Frustrations of a Novice Interviewer

Methodological Memo

At this point in my academic career, I have engaged in quite a few interviews for various projects. While I would never have considered myself to be an excellent interviewer, I would hardly consider myself to be a novice. Unfortunately, when I interviewed Sydney that is how I felt. I was nervous, my voice cracked, and I felt as if I incessantly jumbled my questions. Furthermore, as I was nervous, I literally read most of my questions straight off the interview protocol. Doing such made me sound canned and artificial. Twice, I asked a follow-up question, and then realized it was close-ended the second it left my mouth. To somehow “fix” my mistake, I would add a pithy remark like, “in a few sentences” at the end. Once, I accidentally walked Sydney into the response for which I was looking. Thankfully, as I asked her to provide an example to elaborate on the issue, the exchange had a satisfactory outcome.

As I reflect on my first interview for a “real” qualitative project, I embrace this experience as one of great learning. Overall, the interview was great. There were a number of contributing factors that made it seem more unusual. Firstly, the interview was conducted over the phone. Though Sydney and I have not yet met in person, this was our first phone conversation as well. Secondly, as I am accustomed to providing non-verbal cues to demonstrate that I am listening, I struggled with how to do so over the phone. Hence, I almost “spoke over her” with my audible and much-too-often “mm hhhms.” I have to say, transcribing for me was a rather painful process—and it wasn’t the actual transcribing part I found difficult—it was listening to how stupid I sounded! 

Creswell Chapter 8 - Data Analysis

Reflective Reading Journal #2 (part 2)

In Chapter 8, Creswell covered the “basics” of qualitative data analysis:

• Prepare and organize the data
  
• Reduce (through coding and condensing) the data into a manageable set of themes
  
• Represent the data in figures, tables, or discussions
  

Most qualitative research centers on these basics. However, different researchers integrate various types of additional procedures.  For example, in terms of code identification and reduction to themes, Madison, Huberman and Miles, and Wolcott all note the need to identify meaningful patterns and themes.  However, Madison, the critical ethnographer, also recommends that the researcher identify a critical/theoretical point of view that is central to the analysis. Wolcott, on the other hand, highlights the need to form  description of the data that is relatable to the literature or culture.  

Creswell discussed the “spiral of analysis,” where he detailed the various iterations of qualitative research. He begins with the gathering of data, and moves into data management, the importance of writing, reading, reflecting, and memoing, then on to the art of describing, classifying, and interpreting, categorizing, and comparing, and finally, representing and visualizing the data.

Creswell gave brief descriptions of unique steps to data analysis for each of the five included research models. In addition to the “spiral,” each research method has distinctive characteristics of analysis.

For my qualitative project, I will be conducting my first case study. I will have to describe the case (campus climate for diversity) and its setting (West University). The setting description cannot be confined to location of where the case occurred – rather, it must include and integrate a much wider area, possibly transcending the boundaries of the community or campus. For example, in addition to describing the campus and the demographics of the school (faculty and staff), I will need to describe the school’s location, community demographics, etc. For case studies, some recommend that the researcher considers a collection of incidents, stories, etc, allowing the meanings to emerge. Others look at a single instance and draw meaning form that one experience (direct interpretation). For my project, I will consider a variety of stories, experiences, and locations. Regardless, patterns across different categories will be identified. Such patterns can be represented in tables, charts, categories, etc. I must also not forget the facts—for my study, I will need to identify the major players, the facts, the circumstances, the activities, and the locale. Eventually, I want to do multiple case studies to allow for cross-case analysis—this way, I will be able to develop naturalistic generalizations through my data analysis.

Lastly, Creswell described several computer programs that aid researchers in the pursuit of data analysis. NVivo is the only computer program that I have seen in action – while it can certainly do a great deal of very cool things (and it offers a fabulous way to store and organize data), I don’t think I, as a researcher, will utilize such software. To me, it seems as if such software tries to quantify qualitative data. Creswell mentioned that some researchers (not himself, J of course) will count the number of times certain codes are found in the data, etc, to make it seem more rigorous or scientific or, I don’t know, viable in a quantitative world. I believe in qualitative research – and yes, a computer program would certainly help me to organize, I do not think it is necessary to create quality qualitative work. Is that a double entendre? 

