U1D1-68 -compare and contrast the characteristics of quantitative and qualitative research, addressing the philosophical assumptions of both. Based on your review of the assigned readings, identify and describe what you believe to be meaningful about the

Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber provides a grounding in feminist research through discussions of current perspectives on its influence on social change and transformation as well as the new technologies that are influencing methodological approaches within the field.

Lovern, L. L. & Locust, C. (2013). Native American communities on health and disability: Borderland dialogues. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lavonna Lovern and Carol Locust provide a foundational resource for researchers interested in how to begin a genuine dialogue with indigenous communities. The authors experiences are particularly noted in the sections focused on “wellness” concepts that are respectful of disability and indigeneity.

Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York, NY: Guilford.

In this book, Donna Mertens provides a step-by-step guide to conducting research using a transformative lens in a way that clearly connects theory to practice.

Mertens, D. M. (2015). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Donna Mertens presents a brief history and then focuses on the philosophical underpinnings of four research paradigms: postpositivism, constructivist, transformative, and pragmatic. Of particular note is her useful description of the transformative paradigm including a rationale for its emergence and description of its philosophical and theoretical basis.

Mertens, D. M., Cram, F., & Chilisa, B. (Eds.) (2013). Indigenous pathways into social research. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

Through life stories of over 30 indigenous researchers from six continents representing diverse disciplines, editors Donna Mertens, Fiona Cram and Bagele Chilisa provide a powerful conduit for researchers to learn about challenges experienced and effective strategies for producing meaningful work.

Phillips, D. C., & Burbules, N. C. (2000). Postpositivism and educational research. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Dennis Phillips and Nicholas Burbules offer an excellent description of postpositivism in practice that is a foundational read for researchers.

Slife, B. D., & Williams, R. N. (1995). What’s behind the research? Discovering hidden assumptions in the behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brent Slife and Richard Williams explore the assumptions underpinning major theoretical approaches in the behaviorial sciences. This seminal work has been widely cited across disciplines (e.g., psychology, education) as useful for encouraging critical thinking of theories.

Schwandt, T. A. (2003). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretativism, hermeneutics and social constructionism. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 292–331). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

In his useful comparisons, Thomas Schwandt draws both commonalities and distinctions. For example, he views a shared focus of social constructionists and interpretivists on the process by which meanings are developed, negotiated, sustained, and adapted. Yet how the theory is applied in practice highlights differences.

Tierney, W. G. (1997). Academic outlaws: Queer theory and cultural studies in the academy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

William Tierney situates the theoretical intersection of cultural studies and queer theory in this book. He provides an important historical look backward and an interesting look forward.

3 Designing a Qualitative Study

We think metaphorically of qualitative research as an intricate fabric comprising minute threads, many colors, different textures, and various blends of material. This fabric is not explained easily or simply. Like the loom on which fabric is woven, general assumptions and interpretive frameworks hold qualitative research together. To describe these frameworks, qualitative researchers use these terms—constructivist, interpretivist, feminist, postmodernist, and so forth. Within these assumptions and through these frameworks are approaches (or designs) to qualitative inquiry, such as narrative research, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and case studies. This field has many different individuals with different perspectives who are on their own looms creating the fabric of qualitative research. Aside from these differences, the creative artists have the common task of making a fabric. In other words, there are characteristics common to all forms of qualitative research, and the different characteristics will receive different emphases depending on the qualitative project. Not all characteristics are present in all qualitative projects, but many are.

The intent of this chapter is to provide an overview of and introduction to qualitative research so that we can see the common characteristics of qualitative research before we explore the different threads of it (through specific approaches such as narrative, phenomenology, and others). We begin with a general definition of qualitative research and highlight the essential characteristics of conducting this form of inquiry. We then discuss the types of research problems and issues best suited for a qualitative study. We emphasize the requirements needed to conduct this rigorous, time-consuming research as well as criteria for assessing its quality. Given that you have the essentials (the problem, the time, the criteria) to engage in this inquiry, we then sketch out the overall process involved in designing and planning a study. This process entails preliminary considerations, phases in the process, and overall elements to consider throughout the process. Within these aspects, qualitative researchers need to anticipate and plan for potential ethical issues because these issues arise during many phases of the research process. We end by suggesting design structures including considerations for engaging readers and an outline that you might use to guide the overall structure for planning or proposing a qualitative research study. The chapters to follow will then address the different types of inquiry approaches. The general design features, outlined here, will be refined for the five approaches discussed in the remainder of the book.

Questions for Discussion What are the key characteristics of qualitative research? What types of problems are best suited for qualitative inquiry? What research skills are required to undertake this type of research? What are the features of a “good” qualitative study? How do researchers design a qualitative study? What types of ethical issues need to be anticipated during the process of qualitative research? What design structures are useful for a qualitative study plan or proposal?

