联系我们
我们只做按需定制化代写服务,绝对原创!
QQ:41806229 点击这里在线咨询代写
Email:admin@assignment.cc
网  址:http://www.assignment.cc/
支持Paypal、VISA、MasterCard、Discover等银行卡支付
Paypal支付
代写paper,Qualitative Research Methodology
发表日期:2013-10-07 08:55:32 | 来源:assignment.cc | 当前的位置:首页 > 代写paper > 正文
Qualitative Research Methodology

Introduction

In this essay I am going to express my understanding of the key principles of qualitative research. In order to understand the nature of qualitative research, we must primarily look at the constructivist ontology and the interpretivist epistemology, which will allow us to develop an understanding of the context in which the qualitative methodology is conceptualised.

Furthermore, I will look at the research design process and the inductive nature of this subjective, value laden procedure. I will then go on to look at the principles of qualitative research, with focus on the concepts of trustworthiness and authenticity from a qualitative perspective, which can help sociologists gain Verstehen with individuals. To conclude my essay, I will look at the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative research, making reference to specific methods.

Ontology and Epistemology

Researchers using qualitative methods of inquiry believe that social phenomena are constructed through human interactions and not determined by governing laws. This is known as the constructivist ontology and aims to understand how a social phenomenon is created through interaction and intersubjective meaning. From their perspective, they believe that social actors create the social world through interactions as opposed to objectivists who believe that social structures determine individual actions and behaviour (Bryman, 2004, p. 3-25).

This constructivist ontology needs to be investigated using an interpretivist epistemology, and by understanding this epistemology we can therefore appreciate the key principles of qualitative research. By using interpretivism and an inductive form of inquiry, sociologists aim to understand how individuals construct meaning. For interpretivists, subjectivity is incredibly important due to the subjective nature of individuals, and they try to gain Verstehen. They would see value neutrality as unnecessary because it is impossible to gain Verstehen without using qualitative methodologies (Berg, 2007, p. 19-52).

The Inductive Research Process

To conduct qualitative research, you would primarily need to select an area of research and research questions, and in this sense the type of question you select will guide your research process. Qualitative research is inductive, so it does not require an initial hypothesis, unlike quantitative research. This is because behavioural and socio-cultural patterns emerge over time and in some cases are not noticed until after the research has been conducted. After selecting an area of interest, the researchers would need to decide on the research setting and establish what method/s they will use to conduct their research (Bryman, 2004, p. 265-290).

There are many methods that can be used in qualitative research, which, according to Strauss and Corbin is used to describe "any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification" (1990, p.17). The researchers themselves play an important part in the research process as they bring their values to the research, which complements the interpretivist epistemology.

Researchers have to be aware of the ethical guidelines set out by the British Sociological Association (BSA). Researchers have to take into consideration professional integrity, anonymity, privacy, confidentiality and informed consent (unless research is conducted covertly). Covert research has ethical implications if the research is not important and in the public’s interest. The researchers are in a sense a tool used to collect primary data, and the flexible nature of qualitative research means they are not bound by a rigid process and can adapt their research when needed. The final stage of qualitative research is writing up findings. Research results can be compiled to form a book, journal, article or report (Bryman, 2004, p. 61-82).

The Principles of Qualitative Research

Qualitative research looks at the micro sociological context. That is, qualitative researchers like to study people in their natural environments. This means that qualitative research is context specific. Qualitative research is concerned with the quality of the social research and aims to be explanatory by looking at the interaction between variables.

Qualitative researchers want to understand and explore social situations through generating descriptions from on-site observations and interviews. Qualitative researchers focus on understanding patterns and themes as stated by the author of Jones International University web site:

The real world is complex; qualitative research focuses on the elements of that complexity: emotions, meanings, symbols, motivation, thought processes, feelings, patterns and themes. Qualitative research seeks to make sense of this world by finding meaning through the eyes of participants. (http://www.jonesinternational.edu/schools/courses/edu793.php)

Using qualitative methodology, researchers are able to give detailed accounts and descriptions of socio-cultural phenomena which do not need to be conveyed quantitatively. In contrast, quantitative, positivist, deterministic research generalizes findings to the whole population and aims to be conclusive by discovering governing laws (Bryman, 2004. p. 3-25).

