Marco estratigráfico y ambientes de depósito

In order to pursue the aims of the study, and due to the limited research in this area, it was paramount that the voices of both children and adult participants were valued and heard, promoting a partnership approach through an interactive dialogue with participants (Berg, 1998; Mudaly & Goddard, 2009; Warr, 2004). Especially as the research aimed to involve children, qualitative inquiry can facilitate children sharing their definitions and interpretation of events, as they tell their personal accounts in their own voice (Mudaly & Goddard, 2009). In light of the limited yet growing body of qualitative DVA research with regard to interventions for children, I designed this qualitative study to be exploratory. Qualitative research emphasises process and meaning, capturing in-depth experiences in order to understand complex situations

99

(Reid, 1996), and emphasising the meaning and richness of qualitative data rather than its replication (Lombard, 2015).

4.5.2 Semi- structured interviews

Interviewing is the most commonly used qualitative method of data collection (King & Horrocks, 2010), focusing on participants’ personal accounts to illuminate meaning (Legard et al., 2003). Interviews have increasingly been used to explore the experiences of children participating in DVA interventions (Callaghan & Alexander, 2015; Cater, 2014; Howarth et al., 2016). I decided to conduct semi-structured interviews with participants in order to facilitate a flexible approach to interviewing without being too rigid. The semi-structured approach enabled me to invite participants to discuss specific topics whilst not restricting them in the issues they chose to discuss. Furthermore, the semi-structured nature of the interviews provided some structure, which helped in facilitating cross-case comparability between participants’ accounts (Bryman, 2016).

Prior to any data collection, I prepared an interview guide (see Appendix 7) which provided some topic areas that could be explored for each participant group (children, parents and intervention providers), such as the purpose of the intervention, the perceived impact of the intervention and how participants viewed it, and their personal experiences of being involved in the intervention. These initial interview guides were designed to invite participants to share some information about themselves, such as their hobbies and interests, to ‘ease’ them into the interview. Beginning the interview by asking broad questions that focused on the present aimed to encourage a non-threatening opening (Kirk, 2007). When closing the interviews, the final questions aimed to provide some focus for participants with regard to their current situations, helping participants to look ahead to what they hoped for in the future, with the aim that the interview would end on a positive note. In relation to the interviews with children, the flexible interview style facilitated the adoption of child-specific approaches which invited children to engage in other activities during the interviews, such as using crayons to draw or interacting with toys (Cappello, 2005; Doverborg & Pramling Samuelsson, 2003 as cited in Einarsdottir, Dockett, & Perry, 2009; Parkinson, 2001). Follow-up interviews with participants enabled opportunities for participants to further share and elaborate their experiences, and for me to present follow-up questions. I did not intend to restrict the interviews to only asking the specific questions that were included in the interview guides, nor rigidly adhering to the order in which the questions were asked. Rather, the

100

interview guides provided me with topic areas that could be explored and I encouraged participants to discuss issues that held particular interest to them.

Consistent with qualitative research principles, I viewed the interview guides as part of an iterative process which required me to be responsive over the course of data collection. Thus, the initial interview guides that I developed were not intended to be the only versions that I used. I used the initial interview guides flexibly and this was fundamental to being responsive and following-up new leads of enquiry with participants, and seeking clarification.

I developed the interview guides whilst I collected data and began analysing the interviews. Adjustments to the initial interview guides were made in light of interviewing the three distinct participant groups. As there were multiple voices in the study and the time points at which participants were interviewed varied, I was able to refine my questions over the course of the study. One example of this was how I asked intervention providers to share their experiences about how they viewed specific intervention activities, but the development of these questions had been informed through the interviews with the children when they shared their views of certain intervention activities. Another example was in relation to the parents’ interviews, whereby my enquiry about parental engagement in the interventions arose from concerns about parental engagement expressed by providers. As a result I asked parents about the factors which affected their engagement in the intervention and in particular their views about the parent sessions. These conversations with parents then informed questions I followed up with intervention providers in subsequent interviews. Thus the questions were refined over time as data were generated and analysed.

4.5.2.1 Note taking

Taking notes during interviews served the purpose of recording helpful prompts in the context of the interview. If participants mentioned something in the interviews that I wanted to follow-up, I made brief notes in order to remind myself (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). Where possible, the notes also included observations about participants’ body language and facial expressions, which I subsequently documented in interview transcripts to facilitate data analysis.

4.5.2.2 Recording the interviews

To record the interviews, I used a pocket-sized, electronic dictaphone, which was easily portable and posed minimal visual distraction. Although I ensured that the dictaphone was fully charged before each interview, I brought the dictaphone charger along to the interview in case the battery drained unexpectedly. The audio recording was

101

deleted from the dictaphone once the interview was fully transcribed. I presented participants with the dictaphone so they were aware of how I was recording the interview. Although one child was particularly excited that her interview would be recorded, another child showed some intial reluctance. However, this reluctance receded once I had assured her that it would only be myself who would listen to the recording, and that it would be deleted once the interview was transcribed.