The Characteristics of Qualitative Research Our rationale underlying our working definition of qualitative research emphasizes the design of research and the use of distinct approaches to inquiry (e.g., ethnography, narrative). To build upon the definition of qualitative research presented in the introductory chapter for the purpose of discussing the characteristics of qualitative research, we restate our working definition here:

Qualitative research begins with assumptions and the use of interpretive/theoretical frameworks that inform the study of research problems addressing the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. To study this problem, qualitative researchers use an emerging qualitative approach to inquiry, the collection of data in a natural setting sensitive to the people and places under study, and data analysis that is both inductive and deductive and establishes patterns or themes. The final written report or presentation includes the voices of participants, the reflexivity of the researcher, a complex description and interpretation of the problem, and its contribution to the literature or a call for change. (Creswell, 2013, p. 44)

Notice in this definition that the process of research is described as flowing from philosophical assumptions, to interpretive lens, and on to the procedures involved in studying social or human problems. Then, a framework exists for the procedures—the approach to inquiry, such as grounded theory, or case study research, or others.

It is helpful to move from a more general definition to specific characteristics found in qualitative research. We believe that the characteristics have evolved over time, and they certainly do not present a definitive set of elements. But a close examination of the characteristics mentioned in major books in the field shows some common threads. Examine Table 3.1 for four introductory qualitative research books and the characteristics they espouse for doing a qualitative study. As compared to a similar table in the first edition of this book almost 15 years ago (drawing on other authors), qualitative research today involves closer attention to the interpretive nature of inquiry and situating the study within the political, social, and cultural context of the researchers, and the reflexivity or “presence” of the researchers in the accounts they present. By examining Table 3.1, one can arrive at several common characteristics of qualitative research. These are presented in no specific order of importance:

Natural setting. Qualitative researchers often collect data in the field at the site where participants experience the issue or problem under study. They do not bring individuals into a lab (a contrived situation), nor do they typically send out instruments for individuals to complete, such as in survey research. Instead, qualitative researchers gather up-close information by talking directly to people and seeing them behave within their context. These face-to-face interactions might occur over time. Researcher as key instrument. The qualitative researchers collect data themselves through examining documents, observing behavior, and interviewing participants. They may use an instrument, but it is one designed by the researcher using open-ended questions. They do not tend to use or rely on questionnaires or instruments developed by other researchers. Multiple methods. Qualitative researchers typically gather multiple forms of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents, rather than rely on a single data source. Then they review all of the data and make sense of it, organizing it into categories or themes that cut across all of the data sources. Complex reasoning through inductive and deductive logic. Qualitative researchers build their patterns, categories, and themes from the “bottom up” by organizing the data inductively into increasingly more abstract units of information. This inductive process involves researchers working back and forth between the themes and the database until they establish a comprehensive set of themes. It may also involve collaborating with the participants interactively so that they have a chance to shape the themes or abstractions that emerge from the process. Researchers also use deductive thinking in that they build themes that are constantly being checked against the data. The inductive–deductive logic process means that the qualitative researcher uses complex reasoning skills throughout the process of research. Participants’ multiple perspectives and meanings. In the entire qualitative research process, the researchers keep a focus on learning the meaning that the participants hold about the problem or issue, not the meaning that the researchers bring to the research or writers from the literature. The participant meanings further suggest multiple perspectives on a topic and diverse views. This is why a theme developed in a qualitative report should reflect multiple perspectives of the participants in the study. Context-dependent. The research is situated within the context or setting of participants or sites. In order to report the setting in which the problem is being studied, the researcher must seek an understanding of contextual features and their influence on participants’ experiences (e.g., social, political, and historical).

This is essential because the particular contexts allow researchers to “understand how events, actions, and meaning are shaped by the unique circumstances in which these occur” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 30). Emergent design. The research process for qualitative researchers is emergent. This means that the initial plan for research cannot be tightly prescribed and that all phases of the process may change or shift after the researchers enter the field and begin to collect data. For example, the questions may change, the forms of data collection may be altered, and the individuals studied and the sites visited may be modified during the process of conducting the study. The key idea behind qualitative research is to learn about the problem or issue from participants and engage in the best practices to obtain that information. Reflexivity. Researchers “position themselves” in a qualitative research study. This means that researchers convey (i.e., in a method section, in an introduction, or in other places in a study) their background (e.g., work experiences, cultural experiences, history), how it informs their interpretation of the information in a study, and what they have to gain from the study. Wolcott (2010) said the following:

Our readers have a right to know about us. And they do not want to know whether we played in the high school band. They want to know what prompts our interest in the topics we investigate, to whom we are reporting, and what we personally stand to gain from our study. (p. 36)

Holistic account. Qualitative researchers try to develop a complex picture of the problem or issue under study. This involves reporting multiple perspectives, identifying the many factors involved in a situation, and generally sketching the larger picture that emerges. Researchers are bound not by cause-and-effect relationships among factors but rather by describing the complex interactions of factors in any situation.

When to Use Qualitative Research When is it appropriate to use qualitative research? We conduct qualitative research because a problem or issue needs to be explored. This exploration is needed, in turn, because of a need to study a group or population, identify variables that cannot be easily measured, or hear silenced voices. These are all good reasons to explore a problem rather than to use predetermined information from the literature or rely on results from other research studies. We also conduct qualitative research because we need a complex, detailed understanding of the issue. This detail can only be established by talking directly with people, going to their homes or places of work, and allowing them to tell the stories unencumbered by what we expect to find or what we have read in the literature.

