconsistent with a common practices of field researchers. Thus, when students write, “The researcher conducted six interviews,” I request that they give me the name of the researcher. They get the point and switch to “I.” Even if your work is firmly rooted in a post-positivist tradition, using “I” is still appropriate. There is no need to include “I” or “me” in every sentence, as long as your reader knows whether you are expressing your view and opinion or someone else’s. Now the quick qualifier. I just gave you my personal opinion; whether “I” or “the researcher” is used depends upon your instructor, department and disciplinary traditions, and other factors. In a previous chapter, I used Switzer’s account of her experiences drinking milk in a Maasai village. She makes clear that the description is hers: “The Maasai milk tastes to me like a drinkable yogurt.” Told from the point of view of one of the Maasai, Switzer might have used the words of one of the women, “Our milk is like a drinkable yogurt.” This milk example is simpler than what is usually encountered in the field. In both of my examples the milk was compared to yogurt, whereas in the “real world,” stories told from different views are not as likely to have this much agreement. It is important in many cases that you include different perspectives. Don’t fall into the trap of cherry picking the account that best fits what you “hope to find.” The important voice might be the one that is counter to all the others. Recall in the chapter on gaining entrée how I noted that it is easy to take the Page 11 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

view of the key actor at the risk of ignoring other perspectives. Try to avoid this by deliberately seeking out all possible different points of view. Because of the lack of consistency in how events are experienced and told, researchers craft stories that use multiple points of view unless there is a reason not to—not every contrary view is important. One of many ways that researchers’ voices enter into the story is through inclusion of reflective statements about their role in the research. Creative writers might explain their writing process or the inspiration for their work in an interview but not likely in the story itself. In contrast, researchers using a form of interpretive or critical paradigm include their reflections in the final paper, not only about their part in arriving at the results but also about how they affected the research process itself and sometimes about how the process affected them. Sulsberger (2014) included reflective statements in her dissertation about first grade students’ environmental identity formation through a school gardening program for which she was the teacher. She wrote, This choice of conducting ethnographic case study research brought with it a new set of challenges. As I acted as a participant researcher in this study, I had to maintain a certain level of reflexivity in my work. To address this need for reflexivity throughout my research practices, I continually positioned myself within the research process, as well as continually re-examined the possible biases or impacts my presence or position of power may have caused. Maintaining a close connection between theory and practice, as well as reflecting in my research journal throughout data collection, analysis, and interpretation, promoted the necessary structure and reflexivity required in this ethnographic work. (p. 63) She continued later, writing, As a researcher, environmental educator, and the biggest cheerleader of this public garden space, I come again to a place where it is necessary to attend to my roles in the production of this research. I designed the study, theoretically framed the garden space, guided the learning experiences, collected certain data, interpreted the “researcher other,” chose which stories to share, and thus, influenced the students’ identity production stories. And now, in this final step of this dissertation process, I am writing these stories into existence. While I triangulated my data, empowered the kids over myself in the garden space, and engaged in reflexive processes at every turn, I am and always will be a large part of this work. (p. 187)

Page 12 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

You may hesitate to “admit” your level of involvement in the research outcomes, but not doing so can be a mistake. You might not be as involved in what you are studying as Sulsberger was, but you are still there. Your work can be less trustworthy if you fail to address your role in the research process. At the same time, a considerable difference exists between locating yourself in the production of knowledge and being completely self-centered. Punch (1986) warns against opening “the floodgates for sentimental, emotional, pseudo-honest accounts detailing every nervous tremor and moment of depression or elation” (p. 14). Another useful reminder is Bourgois’s (1995) comment that “[s]cholarly self-reflection often degenerates into narcissistic celebrations of privilege” (p. 14). These are to be avoided.

Themes As you read earlier, researchers analyze and report themes as topical themes, overarching themes, or both. A theme is what the story is about, but it is not the plot of the story. Both types of stories can have themes about life and death, the strength of the human spirit in the face of terrible conditions, the misuse of power, structural inequality, anti-immigration rhetoric, social bonds, conflicting values, or social support. In literature, we sometimes have to figure out “the point of the story.” I recall being irritated when Mrs. Sheppard, my ninth-grade English teacher, would ask, “What do you think the author is trying to convey in this story?” I floundered in coming up with an answer because the author never directly said what it was. If Mrs. Sheppard asked her question about a research paper, I would have been able to state exactly what the student was trying to convey and give the page number where it was said. Why? The art of writing fictional stories and research stories diverges at the point of themes because the field researcher explicitly states them. A field research story should leave no one guessing about what your theme is and how you arrived at your conclusion. This is particularly the case when one takes the position that themes are inferred from the data rather than being derived directly from quotes to which one can point. In a final paper, readers are often told the theme early in the paper, and its relevance to the big picture will be clearly articulated many times thereafter with details given as support. The same is true when a theme is defined as a recurring pattern. A search for similar terms and listing quote after quote based on the search term does not lead to a field research story. It is the integration of the theme Page 13 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

and the documentation of it that allow you to explain the relevance of the patterns to the big picture. How do your themes illuminate the plot, characters, setting, scenes, and so on? And as always, what is the conceptual relevance of the theme. The following example from Duneier’s (1999) research on street vendors shows how the overarching theme of the “limits of social control” is supported by the presentation of a scene. Making the case for the overarching theme resulted in him writing multiple chapters that illuminated the theme from different angles. In one instance, he uses the difficulties the men have in gaining access to restrooms in the area, a scene, to illustrate the limits of social control. He provides multiple pieces of data to support his conclusion that formal social controls have, at times, exacerbated rather than reduced problems as intended. After thus contextualizing his story, he provides scenes that illustrate his point. Duneier (1999) begins the chapter by noting that the setting in question—Sixth Avenue—has no public restrooms. Most local businesses will not allow the street vendors who work on Sixth Avenue to use their restrooms. Therefore, they urinated against the sides of buildings or other public places, which shows that attempts to control them did not drive them away but led to behaviors frowned upon by others. “I gotta get me a paper cup and I’m gonna be all right,” Mudrick tells me as we walk down Sixth Avenue at 10:00 p.m. After he finds one in a trashcan, he pauses, unzips his pants, and begins urinating into it. I ask him why. “This is for the street, Mitch. This is for Guiliano,” he laughs, referring to the mayor, who is more commonly known as Rudolph Giuliani. “Guiliano say you can’t go to the bathroom. I invented this thing. Now everybody out here gets a cup. You can’t go to the bathroom in the stores and restaurants, because they don’t want you in there if you ain’t got no money to spend. So how you gonna piss? You gotta get a cup.” “And then you just throw it in the street?” I ask. “Throw it in the street!” said Mudrick. “And that’s for Giuliani?” I ask, surprised that urination is being described as a political act. “Yeah. I went to Riker’s Island jail for pissing in the street. Now I get a cup.” (pp. 173–174)

Page 14 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Two paragraphs later, the story continues: A few days earlier, I had noticed Mudrick flagging down a cab. None stopped for him. A few seconds later, he turned away with a cup in hand and dumped it in the sewer. While Mudrick pretends to be hailing a cab, he holds the cup and urinates under an untucked shirt. . . . On another occasion, after dumping his urine in the sewer, Mudrick placed the Starbucks cup he had just used on the branch of a tree on Sixth Avenue. (The tree had been planted by the local Business Improvement District to cut down on space for vendors.) I had occasionally noticed paper cups hanging from tree branches but had never thought twice about them. (p. 174) After Duneier presents Mudrick’s solution to the bathroom problem, he turns to the conversations about urination he had with other men to show similarities and differences.

Theory and Concepts I end this section on research stories by highlighting that theories and concepts are used differently in creative stories and research stories. They are not essential to creative stories. In contrast, you cannot ignore theory when analyzing your data in order to present them as a research story. Powell’s (2010) ethnographic research on the cultural politics of energy development on the Navajo (Diné) Nation in Arizona and New Mexico illustrates how research stories can be used to make theoretical contributions. Powell’s various stories include scenes, her point of view, time, place, characters, themes, and plots. She frames her research stories in a way that we know early on that she is not only a researcher but also a political activist. She infuses methodological details in her stories, including the process of gaining entrée, her methods, ethics, paradigms, and research questions. For example, she provides details about her arrival in the field: My first arrival to the Navajo Nation was on a biodiesel-fueled tour bus filled with musicians, environmental activists and sound engineers. The bus pulled into Window Rock, capitol of the Navajo Nation, on the cool dawn of October 9, 2000. Out the bus window, I saw a rider on horseback herding a flock of sheep across the parking lot of a Taco Bell, surveying the nearby wall of terracotta-colored

Page 15 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

cliffs. She mentions sheep in her description of her arrival and later she tells a research story with sheep as the center. She includes these descriptive details: Many mornings at Adella’s homestead, I awoke to the sound of lambs bleating, their mothers’ collar bells sounding their location as they grazed slowly through sagebrush and low-hanging juniper branches. Adella’s sister Angie and her husband Jay organized their days around their sheep. Her story about sheep continued for many pages and was considerably more than just description. Her theoretical concepts were integrated into it. Through her story, she conveyed the sheep’s cultural and political significance and importance to Navajo identity and spirituality; the role of sheep in relationship to the history of resistance and independence; and the differences between bureaucratic, land management political economy and the relational, experiential political ecology of sheep among the Diné.

