Resumen de la información contenida en los análisis

This study undertakes a qualitative field study strategy, and data is sourced from two different data collection methods, participant interviews and observation, as they assist to explore and to understand the research questions, therefore, these two data gathering methods are the most feasible and suitable for this study. This sub-section provides an overview of selected data generation methods – semi-structured interviews and observation of participants – and justifies the rationale behind considering it.

3.7.1 Interviews

The term ‘interview’ in this research refers to a special type of conversation between two people (the researcher and a single participant), in which the researcher is interested in gathering information from a participant on a topic of research. (Oates, 2006). There are generally three types of interview: structured, unstructured and semi-structured (Oates 2006, p. 187). Structured interviews are designed to ask participants a fixed set of questions for data gathering, whereas in unstructured interviews participants are in control of the interview process as the process aims to allow participants to develop ideas and lead the conversation (Oates, 2006). This study has an exploratory nature and semi- structured interviews are most suitable as this allows the researcher to conduct interviews around the guidelines with questions and themes to explore the research questions in more detail (Silverman, 2006), but at the same time the semi-structure form of the interview allows both researcher and participant to follow up any interesting ideas that arise from

78

the conversation (Flick, 2006). The focus of the interview is chosen by the researcher and the objective is to record and understand the participant’s point of view (Oates, 2006). During semi-structured interviews, open-ended questions suggested by the interviewer are used, and usually some questions arise naturally during the interview depending on the response to the questions (Oates, 2006).

The interview technique allows personal interaction between the researcher and the participant in which the researcher is able to record the moods, emotional responses or other social nuances of the participants for a richer description to be gathered (Oates, 2006). For example, if a particularly interesting issue or example is brought into the discussion by the participanst, the researcher may then follow this up and ask for more details. The semi-structured interview is known to increase the likelihood of capturing interpretations and constructed reality from an individual point of view (Oates, 2006). However, Miles and Huberman (1994) are identified that interviews also have limitations. For example, participants might steer the conversation towards what the researcher wants to hear. This bias is linked to the direct face-to-face interview setting where both parties (researcher and participant) naturally aim to build a rapport during the process. Reserchres are adviced to conduct follow up interviews with specific cases to reduces the biases. (Miles and Huberman, 1994).

There are two ways of recording interview responses: taking notes during interviews or tape-recording the conversation process to be transcribed after the interview sessions(Oates, 2006). Both of these methods have disadvantages and the researchers’choice of recording is based on personal preferences (Silverman, 2013). Taking notes during the interviews could place an uneasy divide between the interviewer and the interviewee, and a loss of concentration or attention. On the other hand, tape- recording the conversation is certainly the most effective approach, which allows the researcher to transcribe the interview with attention to detail, however, this could also create an uneasy divide between the participant and researcher as the idea of tape- recording their views and opinions could be considered risky and thus participants may not be completely honest or open about their feelings (Oates, 2006). This study will use both methods of recording interviews, depending on participants' preferences.

In order to better track changes in usage behaviours over time, follow-up interviews and observations were conducted (Miles and huberman, 1994; Oates, 2006) with participants

79

when it was required (only with those who agreed to participate in two phases of the study). Most interviews were tape-recorded with the permission of the respondents, however, a few participants preferred not to be tape-recorded. Interviews were conducted in Farsi and English, depending on the participants' preferences and were translated and transcribed thereafter. The interview guide was provided to participants before the interview date, describing the research and the interview process along with the interview questions. The participants were assured of anonymity as part of their consent to participate in the research. Descriptions of the participants are therefore generic and unspecific, so that their identity is not revealed.

3.7.2 Observations

The observation of participants in a field study is essential and beneficial for many reasons. Oates (2006) has identified two general types of observation: a) participants are not aware of being observed by the researcher (covert observation) and b) participants are aware that they are being observed by the researcher (overt observation). This study benefits from the overt observation because of the ethical and moral standpoint; it is not acceptable to watch participants’ Facebook interactions for research purposes, through covert observation.

However, Miles and Huberman discussed the applicability of bias in the process of observation as “‘A’ the effects of the researcher on the case, and ‘B’ the effects of the case on the researcher.” (Miles and Huberman 1994, p. 265). Triangulation is known as an effective way of managing the biases (Miles and Huberman 1994) in field study research. The triangulation process is based on the use of independent measures to evaluate the situation by the researcher. One way, for example, is to use different data sources for the data gathering process (Miles and Huberman 1994; Oates 2006). Therefore, this study benefits from triangulation by drawing on semi-structured interviews and partcipants observation.

Another technique for observation is identified as systematic observation (also referred to as structured observation) which involves using a predetermined plan to observe preselected objects or events (Oates, 2006). This approach can generate in-depth data and provide perspectives and views that are not available through other forms of observation. This study benefits from the systematic observation of participants, as the research aims

80

to observe the technical privacy settings application of the profile page, and this process is demonstrated by the participants to the researcher. Therefore, both overt and systematic observation techniques are applicable in the process. In this study, the researcher explores the field with the reaserch subject. The observation process takes place through the demonstration of profile page by the participant, therefore, it helps to limit the possible observation bias. This methodology was developed after the researcher faced many difficulties to recruite and conduct observation with Iranian participants (more details in follow up section). It was evidednt that the application of similar methods from SNSs studies in the westen context is not suitable for the participants in this study. However, this observation method can be applied to studies of SNSs in other countries. It is ethical in comparison to other observations methods in the SNSs field and reduces the bias from participants self reports from interviews and surveys as well as reduces the bias from the researcher, since the participant and researcher are both colaborartiong in collection observation of data.

The data collected from interviews are much more in-depth, the ability to follow up on points and flexibility in the questioning style allow the interviewer to bring out related issues. Although interviews conducted over the telephone or through video conferencing will still facilitate these advantages, face-to-face interviews also add the possibility of reading facial expressions and body language. In the case of participants in this study, all interviews were conducted in face-to-face settings, apart from a few follow-up discussions, which were very short and conducted for clarification on specific matters that were mentioned during the face-to-face interviews, therefore they were conducted over the phone.

To sum up, in this research multiple data collection techniques (interviews and observations) were employed. Interviews allow for the collection of in-depth data, but are difficult to implement with a large number of research participants (Swanborn, 2010). Observational techniques are good for examining specific situations (Oates, 2006). Although each technique uses a distinct approach and may produce different kinds of data, each is applied to the same research question. This can facilitate the gathering of multiple perspectives on the same issues. It may be the case that one technique reveals something that another technique would not, or perhaps one technique may corroborate or disprove the findings of another technique (Oates, 2006). It was therefore hoped that

81

the interviews would provide depth, while observation of participant’s specific activities would then be used to confirm or disprove the findings of the study.

As described earlier in chapter two, the majority of literature reporting on empirical research in SNSs consists of studies revolving around quantitative data. A significantly smaller amount of research has involved the use of qualitative data, or a mixture of both qualitative and quantitative methods. Upon analysis of the literature, it is also evident that few studies have practised methodological pluralism or attempted to achieve triangulation of data. It is therefore hoped that this study will bring new insights into the potential use of more varied research methods in the SNSs literature. Next sub section, identifies the criterias for evaluation of the interpretive field study.