There are also many other methods qualitative researchers can employ, for example, focus groups, interviews and case studies. After the researcher has decided on the methods, they need to conduct their research. Qualitative researchers are not bound to one particular research method. They can use a variety of different methods if their research requires them to. This use of multi methodology is called triangulation (Berg, 2007, p. 19-52).

Qualitative research design is circular. Qualitative researchers needto repeat and adapt their design to suit the flow of their research. After selecting their methods and collecting their data, researchers need to analyse their findings, which can be done in various ways. For example, the research findings would need interpreting; this can be done by linking data to a larger sociological context and generating concepts. Findings can also be analysed by detecting patterns and trends in the data. This can be done by using textual analysis, such as coding using computer software such as MaxQDA (Bryman, 2004, p. 398-416).

There are different theoretical approaches involved in qualitative methodology, for example naturalism, ethnomethodology, emotionalism and postmodernist research. Each approach is used as a means of interpreting social phenomena by using a value laden perspective where a researcher applies his/her own values to a social context through an unscientific, flexible process and finally an in-depth, subjective methodology. These principles shape the methods used for qualitative research as they compliment both the constructivist ontology and the interpretivist epistemology. I am now going to discuss some of the different methods used by qualitative researchers that apply these principles.

Qualitative Methods

Qualitative data collection can be conducted through observations. Participant observation is one of the most common methods for qualitative data collection. Participant observation has strong authenticity but it does lack in repeatability as the research is difficult to reproduce in the same way. There are many different ways of conducting participant observation, and it typically requires the researcher to become a participant in the culture or context being observed.

Participant observation is often longitudinal; the researcher needs to spend long periods of time with the focus group to be able to gain a “native’s point of view”. Participant observation can be conducted either overtly or covertly, depending on the nature of the research. Covert participant observation involves the researcher hiding their true identity and motives of their research from their subjects. This is effective in socially sensitive areas, such as deviant or criminal subcultures, where a researcher can gain Verstehen by using qualitative research methodologies (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995, chap 8).

An example of observational methods is ethnography. Ethnography focuses on the sociology of meaning through observation of socio-cultural phenomena; typically, the ethnographer focuses on a small group or community and uses largely participant observation. This research method was employed by the University of Chicago during the 1920’s and 1930’s. Robert Park, an important figure at the University of Chicago in the 1920s, encouraged students to go outside and collect primary information by using observational methods to study social phenomena:

Go and sit in the lounges of the luxury hotels and on the doorsteps of the flophouses; sit on the Gold Coast settees and on the slum shakedown; sit in the Orchestra Hall and the Star and Garter Burlesque. In short, gentlemen, go get the seat of your pants dirty in real research (Park, cited in Prus, 1996, p. 103-140).

Overt participant observation contrasts with covert, as the identity of the researcher and intentions of the research are known to the group being studied. Researchers using this method will often record their findings by making detailed field notes; this, however, can become difficult if the research requires them to take a covert stance, as their ‘cover’ may be jeopardized if they were recording their findings in front of the group. Qualitative research analysis is dependent on building interpretations of the research to gain authenticity and trustworthiness. This may be difficult because of the subjective nature of this method, but due to the ideographic nature of individuals and the interpretivist epistemology, this would not be an issue for qualitative researchers, who ultimately aim to gain Verstehen.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while this approach can be criticized by positivists for its subjective nature and lack of empirical methods, it does, however, offer a more in-depth perspective into individuals and their lives. Qualitative research is rigorous and highly subjective because the researcher’s investigation is overly influenced by the views of the researcher involved. Also, qualitative research does provide a way of extracting more complex, in-depth and comprehensive information from social contexts that would be difficult to retrieve using quantitative methods.

However, this methodology has been criticised by positivists and the objectivist ontology because of the value laden perspective it takes. If the researcher does have any preconceived ideas of the findings, it may cause bias in the results and therefore affect the authenticity of their work. Also the researcher may misinterpret the social phenomena they are studying and therefore have difficulties establishing the real meaning of that particular social situation.