We conduct qualitative research when we want to empower individuals to share their stories, hear their voices, and minimize the power relationships that often exist between a researcher and the participants in a study. To further deemphasize a power relationship, we may collaborate directly with participants by having them review our research questions, or by having them collaborate with us during the data analysis and interpretation phases of research. We conduct qualitative research when we want to write in a literary, flexible style that conveys stories, or theater, or poems, without the restrictions of formal academic structures of writing. We conduct qualitative research because we want to understand the contexts or settings in which participants in a study address a problem or issue. We cannot always separate what people say from the place where they say it— whether this context is their home, family, or work. We use qualitative research to follow up quantitative research and help explain the mechanisms or linkages in causal theories or models. These theories provide a general picture of trends, associations, and relationships, but they do not tell us about the processes that people experience, why they responded as they did, the context in which they responded, and their deeper thoughts and behaviors that governed their responses.

We use qualitative research to develop theories when partial or inadequate theories exist for certain populations and samples or existing theories do not adequately capture the complexity of the problem we are examining. We also use qualitative research because quantitative measures and the statistical analyses simply do not fit the problem. Interactions among people, for example, are difficult to capture with existing measures, and these measures may not be sensitive to issues such as gender differences, race, economic status, and individual differences. To level all individuals to a statistical mean overlooks the uniqueness of individuals in our studies. Examine Figure 3.1 for a summary description of when qualitative approaches are simply a better fit for our research problem.

Figure 3.1 When to Use Qualitative Research

What a Qualitative Study Requires From Us What does it take to engage in this form of research? To undertake qualitative research requires a strong commitment to study a problem and its demands of time and resources. Qualitative research keeps good company with the most rigorous quantitative approaches, and it should not be viewed as an easy substitute for a “statistical” or quantitative study. Qualitative inquiry is for the researcher who is willing to do the following:

Commit to extensive time in the field. The investigator spends many hours in the field, collects extensive data, and labors over field issues of trying to gain access and establish rapport. Collaborating with participants takes time yet is important for developing an “insider” perspective. Engage in the complex, time-consuming process of data analysis. The investigator undertakes the ambitious task of sorting through large amounts of data and reducing them to a few themes or categories. For a multidisciplinary team of qualitative researchers, this task can be shared; for most researchers, it is a lonely, isolated time of pondering and making sense of the data. Write lengthy and descriptive passages. The investigator presents the evidence in a way that the claims are substantiated and reflective of multiple perspectives. The incorporation of quotes to provide participants’ perspectives also lengthens the study. Embrace dynamic and emergent procedures. The investigator participates in a form of social and human science research that does not follow specific procedures and is constantly changing. This might complicate telling others about study plans and how others judge the study when completed. Attend to anticipated and developing ethical issues. The investigator considers what ethical issues might surface during the study and to plan how these issues need to be addressed. Additionally, new issues might emerge, which require attention, while undertaking the study.

The Features of a “Good” Qualitative Study In the end, individuals such as readers, participants, graduate committees, editorial board members for journals, and reviewers of proposals for funding will apply some criteria to assess the quality of a study. Standards for assessing the quality of qualitative research are available (Howe & Eisenhardt, 1990; Lincoln, 1995; Marshall & Rossman, 2015). Here is our short list describing the features of a “good” qualitative study. You will see an emphasis on rigorous methods present in this list.

The researcher frames the study within the assumptions and characteristics of the qualitative approach to research. This includes fundamental characteristics such as an evolving design, the presentation of multiple realities, the researcher as an instrument of data collection, and a focus on participants’ views—in short, all of the characteristics mentioned in Table 3.1. The researcher conducts an ethical study. This involves more than simply the researcher seeking and obtaining the permission of institutional review committees or boards. It means that the researcher considers and addresses all anticipated and emergent ethical issues in the study. The researcher uses an approach to qualitative inquiry such as one of the five approaches (or others) addressed in this book. Use of a recognized approach to research enhances the rigor and sophistication of the research design. It also provides some means to evaluate the qualitative study. Use of an approach means that the researcher identifies and defines the approach, cites studies that employ it, and follows the procedures outlined in the approach. Certainly, the approach taken in the study may not exhaustively cover all of the elements of the approach. However, for the beginning student of qualitative research, we recommend staying within one approach, becoming comfortable with it, learning it, and keeping a study concise and straightforward. Later, especially in long and complex studies, features from several approaches may be useful. The researcher begins with a single focus or concept being explored. Although examples of qualitative research show a comparison of groups or of factors or themes, as in case study projects or in ethnographies, we like to begin a qualitative study focused on understanding a single concept or idea (e.g., What does it mean to be a professional? A teacher? A painter? A single mother? A homeless person?). As the study progresses, it can begin incorporating the comparison (e.g., How does the case of a professional teacher differ from that of a professional administrator?) or relating factors (e.g., What explains why painting evokes feelings?). All too often qualitative researchers advance to the comparison or the relationship analysis without first understanding their core concept or idea. The researcher employs rigorous data collection procedures. This means that the researcher collects multiple forms of data, creates a summary—perhaps in tabled form—of the forms of data and detail about them and spends adequate time in the field. It is not unusual for qualitative studies to include information about the specific amount of time in the field (e.g., 25 hours observing). We especially like to see unusual