My Freshman Year...a Reflection

Reflective Reading Log #2

Written: 2/14/09

In My Freshman Year, Nathan (2005) curiously situates herself as a college freshman.  It is another village experience for a seasoned anthropologist who has spent considerable time overseas, studying cultures vastly different from her own.  In her description of this experience, she gives valuable insight to: 1) the practice of anthropology, 2) methodological intricacies and difficulties, and 3) the American college.  As a middle aged female, she begins with what she calls a “delicate balancing act between truth and fiction” (p. 6).  This is a key question for the anthropologist, but comes to fore when the research site is actually your home. 

            The research is sound and the writing is clever.  It seems whimsical to enter college life as a freshman, but Nathan provides insightful comparisons to her own overseas experiences and even those of renowned researchers like Clifford Geertz.  She describes entry into the setting through getting in trouble, playing sports, and living in the dorms.  In the midst of intriguing descriptions, she offers sound methodological realities and philosophical foundations for this kind of research:

One can never really “go native” or expect that one’s own experience is indicative of the experience of others born in the culture.  At the same time, it is the experience of living village life that offers insight and vantage point needed to ask relevant questions and understand the context of the answers given.

While Nathan include national statistics for purposes of comparison, she reveals the brilliance and depth of anthropological research that cannot be captured through quantitative survey data.  Although ethnographic methods are often thought to be less generalizable, this study intimately connects with the American college phenomena and provides insight into the experience.

            Ranging from mapping physical spaces, to noting advertisements like “get involved” and rape and sexual assault methods, Nathan adequately paints a picture of the messages being communicated and then how they are received by the students.  She is able to uncover “underlying values” expressed by the students through dorm decorations, common images, and language use. 

            In terms of insight, Nathan pinpoints that the real experience of college life, “was in the variation—in the sense that it was also considered normal to stay up past 2 AM or to awaken after noon” (p. 35).  Her description for the university is “overoptioned” and her focus on community in Chapter 3 reveals the paradoxical desire and resistance to community and the value of individualism, spontaneity, and choice.  Noting that some university events geared at community fail and that many dorm lounges are empty, Nathan unveils that community, for many students, means a network of close personal friends—an ego-centric social group of students with intense reciprocity.  Individualism, community, networks, and reciprocity are difficult to define, understand, and research.  However, five months in a university cafeteria monitoring that pattern of traffic and eating groups has produced research valuable to students, faculty, administrators and other researchers.   

Notes on Five Methods of Qualitative Research

Methodological Memo #1 

Written 1/14/09

Narrative: studying a single life or experience, or a small group

•            Challenges: need a clear understanding of context, know your own personal biases as it impacts your ability to retell the story

•            Why is a narrative important? It may be difficult to write on the doctoral level. These should not be conducted as a first study.

Phenomenological: study a shared experience, moment, or epiphany 

•            Event does not have to be spectacular – in fact, many like to study a phenomena that is mundane (a long line at Starbucks, etc)

•            Must put aside own experiences and biases

•            Challenges: it is impossible for the researcher to separate themselves from the text, their own biases, etc

•            Alex does these, while some consider his to be more narrative in nature

Grounded Theory: Review the literature, interview participants, and see what emerges

•            If there is a gap in the literature, grounded theory is used

•            Finding a voice for the voiceless

•            Zigzag motion of gathering research, analyzing, going back to the literature, checking and rechecking, getting more data

•            Saturation: when the interviewees start to say the same thing

•            Challenges: difficulty of determining when saturation is reached, identifying a theory

•            Systematic approach to research

Ethnography: the study of culture

•            Uses observation instead of interviews, looks at shared patterns, life histories, etc

•            Researcher immerses themselves in the culture, studying the Other, understanding culture, finding a gatekeeper into the culture

•            Social justice oriented

•            Fieldwork

•            Reciprocity is important – the researcher has a voice, but there is a certain amount of respect for the Other

•            This should never be a colonial approach

•            Emic: view of the participant

•            Etic: the researcher’s interpretation of the views

•            Challenges: time, how does one really understand another culture?  