Qualitative research can also be criticised because of its lack of representativeness of the larger population, as qualitative research typically deals with micro social issues that cannot be generalised to the wider population because they are context specific. However qualitative researchers would see this as an advantage because they require a deeper understanding in order to gain Verstehen. Another criticism would be that qualitative methods are also very expensive to conduct, mainly because of the amount of time it takes to interpret data and conduct observational studies.

Despite these criticisms, qualitative research is a flexible, in-depth form of enquiry that is not dominated by statistics or rigid research methods. It is largely dominated by the constructivist ontology and the interpretivist epistemology which believe that the social world is built upon actions and interactions. Researchers adopt this qualitative approach to enable them to form Verstehen with their research topic or group.

Bibliography

Berg, B. (2007) Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, Boston:

Pearson.

Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods (Second Edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.) (2003) The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. K. (1997) Interpretative Ethnography: Ethnographic Practices for the 21st Century, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.) (2003) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Guba, E. G., Lincoln, Y. S. (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In . K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.)  Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (1995) Ethnography: Principles in Practice, London: Routledge.

Miles, Matthew B. and Huberman, A. Michael (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Morris S. Schwartz and Charlotte Green Schwartz (1955) ‘Problems in Participant Observation’, American Journal of Sociology, 60, pages 343-53.

Prus, R (1996) “The ethnographic research tradition”, in Symbolic Interaction and Ethnographic Research, New York: State University of New York Press.

Silverman, D. (2001) Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction, London: Sage.

Spradley, J. (1980) Participant Observation, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

http://www.jonesinternational.edu/schools/courses/edu793.php

 