Critical Events and Cases Wolcott (1994) reminds us that because no researcher can ever tell the “whole story,” a solution is to select a particular critical event or activity and subject it to microscopic scrutiny that tells a bigger story. Ideal events are ones that “perfectly capture” the essence (themes, characteristics, relationships, patterns) of the whole (p. 19). Think of a critical event as a perfect example of something. Using clichés, critical events are ones that “just say it all” or “provide a window into a larger world.” Given that undergraduates tend not to have the luxury of months or years in the field, focusing on a seemingly small, but yet telling, event can be a good choice. Placing your focused attention on a narrowly defined specific event is what Wolcott calls “doing less more thoroughly” (Wolcott, 1990, p. 62). Three examples of critical events might help you see the usefulness of them for understanding your setting: an analysis of people selecting a new principle, unmowed grass, and women collecting oysters. These are good models of how theories and theoretical concepts are used in field research stories about critical events.

Page 16 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

As part of a larger case study of an elementary school principal, Wolcott (1994) included detailed accounts of the Principal Selection Committee as a critical event because “that event, though well removed from the daily routine of any principal, brought into bold relief several aspects central to the professional life of the case study principal and to the principals with which he worked” [italics added] (p. 140). After analyzing the committee meetings, Wolcott concluded that within them one could find evidence of three interrelated dimensions of the principal’s life and work: the lack of professional knowledge associated with the role, an esteem for personal feelings, and a proclivity toward variety-reducing behavior (p. 14). In her study of a public housing community, Chenault (2004) used critical event analysis, focusing her attention on an episode she aptly identified as the “grass incident.” One member of the resident council expressed concern that, because the grass in the community had remained uncut for so long, snakes had moved into the yards and posed a safety hazard for the children who played there. Although the resident’s request that the grass be mowed seems so simple and reasonable that one might expect it to have been implemented quickly, this was not the case. During this “grass incident,” issues of self-determination, power, inadequate funding, gender relations, employee turnover, and disjunctions between the written policies of the community and tenant expectations surfaced.

Photo 14.2 In a study of carpooling, details about interpersonal conflict, social class, political activism, and policies related to distracted driving were brought to the fore by this critical event. Figure 17

Page 17 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Source: Photo courtesy of the author. In her ethnography of a banguay (village) in the Philippines, Macabuac (2005) used the collection of oysters by female inhabitants as a critical event. Guided by world systems and ecofeminist theories, she demonstrated in her detailed narrative of the oyster collection process how global policies played out at the micro level. Macabuac made vivid for readers the fact that export food production had created such ecological destruction for the banguay that oysters had become an important food source for the inhabitants, a food that required long hours of backbreaking labor by the women. A close cousin to a critical event analysis is a critical case that focuses the researcher’s attention on a single individual. Concentrating on one case in depth allows for highly detailed accounts of how one person navigates the complex web of social relationships, processes, and structures in the setting. In her ethnography of a grassroots organization in New York City that defended the legal and human rights of the city’s Mexican immigrants, Solis (2003) embedded a critical case study of a single youth, David, to illustrate how multiple kinds of violence intersect with an individual’s identity formation (p. 23). She used theories of sociohistory and dialectical violence to examine how Mexican youths become victimized by their illegal status. Through a highly detailed analysis of David’s experiences, she provided insight into how the status of illegality “produced on a societal level through social structures such as the mass media, immigration laws, and popular opinion” plays out at the level of the individual (p. 16). Both critical events and critical cases can be presented as research stories.

Conclusions Although I presented the elements used in research stories in separate sections, they are combined in the final document. The descriptions of the characters are included with their dialogue in a scene that moves the plot forward. You might have multiple stories focusing on different parts of your research. A research story format can incorporate methodological details as well as the implications for your theoretical concepts. Alternatively, you might have separate parts of your final paper reserved for these. Because of all the details you have to give about your methodology in the final document, research stories typically have a methods chapter even if information about methodology is sprinkled throughout the story. The most difficult part of writing your field research story is gathering the data, coding, interpreting it, deterPage 18 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

mining how it answers the research question, and so on. It also is not a simple task to figure out how to tell the research story, but hopefully this is made easier because you will have started writing it from the very early stages of your field research. The results should be rigorous research presented as a compelling story that provides readers with insight into the lives of the participants in the setting. I return to Welty’s (1994) insights about stories: This makes it the business of writing, and the responsibility of the writer, to disentangle the significant—in character, incident, setting, mood, everything—from the random and meaningless and irrelevant that in real life surround and beset it. It is a matter of his selecting and, by all that implies, of changing “real” life as he goes. With each word he writes, he acts as literally and methodically as if he hacked his way through a forest and blazed it for the word that follows. He makes choices at the explicit demand of this one present story; each choice implies, explains, limits the next, and illuminates the one before. Not all research proves amenable to storytelling. If the goal is to create a typology of whistle blowers, then using a story approach might not be the best way. However, when appropriate, I think stories provide a richness that other forms of data presentation often lack. When an analytical style focuses on what is said disconnected from the speaker, the context gets lost, the observational data are not as apt to be included with the speech, and the presence of the researcher disappears—all features that help make field research insightful. Henry Selick, the director of the film adaptation of the popular classic novel, James and the Giant Peach (Dahl, 1961), described himself as having “the ability to zoom in super tight for very small details, but then jump back for sort of that big picture perspective” (www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/henryselic543903.html). Whether you focus on a single event or case or a larger setting or group, a good final paper both zooms in tight on the small descriptive details and jumps back to show the big theoretical picture. In the last chapter, I discuss how to create such a final paper.

Chapter Highlights • Analyzing and presenting a research story is a valid research technique for gaining insight into a setting and its members.

Page 19 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• Research stories have plots, characters, place, time, summaries, scenes, dialogue, point of view, themes, theories, and concepts. • Research stories answer research questions and have presentation styles that engage the reader. • Researchers conduct critical event analysis and critical case analysis to provide a microscopic view of how processes of the whole play out in specific instances.

Exercises 1. Take detailed field notes about your activities during the day. Write two pages about your experiences that include all the elements in a research story. Don’t forget to take good field notes so you will have verbatim dialogue for some of your scenes. 2. Select a particular event or relatively small portion of your day in which you interacted with others. Take detailed notes. Write a summary and then a scene based on the same experience. Both should be at least one half of a page. 3. Write a creative story about the major points presented in this chapter. For example, one of your characters might be a dragon that is telling a unicorn about the difference between a summary and scene. That is, write a creative story to explain what a research story is and how the two types of stories differ or are the same. 4. List six events in the last few weeks that are suitable for a critical event analysis. These do not have to be dramatic, but they should be more than routine events or experiences. Reading a newspaper or watching the news can help you find good examples. In a sentence or two, explain why each might be important enough to study.

Page 20 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Caulley, D. (2008). Making qualitative reports less boring: The techniques of writing creating nonfiction. Qualitative Inquiry, 14, 424–449. Frank, A. (2004). After methods, the story: From incongruity to truth in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 14, 430–440. Holloway, I., & Biley, F. (2011). Being a qualitative researcher. Qualitative Health Research, 21, 968–975.

Recommended Additional Reading Diamond, T. (1992). Making gray gold: Narratives of nursing home care. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Goodall, H. (2010). From Tales of the Field to tales of the future. Organizational Research Methods,13, 256–267. Pelias, R. (2015). A story located in “shoulds”: Toward a productive future for qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 21, 609–611. Van Maanen, J. (2011). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

• tourism

Page 21 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

• Fieldwork • Field notes • Research questions https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 22 of 22

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

CHAPTER 15: Writing and the Final Paper A scholar’s life is a writer’s life, but to become a writer means cultivating readers, and cultivating readers means communicating with them and for them, not above them or beyond them. For this reason, we need to train our next generation of scholars to be better storytellers. —Goodall, 2004, p. 191

Objectives By the end of this chapter, you will be able to • improve your writing, • compare traditional and alternative ways of structuring a final paper, • explain the differences between presenting results and drawing inferences from them, and • write a paper about your field research organized by the chapters or sections presented below.

What if you gave a party and no one attended? What if you conducted long-term and rigorous research and nobody read, understood, or liked your final paper? I am pretty certain that you would not feel good about any of these possibilities. I can’t help you with party planning, but I have suggestions for creating a final paper that is clear, engages the reader, and communicates your findings effectively. I begin this chapter with a short section about the writing process, because from the inception of your field research to the last word in any appendix, writing is unavoidable. Then I present ways of structuring the final paper so that others will learn as much from your research as you have.

Writing Process Writing plays an essential role in all phases of field research (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994, p. 479). You should not complete all the other stages of field research and then “write up” the results. Rather, near the end you will polish and finish writing your final paper, but you’ll be in trouble if you don’t begin to write about your research until after you leave the field. I like this reminder from Richardson (1994): Page 2 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Although we usually think about writing as a mode of “telling” about the social world, writing is not just a mopping-up activity at the end of a research project. Writing is also a way of “knowing”—a method of discovery and analysis. I write because I want to find something out, I write in order to learn something that I didn’t know before I wrote it. (pp. 516–517) Like Richardson, I view writing as yet another analytical strategy used by field researchers to gain insight into a setting. One major difference between writing throughout the field research process and the writing that appears in the final paper is that the latter must meet professional standards. Follow grammar rules, have thesis and topic sentences, create paragraphs that focus on the same topic, and follow all of the other conventions of good writing. A trick I suggest is to outline a chapter after you have written it. This might show you that you have sections or paragraphs about similar material scattered throughout a chapter. If so, consider whether reorganizing your chapter and putting related information together will lead to a better presentation. If your paper is not well written, readers may conclude that your research is also sloppy. Good writing requires writing and rewriting (and rewriting some more). I agree with Michael Kanin, who said, “I don’t like to write, but I love to have written” (ThinkExist.com, 2005). Writing can be hard work that is not always enjoyable. It is easy to get writer’s block and to want to put it off until later. Ueland (1938, as cited in Richardson, 2000) provides good reasons for writing frequently, regardless of how you judge the quality at any one time: Writing, the creative effort, should come first—at least for some part of every day of your life. It is a wonderful blessing if you will use it. You will become happier, more enlightened, alive, impassioned, light-hearted, and generous to everybody else. Even your health will improve. Colds will disappear and all the other ailments of discouragement and boredom. (p. 940) Although Ueland exaggerates the benefits of daily writing, writing every day is an excellent strategy for the field researcher. You already know that you should be writing your field notes daily, but any kind of writing helps you develop your skills. Your mind will become more flexible, your style more fluid, and ideas will become sharper. Additionally, you will gain confidence in your ability to write. There is no guarantee you won’t still get a cold, but frequent writing will help make the creation of the final product easier.

