Professional Documents
Culture Documents
4. How and why cultures have developed in the way they have
5. The differences between social groups
5. Qualitative questions:
1
How
Why
What
people being studied (Geertz, 1973), "thick description," alternative interpretations, and
"multiple realities" are expected. Ongoing attention to complex meanings is extremely
difficult when the instruments of data-gathering are objectively-interpretable checklists,
survey items. The ongoing interpretive role of the researcher is prominent in the work of
qualitative research.
12. Other characteristics of qualitative research. In addition to its orientation away from
cause-and-effect explanation and toward personal interpretation, qualitative inquiry is
distinguished by its emphasis on holistic treatment of phenomena (Schwandt, in press). I
have remarked already on the epistemology of qualitative researchers as existential (nondeterminant) and constructivist. These two views are correlated with an expectation that
phenomena are intricately related to many coincidental actions and that understanding
them requires a wide sweep of contexts: temporal and spatial, historical, political,
economic, cultural, social, personal.
13. Thus the case, the activity, the event are seen as unique as well as common.
Understanding it requires an understanding of other cases, activities and events, but also
an emphasis on its uniqueness. Such uniqueness is established not particularly by
comparing it on a number of variables, there may be few ways in which this one strays
from the norm, but the collection of features, the sequence of happenings is seen by
people close at hand as in many ways unprecedented, a critical uniqueness. Readers are
drawn easily to this sense of uniqueness by providing experiential accounts.
14. For all the intrusion into habitats and personal affairs, qualitative researchers are noninterventionists. They try not to draw attention to themselves or their work. Other than
positioning themselves, they avoid creating situations to test their hypotheses. They try to
observe the ordinary and they try to observe it long enough to comprehend what, for this
case, ordinary means. For them, naturalistic observation has been the primary medium of
acquaintance. When they cannot see for themselves, they ask others who have seen.
When there are formal record kept, they search the documents. But they favor a personal
capture of the experience, so they can interpret it, recognize its contexts, puzzle the many
meanings while still there, and pass along an experiential, naturalistic account for readers
to participate in some of the same reflection.
15. Recognition of risks. Qualitative study has everything wrong with it its detractors claim.
The contributions toward an improved and disciplined science are slow and tendentious.
New questions are more frequent than old answers. The results pay off little in the
advancement of social practice. The ethical risks are substantial. And the cost is high.
16. The effort to promote a subjective research paradigm is a given. Subjectivity is not seen
as a failing to be eliminated but as as essential element of understanding. And
Generalizing is possible in qualitative research, but it is of a type different from that found in
quantitative studies. Most likely it will be done by interested practitioners
Ethics and qualitative research
The identities of all participants in a qualitative study should be protected, and they should be
treated with respect.
Reconsidering Qualitative and quantitative research
Aspects of both qualitative and quantitative research often are used together in a study.
Increased attention is being given to such mixed- method studies.
Whether qualitative or quantitative research is the most appropriate boils down to what the
researcher wants to find out.
Qualitative Research
Ruth G. McRoy
Qualitative research is concerned with nonstatistical methods of inquiry and analysis of social
phenomena. It draws on an inductive process in which themes and categories emerge through
analysis of data collected by such techniques as interviews, observations, videotapes, and case
studies. Samples are usually small and are often purposively selected. Qualitative research uses
detailed descriptions from the perspective of the research participants themselves as a means of
examining specific issues and problems under study.
Qualitative research differs from quantitative research in that the latter is characterized by the use
of large samples, standardized measures, a deductive approach, and highly structured interview
instruments to collect data for hypothesis testing (Marlow, 1993). In contrast to qualitative
research, in quantitative research easily quantifiable categories are typically generated before the
study and statistical techniques are used to analyze the data collected. Both qualitative and
quantitative research are designed to build knowledge; they can be used as complementary
strategies.
DEFINITIONS
Qualitative research is referred to by a variety of terms, reflecting several research approaches.
Field research is often used interchangeably with qualitative research to describe systematic
observations of social behavior with no preconceived hypotheses to be tested (Rubin & Babbie,
1993). Hypotheses emerge from the observation and interpretation of human behavior, leading to
further observations and the generation of new hypotheses for exploration.
Qualitative research is also referred to as naturalistic research or inquiry (Taylor, 1977) into
everyday living. Direct observations are made of human behavior in everyday life. Drawing on
symbolic interaction theory (Blumer, 1969), naturalistic researchers believe that gaining
knowledge from sources that have intimate familiarity (Lofland, 1976) with an issue is far
better than the objective distancing approach that supposedly characterizes quantitative
approaches (Haworth, 1984). Zurcher (1983) used this technique as he examined such common
occurrences as riding on an airplane or attending a football game.
Ethnographya term more commonly associated with anthropology and sociology than with
social workis used in qualitative research to describe a field study of a particular site or
population undertaken to better understand the culture from the perspective of that population. In
ethnographic studies, teams of researchers collect data by observing and interviewing
participants over time. Typically, field notes are taken and life histories and case studies are
derived from extensive contact with the group under study. Examples of the ethnographic
approach include Rainwater (1970) and Liebow (1967). Recently, social work researchers have
used participant observation and interviews in such settings as residential treatment centers
(Penzerro, 1992) and housing projects (Lein, 1994) to study foster care drift and persistent
poverty.
