Week 1 Assignment
Overview of Qualitative Research
What have sampling and data collection got to do with good qualitative research? My current research project is a mixed phenomenological and meta-analysis of declining membership and participation in the church. Operating on the presumption that sampling and data collection are critical to a study (Gibbs, 2007). Like Gibbs (2007) I want to be guided by the research goal developing theoretical outcomes Gibbs (2007), covering intrinsic participant cognitions, and clearly explaining any limitations (Gibbs et al, 2007). I have decided to reduce the scope of my study to the a case study approach with a Pastor and five Associate Ministers within a single church to which I happen to belong, in the Midwest. I believe these five observers are in the best “position” to observe this phenomenon and its effects. The information obtained in this first week has led me to the following conclusions concerning sampling and data collection. According to the work of Gibbs, Kealy, Willis, Green, Welch, & Daly (2007), sampling and data collection are intrinsically germane to generalizability (Gibbs et al, 2007). These authors, in agreement with other exceptional researchers, use designs like those of Daly, Willis, Small, Green, et al (2007) who also note that generalizable studies provide a comprehensive analysis of experience (Daly, et al, 2007). There is an imperative for the allowance of immersion to investigate context and population, along with practical constraints operating against sampling and data collection (Gibbs et al, 2007). Qualitative research begins with justification of the research problem with reference to the literature (Gibbs et al, 2007). Qualitative research then according to Willis, Daly, Kealy, Small et al (2007) provides theoretical framework to identify the theoretical concepts relevant to and employed in the study Willis, et al, 2007). Data is then collected according to a sampling plan, as suggested by Green, Willis, Hughes, and Small, et al, (2007), thus the most acceptable evidence possible, through data analysis (Green, et al, 2007). The hierarchy of evidence model proposed by Gibbs, et al (2007), offers studies that differing evidences such as the single case study, the descriptive study, the conceptual study, the generalizable study and the interview study (Gibbs et al, 2007). Accordingly transcribed data from verbatim recordings is the most common method of data collection (Gibbs et al, 2007). In these instances individual case studies, are limited by small samples but, capable of provide more information on setting (Gibbs et al, 2007); and Descriptive studies, describe experiences or activities but do not describe their differences (Gibbs et al, 2007). Case and descriptive studies provide good information as long as their limitations are clearly acknowledged (Gibbs et al, 2007). According to Suri (2011), informed decisions concerning sampling are necessary to improving the quality of research (Suri, 2011). Suri additionally points out that data may be retrieved through group discussion, personal journals, follow-up in-depth interviews and researcher field notes (Tuckett and Stewart 2004a, 2004b; Suri, 2011). According to Tuckett, et al 2011 and in agreement with Rubinstein (1994), no rules governing the numbers in sampling apply; however, experiential methods have been used for choosing samples from 1 to 100, with clustering. Some have suggested as few as 12-20 data sources, for the best variation, because no definite rules apply (Baum 2002). Suri notes that according to Patton (1990), some research relies on small samples aiming to study provide depth and thoroughness (Miles and Huberman 1994, Patton 1990). Purposeful sampling is seen as a means for developing rich data, derived non -randomly (Ezzy 2002, Mays and Pope 1995, Reed et al, 1996), Also, according to Lincoln and Cuba (1985) and Higginbotham et al (2001), the desired sample size may unfold, depending on previous studies, allowing the support of emerging theory (Baum 2002, Kuzel 1992, Miles and Huberman1994, Reed et al, 1996). Another issue in data analysis is presented by Sandelowski (2011), when he suggests alternative interpretations of data do not conform to the parameters between methods (Sandelowski, 2011). Sandelowski suggests that taking a view of inquiry as dynamic and flexible rather than static and unchangeable might prevent researchers from succumbing to that follow (Sandelowski, 2011). Sandoelowski also notes that Alvesson and Skoldberg (2009) coined extreme terms such as grounded theory ‘‘dataism’’ (p. 283), the hermeneutic ‘‘narcissism’’, and critical theory “reductionism’’ (p. 269). Sandelowski further suggests that data analysis and presentation do not have to be considered as discrete independent operations (Sandelowski, 2011). Recognizing Spalding and Phillips (2007, p. 961), Sandelowski proposed that the use of vignettes will reveal the often concealed author’s vision which Phillips expects will produce doubt’ (p. 961), inevitably serving to enhance the validity of interpretations (Phillips, 2007, p. 961; (Sandelowski, 2011). Sandelowski finally concludes that recognizing the need to account for problems associated with cognitive flexibility validating qualitative or