TERAPIA FOTODINÁMICA 65

Research strategies can be quantitative or qualitative. These research strategies differ in their choice of a deductive or an inductive approach, their epistemology and their ontology. Table 4.1 summarises the arguments made below. My discussion on general matters in this chapter is based upon Bryman (2012), Bryman and Bell (2013), Grover et al. (2000) and Pallant (2103).

95

Table 4.1 Differences between quantitative and qualitative research

Orientation Quantitative Qualitative

Deductive/inductive orientation

Which comes first: theory and findings?

Deductive research method Theory → findings

Inductive research method Findings → theory

Epistemological orientation. Can scientific and social phenomena be studied in the same way?

Positivism: Scientific phenomena and people can be studied in the same way.

Interpretivism: Scientific phenomena and people cannot be studied in the same way. People’s behaviour must be understood through their own eyes.

Ontological orientation What is real and what is not real?

Objectivism: Social

phenomena are real; they are separate from people.

Constructionism: Social phenomena do not exist independently of people. Instead social phenomena are continuous social interactions between people.

Quantitative research

In quantitative research the principal orientation to the role of theory in research is deductive. Quantitative researchers take current theory and knowledge about a field of research and from these derive research hypotheses. Researchers then go into the field to collect the relevant data. After collecting their data the researchers then compare their data with their research hypotheses and decide whether they are supported or not. The sequence for quantitative research is Theory → Findings. However, after analysing their findings, researchers then decide how their supported research hypotheses affect the current state of

96 theory. While the previous steps were deductive, this step is inductive. Researchers infer the implications of their study findings for current theory.

The epistemological orientation in quantitative research is positivist. A positivist orientation assumes that only research phenomena that can be measured can be properly described as knowledge. Quantitative researchers believe that social science research should imitate natural science research. Thus, organizations and people can be studied the same way as a hydrogen atom. This leads to the belief that research can be conducted in a way that is value free.

The ontological orientation in quantitative research is objectivism. In quantitative research, social phenomena are seen as objects, as having an existence independent of people. This is objectivism, a position that asserts that social phenomena have an objective existence independent of social actors.

The main type of quantitative research is the questionnaire survey. Other kinds are contents analysis and secondary analysis of data. I describe questionnaire surveys in this chapter as I adopted this method in my study. Questionnaire surveys (and other quantitative methods) collect data that can be subject to statistical analysis enabling researchers to draw inferences from the data they have obtained about their samples to the populations concerned i.e. researchers can make generalisations about their data. However, researchers can only properly draw inferences from probability samples, not from non-probability samples.

Questionnaires can have closed-answer or open-answer questions. In closed-answer questions the respondents choose from a list of answers or add one word answers (for example, place of

97 birth). In open-answer questions the respondents write their answers (generally more than one word) in a blank box set out in the questionnaire. Open-answer questions collect qualitative data and researchers afterwards devise a coding frame for the open answers and then code each answer. The main disadvantage of these questions is that coding the answers is time- consuming.

Researchers designing questionnaires need to take care as, once the questionnaires are distributed, they cannot change their minds about what questions they want to ask or how they want to ask them. Researchers need to be aware that they will not be present when the respondents who are filling in the questionnaire find a question difficult to answer. Researchers need follow a number of basic rules, such as avoiding leading questions, double- barrelled questions, over-lapping answer categories, non-exhaustive answer categories and sexist/racist/disablist language. Researchers must also be aware of respondent fatigue. Specifically, in open-answer questions, researchers also need to be aware that they cannot probe respondents’ answers and that respondents may be reluctant to write answers.

A major difficulty for self-completion questionnaire surveys is the generally lower response rates than for interviews. A low response rate indicates that the survey findings might be biased as those respondents who fill in the questionnaire might differ in specific and significant ways from those who did not. Researchers can take a number of steps to reduce non-response such as giving a questionnaire an attractive appearance, and adding an introduction letter explaining the purpose of the research and assuring respondents of the confidentiality of their answers. Most importantly, researchers should pilot their questionnaires before administering it.

98 The response rate is calculated as follows:

Number of usable questionnaires x100 Total number of questionnaires distributed

Mangione (1996) classified the acceptability of survey response rates: at one end of the scale, over 85 percent is ‘Excellent’ while, at the other end, less than 50 percent is ‘Not acceptable’.