forms of qualitative data collection, such as using photographs to elicit responses, sounds, visual materials, or digital text messages. The researcher includes detailed methods describing a rigorous approach to data collection, data analysis, and report writing. Rigor is seen, for example, when extensive data collection in the field occurs or when the researcher conducts multiple levels of data analysis from the narrow codes or themes to broader interrelated themes to more abstract dimensions. Rigor means, too, that the researcher validates the accuracy of the account using one or more of the procedures for validation, such as member checking, triangulating sources of data, or using a peer or external auditor of the account. The researcher analyzes data using multiple levels of abstraction. We like to see the active work of the researcher as he or she moves from particulars to general levels of abstraction. Often, writers present their studies in stages (e.g., the multiple themes that can be combined into larger themes or perspectives) or layer their analysis from the particular to the general. The codes and themes derived from the data might show mundane, expected, and surprising ideas. Often the best qualitative studies present themes analyzed in terms of exploring the shadow side or unusual angles. In one class project, the student examined how students in a distance learning class reacted to the camera focused on the class. Rather than looking at the students’ reaction when the camera was on them, the researcher sought to understand what happened when the camera was off them. This approach led to the author taking an unusual angle—one not expected by the readers. The researcher writes persuasively so that the reader experiences “being there.” The concept of verisimilitude, a literary term, captures our thinking (Richardson, 1994, p. 521). The writing is clear, engaging, and full of unexpected ideas. The story and findings become believable and realistic, accurately reflecting all the complexities that exist in real life and engaging the reader. The researcher situates himself or herself within the study to reflect his or her history, culture, and personal experiences. This is more than simply an autobiography, with the writer or the researcher telling about his or her background. It focuses on how individuals’ culture, gender, history, and experiences shape all aspects of the qualitative project, from their choice of a question to address, to how they collect data, to how they make an interpretation of the situation, and to what they expect to obtain from conducting the research. In some way—such as discussing their role, interweaving themselves into the text, or reflecting on the questions they have about the study—individuals position themselves in the qualitative study.

The Process of Designing a Qualitative Study There is no agreed upon structure for how to design a qualitative study. Although books on qualitative research vary in their suggestions for design, the process is very much shaped by the particular approach adopted by the researcher. You may recall from the introduction that research design means the plan for conducting the study. Some authors believe that by reading a study, discussing the procedures, and pointing out issues that emerge, the aspiring qualitative researcher will have a sense of how to conduct this form of inquiry (see Weis & Fine, 2000). That may be true for some individuals. For others, understanding the broader issues may suffice to help design a study (see Richards & Morse, 2012) or to seek guidance from a how-to book (see Hatch, 2002). Rather than offering a how-to perspective, we consider our approach as more in line with creating options for qualitative researchers (hence, the five approaches), weighing the options given our experiences, and then letting readers make informed choices for themselves.

We can share, however, how we think about designing a qualitative study that is logically consistent across its research elements. It can be conveyed in three components: preliminary considerations that we think through prior to beginning a study, the steps we engage in during the conduct of the study, and the elements that flow through all phases of the process of research.

Preliminary Considerations There are certain design principles that we work from when designing qualitative research studies. We find that qualitative research generally falls within the process of the scientific method, with common phases whether one is writing qualitatively or quantitatively. The scientific method can be described as including the problem, the

hypotheses (or questions), the data collection, the results, and the discussion. All researchers seem to start with an issue or problem, examine the literature in some way related to the problem, pose questions, gather data and then analyze them, and write up their reports. Qualitative research fits within this structure, and we have accordingly organized the chapters in this book to reflect this process. We like the concept of methodological congruence advanced by Morse and Richards (2002) and revisited in Richards and Morse (2012)—that the purposes, questions, and methods of research are all interconnected and interrelated so that the study appears as a cohesive whole rather than as fragmented, isolated parts. With a similar goal for creating coherent and workable relationships among the key components of a research design, Maxwell (2013) advances an interactive approach to research design. When engaging in the process of designing a qualitative study, we believe that the inquirer must be mindful of the interconnectedness of the parts and interactiveness of the design processes.

