Reflections on Theme 6: Qualitative and case study research

In this blog post I will not discuss all the qualitative methodologies, but I will rather focus on the narratives, interviews and focus groups.

The first research paper that I chose was called Situating Internet Use: Information-Seeking Among Young Women withBreast Cancer. The qualitative methodology used in this paper was narratives, which I found to be a really interesting one. In my previous post I discussed that I consider narratives as a form of interviews, but after the first seminar I understand that narratives is a different type of qualitative methodology that can provide us with valuable insights and deeper understanding. During the seminar we discussed that the general idea for narratives is to see a story as source of information for a specific research. Narrative research uses field texts, such as stories and life experiences as the units of analysis. A benefit of this methodology is that the participants have the opportunity to narratize their experiences in ways that are personally meaningful to them. On the other hand, it might be time consuming to organize and collect only the relevant information according to the research topic. It was interesting to find out that that narratives could also be used in telling the results of a research.

At the first seminar we also discussed the interviews because the majority of the chosen research papers used this methodology. Interviews can provide an in-depth understanding of personal experiences and viewpoints that can contribute to research. Interesting and unexpected topics might emerge from semi-structured and open-ended interviews, which might lead to new insights and further knowledge. An advantage of using face-to-face interviews is the possibility to get non-verbal data from interviewees, while an advantage of online interviews is that it might be easier to reach a larger number of participants. On the other hand, in online interviews it is more difficult to ask follow-up questions and provide explanations and clarifications to the participants. The disadvantages of using interviews is that it is time consuming to transcribe the material. Plus, I agree with the argument that there is a risk of the interviewer unconsciously influencing the interviewee.

Focus groups is another interesting methodology. Even though I find it valuable, I have to note that I agree with the arguments about the risks related to the dynamics of the group. Some participants might dominate the discussion. Therefore I believe in the importance of an experienced moderator who can make sure that there is a balance in the discussion and that it stays in focus-according to the researched topic.

I noticed that the majority of the chosen research papers which used qualitative methodologies were published in the same journals, with a focus in social science research. I understand that qualitative methodologies are used when researchers try to answer to the question why. They can provide in-depth understanding of a phenomenon.

I also want to briefly discuss the case study research. I would like to note that it is not always explicit that a research paper uses case study research. In case studies the focus is in one setting. From discussions during the second seminar I realized that even though it is unusual, case studies can also be based on one person. The researchers can also examine multiple case studies. In the typical case study research, there is a combination of methodologies- triangulation is a technique that facilitates validation of data that was received from more than two sources. Case studies are helpful in getting a deeper understanding about a phenomenon. They can be used for various reasons: to provide descriptions, test theories and generate theories. 

REFERENCES:

Balka, E., Krueger, G., Holmes, B. J. and Stephen, J. E. (2010). Situating Internet Use: Information-Seeking Among Young Women with Breast Cancer. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15, pp. 389–411.

Reflections on Theme 4: Quantitative Research

This week’s theme was quantitative research. It involved reading the paper Physical activity, stress, andself-reported upper respiratory tract infection (Fondell et al., 2010), selecting a paper where quantitative methodologies were used in a good way, discussing and critically reflecting on quantitative methodologies, their benefits and limitations.

I believe that the seminar exercise, where we had to develop a model and show the relationship between the researched phenomena, was helpful in my understanding that in quantitative papers, researchers usually look for patterns and relationships between phenomena. 

The benefit of quantitative methodologies is that researchers are able to collect statistical data and thus test and prove their hypotheses. If data do not prove the hypothesis, then researchers might be led to interesting insights. The limitations of quantitative methodologies concern the reliability and validity of the data and the results and thus the conclusions of the studies. Another limitation could be the inability to generalize results. Further research is usually necessary. 

Similarly, qualitative methodologies have both benefits and limitations. Researchers might argue for the use of either qualitative or quantitative methods, but after the readings and the discussions of this week I realized that all methodologies have their limitations. Taken this into account, the researchers evaluate the methodologies and chose the one that they think is appropriate for the specific topic. During the week I was wondering if a combination of quantitative and qualitative methodologies would be provide richer results and better insights.

Having worked with online questionnaires enabled me to understand how demanding a procedure it is to design a questionnaire, formulate the right questions, send it out to a representative sample, getting a good response rate, using the right tools to understand, analyze and interpret the results. Based on my previous work experience and on discussions about quantitative methodologies during this week, I came to the following conclusions:

An important factor of statistical and online surveys is the design of questionnaires and how questions are formulated. During the lecture we discussed that questions should be carefully structured and that the questionnaires should be tested in order to avoid misunderstandings and mistakes that could affect the data and the results.

During this week, I confirmed my prior thoughts that it is difficult to generalize results of a survey. At the seminar we discussed the problem of generalizing results because the number of participants was considered to be small and because studies were conducted in specific contexts. Finding a representative sample is a demanding procedure. And in most of the selected papers, we concluded that further research is needed and/or that the study should be replicated in different communities.

Simon discusses in his blog post, and I agree with him, that interpreting the results involves statistical knowledge. Interpreting statistical data and explaining results in the right way is certainly not an easy procedure. It demands specific knowledge and use of specific programs. I think that weighing data is an important factor of reliability and validity of results. 

During the seminar, we also discussed the importance of researchers thoroughly explaining their methodologies. Not only is it important for the peer review process, but this way readers can also critically reflect on the study and its results. Plus, future research can use the same methodologies in different environments and test the hypotheses in different contexts. This might lead to the generalization of results.

To conclude, I believe that all methodologies have benefits, as well as limitations. I don't think that there is one right methodology. I would rather say that choosing the right methodology depends on the focus of the researched subject. 

REFERENCES

Fondell, E., Lagerros, Y. T., Sundberg, C. J., Lekander, M., Bälter, O., Rothman, K., & Bälter, K. (2010). Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(2), 272-279.

Kim, J. and Haridakis, P. M. (2009), The Role of Internet User Characteristics and Motives in Explaining Three Dimensions of Internet Addiction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14: 988–1015. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01478.x