Qualitative research

In qualitative research the principal orientation to the role of theory in research is inductive. In such research concepts and theories emerge from the data. Thus, researchers first collect data and then draw generalisations from it leading to the development of theory. The new theory is an outcome of the research. Thus, the sequence for quantitative research is Findings → Theory. However, qualitative methods are often criticised for their lack of generalisability to other groups or social settings.

In qualitative research the epistemological orientation is interpretivism. In quantitative research social phenomenon are seen as fundamentally different from natural science. Qualitative researchers seek to understand human behaviour: to see through the eyes of the people they study. Qualitative researchers provide much more description of their findings than do quantitative researchers: they show how and, very importantly, why people behave in a certain way. Qualitative data is usually analysed in an iterative manner, with researchers going back and forth between data and the development of themes.

99 In qualitative research the ontological orientation is constructionism. In qualitative research, researchers do not see social phenomena as having an existence independent of social actors/people. Qualitative researchers see social phenomena as being produced by social actors and as continually being made by social actors.

There area number of qualitative research methods such as participant observation, focus groups and qualitative interviewing, I describe the last two of these as I used these methods in my study.

The focus group method is a form of group interview where there are several participants and a moderator (usually the researcher), where there is an emphasis on a fairly tightly defined topic, and where there is an emphasis on group interaction and the group’s combined construction of meaning. Focus groups can meet once or on a number of occasions. Researchers usually choose to use between 12 and 15 focus groups. However, if the researcher is combining focus groups with other research methods, he or she can choose a smaller number. The usual number of participants in a focus group is between six and eight. If there are more than eight participants, it can be difficult for the moderator to manage the group. Some researchers in focus groups prefer to use just one or two very general questions to stimulate discussion. Other researchers prefer to use more questions and to have more structure with time limits allocated for discussion of each question. An important advantage of focus groups over in-depth interviews is that the participants can probe each other for the reasons why they hold certain views: they can challenge and ague with each other. In contrast, in an interview, interviewers ethically cannot challenge their interviewees when they give inconsistent answers or appear to be covering something up.

100 The researcher can select natural groups to be his/her focus groups (for example, a work team) or groups where he/she brings participants together specifically for the focus group discussions. For selecting participants specifically brought together for the research project, the researcher can select them randomly from a list of possible participants (sampling frame), or he or she can use ‘snowballing’ to find participants − asking one participant to recommend another and so on. When the researcher has a list of possible participants with information on each one, he/she may stratify the focus groups by factors such as industry, occupation/profession, organisational position, and personal criteria such as sex. Researchers may find focus groups difficult to organise as making contact with participants and arranging for them meet at a mutually convenient time takes a long time. Further, ‘no shows’ on the day can be a major problem.

Focus group moderators should not be intrusive and should allow the focus group participants wide latitude in discussing these questions set for them. If focus groups widen the discussion so much that they are no longer discussing matters relevant to the moderator's questions, moderators may need to refocus the participants’ attention. Also moderators may need to intervene in discussions when specific points of interest are not picked up by the focus group participants. Researchers record focus group discussions and then transcribe them. It is harder for researchers to keep control in focus groups than it is in one-to-one interviews.

In-depth interviews are another important qualitative research method. I discuss in particular their use in pilot studies as this is how I used them in my study. Conducting pilot studies are very important in the research process (Teijlingen and Hundley, 2002). Such interviews can focus on feasibility assessment or on pre-testing particular research instruments, such as a questionnaire. Feasibility piloting can refer to undertaking a small scale version of a major

101 study or it can refer, in a smaller study, to a more limited investigation where the use of qualitative methods can help the researcher decide whether or not a planned study is feasible. Conducting a pilot/feasibility study does not guarantee success in the main study; however, to do so does increase the likelihood of success.

In-depth interviews are usually unstructured and researchers typically have only a list of topics for discussion, set out in a checklist. The questioning style is typically informal and researchers may vary widely between interviews the way they frame/ask questions and how they order them. The in-depth interview is in the form of a conversation.

In in-depth interviews, it is vital for interviewers to develop rapport with the interviewees. Rapport means establishing a relationship with interviewees that encourages them to participate in the interviews. However, researchers need to be careful that rapport does not lead interviewees to seek to please interviewers by giving the answers interviewees think interviewers would like. Factors such as gender, age, race and social class differences between the interviewers and interviewees can affect the development of rapport.