Several aspects of a qualitative project vary from study to study, and from initial discussions, we make preliminary decisions about what will be emphasized. For example, stances on the use of the literature vary widely, as does the emphasis on using an a priori theory. The literature may be fully reviewed and used to inform the questions actually asked, it may be reviewed late in the process of research, or it may be used solely to help document the importance of the research problem. Other options may also exist, but these possibilities point to the varied uses of literature in qualitative research. Similarly, the use of theory varies in qualitative research. For example, cultural theories form the basic building blocks of a good qualitative ethnography (LeCompte & Schensul, 1999), whereas in grounded theory, the theories are developed or generated during the process of research (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). In health science research, we find the use of a priori theories common practice and a key element that must be included in rigorous qualitative investigations (Barbour, 2000). Another consideration in qualitative research is the writing or reporting format for the qualitative project. It varies considerably from scientific-oriented approaches; to literary storytelling; and on to performances, such as theater, plays, or poems. There is no one standard or accepted structure as one typically finds in quantitative research.

Finally, we also consider background and interests and what each of us brings to research. Researchers have a personal history that situates them as inquirers. They also have an orientation to research and a sense of personal ethics and political stances that inform their research. Denzin and Lincoln (2011) refer to the researchers as a “multicultural subject” (p. 12) and view the history, traditions, and conceptions of self, ethics, and politics as a starting point for inquiry.

Phases in the Research Process With these preliminary considerations in place, we engage in an eight-phase research process summarized in Figure 3.2. We begin by acknowledging the broad assumptions that bring us to qualitative inquiry, and the interpretive lens that we will use. In addition, we bring a topic or a substantive area of investigation, and have reviewed the literature about the topic and can confidently say that a problem or issue exists that needs to be studied. This problem may be one in the real world, or it may be a deficiency or gap in the literature or past investigations on a topic, or both. Problems in qualitative research span the topics in the social and human sciences, and a hallmark of qualitative research today is the deep involvement in issues of gender, culture, and marginalized groups. The topics about which we write are emotion laden, close to people, and practical.

Figure 3.2 Phases in the Qualitative Research Process

To study these topics, we will ask open-ended research questions, wanting to listen to the participants we are studying and shape the questions after we “explore” by talking with a few individuals. We refrain from assuming the role of the expert researcher with the “best” questions. Our questions will change and become more refined during the process of research to reflect an increased understanding of the problem. Furthermore, we will collect a variety of sources of data, including information in the form of “words” or “images.” We tend to think in terms of four basic sources of qualitative information: interviews (i.e., data generated through direct interactions), observations (i.e., data generated through passive interactions), documents (i.e., data generated from existing materials), and artifacts (i.e., data generated from audio and visual methods). Certainly, new and emergent sources (e.g., social networking interactions) have challenged this traditional categorization. Unquestionably, the backbone of qualitative research is extensive collection of data, typically from multiple sources of information. Further, we collect data using these sources based on open-ended questions without much structure and by observing and collecting documents (and artifacts) without an agenda of what we hope to find. After organizing and storing data, we analyze them by carefully masking the names of respondents, and engage in the perplexing (and “lonely” if we are the sole researcher) exercise of trying to make sense of the data.

To engage in meaning-making of the data, we analyze the qualitative data working inductively from particulars to more general perspectives, whether these perspectives are called codes, categories, themes, or dimensions. We then work deductively to gather evidence to support the themes and the interpretations. One helpful way to see this process is to recognize it as working through multiple levels of abstraction, starting with the raw data and forming broader and broader categories. Recognizing the highly interrelated set of activities of data collection, analysis, and report writing, we intermingle these stages and find ourselves collecting data, analyzing another set of data, and beginning to write the qualitative report. For example, during a case study, we find ourselves engaging in the interconnectedness processes involved in interviewing, analyzing, and writing the case study— not distinct phases in the process. Also, as we write, we experiment with many forms of narrative, such as making metaphors and analogies, developing matrices and tables, and using visuals to convey simultaneously breaking down the data and reconfiguring them into new forms. Next, we might layer the analysis into increasing levels of abstractions from codes, to themes, to the interrelationship of themes, to larger conceptual models. We will (re)present these data, partly based on participants’ perspectives and partly based on my own interpretation, never clearly escaping a personal stamp on a study. In the end, we discuss the findings by

comparing my findings with my personal views, with extant literature, and with emerging models that seem to adequately convey the essence of the findings.

At some point we ask ourselves, “Did we (I) get the story ‘right’?” (Stake, 1995), knowing that there are no right stories, only multiple stories. Perhaps qualitative studies have no endings, only questions (Wolcott, 1994). We also seek to have the account resonate with the participants, to be an accurate reflection of what they said. So we engage in validation strategies, often multiple strategies, which include confirming or triangulating data from several sources, having our studies reviewed and corrected by the participants, and employing other researchers to review my procedures.

Elements in All Phases of the Research Throughout the slow process of collecting data and analyzing them, the narrative is being shaped—a narrative that assumes different forms from project to project. We tell a story that unfolds over time and, in some cases, present the study following the traditional approach to scientific research (i.e., problem, question, method, findings). Throughout the different forms, we find it important to talk about our background and experiences and how they have shaped our interpretation of the findings. This might be best described by letting the voices of participants speak and carry the story through dialogue, perhaps dialogue presented in Spanish with English subtitles.