Case study: an exploration of a “bounded system” or “case” over time

•            Does it have to be about an extreme case or about something spectacular? Yes, but not every time.

•            Challenges: researcher must identify the cases, should one do single or multiple case studies?

Creswell Chapter 5...a review of 5 different studies

Reflective Reading Log #1

Written: 1/28/09

Through detailed description of 5 different studies, Creswell provided further clarification for different methods of qualitative research.

A Narrative-Biographical Study: Angrosino tells the life-story of Vonnie Lee, a man with mental retardation and a colorful criminal record. Vonnie Lee, currently transitioning out of a rehabilitation center called Opportunity House into a sort of employment half-way house. Presented through the eyes of Angrosino, Vonnie Lee tells his life story around and through complex descriptions of the city’s public transportation system. Through his 1.5 hour bus route to work, Vonnie Lee finds stability and empowerment. As a narrative-biographical study, the author tells the story of a single individual, reconstructs conversations and stories into a “life experience,” tells of the subjects’ “epiphany” (the bus route, in Vonnie Lee’s case), describes the surrounding context of the epiphany, and acknowledges his own presence in the study.

A Phenomenological Study: The authors studied 58 men and women with AIDS. Through an exploration of the patient’s experiences and cognitive representations of their disease, the authors attempted to understand how the patient’s emotional response to the disease could lead to improved therapy and quality of life. The authors systematically analyzed the data (which included multiple interviews and actual drawings that represented some of the patient’s image of their disease) which led to 11 themes, created exhaustive descriptions of the data, and described the unique cultural phenomenon of how individuals experience AIDS. While reading the studies, this one seemed the least clear. It was not until I completed the chapter that I felt more comfortable with the difference between this method and ethnography – initially, they seemed pretty similar. They certainly bear some similarities, but now I recognize the differences.

A Grounded Theory Study: In response to two open-ended questions, 11 women who were victims of childhood sexual abuse spoke of their experiences and how they have survived. With the sensitive data from interviews and focus groups, the authors formed categories of information and systematically related them in a visual model. The visual model depicted the two phenomena (or theory) that emerged, in terms of women’s coping strategies: keeping from being overwhelmed by threatening and dangerous feelings, and managing helplessness, powerlessness, and lack of control.

An Ethnographic Study: The author studied the culture-sharing group involved in the straight edge (sXe) movement, a punk rock inspired movement to abstain from drug and alcohol usage and casual sex. The author interviewed 28 people, attended 250 punk rock concerts, and participated in the movement for 14 years in order to describe the core values and beliefs of the unique subculture. He described the group, explored five themes about the subculture, and ended the study with a broad picture about how the subculture existed. From the perspective of a critical ethnographer, the author described how the complex group resisted the dominant culture through a variety of multilayered and transformative qualities found within group members.

A Case Study: The authors described how a campus reacted to a situation where a student with a gun attempted to shoot students. Through analysis of interviews, observations, and detailed (and thick!) descriptions of the events, experiences, and responses surrounding event, the authors saw several themes (denial, fear, safety, campus planning, etc.) and two overarching responses (organizational and psycho-social) emerge. They broadly interpreted the situation and identified the problem, the context, the issues, and the “lessons learned.” Finally, they formed questions to help the university in its response-planning for future experiences of campus violence.

I appreciated the individual studies, as they helped me to envision both the varied intricacies and the similarities between each type. I also liked Creswell’s figure that visually represented the different approaches of foci in each case – that helped to further clarify the differences. I am excited about the upcoming research project – where I actually get to utilize one of these methods of research!

If I had to select my “favorite” research method, I would waiver between ethnography and grounded theory. As a cultural study, I like that ethnographies describe and explain the particular experience of a group of people, and they are often connected with an issue of social justice. However, I love the concept of allowing theory to emerge from the data, as such in grounded theory. Here, it seems as if you are giving a voice to an experience that was previously untold or undocumented. Essentially, I am eager for my research to mean something…