Research - 9 Discussion

Logging Data

There are two forms of data logged (there could be others): field notes and interview

transcriptions

It is usually best to write field notes by hand at the site, then type them into the computer

at the end of each day or at least by the next morning. In some cases field notes can be

done at intervals (if writing them openly arouses suspicion or there are other reasons they

cannot be done at the moment of observation). One researcher used the restroom to write

notes every hour--which he reported worked well, except that some may have wondered

why he had to go there so often! People usually write between five and ten handwritten

pages an hour if they are observing carefully.

When observing, write very concretely. Quantitative research speaks of operationalizing

concepts--stating them in observable, countable terms. This is how you write your

descriptions; avoid inferences, generalizations, vague terms. Avoid sophisticated terms

that will obscure what actually occurred ("they interacted" could mean many possible

terms--even mud wrestling!). Get down the details, even if they seem irrelevant at first.

Describe the obvious, because it may be less obvious (and less likely to be remembered)

once you leave the site. Also what is obvious to you may not be obvious to outsiders.

Push yourself to describe actions without evaluating (evaluating, generalizing, inferring

can all occur in the other kinds of notes, but not the field notes section of notes). Students

must often push themselves to get details. If you begin to generalize too early, you may

be recording more your bias that what actually occurs (although you might put something

in the margins of your notes to be recorded separately when you type them up IF the idea

is absolutely overwhelming or if you think you'll forget an important aspect). You need

data from which to generalize, otherwise the results cannot be trusted any more than folk

tales or generalized impressions (but do record impressions later in personal notes or

theoretical notes). One important distinction between research and general experience is

that research relies upon carefully documented data from which conclusions are formed.

Alternative methods of making field notes include making recordings at intervals or, if it

won't be too distracting, talking quietly into a cassette recorder. I even used a camcorder

with special amplified microphone that hung next to my mouth for making verbal field

notes. It worked well, and the tiny compression system in the microphone made it

possible to hear what was happening in the environment as well. You may need to take

period breaks to say your field notes into the cassette recorder. The drawback for

mechancial recordings is that they will need some kind of transcription later (see

comments on transcribing interviews, below). Some are able to take a small laptop with

them to the field site and type in field notes that way. However, many people find typing

on a laptop to be distracting to people at the site, and a single computer crash can destroy

the whole day of data (or more if you didn't back up regularly!).

If nothing--absolutely nothing--is happening, then describe the physical context in

excruciating detail. Look around carefully, even get down on the floor and look at the

floors and walls carefully during "dead times" when absolutely nothing is happening.

Handwritten notes are then typed into the computer when not observing. During the

typing process, some details will probably be recalled that were not written down at the

site--include these. While typing, separate the personal notes, theoretical notes, and

methodology notes from the standard field notes. This can be done by using separate

computer files for each of these, or simply denoted by some code within a single text.

You will probably find that you will add much more to personal notes, theoretical notes,

and methodology notes at this time--good! Time at the site should emphasize events and

descriptions, while the typing time will tend to be more reflective. This reflection is

actually the beginnings of analysis which is a reflective process (a less formal analysis

than the formal approaches to be used near the completion of the study).

Field notes should be typed in a column on one half of the paper (set your margins

accordingly in your word processor). The other half of the paper is for coding and

comments. If you are right handed, the notes should be on the left side of the paper so

you can write in the right column (and vice versa if you are left handed).

Good interviews have lots of open-ended questions, most of which are formed prior to

the interview. I personally like questions that come out of observations better than those

created out of the student's imagination. Sometimes, though, good questions emerge

during an interview because of what has been said by the one interviewed. Usually I'd go

with the flow and ask the emergent questions, if it's appropriate. Transcribing interviews

can be done several ways. Word-for-word transcriptions are probably best, but they are

laborious. If you are well funded, this can be hired out. But there is value in the

researcher listening to interviews, as the researcher may be able to figure out a muffled

word that a transcriptionist cannot. Also, the interviewer may learn how to better

interview by listening to his or her mistakes. It is also possible to use word-for-word

transcriptions of some sections and summarize others when typing up the interviews. It is

also possible to listen to the tape of the interview several times in order to better discover

what sections are important enough to transcribe, which sections need to be summarized,

and which sections should be ignored. But keep the tape--later in the research you may

find that what was not typed was indeed more important than you thought! It is even

possible to code directly from the tape--there are computer programs that allow you to

connect a cassette player or even a videotape player directly to the computer, so that time

markers and even your transcription can be added to the audio or video data.

As with field notes, transcriptions should be typed in a single column with a wide margin

for coding and comments. You can't code well if your field notes are not concrete and

tangible (think "operationalized"). Coding includes categorizations, classifications, and

other kinds of comments about the field notes (you could code your other notes as well,

but people usually do not--generally what you are most concerned about is what

happened at the site). There are many possible things you can code (see Lofland and

Lofland). As you code, think about possible linkages and relationships between the

different codes you use. This thinking will tend to produce more sophisticated codes,

broader or more precise codes. Be sure to record what you are thinking during the coding

process and the thinking that produced new, more sophisticated codes. This is also a form

of analysis which should be carefully described in your theoretical notes. Push yourself to

develop deeper and more revealing/descriptive/accurate categories and codes.

As you code, keep in mind that possible linkages and relationships may also include

confounds to causation. This is a valuable aspect of quantitative research that should be

considered in qualitative reflection. Don't get too bogged down in thinking about

confounds at first--let the ideas flow in your theoretical notes, but especially give this

some thought as you move to more formal analysis near the end of the study. Robert

Rosenthal's writings help in exploring this topic in greater detail.

Return to Qualitative Research Outline

Return to Qualitative Research Resources