CONCLUSIONES Y RECOMENDACIONES

According to Creswell (2009) qualitative procedures demonstrate a different approach to scholarly inquiry than methods of quantitative research. Qualitative inquiry employs different philosophical assumptions, strategies of inquiry and methods of data collection, analysis and interpretation. The qualitative paradigm has its roots in cultural anthropology and American sociology (Kirk and Miller, 1986). The tradition arose due to the fact that quantitative research methods were unable to fully describe human values, culture and relationships. Krasner (2000 p.70) states that the early philosophers ―argued that human phenomena could not be reduced to mathematical formulas‖. According to Speziale and Carpenter (2003), since early times human scientists have been concerned with describing the fundamental patterns of human thought and behaviour. Descartes‘ ideas were grounded in an objective reality and supported the idea that cause and effect could explain all things. Descartes view of science was hailed as the only approach to new knowledge. Kant is attributed with questioning the fundamental nature of reality and opened up the discussion about human rationality. According to Hamilton (1994), Kant proposed that perception was more than the act of observation and for him all reality was not explainable by cause and effect. He raised the issue that supported the notion that nature was not independent of thought or reason. Therefore, what was observed was not the only reality. The concept of scientific versus practical reason was derived from Kant‘s ideas. Kant‘s ideas were advanced to explore reality as it is perceived rather than an observational phenomenon only. Scientists questioned whether empiricism was the only way to gain knowledge. Philosophers such as Husserl furthered Kant‘s propositions, and eventually, the

80

German School of Philosophy supported and advanced the ideas about self, self- consciousness, reality and freedom. The early debates about the science and reality resulted in the foundations of the qualitative paradigm being established, a paradigm used by many social scientists use today (Speziale and Carpenter 2003). According to Denzin and Lincoln (1994), qualitative research offers the opportunity to focus on finding answers to questions centred on social experience, how it is created and how it gives meaning to human life. The intent of qualitative research is to understand a particular social situation, event, role group, or interaction (Locke, Spirduso and Silverman 1987). It is largely an investigative process where the researcher gradually makes sense of a social phenomenon by contrasting, comparing, replicating, cataloguing and classifying the object of study (Miles and Huberman 1984). Marshall and Rossman (1989) suggest that this entails the researcher entering the participants world and seeking their perspective and meanings.

4.3.3.1 Interviews

An interview is a research strategy that involves one person (the interviewer) asking questions of another person (the interviewee). The questions can be either closed ended or open ended or both. Interviews are an excellent data collection strategy because they facilitate one to one interaction between the researcher and the interviewees. Interviews provide an opportunity for researchers to learn about social life through the experience, language and perspective of those living it. Participants are given the opportunity to share their story, pass on their knowledge and provide their own perspective on a range of topics (Hesse-Biber and Leavy 2006). Boeije (2010) asserts that in order for the interview to be a success it is crucial that a number of factors be adhered to: (1) the questions fit the interviewee‘s frame of reference and the questions match the research topic exactly as it was introduced by the interviewer and to which the participant has agreed to participate; (2) the topic is of concern or interest to the

81

participant and the questions are posed in language that is understandable; and (3) the researcher creates an atmosphere of trust and openness by showing respect for what the participant has to say. Morse and Field (1996) believe that it is paramount that the interviewer accommodates to some degree the participants need to spend more time on certain issues, listens with interest, and does not interrupt the flow. Jumping from one question to another, irrespective of what has been before, is detrimental to the interview. An advantage of interviews is that they provide ample opportunity for interviewers to ask for explanations of vague answers or to provide clarification if a question is not clear (Teddlie and Tashakkori 2009). There are however disadvantages associated with face-to face interviews. For example, interviews are a costly method of data collection and are time consuming as the researcher may have to travel considerable distances to the geographical areas where the participants are based. In addition there is the risk that the researcher‘s presence may bias responses.

Since qualitative researchers are often looking for a true understanding of what is happening, the interviews are usually not entirely pre-structured in relation to the content, formulation, sequence and answers. Neither are they left entirely open. Rather, thorough preparation results in a list of topics and or questions to be asked. This type of interview is a ‗semi-structured‘ interview (Boeiji 2010). Face to face semi-structured interviews was the method of qualitative data collection used in the study. The rationale for choosing this method was to explore the area of enquiry from the participant‘s perspective by providing them with an opportunity to share their ideas and opinions. Thus allowing detailed and rich information to be collected.

4.3.4 Mixed Methods

The collection and combination of both quantitative and qualitative data in research has been influenced by several factors. Unquestionably, both quantitative and qualitative data are increasingly available for use in studying social science research

82

problems. As limitations exist with all methods of data collection, the use of multiple methods can neutralise or cancel out some of the disadvantages of certain methods. Furthermore, mixing qualitative and quantitative methods facilitates each complementing the other, allows for a more robust analysis and takes advantage of the strength of each (Creswell et al 2003; Miles and Huberman 1994; Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998; Ivankova, Creswell and Stick 2006). Therefore there is a vast consensus that mixing different types of methods can strengthen a study. In addition as social phenomena are so complex, different kinds of methods are required to best understand these complexities (Greene and Caracelli 1997). Mixed methods studies can access knowledge or insights unavailable to a quantitative study and a qualitative study undertaken independently (O‘Cathain, Murphy and Nicholl, 2007a). Mixed methods research is an attempt to legitimise the use of multiple approaches in answering the research question, rather than restricting or constraining the researchers‘ choice, hence why it is seen as an expansive and creative form of research and not a limiting form of research. It suggests that the researcher takes an eclectic approach in relation to method selection. What is most fundamental is the research question, that is, the research method should follow the research question in a manner that offers the best chance to obtain useful answers (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Gaining an understanding of the various strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research puts the researcher in a position to mix methods and to utilise the fundamental principles of mixed methods research (Johnson and Turner, 2003). Maxwell and Loomis (2003) argue that when mixing methods within a single study, the intention is not to homogenise the research methods but rather to synthesise and preserve the unique qualities and advantages of utilising both quantitative and qualitative methods. According to this principle, researchers should collect multiple data using different strategies, approaches and methods in a manner that the combination of methods is

83

likely to result in complementary results with no overlapping weaknesses. According to Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004) using this principle effectively is a justification for mixed methods research as the result will be superior to monomethods.

4.4 Research Paradigms: Theoretical Perspective and Philosophical