Page 3 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Writing Styles Used in Final Papers The final paper usually follows a style consistent with disciplinary traditions. As is the case with so many other aspects of field research, though, no single standard convention exists for the final paper, and styles have changed over time. Presenting results as a poem or performance are examples of the diversity of styles used by a few researchers. Most likely you will have a hard time getting approval from your professor if you want to select such radically different approaches for conveying your results. The paradigm used can affect the style of a final paper. A standard style for those using an interpretive paradigm acknowledges the role of the researcher in the process and as the author of the final paper. This means that the active voice is used rather than passive, and “I” is used rather than the generic term the researcher. Those who use this style have moved from writing about “the other” to focusing on the interdependence of the researcher and participants in the research process. This style avoids saying “giving voice to . . .” as it recognizes that the participants have voices, whether from audible articulations, sign language, or other systems of communication. At best, we can say that we have expanded the audience for others.

Page 4 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Photo 15.1 Once upon a time, a field researcher met a unicorn. “Tell me, Mr. Unicorn, how do you feel about the intersection of postcolonial, discursive practices juxtaposed against the hermeneutic circle as articulated by Stevens in her liminal stage?” The unicorn paused a moment and said, “I don’t!” and wandered away. The end. Figure 18

Source: Photo courtesy of Beth Mabry. A final paper grounded in a post-positivist paradigm is similar, but the tone tends more toward using the voice of the neutral and objective researcher, and reflective statements are not as common. The style also is dependent upon the research design and analytical technique. For example, a research story tends to draw the reader into the setting more than the final paper from evaluation research. Regardless of what style of writing you use, you must maintain the same high ethical standards as you have throughout your research. Ethical concerns should always be a consideration in your final paper, whether you are presenting your results as a long poem, a traditional paper, or someplace in between. In several places in this book, I give instructions on ways to avoid ethical breeches in your final paper. It’s a good idea to review these while you are drafting your paper. Your writing should be accessible to your intended readers, and that sometimes includes the participants in the setting. We can assume that your instructor and committee members have the expertise to slog through Page 5 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

a turgid document to figure out what you’re trying to say, but they’ll appreciate it if they don’t have to—and get your paper back to you more quickly. Writing in a way that is easily understood does not excuse you from rigorous scholarship and will not require you to “dumb down” what you are saying. Nor are you expected to be a creative writer. Still, how you write can affect your chances for a good grade, committee approval, and publication, and most important, others understanding and benefiting from your work.

Format of a Final Paper I now present different options for the structure of your final paper, but I want to warn you that you may not have as much freedom as I seem to imply. Most likely, the structure of your final paper will be based more on the instructions of your professor, graduate school requirements, and committee members than on your personal preference. In this discussion, I use the term chapter. However, if you are not required to have chapters, then substitute the words sections, headings, subheadings, and/or parts as you continue to read. A typical format for a final paper has the following chapters: introduction, theory and review of literature, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions. There are variations of this basic structure. For example, a chapter called “Statement of the Problem” can follow an introductory chapter, and theory and review of literature may be in separate chapters. Below I contrast a traditional chapter structure with alternatives. Field researchers generally have greater leeway than quantitative researchers in how they organize their final papers. This is fortunate because trying to use a traditional format for field research can be similar to the proverbial attempts to put the square peg in the round hole. It doesn’t fit. For example, the results from field research are not easily compressed into one chapter. Rather, multiple chapters, each with a name that reflects the focus of the chapter, are used to convey the findings in large projects. Scattering details about methodology throughout the paper may work better than trying to confine them all in one methods chapter, although you will still need a chapter devoted to methods. Consequently, do not automatically assume that you have to have a set number of chapters with generic names, although the traditional format can be a good option too. Before proceeding to an overview of chapter content, I want to say more about chapter names.

Chapter Names In Table 15.1, I present some examples of chapter names, mostly from research I have already cited. I think Page 6 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

you will see a pattern, hanging onto the traditional “Introduction” as the first chapter and then fleeing from convention. Now I will give you a sense of what might be in various chapters. I begin with the first chapter, introduction.

Introduction “Once upon a time” (Grimm & Grimm, 1955), “It was a dark and stormy night” (Bulwer-Lytton, 1830), and “Call me Ishmael” (Melville, 1851) are easily recognized beginnings. Field researchers also can have memorable opening lines. The following is the first sentence in Bourgois’s (1995) book: “I was forced into crack against my will” (p. 1) Table 15.1 Examples of chapter names Author

Chapter One

Chapter Two

Copeland

From Hope to Terror and Into Compro-

The Slow and Uneven Thaw of Military Imposed Truth: Revolutionary Mayan Politics

(2007)

mise

Reconsidered

González

Introduction: Democracies and Civic

(2005)

Engagement

Gill (2008)

Introduction

O’Connor (2009)

Labuski (2008)

Drake (2010)

Page 7 of 19

Introduction

Democracy and the Historic Civic Mission of Higher Education

Revisiting the World of Men

Embodied Knowledge in Glassblowing: The Development of Proficiency and Terms of Practical Knowledge

Insinuation

Examination

Introduction

Literature Review

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Coats

Worship as Communicative Complexi-

(2009)

ty

Darrow

Literature Review and Conceptual Ap-

(2015)

proach

Poole (2009)

Sarfaty (2011)

Vignes (2009)

Spielman (2006)

Wynn (2006)

Voices in Speech Communities

Research Methods and Data

Introduction

Step Hills and Borderlands—Research in a Resettlement Community

Introduction

Behind the Cure: The Bank’s Resistances to Human Rights

Begin with a Story

Performance Ethnography as Method

Introduction

The Teacher Education Program and My Research Methods

Disneyfication and the Tourist City

The Tour Guide

Although we learn later that Bourgois is referring to the necessity of including in his research an analysis of the role of drugs in “El Barrio,” he grabs our attention with that first sentence. Field researchers know how to write a good story, albeit one dependent upon rigorous scholarship. These sorts of attention-grabbing first sentences can be a way to draw your reader quickly into your research, but they are not required. You might want a traditional beginning: The purpose of my research is to . . . , or a brief explanation of the importance of your research: Opiate addiction has risen by . . . .Table 15.2 gives examples of a range of first lines, mostly from research already cited here. Expectations for the first chapter are so variable, I am reduced to giving you my personal preference, which I know is different from many others and varies for me as well. Even if you have a dramatic first sentence, your final product is about your research, and you need to establish what that is early on. Without that, your

Page 8 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

readers will have no idea why you told us about a gym, Hakim Hasan, or General Ríos Montt. Table 15.2 Example beginnings of final papers • My first hiking experience along the Appalachian Trial, or simply “AT,” was in 1983. Since then, I have enjoyed short-term and extended trips along this scenic and historic trail. Four years ago, I uncovered a mystery in the mountains of southern Appalachia at the intersection of my passion for the trail and my research on knowledge construction and communal learning processes (Siudzinski, 2007, p. 1). • When General Ríos Montt, Guatemala’s ex-dictator-turned-presidential candidate, arrived in the highland town of San Pedro Necta in September 2003 at the peak of the electoral season to speak at a campaign rally, he was not ready for the hostility that awaited him (Copeland, 2007, p. 1). • On the second floor of historic Central High, at the South end of the building, sits an auxiliary gym that serves as the school’s “wrestling room.” This space is rarely ever exclusively a wrestling room though (Snyder, 2012, p. 1). • It is imperative that people of color, the fastest growing populations in the country, gain access to higher education, since 60% of all new jobs in the global economy require at least some college education (Govan 2011, p. 1). • The worship of Pentecostal Christians uniquely provides avenues for exploration of religious communication because of their strong emphasis on communicative activity (Coats, 2009, p. 1). • The purpose of this project is to identify people’s perceived options when they learn that someone they know is involved in a violent relationship and to investigate cultural models for domestic violence interventions (DiVietro, 2010, p. 5). • NEW YORK CITY HALL, JUNE 16, 2003 I crane my neck to look at the mural, New York Receiving the Tributes of the Nation, for a few moments. Spanning most of the City Council Chamber’s ceiling, the 41 by 23 foot oval painting is over a century old (Wynn, 2006, p. 1). • Hakim Hasan is a book vendor and street intellectual at the busy intersection of Eight Street, Greenwich Avenue, and the Avenue of the Americas—aka Sixth Avenue (Duneier, 1999, p. 3).

I like a first chapter that lets me know quickly the style that is going to be used throughout. For example, if you are using an interpretive paradigm, give me that interesting first paragraph and use “I” statements. Early in the first chapter, tell me what your topic is and why it is worth studying. I want the purpose statement in the first or second page and the research questions closely thereafter. A paragraph or two that gives me a brief overview of your methods is important—setting, time in the field, and type of data collected. In your final paper, it is expected that you will discuss the same things multiple times in different ways, so the fact that you state your primary research questions and other key features of your research in your first chapter does not mean you won’t discuss them again in great detail in your other chapters. Spoilers are also allowed: What is your most important finding? You will provide expanded coverage on all of these later, but I like a quick introduction to them to guide me as I continue to read.

Page 9 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Although I’ve made suggestions for what I like to see in a first chapter, some departments have rigid structures, such as requiring the chapter to include delimitations of the research. For undergraduates, your instructor will most likely provide examples for your final paper. For graduate students, you should easily be able to find models that have been used in your department and your committee will advise you.

