2. Formas de la democracia:
2.6. Democracia Participativa
Ensuring that the research was internally valid required checking for congruence between the data and interpretations of those data.76 It is important to note however, that this process occurred within an interpretivist paradigm, acknowledging multiple perspectives of reality and truth for interviewees, focus group participants and the researcher.77
Internal validity was achieved in this research by employing several qualitative design measures. The first is in acknowledging the researcher’s influence on the research, or as referred to by Goffman, the researcher’s ‘frame’.78 The second was keeping a research diary to reflect on the research process. The third was ensuring triangulation of the data and the fourth was checking for consistency in the coding of the data.
72 Positivism is a paradigm that sees reality as a single, fixed and measurable phenomenon, an assumption that underlies quantitative research, see Sharan B Merriam, ‘Introduction to Qualitative Research’ in Sharan B Merriam (ed), Qualitative Research in Practice: Examples for Discussion and Analysis (Jossey-Bass, 2002). 73 Golofshani, above n 71.
74 Gray, above n 3, 189-190.
75 In addition to the above approaches to quality and rigour are the checks of transferability, dependability,
confirmability and credibility suggested by Thomas M Skrtic, ‘Doing naturalistic research into educational organizations’ in Yvonna S Lincoln (ed) Organizational Theory and Inquiry (Sage, 1985); and see also authenticity as a measure of reliability in ibid.
76 Merriam, above n 72, 25. 77 Ibid.
78 Frames have been defined by Erving Goffman, Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience (Harvard University Press, 1974) 10, as the ‘principles of organisation which govern social events and the actor’s subjective involvement in them.’ Extra textual frames are those describing what you’ve learnt and the knowledge you bring as a researcher; intra textual are internal framing devices such as gender, and culture — who you are; inter textual are those that come from the discipline you are a part of and circum- textual relies on contextual interpretation — the environment in which information or in this case, research, is presented.
Reflexivity
Reflexivity by the researcher is important so that the results, project design and analysis of the data may be defended. Reflexivity refers to the process of challenging a researcher to explicitly examine how their research agenda and assumptions, location, previous experience and personal beliefs might influence the research.79 The practice of conducting and writing up qualitative research in a self-aware and self-critical way is important for ensuring internal validity in qualitative research. If a researcher understands and projects how his or her own background might influence the interpretation of information, then limitations of a qualitative methodology are reduced. One mechanism for identifying and exploring these assumptions is using a research diary. The research diary kept during this research contained memos on sampling, data collection methods, operationalisation of the research process and analysis strategies.80 These are typically the areas of research validity that are challengeable.81 The research diary and memos were used to evaluate and interrogate the approach taken to the interviews and focus groups in this research.82
Research diary
Except for the focus groups with forensic scientists and a small number of lawyer interviews, data collection took place over a six-month period during the first and into the second year of research. At the end of each day of empirical data collection, an audio research diary was recorded. Reflections were predominantly about research methods used, research questions, interview questions and how the collection process might shape the overall analysis.83 There is no single correct method for keeping a research diary84 and the purpose is to keep a record of the researcher’s thoughts and experiences and to develop a reflexive stance.85
The use of a digital voice recorder meant that feedback and reflection could be recorded immediately. The sincerity and overall tone of an interview is not obvious in the transcripts of recorded interviews and focus groups. The research diary was often used to provide the researcher’s reflections on lawyers’ mannerisms or the apparent sincerity or guardedness with which they gave information.
79 Ping-Chun Hsiung, ‘Teaching Reflexivity in Qualitative Interviewing’ (2008) 36 Teaching Sociology 211, 211. 80 See 4.6.1 for further discussion of research memos.
81 Walter, above n 64. 82 Hsiung, above n 79, 214.
83 Deemed an important aspect of reflexivity by Cynthia Hardy, Nelson Phillips and Stewart Clegg, ‘Reflexivity in organization and management theory’ (2001) 54(5)Human Relations 531.
84 David Silverman, Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook (Sage, 2000). 85 Miles and Huberman, above n 51.
The research diary was also used to process information from the interviews. Changes to the probing questions asked in association with research questions were made in response to the realisations recorded in the research diary. An example of how the research diary influenced later interviews is seen in the transcript of a diary entry:
Research Journal – 23rd June 2011
So this is my research journal for the 23rdof June, 2011 and it’s actually for yesterday. Yesterday I
interviewed two people from X. I was supposed to interview X at 10:00 but I’m now interviewing him tomorrow and/or later today depending on how he goes.
First of all, I spoke to X at one o’clock. Now I’ve realised quite a big difference between talking to solicitors and talking to barristers. So obviously, solicitors take care of matters in Magistrates’ Court a lot of the time or they instruct barristers in the Supreme Court. Their involvement in the actual presentation of evidence is quite limited and that meant that some of the questions weren’t particularly relevant. For example, how do you explain DNA in front of a jury and the influence that their knowledge has of limitations or of the process on presentation or explanations. It wasn’t relevant at all. So, in later interviews I suppose I need to be aware to tailor the questions to the interviewee.
X came into the interview fairly flustered and said “I don’t know how long this is going to be. I don’t know much about it. I haven’t been in a case where the DNA is contentious.” It was still interesting to have a chat to him and I think he, and probably others, have more experience than they realise. Not every lawyer is going to have a major and high profile case involving DNA evidence to fall back on. And we ended up still talking for almost an hour about, first, about X and the connections that he has there but also about DNA more generally. And as a criminal lawyer, he has had experience in criminal matters and does a lot of burglaries and other trials and spoke from his experience of being at X where he did murder trials. So, he started off the interview a little bit out of context. It wasn’t particularly relevant but then moved into what he thought of DNA, what confused him, where he thinks the issues are and how best to learn about it.
Now communication has been a huge thing through these interviews so far. So, the communication of the evidence itself and how problematic it is when an expert is quite hard to understand. He had had a lot of experience in forensics and said that “you know that has influenced his tendency to talk to the experts”. He still talks to the experts and he would also talk to people in the process as well.86
Questions to barristers and solicitors were adapted because of the research diary reflections on these interviews.
Triangulation and code consistency
The use of different research methods to test the same information is often referred to as triangulation.87 Methodological rigour was ensured by the use of the four triangulation techniques identified by Denzin.88 Methodology triangulation is the use of more than one data-gathering technique.89 This was achieved in this research by collecting data by interviews, focus groups and thematic analysis90 of secondary data sources, including current legal and scientific education programs, case law and the reviews of process discussed in Chapter 2. Data triangulation was achieved by gathering the same type of data across two jurisdictions (Victoria and the ACT) and with some overlap in the questions directed to those participating in interviews and focus groups.91 Investigator triangulation was achieved by having final codes checked by a third party92 to ensure understanding of description and consistency in the information attributed to those codes. This was also achieved during the development of codes with the assistance of supervisors, one of whom was also present during the ACT Supreme Court judges’ focus group. Finally, theory triangulation involves the use of more than one theoretical scheme in the interpretation of the data, and in this research, that was achieved by the interdisciplinary overlap between the legal and forensic science disciplines.