HISTORY
Although social work since its beginnings has been involved with the study of natural
occurrences and the interaction between human behavior and the social context, only minor
acknowledgment has been made of the contributions of qualitative methodology. Almost since
1915, when Abraham Flexner asserted that social work lacked a core of knowledge derived from
the scientific process (Austin, 1978; Bruno, 1958), social work researchers have been striving to
demonstrate strict adherence to the objective methods characteristic of the hard sciences, and
much social work research has relied on the positivistic approach, using quantitative methods.
This situation is exemplified by the CambridgeSomerville youth delinquency prevention study,
in which Powers and Witmer (1951), using traditional social science quantitative methodology,
applied an innovative experimental model to assess effectiveness of social services. The study
has been cited as a landmark social work research project. Although Powers and Witmer found
no significant differences in terms of delinquency records and social adjustment between the
treatment and control groups, Witmer, in a supplemental study, used qualitative methodology in
intensive case studies and found that some children definitely benefited from the intervention
(Zimbalist, 1977). Witmer's use of qualitative methods was an early indicator that qualitative
techniques could be used to examine social processes that might be missed by traditional
quantitative measures.
Nevertheless, social work continued to emphasize quantitative techniques. Research was heavily
influenced by the methodologies of the natural sciences. Beginning in the 1950s and 1960s,
numerous doctoral programs in social work were established, and formal research courses in the
scientific method became a major component of the curriculum (Austin, 1978). And as social
work strove for greater legitimacy through the development of empirically based theories and
proof-oriented models for greater accountability and effectiveness, discovery-oriented
qualitative research was considered to have little scientific merit (Karger, 1983).
In the late 1970s, Taylor (1977) advocated four alternative approaches to social work research,
among them qualitative methods. He asserted that naturalistic inquiry is a perfect technique for a
profession that deals not just with the expected and easily measurable but also with the
unexpected events that are characteristic of human experiences. Taylor noted that when field
researchers use quantitative methods to increase the precision of observations (p. 121),
qualitative and quantitative approaches complement one another.
In the 1980s, debate about the use of quantitative methods as the preeminent social work strategy
was ongoing (Haworth, 1984; Hudson, 1982; Karger, 1983; Reid, 1987). As social workers tried
to meet the requirements of logical positivists for experimental designs with objective measures,
it was found that many research questions that did not fit neatly into a quantitative research
design were not investigated (Heineman, 1981). Some researchers acknowledge that qualitative
strategies are appropriate for exploratory or preliminary inquiry into a topic. Others suggest that
once there is an organized body of scholars who use a well-delineated qualitative methodology,
more serious attention will be given to the qualitative approach (Karger, 1983).
Although debate continues in the 1990s, and the paradigm of scientific inquiry in social work is
still primarily viewed to mean quantitative methodology, the merits of qualitative methods are
now being acknowledged by most authors of leading social work research texts (Babbie, 1989;
Chambers, Wedel, & Rodwell, 1992; Grinnell, 1988; Marlow, 1993; Rubin & Babbie, 1993;
Sherman & Reid, 1994), and some qualitative techniques are covered in the research courses of a
growing number of schools of social work.
ADVANTAGES AND CONTRIBUTIONS
A number of advantages of qualitative methodologies for social work have been noted in the
literature. Descriptive, inductive, and unobtrusive techniques for data collection are viewed as
compatible with the knowledge and values of the social work profession (Epstein, 1988). For
situations in which social workers are faced with issues and problems that are not amenable to
quantitative examination, qualitative methods have been advocated (Sherman & Reid, 1994).
The socialpsychological bases of qualitative research suggest that it is compatible with the
person-in-environment paradigm of social work practice (Epstein, 1988; Taylor, 1977).
Gilgun (1994) suggested that qualitative approaches are similar in method to clinical social work
assessments. Clinicians rely on interviews to gather data on a client's issues in the context of the
environment. A clinician goes over a series of hunches and working hypotheses that are based on
observations made through ongoing contact with the client. Qualitative researchers, like
clinicians, are trained to look at each case individually, without imposing preconceived notions
or attempting to generalize to all clients having a particular problem. Qualitative researchers
maintain field notes and documents on their research (Gilgun, 1994; Marlow, 1993), just as
clinicians keep running accounts of contact with a client in the form of process recordings or
case records.
In studies of social processes of complex human systems such as families, organizations, and
communities, qualitative methodology may be the most appropriate research strategy (Reid,
1987). Scholars of the family now extol the benefits of qualitative methodologies in gaining
Verstehen (Weber, 1947), or understanding, of the dynamic processes, meanings, communication
patterns, experiences, and individual and family constructions of reality (Daly, 1992). Field
settings and social service agencies provide unique opportunities for the qualitative study of
social processes.