Theory and Review of Literature Theory and the review of literature are common in the second chapter, but how the chapter is structured varies. Are you using or testing a theory? If so, the theory might be your second chapter. When using an interpretive paradigm, you might figure out the appropriate theory(ies) for explaining your data while in the middle of your analysis. Thus you might want to give a brief overview of possible theories and explain in detail later the theory you ultimately used. Whether your literature review comes before or after the theoretical discussions or is integrated into it is another question. The literature review in some cases is presented with the results, and an entire chapter devoted to it is not needed. The theory and review of literature do not necessarily have to be the second chapter. What chapters follow the first one is also variable. To see examples of variability, please look again at the names of the second chapters that are given in Table 15.1. In several cases, the methods chapter followed Chapter 1. Others set the historical context of the research topic, provided an overview of the problem, introduced the first theme, or reviewed the literature. Some of these headings suggest that the researcher is presenting his or her results as a research story and others as themes.

Methods The third chapter is often the methods chapter, but it can precede or follow a theory and literature chapter, historical context, statement of the problem, or other chapters. Regardless of where it is, a methods chapter is not optional except in rare circumstances. You might embed some of your methods into other parts of your final paper instead of presenting them all in a single chapter. For example, Powell (2010) integrated her arrival story about watching the sheep walk across a Taco Bell parking lot as the third paragraph of her first chapter. However, all the required details about your methodological procedures most likely cannot be given without a Page 10 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

chapter that focuses on methods. Some of what should be included in a methods chapter are the same as are expected in research proposals. Look again at the table in Chapter 5; you can use the list as a starting point. (As you look at the table, you should feel pleased about how much of it makes sense now compared to when you first encountered it.) Many more details are needed in the final paper than were stated in your initial plans. If you had a proposal, you might have said that you were going to “spend 6 months in the field.” Now we need the specifics. When did you enter the field? ? How long did you actually spend in the field? Did you observe every day? Evenings only? Once a week? Were your field notes written in private or when others could see you? What procedures did you use to conduct member checks? How did you administer your informed consent? Saying that you engaged in open and focused coding is not sufficient; you need to explain how you coded. Did you print the transcripts and code by hand using different colored highlighters? Did you code line-by-line? Did you transcribe tapes yourself? In short, provide the reader with details about your methodology. Remember from previous chapters that people need to know about your methodology in order to evaluate your research. Without the details, the validity and trustworthiness of your research is greatly diminished. An undergraduate paper with a maximum length of 25 pages will not have the same level of detail as an 80-page master’s thesis or a 300-page dissertation. The key for you will be determining what can be mentioned briefly and what needs elaboration.

Results In the body of your final product, you could have one or more chapters that contain your results. One chapter might be devoted to each theme, or you may present all the themes in one chapter. The chapter could be called “Results,” or the chapter name might have the same name as the theme being presented. One of the chapters in which Coats (2009) presented some of his findings was called “Even the Bishop Danced! Service Contours and Worship Texture”. If you are telling a research story, you could have different chapters that emphasize each of the overarching themes that the story supports and name them accordingly. Suggestions for how to present the results for the different analytical techniques were given in the chapters that explained the technique, so I will not review them further here. Please return to the appropriate chapters to refresh your memory about different ways of presenting your results. Page 11 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Discussion and/or Interpretation One or more chapters devoted to a discussion and interpretations of your results often follow in a typical format. You may have discussed and interpreted your work along the way, but more attention is often needed toward the end. An important part of your discussion will be comparing your results with the literature you have reviewed and explicit connections to theory. Interpretation of the results includes the answers to the following types of questions: What does all this mean? How does it contribute to our understanding based on prior theory and research? What is important about this research? Why should anyone care? Wolcott (1994) asserts that the goal of interpretation is “to reach out for understanding or explanation beyond the limits of what can be explained with the degree of certainty usually associated with analysis” (pp. 10–11). When interpreting results, researchers draw inferences, use theory for insight, raise questions, make comparisons, and provide personal reactions. Interpretation requires hunches, insights, intuition, and creativity (Creswell, 1998; Wolcott, 1994). In other words, your discussion/interpretation chapter is more than a summary of your research.

Conclusion In a traditional format, you might have a final chapter named “Conclusion.” As you might expect, you have options for your final chapter. Returning to the works cited in Table 15.1, almost all had “conclusion” as part of the name for the last chapter. “Teaching How to Walk in New York City” (Wynn, 2006) was the most unique name for the last chapter. A fairly standard model for the final chapter includes a brief review of your methodology and highlights what you have learned, specifically in reference to your research question. If not included in previous chapters, analytic generalizations and contributions to theory sometimes appear. Personal reflections about your experiences are common in the final chapter. Coats (2009) aptly named his last chapter “Reflections.” You might include your thoughts about your relationships to the participants and the implications for your research. If you struggled with whether you made the right ethical decisions, referring to them in a conclusion chapter is appropriate. Conclusion chapters often discuss the limitations of the research and suggestions for future research. You will feel good when you get to the last chapter, and also you are probably burned out by the time you

Page 12 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

reach it. But hang in there—you’re almost done! If you have no idea how to end your opus, make your last sentence this quotation attributed to Peter Sellers: “And in conclusion, I just say this.”

Putting It All Together My brief comments below about the table of contents from Saatcioglu’s (2009) dissertation research about an ethnographic study of mobile home park residents illustrates how many of the things presented in this book can be put together to create an awesome final paper. This example serves as a review of much of what you have learned thus far. An undergraduate paper will not be as complex and will be organized differently, but many of the same elements will appear in a class project.

Chapter 1: Introduction Saatcioglu has three epigrams and then starts the first chapter with these lines: Poverty is a pressing social problem affecting consumers worldwide; it is estimated that almost half of the world’s population live on less than $2.50 a day (The World Bank, 2008).

Chapter 2: Review of Literature Her second chapter is divided into four sections: defining and measuring poverty, explanations of poverty, coping with poverty, and marketing research on poverty. She reviews a lot of empirical research, but she embeds considerably more in the remaining chapters.

Chapter 3: Methodology Among other details, Saatcioglu discusses gaining access, arrival in the field, key informants, sampling, gatekeepers, interviews, observations, ethics, evaluation criteria, coding, development of the plot and story, and Page 13 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

reflexivity. One of the things she includes in this chapter is a quote from her unpolished field notes, followed by a critique: Along with the cigarette smell, there was this “trailer smell” I felt before at Fun 184. The smell reminds me of old, moldy, and dirty places and objects. . . . Tina looks in her 60s; she has shoulderlength (almost) blonde hair (fake blond I could tell). The hair color is so close to white and her hair is very much dyed with bleach. (Field Notes, April 15, 2008) My heavy focus on visual and olfactory details resulted in not only unnecessary data but also an “evaluative depiction which generalizes” (Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw 1995, p. 72). I realized I immediately saw this woman in very stereotyped ways such as describing her hair as “fake blonde” rather than trying to understand who she was trying to be. Therefore, I attempted to write my subsequent interview field notes in more concrete details, avoiding evaluative labels. (p. 46)

Chapter 4: The Socio-Cultural Context of the Study This chapter includes descriptions of the social, cultural, and economic setting of what she refers to as Lakeside Trailer Park. She discusses the concepts of internal constraints and external restrictions. She supplements her literature review in Chapter 2 with a review of the research on mobile homes,

Chapter 5: The Multiple Social Constructions of Poverty Saatcioglu had two overarching themes: (1) social construction of poverty and (2) stigmatization. This chapter is devoted to her first theme. She discusses this overarching theme as it related to a typology of residents. The characteristics she used to create her typology were (1) how the poor consumers perceive their home and (2) how the poor construct different relationships with the community as a whole. The result was a typology with five groups: The Aspirers, The Strangers, The Civics, The Survivors, and The Hedonic Dependents,. She also had four topical themes: Concentrated Disadvantage, Resources and Coping, Perception of Community, and The Meaning of Home. Page 14 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

This chapter has a focus on the first group in her typology, the Aspirers. She provides descriptive details about the Aspirers and explains how her four themes are manifested by them within the context of her overarching themes. Knowing that she has a complicated model that links the results from a variety of analytical techniques, she includes a diagram of how the different parts are related.

Chapters 6–9: The structure of the next four chapters follows the one above, each one focusing on another group in Saatcioglu’s typology and the related themes. In all the chapters about the different types and elsewhere, she embeds theoretical concepts and more about the literature she reviews. Some of the theoretical concepts she includes throughout are structural inequalities, formal and acquired cultural capital, micropolitical weapons, alternative coping strategies, and dominate cultural norms. In all of her results chapters, Saatcioglu provides dialogue to support her claims. Here is an example of how she presents dialogue: Irene: They look at you like you’re asking for their blood. Sharon: The people at Social Services think they are above everybody. Irene: They truly do. . . . Like you’re a bum off the street regardless of whether you’re a working person.

Chapter 10: Interpretation of the Findings In this chapter, she focuses on the interpretation of her results as they relate to the concept of poverty, dominant poverty theories and the relational view, social stigma and the relational perspective, the stigma of poverty, and social construction and management of various associated stigmas. The chapter has considerable coverage of theory, and she further develops her overarching themes of social construction and stigmatization.

Page 15 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Chapter 11: Conclusions, Limitations, and Future Directions Conceptual contributions, public policy implications, implications for marketing managers, and limitations of the research are major topics of the last chapter. She ends with a summary statement about future research directions.

References These are the full citations for the work she references by name and date in her text.