介绍
在这篇文章中,我要表达我的理解,定性研究的主要原则。为了了解的性质定性研究,我们必须主要看建构主义的本体论和解释学的认识论,这将让我们制定一个定性的方法是概念化的上下文中理解。
此外,我将着眼于研究设计过程和这种主观价值载货过程的感性特性。然后,我会去,看定性研究的原则,重点从定性的角度看,它可以帮助社会学家获得与个人的投入理解的概念,可信性和真实性。要结束我的文章,我会看在定性研究的长处和短处,具体方法参考。
本体论和认识论
采用定性调查方法的研究人员认为,社会现象,通过构建人类交往,而不是由执政规律。这就是所谓的建构本体,目的是要了解如何创建一种社会现象,通过互动和主体间性的意义。从他们的角度来看,他们认为社会行动者创造社会的客观主义者认为,社会结构决定个人的行动和行为(布里曼, 2004年,第3-25页) ,而不是世界,通过互动。
这种建构主义的本体论解释学的认识论,需要进行调查,因此,我们可以理解这个认识论欣赏定性研究的主要原则。社会学家通过使用解释主义和感性形式的调查,目的是了解个人如何建构意义。对于interpretivists ,主体性是非常重要的,由于个人的主观性质,他们试图获得投入理解。他们会看到价值中立是不必要的,因为这是不可能的投入理解,而不使用定性方法(伯格, 2007年,第19-52页) 。
研究的归纳过程
要进行定性研究,你会主要是需要选择一个区域的研究和研究的问题,在这个意义上,您所选择的问题类型,将引导您的研究过程。定性研究是感性的,所以它并不需要一个最初的假设,不同的定量研究。这是因为随着时间的推移,在某些情况下,行为和社会文化模式的出现,都没有注意到,直到之后的研究已进行了。选择感兴趣的领域后,研究人员将需要决定研究制定和建立他们会用什么方法/ s的进行他们的研究(布里曼, 2004年,第265-290页) 。
有许多方法可用于定性研究,其中,根据斯特劳斯和Corbin是用来描述“任何种类的研究,产生结果没有到达,通过统计的程序的装置,或其他装置,定量” ( 1990年,第。 17)。研究人员在研究过程中发挥重要作用,为他们带来他们的价值观的研究,补充解释学的认识论。
研究人员必须知道由英国社会学协会( BSA )的道德准则。研究人员必须要考虑到考虑专业诚信,匿名,隐私,保密和知情同意(除非暗中进行的研究) 。隐蔽的研究如果研究是有道德的影响并不重要,市民的利益。研究人员是在一定意义上使用的工具,收集原始数据,意味着他们并不受一个僵化的过程,并在需要的时候,能适应他们的研究和定性研究的灵活性质。定性研究的最后一个阶段是写作的调查结果。研究结果可以被编辑成一本书,杂志,文章或报告(布里曼, 2004年,第61-82页) 。
定性研究的原则
定性研究着眼于微观社会学背景。也就是说,定性研究者们喜欢学习的人在他们的天然环境。这意味着,定性研究是上下文特定的。关注与社会研究的质量和定性研究的目的是通过寻找变量之间的相互作用解释。
定性研究人员希望了解和探索社会产生说明的情况下,通过现场观察和采访。定性研究着重了解模式和主题琼斯国际大学网站的作者所指出的:
现实世界是复杂的,定性的研究主要集中在这种复杂的元素:情感,意义,符号,动机,思维过程,感受,模式和主题。定性研究旨在通过寻找意义参与者眼中的这个世界的感觉。 ( http://www.jonesinternational.edu/schools/courses/edu793.php )
采用定性的方法,研究人员能够给社会文化现象,不需要定量传达的详细账目和说明。相反,定量,实证的,确定性的研究发现的问题概括整个人口的目标是成为确凿的发现管辖法律( 2004年布里曼,第3-25页) 。
也有许多其他的方法,定性研究人员可以采用,例如,焦点小组,访谈和案例研究。方法后,研究人员已决定,他们需要进行他们的研究。定性研究人员没有绑定到一个特定的研究方法。如果他们的研究需要他们,他们可以使用各种不同的方法。这种使用多方法被称为三角(伯格, 2007年,第19-52页) 。
定性研究设计为圆形。定性研究人员needto ,重复和适应他们的设计,以满足他们的研究的流程。选择的方法,并收集他们的数据后,研究人员需要分析他们的研究结果,可以以各种方式进行。例如,研究结果需要解释,这可以通过连接到一个更大的社会学上下文的数据和生成的概念。研究结果也可以通过检测数据中的规律和趋势分析。这可以通过使用文本的分析,例如使用计算机软件,如MaxQDA (布里曼, 2004年,第398-416页)的编码。
有不同的理论方法,涉及定性方法,例如自然主义,民族方法学,情绪化和后现代主义的研究。每个方法是用来作为解释社会现象的一种手段,通过使用值载货的角度,一个研究者的社会背景下,通过不科学的,灵活的过程和最后的深入,主观的方法适用于他/她自己的价值观。这些原则塑造用于定性研究的方法,因为他们都称赞建构本体论和认识论解释学。我现在要讨论一些不同的方法用于定性研究人员应用这些原则。