Throughout all phases of the research process, we strive to be sensitive to ethical considerations. Different ethical considerations are especially important at different times during the research process—for example, as we negotiate entry to the field site of the research; involve participants in the study; gather personal, emotional data that reveal the details of life; and ask participants to give considerable time to the projects. Hatch (2002) does a good job of summarizing some of the major ethical issues that researchers need to anticipate and often address in their studies. Key among those is giving back to participants for their time and efforts in our projects —reciprocity, and we need to review how participants will benefit from our studies and how they will be protected from harm.

Most often our research is done within the context of a college or university setting where we need to provide evidence to institutional review boards or committees that our study design follows their guidelines for conducting ethical research. Thus, learning about and then engaging in thinking and writing about potential ethical issues specific to the study is an important component of a design process (Israel & Hay, 2006; Sieber & Tolich, 2013). Further, researchers must be prepared for addressing ethical issues as they arise during the research process. To reflect a necessary emphasis on research ethics, we devote the following section to introducing research ethics within qualitative studies.

Ethics in Qualitative Research During the process of planning and designing a qualitative study, researchers need to consider what ethical issues might surface during the study and to plan how these issues need to be addressed. A common misconception is that these issues only surface during data collection. They arise, however, during several phases of the research process, and they are ever expanding in scope as inquirers become more sensitive to the needs of participants, sites, stakeholders, and publishers of research. One way to examine these issues is to consider the catalogue of possibilities such as provided by Weis and Fine (2000). They ask us to consider ethical considerations involving our roles as insiders/outsiders to the participants; assess issues that we may be fearful of disclosing; establish supportive, respectful relationships without stereotyping and using labels that participants do not embrace; acknowledge whose voices will be represented in our final study; and write ourselves into the study by reflecting on who we are and the people we study. In addition, as summarized by Hatch (2002), we need to be sensitive to vulnerable populations, imbalanced power relations, and placing participants at risk.

Our preferred approach in thinking about ethical issues in qualitative research is to examine them as they apply to different phases of the research process. Important recent books provide useful insight into how they array by phases, such as found in writings by Lincoln (2009), Creswell (2014), Mertens and Ginsberg (2009), Ravitch and Mittenfelner Carl (2016), and the American Psychological Association (APA; 2010). As shown in Table 3.2, ethical issues in qualitative research can be described as occurring prior to conducting the study, at the beginning of the study, during data collection, in conducting data analysis, in reporting the data, and in publishing a study. In this table, we also present some possible solutions to the ethical issues so that these can be actively written into a research design or plan. This table should not be considered exhaustive but rather as a way of starting the conversation about different types of ethical issues that need addressing in qualitative research and will be further developed throughout the chapters.

Prior to conducting a study, it is necessary to gather college or university approval from the institutional review board for the study. The approval processes of many institutional review boards are guided by policies requiring evidence of awareness of relevant ethical issues for the study and plans for addressing ethical issues related to three principles: respect for persons, concern for welfare, and justice. Respect for persons encompasses the treatment of persons and their data involved in the research process and this means that we must provide evidence of measures for respecting the privacy of participants and ensuring the consent process is clearly communicated including the right of participants to withdraw from the study. Concern for welfare involves researchers ensuring adequate protection of participants, and this means we must provide evidence that we do not place participants at risk. Justice refers to the need to treat people fairly and equitably, and this means we must carefully consider recruitment and justifications for sampling strategies as well as site selection and criteria guiding site choice. Completion of the review by institutional review boards or committees is required prior to accessing the study site and participants and, in some cases, for access to funding. Equally important is to examine standards for ethical conduct of research available from professional organizations, such as the American Historical Association, the American Sociological Association, the International Communication Association, the American Evaluation Association, the Canadian Evaluation Society, the Australasian Evaluation Society, and the American Educational Research Association (Lincoln, 2009). Local permissions to gather data from individuals and sites also need to be obtained at an early stage in the research, and interested parties and gatekeepers can assist in their endeavor. Sites should not be chosen that have a vested interest in the outcomes of the study. Also, at this early stage, authorship should be negotiated among researchers involved in the qualitative study, if more than one individual undertakes the research. The APA (2010) has useful guidelines for negotiating authorship and how it might be accomplished.

Sources: Adapted from APA (2010); Creswell (2013, 2016); Lincoln (2009); Mertens and Ginsberg (2009).

Beginning the study involves initial contact with the site and with individuals. It is important to disclose the purpose of the study to the participants. This is often stated on an informed consent form completed for college or university institutional review board purposes. This form should indicate that participating in the study is voluntary and that it would not place the participants at undue risk. Special provisions are needed (e.g., child and parent consent forms) for sensitive populations. Further, at this stage, the researcher needs to anticipate any cultural, religious, gender, or other differences in the participants and the sites that need to be respected. Qualitative writings have made us aware of this respect, especially for indigenous populations (LaFrance & Crazy Bull, 2009). For example, as American Indian tribes take over the delivery of services to their members,

they have reclaimed their right to determine what research will be done and how it will be reported in a sensitive way to tribal cultures and charters.