Appendices Multiple appendices are the last items in her manuscript. They include gatekeeping contacts, profiles of each type, interview protocol for the gatekeepers, interview protocol for informants, informed consent form for gatekeepers, and informed consent for the informants. Ignoring the substance of Saatcioglu’s work, I suspect much of what you’ve read here makes sense to you; this would not have been the case when you started this book.

Conclusions When you have concluded your research, you will have formulated important research questions and rigorously planned and implemented a methodology designed to bring your work to fruition. Prepared with a theoretical background and informed by reading the literature on your topic, you gathered and analyzed data, eventually drawing from it what you believe to be important. You have answered your research question. The goal of your field research in a natural setting has been met: to gain a complex, contextual, and holistic understanding of experiences and the meanings attached to them from multiple perspectives of the participants. At the same time, you know that what you learned is mediated by your views, skills, conceptual framework, Page 16 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

and choices made. Although your work as a researcher might be just beginning, you should now have a better sense of how to gain insight into everyday life in a setting through long-term interactions with the people you meet there or with interactions in the virtual world. I hope I have given you an appreciation for the complexity and utility of field research, made you aware of the importance of ethics in all stages of research, and written a guide that will be of assistance to you as you conduct your research. I want to reassure you that despite the challenges, you are more than capable of undertaking field research, even at this early stage of your career. Field research is not an activity that should be restricted to an elite few. It involves careful preparation, adherence to ethical standards, intense interaction, thorough data collection, rigorous analysis, and polished writing—tasks that any of us can complete competently given time and determination. I strongly encourage you to engage in field research because that is the best way to learn how to conduct field research.

Chapter Highlights • Writing is a method for making discoveries and analyzing data and not just for recording things already known. • A well-written paper requires rewriting and rewriting and rewriting some more. • The final paper should be written so that it is easily understood and compelling. • Many alternatives exist for field researchers on how to structure the final paper. • Interpretations include drawing inferences about the importance of the research and are more than simply reporting results. • Ethics are important considerations when crafting the final paper.

Page 17 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Exercises 1. Write a one- or two-page letter to a high school student that summarizes the major points in this chapter. In addition to having a good summary, your letter should (1) have an introduction and a topic sentence for each paragraph, (2) have all the information in each paragraph relate to the topic, and (3) have transitions between paragraphs. Use quotes sparingly. “Talk” to the student—use words such as you and I. 2. Look for journals that primarily publish qualitative research (for example, Qualitative Inquiry, Qualitative Research, Qualitative Health Research, Qualitative Social Work, Qualitative Sociology, and Ethnography). Find five articles that are of interest to you from five separate journals. Using your own words, write a paragraph that summarizes each article. List all the headings and subheadings for each article. Based on only these five articles, discuss whether you think there is a fairly consistent format for qualitative research published in academic journals. Justify your answer using similarities and differences in your lists to support your conclusions. 3. Pretend that you have to write a book to teach your peers how to conduct qualitative field research. Your book should be between 10 and 15 pages. Given the space limitations, use section headings instead of chapters. Like other authors, you know more than you can convey within the page requirements for your book, so you will have to make tough decision about what to include. Rather than summarizing this book, write your own by keeping what you think is most important and excluding everything else. You might, for example, only discuss one analytical technique and skip paradigms totally. All the forms of data collection could be combined into a section. It’s up to you. However, some topics have to be included—ethics and research questions as examples. Use quotes sparingly. As always, demonstrate that you understand the material while still being creative.

Online and Recommended Reading

Online at study.sagepub.com/bailey3e Flick, U. (2015). Qualitative Inquiry—2.0 at 20? Developments, trends, and challenges for the politics

Page 18 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

of research. Qualitative Inquiry, 21, 599–608. Gilgun, J. (2005). “Grab” and good science: Writing up the results of qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 256–262. Wolcott, H. (2002). Writing up qualitative research . . . Better. Qualitative Health Research, 12, 91–103.

Recommended Additional Reading Adler, P., & Adler, P. (2008). Of rhetoric and representation: The four faces of ethnography. The Sociological Quarterly, 49, 1–30. Bowen, G. (2005). Preparing a qualitative research-based dissertation: Lessons learned. The Qualitative Report, 10, 208–222. Goldberg, A., & Allen, K. (2015). Communicating qualitative research: Some practical guideposts for scholars. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77, 3–22. Wolcott, H. (2009). Writing up qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• writing processes

• Fieldwork https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 19 of 19

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

REFERENCES Aistara, G. (2011). Seeds of kin, kin of seeds: The commodification of organic seeds and social relations in Costa Rica and Latvia. Ethnography, 12, 490–517. Alder, M. (2005). Latter-day Saint couples’ experience as newlyweds (Unpublished master’s thesis). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Ali, D. (1998). Case study of development of the peripheral coastal area of South Sinai in relation to its Bedouin community (Unpublished master’s thesis). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Allingham, M. (1959). Crime and Mr. Chapman. New York, NY: Doubleday. Altheide, D., & Johnson, J. (1994). Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 485–499). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. American Sociological Association. (1999). Code of ethics and policies and procedures of the ASA committee on professional ethics. Washington, DC: Author. Arnado, M. (2002). Class inequality among third world women wage earners: Mistresses and maids in the Philippines (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Assuliman, A. (2007). The problem of connectivity: A sociological study of the problem of connectedness of nationally produced science and national needs in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1, 385–405. Aycock, J., Buchanan, E., Dexter, S., & Dittrich, D. (2011). Human subjects, agents, or bots: Current issues in ethics and computer security research. In G. Danezis, S. Dietrich, & K. Sako (Eds.), Financial cryptography and data security (FC 2011). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7126. Berlin, Germany: Springer. Retrieved from http://www.spinger.de/comp/lncs/index.html Bailey, C. A. (2010). Public ethnography. In S. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 265–282). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Barbaro, M., & Zeller, T. (2006). Shooting in the dark. The New York Times. Retrieved http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/studying-the-effects-of-playing-violent-video-games.html?r=1& Barley, S. (1990). Images of imaging: Notes on doing longitudinal field work. Organization Science, 1,

Page 2 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

220–247. Barnard, A. (2011). “Waving the banana” at capitalism: Political theater and social movement strategy among New York’s “freegan” dumpster divers. Ethnography, 12, 419–444. Barratt, M., & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative Research, 16, 701–719. Barrow, K. (2013). When a second child comes out as LGBT: Examining sibling relationships and family experiences (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Becker, S. (2010). Badder than “Just a bunch of SPEDs”: Alternative schooling and student resistance to special education rhetoric. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 60–86. Bonsu, S., & DeBerry-Spence, B. (2008). Consuming the dead: Identity and community building practices in death rituals. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 37, 694–719. Bourgois, P. (1995). In search of respect: Selling crack in El Barrio. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. British Psychological Society. (2013). Code of human research ethics. Leicester, England: The British Psychological Society. Bronte, C. (1847). Jane Eyre. London, England: Smith, Elder & Co. Brown, B. (2002). Improving teaching practices through action research (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Browning, J. (2014). The real vampires of New Orleans and Buffalo: A research note towards comparative ethnography. Palgrave Communications. Retrieved from http://www.palgrave-journals.com/articles/palcomms20156 Bulmer, M. (1982). Social research ethics. London, England: Macmillan. Bulwer-Lytton, E. (1830/2004). Paul Clifford. Rockville, MD: Wildside. Burgess, R. (1991). Sponsors, gatekeepers, members, and friends: Access in educational settings. In W. Shaffir & R. Stebbins (Eds.), Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research (pp. 43–52). New

Page 3 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Burroway, J. (2003). Writing fiction: A guide to narrative craft (6th ed.). New York, NY: Longman. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. London, England: Routledge. Casati, N. (2016). Political participation in a Palestinian university: Nablus undergraduates’ political subjectivities through boredom, fear and consumption. Ethnography, 17, 518–538. Chapman, R. (2003). Endangering safe motherhood in Mozambique: Prenatal care as pregnancy risk. Social Science and Medicine, 57, 355–375. Chappell, A. (2005). Learning in action: Training the community policing officer (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Charmaz, K. (2010). Grounded theory as an emergent method. In S. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy. (Eds.), Handbook of Emergent Methods (pp. 155–172). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Chenault, T. (2004). “We did it for the kids,” housing policies, race, and class: An ethnographic case study of a resident council in a public housing neighborhood. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Choi, K. (2016). Habitus, affordances, and family leisure: Cultural reproduction through children’s leisure activities. Ethnography, 0, 1–24. doi: Cleaveland, C., & Pierson, L. (2009). Parking lots and police: Undocumented Latinos’ tactics for finding day labor jobs. Ethnography, 10, 515–533. Coats, B. (2009), Voices in concert: Communication ethnography of Pentecostal worship (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI. Collins, K. (2015). A quick guide to the worst corporate hack attacks. Bloomberg News. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2014-data-breaches/ Comfort, M. (2002). “Papa’s house”: The prison as domestic and social satellite. Ethnography, 3, 467–499. Copeland, N. (2007). Bitter earth: Counterinsurgency strategy and the roots of Mayan neo-authoritarianism in Guatemala (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas at Austin, Austin.