定性方法
通过观察,可以进行定性数据收集。参与观察是定性数据收集的最常用的方法之一。参与观察具有很强的真实性,但它缺乏可重复性的研究是很难以同样的方式重现。有许多不同的方式进行参与观察,它通常要求研究者成为被观察的文化或背景的参与者。
参与观察往往是纵向的,研究人员需要花费很长一段时间,焦点小组能够获得“本土观点” 。参与观察,可进行明里暗里,根据研究的性质。隐蔽参与观察涉及隐藏自己的真实身份和动机,他们的研究的研究人员,从他们的臣民。在社会敏感的领域,如越轨或犯罪亚文化,其中一名研究人员能够获得采用定性研究方法(哈默斯利和阿特金森, 1995年,第一章8)的投入理解,这是有效的。
观测方法的一个例子是民族志。人种学的重点,通常情况下,通过观察社会文化现象的社会学意义上的民族志学者专注于一小群或社区,并使用在很大程度上参与观察。 1920年代和1930年代期间,受聘于芝加哥大学的这个研究方法。罗伯特公园,在20世纪20年代在芝加哥大学的一个重要人物,鼓励学生到外面去使用的观测方法研究社会现象和收集的主要信息:
去坐在休息室的豪华酒店,台阶上flophouses ;在黄金海岸的长沙发和贫民窟勒索坐,坐在乐团音乐厅和星和吊袜带滑稽。总之,先生们,去获得你的裤子脏的座位在真正的研究中(公园,引用普鲁士, 1996年,第103-140页) 。
公开的参与者观察对比,比较隐蔽,研究者的身份和意图的研究组正在研究。研究人员使用这种方法往往会通过详细的现场记录,记录了他们的发现,然而,这可以成为困难的,如果研究要求他们采取隐蔽的立场,可能会危及他们的“盖” ,如果他们记录了他们的发现在前面的该组。定性研究分析依赖于诠释真实性和可信赖的研究获得。这可能是困难的,因为这种方法的主观性质,但由于表意性质的个人和解释学的认识论,这不会是一个问题,谁最终目标是​​获得投入理解为定性研究者。
结论
总之,实证其主观性质和缺乏实证的方法,而这种方法可以批评,它,然而,提供了一个更深入的观点纳入个人和他们的生活。定性研究是严谨和高度主观的,因为过分受研究者的调查,涉及研究员的意见。此外,定性研究确实提供了一种方法提取更复杂的社会背景,是很难用定量的方法来检索,深入和全面的信息。
然而,这种方法实证和客观的本体,因为载货的价值的角度来看,它一直批评。如果研究者的结果有任何先入为主的想法,它可能导致的结果偏差,并因此影响其工作的真实性。此外,研究者可能曲解他们正在研究的社会现象,因此,难以建立真正意义上的,特定的社会局势。
定性研究也受到批评,因为它缺乏代表性,较大的人口,定性研究通常涉及微观的社会问题,不能推广到更广泛的人群,因为他们是特定的上下文。然而,定性研究人员认为这是一个优势,因为他们需要一个更深入的了解,以获得投入理解。另一种批评是定性的方法也非常昂贵,主要是因为花费的时间量的解释数据,并进行观测研究进行。
尽管有这些批评,定性研究是一个灵活的,深入的调查形式,不占主导地位的统计数据或硬质的研究方法。它主要是占主导地位的建构本体论和解释学的认识论,认为世界是建立在社会行动和相互作用。研究人员采用这种定性的方法,使他们能够形成的投入理解与他们的研究课题或一组。
参考书目
伯格, B. (2007)社会科学学院,波士顿的定性研究方法:
皮尔逊。
布里曼, A. (2004)社会研究方法(第二版) ,牛津大学出版社。
登青, N.和林肯(合编) , Y. (2003)景观定性研究:理论与问题,千橡, CA :贤者。
登青, NK (1997)解释人种学: 21世纪的民族志实践,加利福尼亚州Thousand Oaks :贤者。
登青, N.和林肯(合编) , Y. (2003)策略定性询价,千橡,加利福尼亚:贤者。
孤拔,例如,林肯, YS (1994)竞争范式定性研究。在。 K.登青YS林肯( 1997 )定性研究手册“ ( 105-117页) 。加利福尼亚州Thousand Oaks ,鼠尾草。
哈默斯利,M.和阿特金森, P. (1995)人种:实践中的原则,伦敦:劳特利奇。
万里,马修B.和Huberman (1994) , A.迈克尔定性数据分析:一个扩展原始资料,千橡:贤者。
莫里斯·施瓦茨和夏洛特绿色施瓦茨(1955) “参与观察”的问题,美国社会学杂志, 60 ,第343-53页。
普鲁士,R (1996) “人种学研究传统” ,在符号互动和人种学研究,纽约:纽约州立大学出版社。
西尔弗曼, D. (2001)解释定性数据分析讲座,文本和互动,伦敦:贤者方法。
独具, J. (1980)参与观察,纽约:霍尔特,莱因哈特和温斯顿。
施特劳斯, A. , &科尔宾, J. (1990) 。定性研究的基础:扎根理论的程序和技术。纽伯里公园, CA :贤者。
http://www.jonesinternational.edu/schools/courses/edu793.php