We have also become more sensitive to potential issues that may arise in collecting data, especially through interviews and observations. Researchers need to seek permission to conduct research on-site and convey to gatekeepers or individuals in authority how their research will provide the least disruption to the activities at the site. The participants should not be deceived about the nature of the research and, in the process of providing data (e.g., through interviews, documents, and so forth), should be appraised on the general nature of the inquiry. We are more sensitive today about the nature of the interview process and how it creates a power imbalance through a hierarchical relationship often established between the researcher and the participant. This potential power imbalance needs to be respected, and building trust and avoiding leading questions help to remove some of this imbalance. Also, the simple act of collecting data may contribute to “using” the participants and the site for the personal gain of the researcher, and strategies such as reward might be used to create reciprocity with participants and sites.

In analyzing the data, certain ethical issues also surface. Because qualitative inquirers often spend considerable time at research sites, they may lose track of the need to present multiple perspectives and a complex picture of the central phenomenon. They may actually side with the participants on issues, and only disclose positive results that create a Pollyanna portrait of the issues. This “going native” may occur during the data collection process, and reporting multiple perspectives needs to be kept in mind for the final report. Also, the research results may unwittingly present a harmful picture of the participants or the site, and qualitative researchers need to be mindful of protecting the participants’ privacy through masking names and developing composite profiles or cases.

In recent APA (2010) standards on ethics, discussions report on authorship and the proper disclosure of information. For example, honesty—and how authors should not falsify authorship, the evidence provided in a report, the actual data, the findings, and the conclusions of a study—is stressed. Reports should also not disclose information that will potentially harm participants in the present or in the future. The form of report writing should communicate in clear, appropriate language for the intended audiences of the report. Finally, plagiarism should be avoided by knowing about the types of permissions needed to cite the works by others in a study.

Another area of emerging interest in the APA (2010) standards on ethics resides in the publication of a study. It is important to share information from a research study with participants and stakeholders. This may include sharing practical information, posting information on websites, and publishing in languages that can be understood by a wide audience. There is also concern today about multiple publications from the same research sources and the piecemeal division of studies into parts and their separate publication. Finally, publishers often ask authors to sign letters of compliance with ethical practices, disclose sources of funding, and to state that they do not have a conflict of interest in the results and publications of the studies.

The Design Structures of a Plan or Proposal Researchers are tasked with the responsibility of clearly outlining their research in a plan or a proposal. The audiences for these plans and proposals are varied from supervisory committee members to funding review panels. A review of final written products for qualitative research points to great diversity. No set format exists yet there exists some design elements for engaging your reader, and several writers suggest general topics to be included in a written plan or proposal for a qualitative study. In the following section, we describe six design elements that might make the study plan or proposal attractive to a reader.

Design Considerations Useful for Engaging Readers In many cases, it is advantageous for research to be distinctive. In our experience, benefits from such types of research have ranged from securing funding to publishing opportunities. The following list provides some ideas

for study elements to consider when thinking about your study design and these are further expanded in Creswell (2016).

Study a unique sample. Is there a sample or population that has not yet been studied? By studying an unusual group of people, researchers may gain new insights into well-established research areas. Assume an unconventional perspective. Are there angles or perspectives that may not be expected in your area of study? It might well be the reverse side (the shadow side) of what is expected. Observe an uncommon field site. Is an unusual group of people or an unusual location that could be accessed? It may be that access is now available in cases where it was not previously. Collect atypical forms of data. Are the data sources that are appropriate yet not typically expected in social science research (e.g., collect sounds, have participants take pictures)? As new media emerges (see Halfpenny & Procter, 2015), researchers have opportunities for contributing new methods. Present findings in an unusual way. Are there ways of presenting my findings that are influenced by the data I collect? There diverse options exist such as through the creation of analogies (see Wolcott, 2010) or maps or other types of figures and tables. Focus on a timely topic. Is there a topic warranting research that is drawing a lot of attention? When many individuals are discussing topics, often these topics are also being covered by the news media. In some cases, funding priorities may also shift toward those topics.

General Writing Structures Comparing across the differing formats of writing qualitative studies (e.g., Creswell, 2014; Marshall & Rossman, 2015; Ravitch & Mittenfelner Carl, 2016), we see common structures for guiding the writing process of a proposal. Next, we describe each of the six parts and highlight the topics where there might be variation due to the inherent nature of different perspectives adopted in qualitative studies. For each section, we provide examples that list the arguments to be advanced in a qualitative proposal (adapted from Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013). These structures and resources, in addition to the Essentials of a Qualitative Doctorate (Holloway & Brown, 2012), are especially helpful for the student who has never written a thesis or dissertation project. Greater details for composing each of the six parts of the proposal are addressed in subsequent chapters in this book.

1. Introduce the problem to be studied. The introduction generally includes three sections: statement of the problem, purpose of the study, and research questions. The sections within the study introduction may vary across studies adopting different perspectives; for example, whereas a separate section reviewing literature may be optional in a study adopting a constructivist/interpretivist perspective, the identification of a specific transformative issues being explored is expected in studies adopting a transformative perspective. Researchers may find the following questions useful for guiding their introductory arguments: What do readers need to better understand your topic? What do readers need to know about your topic? What do you propose to study?

