Researchers have observed that although the tendency is to associate the conceptions of respondents and what they say about the phenomenon, there are instances where participant‟s experience with a given phenomenon may not correspond with how a participant narrates his/her experience with the phenomenon. Participants will either emphasize one part or all aspects of a conception. As a result, a researcher does not
87
always obtain all what participants understand or experiences on a particular phenomenon from the interview (Bernard et al 1999: 216).
Scholars have also noted that it is not possible for researchers using phenomenographic approach to assume that they can entirely be unbiased while analyzing research data. They observe that an inherent relationship exists between the researcher and the phenomenon under study because a researcher first has to have a good understanding and knowledge of the phenomenon being analysed. It is only rational to think that the researchers‟ experiences and prior knowledge on the phenomenon will influence their data analysis and categorization (Webbs, 1997;
Stamouli and Huggard, 2007).
It is difficult to ascertain reliability and repeatability of phenomenographic studies.
Researchers like Marton (1986) as cited in Orgill (no date:par 23) admit that it is possible that two different researchers working individually would arrive at different categories of views of participants using the same data. However, once the categories have been determined, they need to be put in such a way that every researcher will be able to understand and use them.
The researcher could not employ phenomenography because it basically describes variations of perceptions and experiences of people about the phenomenon and is silent on causal explanations which were crucial in understanding and interpreting the effects of the absence of a national information policy on information services in Malawi.
88 2.6.3 Critical Realism
This study is anchored on critical realism, a theoretical framework developed by Roy Bhaskar in 1978. Critical realism is a paradigm that is used in understanding issues of ontology (theory of being) and epistemology (theory of knowledge) (McEvoy and Richards, 2003; Easton, 2010). The philosophical stand taken by critical realists is that there is reality (the world) out there independent of observers and that it is difficult to apprehend. Critical realists believe that there is need to define ontology first in order to understand epistemology. The argument advanced is that the world exists independent of the knowledge we have about it. Our knowledge about reality is fallible because the thinking we have about reality is at times correct and sometimes incorrect (Easton, 2010:119; McEvoy and Richards, 2003; Sobh and Perry, 2006; Marobela, 2006).
Over the years critical realism has emerged as a significant quantitative as well as qualitative research method applied in understanding a broader range of phenomena across different disciplines. Critical realism has been used for example in economics (Hodgson, 2004; Bisman, 2010), industrial marketing (Easton, 2010), nursing (McEvoy and Richards, 2003), and management (Marobela, 2006).
It has also been successfully applied in policy studies. For instance, Owen et al (2012) used the framework in a study that examined the way information policy is developed in the UK and the part information experts play in policy formulation. The study aimed at investigating the coordination and implementation of information policy across the UK government structure. The study particularly focused on policy relating to citizen‟s access to public sector information. The study was conducted in London. It employed document analysis and semi-structured interviews to collect data from 25 key
89
stakeholders. The study used interviews in order to understand individual views on how information policy is formulated and publicized. The study targeted five categories of respondents in most senior positions which included top civil servants directly dealing with policies, regulators and advisors on the relevant policies, academics and senior professionals in the field of information, analysts and campaigners. The study employed face to face interviews. It used purposive sampling to recruit participants. The study found that UK does not have a single overarching national information policy but a series of information policies addressing a diversity of information issues. The study further found that the responsibility of information policy making is spread over nine government departments dealing with 18 different information policy issues.
Coordination of information policy development was also a challenge because of the silo type of thinking in government departments. Information professionals have not drawn the attention of government to the value and benefits of information to government itself and the society. In addition, the information professionals have not exerted much influence on policy making (Owen et al 2012).
Atkinson and Lucas (2012) also used the theoretical framework to examine the way in which gender interacted with policy in adult social care work. The objectives of the study were to investigate definitions of care and their implications for the status of care work;
conceptions of the skills required in care work; and perceptions of pay using this as a proxy for job quality. The study used semi-structured interviews to collect data and interviewed 76 respondents comprising managers and care workers in care providers across England. The interviews were tape recorded, transcribed verbatim and imported into NVivo software to generate themes. The study used retroduction in order to provide
90
a deeper explanation of the phenomenon. The study found that policy has limited influence on the linking of skills to increased pay. Care workers perspectives are substantially informed by gender. Care work is depicted as a women‟s work that is nevertheless worthy of respect, challenging and complex resisting traditional categorization which render skills invisible and their work low in status (2012:17).