quantitative inquiry Sandelowski, 2011). In addressing the issue of “presentation”, I found an article by Simundic (2012), concerning some “Practical recommendations for statistical analysis and data presentation”. The table below gives a suggestion for what should be included in any presentation of data. In working on the definition of “saturation” I was able to find the differentiation between the various qualitative methods. The following table is a representation of my findings based on the article by Walker (2012). I was impressed with the definitions provided by this author as he explained the different methods of determining saturation. I found the definitions of to be succinct and to the point, and very helpful in making a decision about which methods to use and when. See Appendix 1
USES OF SATURATION BY METHOD|
| Saturation is determined as the collection of data in a study until redundancy of the data has occurred (Morse, 2005). There are two types of saturation: data saturation and theoretical saturation, and the researcher may attempt to meet the criteria for one or both types (Morse, 2005).| Methodology and Definition| and Reported Studies| Recommended Sample Size| Type of Saturation Determined| Reasoning| Grounded theory can be defined asthe task of systematically discovering a theory from data (Glaser & Straus, 1967)| (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).| 16 parents:30 interviews| Theoretical Saturation| Theoretical Saturation without explanation; the necessary factors in determining saturationin a grounded theory study are: “the empirical limits of data, the integration and density of the theory, and theanalyst’s theoretical sensitivity” (p. 62).| | Moola, Fusco and Kirsh (2011) conducted a grounded theory study| 7 Participants; 7 interviews| Data Saturation was achieved.| no new pertinent information; redundancyhad occurred| | Harrison, Umberson, Lin, and Cheng (2010)| 45 women;103 interviews| Data Saturation was achieved| Interviews did not add any new information to categories| Qualitative description. Qualitative description, a qualitative research method described by Sandelowski (2000), isthe method of choice when pure description of phenomena is desired.| Garvalia et al. (2009) | sampling and data collectionwere discontinued when saturation was achieved; researchers did not report the number of interviews| an adequate number of participantswere interviewed until saturation was achieved.| information becameRepetitive (Garavalia et al., 2009).| | Harrison and Becker (2007),| 19 women| each of thewomen was interviewed until saturation was achieved| Information from interviews became repetitive.| | Henry, Dunning, Halpin, Stanger, and Martin (2008)| Sample size not given; number of interviews not given| Theoretical Saturation| No new information obtained| Phenomenology. the study of a phenomenon or the appearance of things, as well as the understanding of the human experience Cohen (1987)| Moore, Kimble, and Minick (2010)| 7 women| Theoretical Saturation| Based on field notes| | Scannell-Desch and Doherty (2010)| Sample Size not given; 29 interviews| Theoretical Saturation| No new themes were presented| | Byers and France (2008)| Sample Size not given| Theoretical Saturation| Themes became repetitive; No new themes emerged| Ethnography. is the description of a cultureand wrien documentation that portrays the culture (Wolfe, 2007),| Green, Meaux, Hue and Ainley (2011)| 14 adolescents | Saturation achieved after 10-12 individual interviews| Repetition in the Data| | Kuper and colleagues (2010) | aer eight traineeinterviews.| theoretical saturation | no new insights were being collected.| | Brown, Greaney, Kelly-Fitzgibbon and McCarthy (2006)| purposive sampling and interviewed each participant 3 times| categorical saturation was achieved| During analysis,semi-structured interviews were analyzed between and within cases | Narrative analysis is a methodological approach in which the researcher examines how a person constructs and organizes experiences into a story in order to make sense of events that have occurred (Riessman, 1993). | Ayres (2000)| 44 Care recipients and 36 Caregivers; | No saturation reported| Snowball sampling and Maximum variation sampling| | Marshall and Long (2010)| Sample Size not given| No saturation reported| because of the use of narrative methods they did not striveto achieve saturation. based onrecommendations by Sandelowski (2000), and the nature ofthe study, stories were adequate for the study| Information for this matrix excerpted from article by Walker, J.L. (2012). The Use of Saturation in Qualitative Research. Canadian Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 22(2), 37–41.| | | | |