2. Describe the procedures guiding the study. The description of the study procedures generally includes eight sections: philosophical assumptions or worldview, qualitative research approach used, role of the researcher, data collection procedures, data analysis procedures, strategies for validating findings, proposed narrative structure of the study, and anticipated ethical issues. Variation in how the procedures are described may occur across studies adopting different perspectives; for example, a collaborative form in data collection is emphasized in studies adopting a transformative perspective and trustworthiness is emphasized in place of what we have been calling validation. Researchers may find the following questions useful for guiding their procedural arguments: What is the setting, and who are the people you will study? What methods do you plan to use to collect data? How will you analyze the data? How will you validate your findings? What ethical issues will your study present?

3. Report the preliminary study findings (if available). The reporting of the preliminary study findings may be available if a pilot study was completed or may be omitted completely. Researchers may find the following question useful for guiding their findings arguments: What do preliminary results (if available) indicate about the practicability and value of the proposed study?

4. Outline the anticipated study implications. This section generally involves specifying the significance of the study. The descriptions of anticipated outcomes are expected to vary across studies adopting different perspectives; for example, whereas a study adopting a constructivist or interpretivist perspective may describe expected impacts, a study adopting a transformative perspective mentions or advocates for the anticipated changes that the research study will likely bring. Researchers may find the following question useful for guiding their implications arguments: What significance does the study intend to have?

5. List the references cited in the study. This section involves listing the references cited in the proposal. It is important that only references that have been cited within the text are included in this list and not those references that were simply consulted during the writing process.

6. Include essential documents as appendices. The focus and quantity of the appendices will differ by study and audience for the proposal. Most common is the inclusion of entry letters, methods protocols (e.g., interview questions, observation forms), and proposed timelines. Less common is the inclusion of informational documents such as a proposed budget and a summary of the proposed content of each chapter in the final study.

These six arguments represent the most important points to include in a qualitative proposal and, in our experience if adequately addressed and used as an organizing structure, create a well-written proposal. It is important to note that these structures speak only to designing a plan or proposal for a qualitative study. In addition to the topics of these proposal formats, the complete study will include additional data findings, interpretations, and a discussion of the overall results, limitations of the study, and future research needs.

Chapter Check-In

1. Do you see how authors incorporate the characteristics of qualitative research into their published studies? Select one of the qualitative articles presented in Appendices B through F. Begin with identifying each of the characteristics advanced in this chapter (summarized in Table 3.1) as they have been applied in the journal article. Note which characteristics are easy and which are more difficult to identify.

2. What structures describe the flow of activities from a published qualitative study? Select one of the articles in Appendices B through F. Begin with listing the activities described in the article. Then indicate the “larger ideas” using boxes or circles and the sequence of ideas using arrows. For example, one study may start with a discussion about the problem and then move on to a theoretical model and then on to the purpose, and so forth.

3. What ethical issues do you recognize, and what options are available for addressing? Choose one of the ethical issues that arise during the process of qualitative research from Table 3.2. Consider a situation that would give rise to this ethical issue within a research study you would like to conduct and then describe as many options as possible about how you might address it in the design of your study.

4. What design considerations can you use to begin designing your qualitative study plan or proposal? Consider which (one or more) of the design considerations for engaging readers fit your project and discuss how they relate to your study and then develop a general outline for how you might organize and present the topics in your own study.

Summary

In this chapter, we provided an overview of and introduction to qualitative research. We began with our definition of qualitative research as an approach to inquiry that begins with assumptions, an interpretive or theoretical lens, and the study of research problems exploring the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. Nine common characteristics for qualitative research were described, including collecting data in natural settings with a sensitivity to the people under study, using inductive and deductive analysis strategies to establish patterns or themes, and developing a complex description and interpretation of the problem that provides for the voices of participants and a reflexivity of the researchers. Recent introductory textbooks underscore the characteristics embedded in this definition. Given this definition, a qualitative approach is appropriate for exploring a research problem; when a complex, detailed understanding is needed; when the researcher wants to write in a literary, flexible style; and when the researcher seeks to understand the context or settings of participants. Qualitative research takes time and expertise as it involves ambitious data collection and analysis and results in extensive reports. Although qualitative research does not have firm guidelines, consensus exists as to the criteria for a good study: rigorous data collection and analysis; the use of a qualitative approach (e.g., narrative, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, case study); a single focus; a persuasive account; a reflection on the researcher’s own history, culture, personal experiences, and politics; and ethical practices.

The process of designing a qualitative study emerges during inquiry, but it generally follows the pattern of scientific research. It starts with broad assumptions central to qualitative inquiry, and an interpretive or theoretical lens and a topic of inquiry. After stating a research problem or issue about this topic, the inquirer asks several open-ended research questions, gathers multiple forms of data to answer these questions, and makes sense of the data by grouping information into codes, themes or categories, and larger dimensions. The final narrative the researcher composes will have diverse formats—from a scientific type of study to narrative stories.