Page 4 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Corman, M. (2016, January 12). Street medicine—Assessment work strategies of paramedics on the front lines of emergency health services. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography.doi: Cottingham, M. (2012). Interaction ritual theory and sports fans: Emotion, symbols, and solidarity. Sociology of Sport Journal, 29, 168–185. University of Akron, Akron, OH. Coy, P. (2001). Shared risks and research dilemmas on a Peace Brigades International Team in Sri Lanka. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 30, 575–606. Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, J., Klassen, A., Plano Clark, V., & Smith, K. (2011). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. Bethesda, MD: Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, National Institutes of Health. Dahl, R. (1961). James and the giant peach. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf. Darrow, J. (2015). The politics and implementation of U.S. refugee resettlement policy: A street-level analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. Davis, M., Bolding, G., Hart, G. Sherr, L., & Elford, J. (2004). Reflecting on the experience of interviewing online: Perspectives from the Internet and HIV study in London. AIDS CARE, 16, 944–952. de Ruiter, H. (2008). To lift or not to lift: An institutional ethnography of patient handling practices (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. Deener, A. (2009). Forging distinct paths towards authentic identity: Outsider art, public interaction, and identity transition in an informal market context. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 38, 169–200. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Part V: The art of interpretation, evaluation, and presentation. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 479–483). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2003). Part II: Paradigms and perspectives in transition. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (2nd ed., pp. 245–252). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DeSantis, L., & Ugarriza, D. N. (2000). The concept of theme as used in qualitative nursing research. Western Page 5 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Journal of Nursing Research, 22, 351–372. Desmond, M. (2006). Becoming a firefighter. Ethnography, 7, 387–421. Dickens, C. (1843). A Christmas carol. London, England: Chapman & Hall. http://genius.com/4572028/ Charles-dickens-a-christmas-carol-part-1/ DiFranco, A. (1993). Willing to fight. On Puddle dive [CD]. Buffalo, NY: Righteous Babe. DiFranco, A. (1995). Crime for crime. On Not a pretty girl [CD]. Buffalo, NY: Righteous Babe. DiFranco, A. (1999). Trickle down. On Up, up, up, up, up, up [CD]. Buffalo, NY: Righteous Babe. DiFranco, A. (2004). True story of what was. On Educated guess [CD]. Buffalo, NY: Righteous Babe. DiVietro, S. (2010). “Sanctions and sanctuary” revisited: Domestic violence and cultural models of intervention (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. Doyle, A. (1891). A scandal in Bohemia. London, England: George Newnes. Drake, T. (2010). “The God of all comfort”: Experiences from a biblically-based perinatal loss support group (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Iowa State University, Ames, IA. Dunbar, R. (2009). Finding their way: A critical ethnography of five African American women educators’ early experiences to develop into culturally relevant pedagogies (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgia State University, Athens, GA. Duneier, M. (1999). Sidewalk. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Durkin, K. (1996). Accounts and sexual deviance in cyberspace: The case of pedophilia (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Ellis, R. (2002). A feminist qualitative study of female self-mutilation (Unpublished master’s thesis). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Emerson, R. (1988). Contemporary field research: A collection of readings. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland. Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Ferron, S. (1980). Ain’t life a brook. On Testimony [Cassette recording]. Oakland, CA: Redwood Records.

Page 6 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Fetterman, D. (1989). Ethnography: Step by step. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Fisher, G. (2007). “You need tits to get on round here”: Gender and sexuality in the entrepreneurial university of the 21st century. Ethnography, 8, 503–517. Fletcher, R. (2010). The emperor’s new adventure: Public secrecy and the paradox of adventure tourism. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 6–33. Flick, U. (1999). An introduction to qualitative research. London, England: Sage. Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage. Fontana, A., & Frey, J. (1994). Interviewing: The art of science. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 361–376). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ford, J., & Schroeder, R. (2009). Academic strain and non-medical use of prescription stimulants among college students. Deviant Behavior, 30, 26–53. Frith, H., & Gleeson, K. (2004). Clothing and embodiment: Men managing body image and appearance. Psychology of Men & Masculinity. 5, 40–48. Froggett, P. (2007). Toward a deeper understanding of nature of resistant behaviors by adult learners in graduate education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Garrett-Peters, R. (2009). “If I don’t have to work anymore, Who am I?”: Job loss and collaborative self-concept repair. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 38, 547– 583. Garcia, A., Standlee, A., Bechkoff, J., & Cui, Y. (2009). Ethnographic approaches to the Internet and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 38, 52–84. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books. General Accounting Office. (1990). Case study evaluations. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/ pe1019.pdf Gibbs, G. (2013). Using software in qualitative analysis. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 277–294). London, England: Sage. Gibeau, A. (2008). Pregnant women’s experience viewing childbirth preparation videos: An interpretive ethnography (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). New York University, New York, NY.

Page 7 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Gill, P. (2008). The everyday lives of men: An ethnographic investigation of young adult male identity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Aldine De Gruyter. Glass, P. (2001). Autism and the family: A qualitative perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8, 597–607. Gold, R. (1969). Roles in sociological field observation. In G. McCall & J. Simmons (Eds.), Issues in participant observation (pp. 30–38). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Golde, P. (1986). Odyssey of encounter. In P. Golde (Ed.), Women in the field: Anthropological experiences (pp. 67–93). Berkeley: University of California Press. Goldsmith, O. (1771). She Stoops to Conquer. [Play] Gongaware, T. (2003). Collective memories and collective identities: Maintaining unity in Native American educational social movements. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 32, 483–520. González, R. (2005). How a university civically engages college students: A comparative ethnography of Cuban-Americans and non-Hispanic whites (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA. Goodall, H. (2004). Narrative ethnography as applied communication research. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32, 185–194. Govan, R. (2011). The soul of a school: An ethnographic study of college-going culture at an urban high school (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of New Orleans, New Orleans, LA. Grimm, J., & Grimm, W. (1955). Grimm’s fairy tales. New York, NY: Random House. Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd. ed., pp. 191–215). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Page 8 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Gynnild, A. (2011). Book review: Grounded theory: A practical guide (Birks & Mills). The Grounded Theory Review, 10, 64–66. Hamm, J. (2003). We can’t die without letting them know we were there: Oral histories of Konnarock Training School alumnae and faculty (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Hammersley, M. (1992). What’s wrong with ethnography? Methodological explorations. London, England: Routledge. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd. ed.). London, England: Routledge. Harrelson, D. (2011). Cyber anthropology: Gaming, blogging, social networking & more. Retrieved from http://www.cyber-anthro.com/2011/01/defining-virtual-ethnography Harrison, A. (2009). Hip hop underground: The integrity and ethics of racial identification. Philadelphia, PA: Temple. Hatch, J. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany: SUNY Press. Hess, M. (2014). Translator, traitor: A critical ethnography of a U.S. terrorism trial (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), City University of New York, New York, NY. Hesse-Biber, S., & Leavy. P. (2010). The practice of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press. Hoepfl, M. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9, 47–63. Holt, K. (2015). Negotiating limits: Boundary management in the bondage/discipline/sadomasochism (BDSM).community (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The City University of New York, New York, NY. Holton, J., & Walsh, I. (2017). Classic grounded theory: Applications with qualitative and quantitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hopper, C., & Moore, J. (1994). Women in outlaw motorcycle gangs. In P. Adler & P. Adler (Eds.), Constructions of deviance: Social power, context, and interaction (pp. 389–401). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Irvine, A., Drew, P., & Sainsbury, R. (2012). “Am I not answering your questions properly?” Clarification, ad-

Page 9 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

equacy and responsiveness in semi-structured telephone and face-to-face interviews. Qualitative Research, 13, 87–106. Johnson, J. (1975). Doing field research. London, England: Free Press. Jordal, C. (2011). “Making it Work”: A grounded theory of how mixed orientation married couples commit, sexuality identify, and gender themselves (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Jorgensen, D. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Jowett, A., Peel, E., & Shaw, R. (2011). Online interviewing in psychology: Reflections on the process. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8, 354–369. Jung, S. (2013). Not a shelter (Unpublished paper). Junker, B. (1960). Field work. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kanter, R. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books. Katz, J. (2015). Situational evidence: Strategies for causal reasoning from observational field notes. Sociological Methods & Research, 44, 108–144. Kaye, K. (2013). Rehabilitating the “drugs lifestyle”: Criminal justice, social control, and the cultivation of agency. Ethnography, 4, 207–232. Kershaw, T. (2003). The Black studies paradigm: The making of scholar activists. p. 27–36. In J. Conyers, Jr. (ed.) Afrocentricity and the academy: Essays on theory and practice. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc. King, M. (2014). Gendering Tamriel: Character creation in the Elder Scrolls video game series and gender stereotypes (Unpublished master’s thesis). Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Indiana, PA. Kipling, R. (1999). The Elephant’s Story. Swindon, England: United Kingdom Child’s Play International. Retrieved from http://members.optusnet.com.au/charles57/Creative/Techniques/elephants_child Kirk, G. (2004). Constructions of scarcity and commodification in university strategy: Restructuring at Virginia Tech (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviews. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kvale, S. (2006). Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 480–500.