Ayres, L. (2000). Narratives of family caregiving: Four story types, Research in Nursing and Health, 23, 359–371. Baum F (2000) The New Public Health, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Brown, G.D., Greaney, A.M., Kelly-Fitzgibbon, M.E., & McCarthy, J. (2006). The 1999 Irish Nurses’ strike: Nursing versions of the strike and self-identify in a general hospital. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 56, 200–208. doi: 10-1111/j.1365-2648-2006.03998.x Byers, D.C., & France, N.E.M. (2008), The lived experience of registered nurses providing care to patients with dementia in the acute care setting: A phenomenological study. International Journal for Human Caring, 12, 44–49. Cohen, M.Z. (1987), A historical overview of the phenomenological movement. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 19(1), 31–34. doi: 0.1111/j.1547-5069.1987.tb00584x Daly J, Willis K, Small R, Green J, et al, 2007, Assessing qualitative research in health– a hierarchy of evidence-for-practice. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2007, 60 (1):43-9. Ezzy D (2002) Qualitative Analysis: Practice and innovation. Crows Nest, NSW, Allen and Unwin. Gibbs, L., Kealy, M., Willis, K., Green, J., Welch, N., & Daly, J. (2007), What have sampling and data collection got to do with good qualitative research?. Australian & New Zealand Journal Of Public Health, 31(6), 540-544. doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2007.00140.x Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). e discovery of grounded theory Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing. Green, A., Meaux, J., Hue, A., & Ainley, K. (2011), “It has its ups and downs”: Adolescents’ quality of life after heart transplantation. Progress in Transplantation, 21, 115–120. Green, Willis, Hughes, and Small, et al., Generating Best Evidence Possible From Qualitative Research, Aus. N Z Journal of Public Health, 2007;31(6):545-50. Harrison, T.C., Umberson, D., Lin, L., & Cheng, H., (2010), Timing of impairment and health promoting lifestyles in women with disabilities, Qualitative Health Research, 20, 816–829. Henry, L., Dunning, E., Halpin, L., Stanger, D., & Martin, L. (2008), Nurses’ perceptions of glycemic control in patients who have undergone cardiac surgery. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 22, 271–277. Higginbotham N et al (2001) Health Sociai Science: A transdisciplinary and complexity perspective. Oxtord, Oxford University Press. Kuper, A., Nedden, N.Z., Etchells, E., Shadowitz, S., & Reeves, S. (2010). Teaching and learning in morbidity and mortality rounds: An ethnographic study. Medical Education, 44, 559–569. Lincoln Y, Guba E (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. London, Sage. Marshall, V., & Long, B.C., (2010), Coping processes as revealed in the stories of mothers of children with autism, Qualitative Health Research, 20, 105–116. doi: 10.1177/1049732309348367 Miles M, Huberman A (1994) An Expanded Source Book: Qualitative data analysis. Second edition. London, Sage. Moola, F., Fusco, C., & Kirsh, J.A. (2011), The perceptions of caregivers toward physical activity and health in youth with congenital heart disease, Qualitative Health Research, 21, 278–291. doi: 10.1177/1049732310384119 Moore, L.C., Kimble, L.P., & Minick, P. (2010), Perceptions of cardiac risk factors and risk-reduction behavior in women with known coronary heart disease, Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 25, 433–443, Riessman, C.K. (1993). Narrative analysis, London, England: Sage. Rubinstein R (1994) Proposal writing. In: Gubrium, J, Sankar A (Eds) Qualitative Methods in Aging Research. London, Sage. Sandelowski, M. (2000), Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing Health, 23, 334–340 Sandelowski, M. (2000), Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing Health, 23, 334–340. Sandelowski, M. (2011). When a cigar is not just a cigar: Alternative takes on data and data analysis. Research In Nursing & Health, 34(4), 342-352. doi:10.1002/nur.20437 Scannell-Desch, E., & Doherty, M.E. (2010), Experiences of U.S. military nurses in the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 42, 3–12. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2009.01329.x Simundic, A. (2012). Practical recommendations for statistical analysis and data presentation in Biochemia Medico journal. Biochemia Medica, 22(1), 15-23. Suri, H. (2011), Purposeful Sampling in Qualitative Research Synthesis, Qualitative Research, Journal (RMIT Training Pty Ltd Trading As RMIT Publishing), 11(2), 63-75, doi:10.3316/QRJ1102063, Retrieved on 12/8/2012 from https://ehis.ebscohost.com/eds/results?sid=d1174a0b-ad81-4d54-8fb1-af01df20e8a3%40sessionmgr115&vid=1&hid=115&bquery=Qualitative+Research+Sampling&bdata=JmNsaTA9RlQmY2x2MD1ZJnR5cGU9MCZzaXRlPWVkcy1saXZl Tuckett A, Stewart D (2004a) Collecting qualitative data: part I. Journal as a method: experience, rationale and limitations. Contemporary Nurse. 16,1-2,104-113 Tuckett A, Stewart D (2004b) Collecting qualitative data: part II. Group discussion as a method: experience, rationale, limitations. Contemporary Nurse. 16,3:240-251. Tuckett, AG, , 2004, Qualitative research sampling: the very real complexities.; Nurse Researcher12 (1): 47-61 (journal article - tables/charts) ISSN: 1351-5578 PMID: 15493214 Walker, J.L. (2012). The Use of Saturation in Qualitative Research, Canadian Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 22(2), 37–41. Willis K, Daly J, Kealy M, Small R, et al, The essential role of social theory in qualitative public health research. Aus. N Z Journal of Public Health, 2007;31(5):438-43. Wolfe, Z.R. (2007). Ethnography: The method. In P.L. Munhall (Ed.), Nursing research: A qualitative perspective (pp. 293–330). Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartle.