research
Positivists often raise the concerns for reliability in qualitative research, due to the researcher’s direct participation in the fieldwork (Alm, 1991; Kirk & Miller, 1986). To address the reliability concerns of the inquiry, Arksey and Knight (1999) suggest providing evidence that the interview accounts are a fair representation of the participants’ accounts. Hence, participants’ verifications were carried out to enhance the credibility (validity) of the research (Bauer & Aarts, 2000; Patton, 2002) and to ensure that the participants’ accounts were correctly understood and interpreted by the researcher. A common comment received from the participants was that the transcription adequately reflects their account, with only five requesting amendments, due to confidential information.
Reliability and validity are common traditional maxims used in mainstream positivistic research, based on the assumptions that the phenomenon studied is regular and
87 unchanging (Lawrence, 2006; Shadish, 1995). This, however, is unattainable for the present study, as the views of the ethnic operators are changeable, contextual, and situational, which is common for qualitative research (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Guba, 1990). Instead of reliability and validity, qualitative researchers encourage field researchers to aim for and ensure that their research is credible, authentic, and has plausibility, criticality and trustworthy values (Baxter & Chua, 2008; Golden-Biddle & Locke, 1993; McKinnon, 1988; Patton, 2002). In-depth description of the duration of the fieldwork and the types of participants interviewed could assist in providing credibility and authenticity to the research (Baxter & Chua, 2008).
Hall and Hall (2004) suggest that the depth and transparency of the research design and process be explained to increase the trustworthiness of the research. Audit trails detailing the design processes, field notes and analysis enable readers to form their own conclusions based on their own social constructions (Patton, 2002), and to evaluate the plausibility of the researcher’s thoughts and actions. The researcher for this study is not attempting to convince readers by claiming that there is one version of reality but rather that there are multiple versions of it (Mason, 1996). Hence detailed collection, sampling and analysis have been provided to facilitate the trustworthiness of the research. Baxter and Chua (2008) also suggest providing implications of the findings and suggestions for future research as a means to achieve criticality values and to encourage readers to envision new research possibilities. Details of implications and suggestions for future research from this research are set out in Chapter 9.
Other tactics used to overcome the threats to validity and reliability “is to use probing” (McKinnon, 1988, p.52). Probing has been used in this research with the three groups of participants for several reasons. First, it enables the researcher to ask the “why” and the “what happened” questions. Second, it allows the researcher to gather contextual data from the participants. Third, it allows participants to clarify their views so that assumptions are not made by the researcher. Fourth, it helps to keep the researcher’s own biases at bay (McKinnon, 1988).
Arksey and Knight (1999) also suggest triangulation and providing “thick description” to further achieve trustworthiness and credibility in qualitative research. Triangulation with the use of multiple perspectives from business experts and tax practitioners, as discussed above in section 5.6.4, was adopted to not only add to the credibility of the findings, but also to corroborate, refute or enhance further understanding of ethnicity
88 and tax compliance (Lawrence, 2006). Thick descriptions are an important component of qualitative research in terms of achieving trustworthiness of the data and forming part of the findings (Patton, 2002; Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Thick descriptions are included in the research findings discussed in Chapters 6 to 8.
5.9
Summary
This chapter provides justification for choosing the qualitative approach and the constructivist-interpretative paradigm for the current study. The ontological roots, epistemology and methodology were discussed. Historically, most SME tax research has been qualitative in nature, due to the sensitivity of the topic as well as the generally poor response rates from surveys, and even lower response rates for ethnic SME surveys. More importantly, the rationale for choosing the qualitative approach is to gain some understanding of how ethnicities might affect SME operators’ tax compliance practices and perceptions. The understanding and meaning-making by the ethnic operators regarding tax compliance is considered more important than determining the causal factors or correlation between tax compliance factors.
Reasons for choosing the face-to-face interview-based approach involved accessing the collectivistic ethnic groups. Certain measures were undertaken to address the reliability and validity concerns in qualitative research. These measures include triangulation, using informant and multiple perspectives, providing a detailed audit trail of the research process and analysis, participants’ verifications, and providing “thick description” of the participants’ accounts.
The diversity of the participants allowed the findings to be a “multi-vocal, multi- industry, multi-ethnic, multi-size” presentation of ethnic SME operators’ tax compliance behaviours and perceptions. The independent accounts given by tax practitioners corroborate the record keeping practices and tax payment histories of ethnic operators. In addition, business experts were able to tell of their own experiences with SME operators which added to the cultural evidence on tax compliance in relation to demands from extended families, churches and communities. Furthermore, this study aims to provide a holistic view of how tax compliance may be influenced by cultural values which is shown in the findings chapters from Chapter 6 to 8.
89