Page 10 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Labuski, C. (2008). Realizing vulvas: Feminism, physiology and culture (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX. Lanier, M. (2008). Home going: A spirit-centered ethnography exploring the transformative journey of documenting Gullah/Geechee Funerals (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. Larsen, R. (2009). The selected works of T. S. Spivet. New York, NY: Penguin. Lawson, H. (2000). Ladies of the lot. Boston, MA: Rowman & Littlefield. LeBesco, K. (2004). Managing visibility, intimacy, and focus in online critical ethnography. In M. Johns, S. Chen, & G. J. Hall (Eds.), Online social research: Methods, issues, and ethics (pp. 63–79). New York, NY: Peter Lang. Leech, N., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 557–584. Lewis, NK. (2005). A study of intra-racial violence among black males: A matter of “diss”respect (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Lian, O., & Nettleton, S. (2015). “United we stand”: Framing myalgic encephalomyelitis in a virtual symbolic community. Qualitative Health Research, 25, 1383–1394. Liebow, E. (1994). Tell them who I am: The lives of homeless women. New York, NY: The Free Press. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Liou, C. (2011). What is going on in adult day services (ADS) in Taiwan? An examination of social and physical environments in two centers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Lofland, J. (1971). Analyzing social settings. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. (1984). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis ( 2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. LoMascolo, A. (2008). “Do you want excitement? Don’t join the army, be a nurse!”: Identity work and advantage among men in training for the female professions (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Macabuac, M. (2005). After the aquaculture bust: Impacts of the globalized food chain on poor Philippine fish-

Page 11 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

ing households (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Marzano, M. (2007). Informed consent, deception, and research freedom in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 417–436. Mason, G. A. (2016). A critical analysis of participation and empowerment in community development: An ethnographic case study from Chiapas, Mexico (Unpublished master’s thesis). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. McGuire, S. (1998). At-risk, first-year students’ patterns of perceptions of their academic performance activities and grades earned (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. McLaughlin, L. (2003). Faith and practice: Bringing religion, music and Beethoven to life in Soka Gakkai. Social Science Japan Journal, 6, 161–179. Melville, H. (1851). Moby-Dick; or, the whale. New York, NY: Harper and Brothers. Merton, R. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672– 682. Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Miller, E. (1986). Street woman. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Morse, J. (2008). Confusing categories and themes. Qualitative Health Research 18, 727–728. Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25, 1212–1222. Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1, 1–21. Morse, J. M., & Cheek, J. (2014). Making room for qualitatively-driven mixed-methods research. Qualitative Health Research, 24, 3–5. Morse, J. M., & Coulehan, J. (2015). Maintaining confidentiality in qualitative publications. Qualitative Health Research, 25, 151–152. Morse, J. M., & Field, P. (1995). Qualitative research methods for health professionals. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage. Myers, J. (1994). Non-mainstream body modification: Genital piercing, branding, burning, and cutting. In P.

Page 12 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Adler & P. Adler (Eds.), Constructions of deviance: Social power, context, and interaction (pp. 414–446). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Neimark, B. (2012). Finding that “eureka” moment: The importance of keeping detailed field notes. African Geographical Review. 31, 76–79. Nelson, M. R., & Otnes, C. C. (2005). Exploring cross-cultural ambivalence: A netography of intercultural wedding message boards. Journal of Business Research, 58, 89–95. Neuman, W. (1991). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Newman, K. (1999). No shame in my game: The working poor in the inner city. New York, NY: Knopf. Nichols, J. (1974). The Milagro beanfield war. New York, NY: Ballantine Books. Nordstrom, C. (2004). Shadows of war: Violence, power, and international profiteering in the twenty-first century. Berkeley: University of California Press. Norris, L. (2000). Interior country. In L. Norris, Toy guns (pp. 9–20). Kansas City, MO: Helicon Nine Editions. Novick, G. (2008). Is there a bias against telephone interviews in qualitative research? Research in Nursing and Health, 31, 391–398. Oakley, A. (1981). Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. In H. Roberts (Ed.), Doing feminist research (pp. 30–61). London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Obasi, C. (2014). Negotiating the insider/outsider continua: A Black female hearing perspective on research with Deaf women and Black women. Qualitative Research, 14, 61–78. O’Connor, E. (2009). HOTSHOP: An ethnography of embodied knowledge in glassblowing (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The New School for Social Research, New York, NY. Ortiz, S. (2004). Leaving the private world of wives of professional athletes: A male sociologist’s reflections. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 33, 466–487. Padgett, D. (2012). Qualitative and mixed methods in public health. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Palacios, R. (2011). Not just balls in the air: Young jugglers and their practical understanding of post-dictatorship Chile. Ethnography, 12, 293–314.

Page 13 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Patton, M. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Patton, M. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34, 1189–1208. Pershing, J. (2001). Gender disparities in enforcing the honor concept at the US Naval Academy. Armed Forces and Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27, 419–449. Phan, T. (2005). Interdependent self: Self-perceptions of Vietnamese-American youths. Adolescence, 40, 425–441. Poole, A. (2009). Reclaiming lost landscapes: An ethnography of refugee resettlement, resource management and statemaking in Lowlands Eritrea (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Pope, C., Ziebland, S., & Mays, N. (2000). Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative Research in Health Care, 320, 114–116. Powell, D. (2010). Landscapes of power: An ethnography of energy development on the Navajo Nation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. Przybylski, L. (2015). Urban indigeneity and hip hop practice in contemporary North America (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Punch, M. (1986). The politics and ethics of fieldwork. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Redmon, D. (2010). Examining low self-control theory at Mardi Gras: Critiquing the general theory of crime within the framework of normative deviance. Deviant Behavior, 24, 373–392. Richardson, L. (1994). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 516–529). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 923–948). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Robson, D. (2015). People who drink human blood. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/future/story/ 20151021-the-people-who-drink-human-blood Rosecrance, J. (1990). You can’t tell the players without a scorecard: A typology of horse players. In C. Bryant

Page 14 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

(Ed.), Deviant behavior: Readings in the sociology of norm violations (pp. 348–370). New York, NY: Hemisphere. Roulston, K., deMarrais, K., & Lewis, J. (2003). Learning to interview in the social sciences. Qualitative Inquiry, 9, 643–668. Roy, A. (1997). The god of small things. New York, NY: Random House. Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Russell, B. (1991). Silent sisters: A study of homeless women. New York, NY: Hemisphere. Ryan, G., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Data management and analysis method. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative material (pp. 259–309). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Saatcioglu, B. (2009). The social construction of poverty and the meaning of deprivation: An ethnographic exploration of mobile home park residents (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Salmons, J. (2015). Qualitative online interviews (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sandelowski, M. (2001). Real qualitative researchers do not count: The use of numbers in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 24, 230–240. Sandelowski, M. (2010). What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing & Health, 33, 77–84. Sanjek, R. (1990). A vocabulary for fieldnotes. In R. Sanjek (Ed.), Fieldnotes: The makings of anthropology (pp. 92–121). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Sarfaty, G. A. (2011). An ethnography of human rights at the World Bank (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. Scarce, R. (1994). (No) trial (but) tribulations: When courts and ethnography conflict. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 23, 123–149. Scheper-Hughes, N. (2004). Parts unknown: Undercover ethnography of the organs trafficking underworld. Ethnography, 5, 29–73. Schwandt, T. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Page 15 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Sedgwick, D. (2016). Using qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): A way to explore complex connections. Invited essay. Selick, H. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/henryselic543903.html Shakespeare, W. (1597/1969). Romeo and Juliet. In A. Harbage (Ed.), William Shakespeare: The complete works (pp. 858–893). Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books. Shay, H. (2015). Virtual edgework: Negotiating risk in role-playing gaming. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 46, 203–229. Shelley, M. (1818). Frankenstein; Or, the modern Prometheus. London, England: Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor & Jones. Sieber, J. (1982). The ethics of social research: Fieldwork, regulation, and publication. New York, NY: Springer. Sierra, A. (2013). Young women’s anger in romantic relationships (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Siudzinski, R. (2007). Not all who wander are lost: An ethnographic study of individual knowledge construction within a community of practice (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Smith, R. V. (1984). Graduate research: A guide for students in the sciences. Philadelphia, PA: ISI Press. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Choosing-a-Research-Topic/45641 Snyder, B. (2012). Hard work, overcoming, and masculinity: An ethnographic account of high school wrestlers’ bodies and cultural worlds (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE. Solis, J. (2003). Re-thinking illegality as a violence against, not by Mexican immigrants, children, and youth. Journal of Social Issues, 59, 15–31. Spielman, L. (2006). Preservice teachers’ characterizations of the relationship between teacher education program components. Program meanings and relevance and socio-political school geographies (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Stacey, J. (1991). Brave new families: Stories of domestic upheaval in late twentieth century America. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Page 16 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stake, R. (2004). Standards-based and responsive evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stein, A. (2010). Sex, truths, and audiotape: Anonymity and the ethics of exposure in public ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 554–568. Stein, G. (1922). Sacred Emily. In Geography and plays (pp. 178–188). Boston, MA: Four Seas. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. (2nd edition) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Sturges, J., & Hanrahan, K. (2004). Comparing telephone and face-to-face qualitative interviewing: A research note. Qualitative Research, 4, 107–118. Sulsberger, M. (2014). Cultivating a caring, environmental self: Using the figured world concept to explore children’s environmental identity production in a public school garden space (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Sundberg, J. (2004). Identities in the making: Conservation, gender and race in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala. Gender, Place and Culture—A Journal of Feminist Geography, 11, 43–67. Switzer, H. (2005). Disruptive discourses: Kenyan Maasai schoolgirls make themselves (working paper). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Tanggaard, L. (2014). Ethnographic fieldwork in psychology: Lost and found? Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 167–174. Tarasuk, V., & Eakin, J. (2003). Charitable food assistance as symbolic gesture: An ethnographic study of food banks in Ontario. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 1505–1515. Taylor, S. (1987). Observing abuse: Professional ethics and personal morality in field research. Qualitative Sociology, 10, 288–302. Taylor, S., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley. Taylor, T. (1999). Life in virtual worlds: Plural existence, multimodalities, and other online research challenges. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 436–449. ThinkExist.com Quotations. (2005). Retrieved from http://en.thinkexist.com

Page 17 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Thompson, H. S. (1979). Gonzo papers: Vol. 1. The great shark hunt. New York, NY: Fawcett Popular Library. Townsend, G. (1867). Three hundred Aesop’s fables. London, England: Routledge and Sons. Tracy, S. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 837–851. Trauger, A. (2004). Because they can do the work: Women farmers in sustainable agriculture in Pennsylvania, USA. Gender, Place and Culture—A Journal of Feminist Geography, 11, 289–308. Ueland, B. (1938). If you want to write: A book about art, independence and spirit. St. Paul, MN: Graywolf. Vanderstaay, S. (2005). One hundred dollars and a dead man: Ethical decisions making in ethnographic fieldwork. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 34, 371–409. Van Maanen, J. (1982). Fieldwork on the beat: This being an account of the manners and customs of an ethnographer in an American police department. In J. Van Maanen, J. Dabbs Jr., & R. Faulkner (Eds.), Varieties of qualitative research (pp.103–151). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Venkatesh, S. (2008). Gang leader for a day: A rogue sociologist takes to the streets. New York, NY. Penguin. Vignes, D. (2009). An ethnography of “Hang it out to dry” (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. Wacquant, L. (2002). Scrutinizing the street: Poverty, morality, and the pitfalls of urban ethnography. American Journal of Sociology, 107, 1468–1534. Walstrom, M. (2000). “You know, who’s the thinnest?”: Combating surveillance and creating safety in coping with eating disorders online. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3, 761–783. Walstrom, M. (2004). Ethics and engagement in communication scholarship: Analyzing public, online support groups as researcher/participant-experiencer. In E. Buchanan (Ed.), Virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies (pp. 174–202). Hershey, PA: Information Science. Warren, C., & Karner, T. (2005). Discovering qualitative methods: Field research, interviews, and analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury. Wax, R. (1971). Doing fieldwork: Warnings and advice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Page 18 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Weitzman, E. (1999). Analyzing qualitative data with computer software. Health Services Research, 34, 1231–1263. Welty, E. (1994). Place in fiction. In E. Welty, Collected essays. Retrieved from http://xroads.virginia-edu/~drbr/welty.txt Williams, W. (2008). Students’ perceptions of bullying after the fact: A qualitative study of college students/ bullying experiences in their K-12 schooling (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Wilson, G. (2005). This doesn’t look familiar! A supervisor’s guide for observing co-teachers. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40, 271–275. Wise, A. (2013). Exploring adolescents’ experiences of self-disclosing on Facebook when distressed. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Virginia Tech, Falls Church, VA. Wodehouse, P. (1976). Jeeves, Jeeves, Jeeves. New York, NY: Avon. Wolburg, J. (2001). The “risky business” of binge drinking among college students: Using risk models for PSAs and anti-drinking campaigns. Journal of Advertising, 30, 23–39. Wolcott, H. (1990). Making a study “more ethnographic.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 19, 44–72. Wolcott, H. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wolcott, H. (2008). Ethnography: A way of seeing (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press. Wolcott, H. (2009). Writing up qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wright, M., & Robertson, C. (2014). Heterogeneity in IRB policies with regard to disclosures about payment for participation in recruitment materials. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 42, 375–382. Wynn, J. (2006). The walking tour guide: Cultural workers in the Disneyfied city (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The City University of New York, New York, NY. Xenakis, G. (2009). Living with chordoma online: A thematic analysis of user’s experiences in an online cancer support group (Unpublished master’s thesis). Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Page 19 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Zehr, D. (2015). Studying Skywalkers: Themes in Star Wars, a new hope. Retrieved from http://www.starwars.com/news/studying-skywalkers-themes-in-star-wars-a-new-hope https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 20 of 20

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE Research Methods A Guide to Qualitative Field Research Author: Carol A. Bailey Pub. Date: 2023 Product: SAGE Research Methods DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614 Methods: Fieldwork, Research questions, Field notes Keywords: students, journals, decision making, affect, persons, sentencing, knowledge Disciplines: Sociology, Criminology and Criminal Justice, Business and Management, Communication and Media Studies, Education, Psychology, Health, Social Work, Political Science and International Relations Access Date: February 24, 2023 Publishing Company: SAGE Publications, Inc City: Thousand Oaks Online ISBN: 9781071909614 © 2023 SAGE Publications, Inc All Rights Reserved.

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

GLOSSARY Analysis process of making sense of and seeking substantive meaning from data Analytic generalizations generalizing to a theory instead of to a larger population Anonymous researcher is unable to identify participants in the research Assent type of informed consent given by minors Asynchronous interviews a form of online interviewing in which questions are asked but answers are not expected until convenient for the interviewee Audit trail detailed recordkeeping about what was done during the entire research process Axiology paradigmatic assumption related to the study of the role of values in research Close-ended question a question that restricts the respondents to short answers Coding process of identifying and organizing segments of data in ways useful for data analysis Confidentiality researcher does not disclose the identity of those involved in the research Confirmability Page 2 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

evaluation standard that is met when results are shown to be supported by the data Covert research research conducted without those in the setting being aware of the researcher’s role Credibility evaluation standard that is met when results are believable, authentic, and plausible Critical case focus on in-depth analysis of a single case Critical event focus on in-depth analysis of a key event in a setting Critical paradigm a set of assumptions held by researchers used to guide research, which include the assumptions that reality is shaped by social, political, and cultural structures and that what is learned is mediated through the values of the researcher Data information from and about the participants and the setting used to answer research questions Data analysis process of transforming data in ways that lead to substantive findings Deception not being honest about being a researcher or the reason for the research Dependability evaluation standard that is met when all parts of the research are linked Dependability audit review of written records of decisions and procedures used during the research Page 3 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Dirty hands illegal or immoral behavior of the researcher that occurs during field research Epistemology paradigmatic assumption related to the study of the creation of knowledge Ethnography a type of field research that requires long-term engagement in a natural setting Expert review someone with expertise reviews all parts of the research to help ensure validity and trustworthiness Field notes highly detailed written accounts of observations, interactions, interviews, reflections, and analytical thoughts Field research systematic study of people in their natural settings through long-term interactions and observations Fieldwork the portion of research that is conducted in the location, referred to as a setting, of interest Final paper final report, book, article, dissertation, thesis, or presentation of results of field research Focused coding targeted coding for the purpose of refining codes and seeking relationships among coded categories Focus group interview type of interview with multiple individuals to examine the views of the group Follow-up questions extemporaneous questions designed to elicit additional information from interviewees Page 4 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Gaining entrée the ongoing process of acquiring permission to conduct fieldwork Gatekeepers people who have power to grant or deny access to a setting Generalizability applicability of conclusions from research to a larger population or theory Generalize taking conclusions drawn from research and applying them to other people, settings, or theories Grounded theory generation of a theory based on the data Informal interview an unstructured conversation used to gain specific information of interest to the researcher Informed consent permission from research participants who are fully informed about the nature of the research and their voluntary role in it Initial coding preliminary identification of segments of data possibly useful for analysis Insider researcher has previous experience with the participants or setting Institutional Review Board a university committee that has the authority to decide whether research on human subjects is ethical Internal validity

Page 5 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

studying what you intend to study Interpretive paradigm a set of assumptions held by researchers used to guide research, which include the assumptions that there is no objective social reality independent of the meanings given in a setting Interview guide list of all the questions in the order they will be asked Key actor someone in the setting who acts as the researcher’s mentor or guide Member checks allowing participants in the research to read and respond to the research manuscript Members the participants in a setting Memoing writing notes to oneself about ideas related to the analysis of one’s data Methodology the procedures used during research Methods ways of collecting data, including observations and interviews Mixed methods using qualitative and quantitative data in the same study Naturalistic generalizability research having implications beyond the setting as determined by the reader

Page 6 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Naturalistic inquiry research that is conducted in the setting of interest Near synchronous interview type of online interview in which a response to a question is expected fairly quickly but not immediately Nonparticipant observations researcher observes but does not actively engage in events in the setting Objective the results of the research are not affected by the characteristics of the researcher Observation a way of collecting data from watching the participants and setting Ontology paradigmatic assumption about the study of the nature of reality Open coding preliminary identification of segments of data possibly useful for analysis Open-ended question a question that allows the respondent to answer it in detail Outsider researcher does not have previous experience with the participants or setting Overt research research that is conducted with participants in the setting being aware of the role of the researcher Paradigm set of ontological, epistemological, methodological, and axiological beliefs held by researchers that affects Page 7 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

how the research is conducted Participant observation researcher actively engages in the events in the setting Participants individuals who take part in the research Peer debriefing discussions with others throughout the field research process to help ensure validity and trustworthiness Pilot interview an interview conducted with someone who is part of the study, and is done, in part, to receive feedback about the interview itself Post-positivist paradigm a set of assumptions held by researchers used to guide research, which include the assumptions that there is a stable reality that can be known through objective, value-free, and standardized procedures Probes predetermined questions design to elicit additional information from interviewees Qualitative research research that uses textual and non-numerical data Rapport trusting relationships between researcher and participant in a setting Reactivity changes in behavior resulting from the participants knowing they are involved in research Reflexivity critically reflecting on the implications of the researcher on the research process and outcomes Page 8 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Reliability consistency of responses or findings over time Research design strategy or approach to conducting research that has specific methodological requirements related to a specific purpose Research question the question that the research is designed to answer Research story using the elements from creative writing to analyze the data and to present the results Saturation conclusion that collecting more data in the field is not necessary because the researcher ceases to learn anything new Semi-structured interviews interviews that combine questions that are preplanned with those that are not Status characteristics demographic characteristics, such as age, race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and social class Structured interviews interviews that consist of preplanned questions that are asked in the same way for all participants Synchronous interviews interviews with researcher and interviewee taking part in the interview at the same time Themes common patterns or topics identified in the data or unifying threads that capture the essences of what is being studied

Page 9 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Theory conceptual framework that guides research Thick descriptions highly detailed written accounts of what was experienced in the field Transferability research findings having implications for other settings or theoretical understanding Triangulation use of multiple sources of data, researchers, methods of data collection, or theoretical frames Trustworthiness degree to which results are believable and are worthy of attention Typology a classification of similar items into discrete categories Unstructured interviews interviews without preplanned questions Validity indicator of the overall quality of the research Value neutrality the researcher’s values are not relevant when conducting research Virtual field research field research that primarily takes place in digital spaces Visual representation use of diagrams, tables, maps, or other images to analyze or present data Page 10 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research

SAGE

SAGE Research Methods

© 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071909614

Page 11 of 11

A Guide to Qualitative Field Research