Qualitative approaches also have the advantages of flexibility, in-depth analysis, and the
potential to observe a variety of aspects of a social situation (Babbie, 1986). A qualitative
researcher conducting a face-to-face interview can quickly adjust the interview schedule if the
interviewee's responses suggest the need for additional probes or lines of inquiry in future
interviews. Moreover, by developing and using questions on the spot, a qualitative researcher can
gain a more in-depth understanding of the respondent's beliefs, attitudes, or situation. During the
course of an interview or observation, a researcher is able to note changes in bodily expression,
mood, voice intonation, and environmental factors that might influence the interviewee's
responses. Such observational data can be of particular value when a respondent's body language
runs counter to the verbal response given to an interview question.
Structured interviews.
Structured interviews. Limited time and financial resources may lead some qualitative
researchers to pursue other data collection techniques, such as a structured interview schedule
with open-ended questions. Drawing on the theoretical and research literature, such questions
may be formulated and organized in advance to address a specific research topic. Studies of
adoption dissolution, for example, might include questions posed to adoptive parents that focus
on such themes as parental motivation for adoption, knowledge of the child's past, initial
attitudes toward the child, use of therapeutic resources, development of problematic behavior,
and factors leading to dissolution. Interviewers are expected to take field notes or to keep a field
diary of observations made during the interview.
Data reduction.
Data reduction. Interview questions and responses are typically tape-recorded and then
transcribed verbatim before analysis is begun. Transcription is extremely time-consuming
(Marlow, 1993). Due to the large amount of data that can be generated in qualitative research, a
data reduction process must be used to aid analysis. This procedure includes organizing the data;
identifying emerging themes, categories, and patterns; and testing hypotheses against the data.
Either indigenous or analyst-constructed typologies may be constructed. In indigenous
categories, the language of respondents is used to label types of processes (Marshall & Rossman,
1989; Patton, 1990). For example, in a qualitative study of the development of emotional
disturbance in adopted adolescents, researchers used elbow babiesthe language of the
participantsto classify infants who pushed away from close contact with family members.
Ongoing analysis of data revealed other instances of this phenomenon (McRoy, Grotevant, &
Zurcher, 1988).
In analyst-constructed categories, the researcher attaches a label to observed recurring events.
For example, in Matocha's (1992) qualitative study of the needs of caregivers of acquired
immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients, four categories or domains of needs of caregivers
were identified: physical, spiritual, social, and economic. Matocha's case study data focused on
each of these identified categories.
Narrative descriptions.
Narrative descriptions. Narrative descriptions of data collected through interviews, observations,
and case records are also used in qualitative analysis. Narrative descriptions may be developed in
the form of case studies of a particular interviewee or agency for use in social work practice or
program evaluation (Marlow, 1993).
Analysis
Content analysis is often used in qualitative and quantitative research methods. Some researchers
view content analysis as a technique to quantify manifest (surface-level) descriptive data (AllenMeares, 1985), in which categories are developed, content is coded, and category counts are
conducted. Hollis (1972), studying communications in social work interviews, categorized
specific statements according to type of communication. Qualitative content analysis typically
does not transform the content into numeric patterns. Instead, recurrent themes, and typologies
and illustrations of particular issues, are used.
When qualitative methods are used in evaluating the effectiveness of social work practice, a
purposive sampling approach may be taken in which one or a few cases are selected for intensive
interviewing and analysis. Qualitative interviews can augment single-subject studies by
exploring variables other than a specific intervention that might have affected the client outcome.
Similarly, in program evaluation studies, qualitative methods allow the researcher to focus on
the process of how something happens rather than on just the outcomes or results that would
be more characteristic of quantitative designs. Program evaluation studies involving qualitative
approaches focus on participants' perceptions and their experiences in the program (Bogdan &
Taylor, 1990; Patton, 1990; Rubin & Babbie, 1993).
Naturalistic evaluation, which is now often referred to as constructivism (Chambers et al., 1992),
emphasizes multiple constructions of reality in the evaluation process of social programs. It
involves an interactive approach in which the direction of inquiry is shaped through
involvement with the participants (p. 293). The research design and process emerge through
interaction with participants in the setting. Although a conceptual base may guide the evaluation,
grounded theory, based on the data, emerges through consideration of multiple realities and
perspectives.
ISSUES IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Reliability and Validity
Among the most cited criticisms of qualitative research are the presumed lack of reliability and
validity of its findings. In regard to field research, critics question the ability of qualitative
research to replicate observations (reliability) or to obtain correct answers or correct impressions
of the phenomenon under study (validity) (Kirk & Miller, 1986). Other criticisms concern the
reactive effects of the observer's or the interviewer's presence on the situation being studied and
selective perception or bias on the part of the researcher. Also of concern has been the
researcher's inability to observe all factors that might influence the situation under study (McCall
& Simmons, 1969; Schaffir & Stebbins, 1991). For example, agency time, staff, and financial
constraints may limit an agency's ability to provide the researcher with the opportunity to review
the entire range of cases pertaining to a particular topic.
Qualitative researchers have addressed these issues in several ways. Purposive sampling, based
on reviews of the literature and knowledge of the subject area, has been used to select cases
under study, rather than as an attempt to observe or collect data from all respondents, who may
be affected by the phenomena under study. Individual bias has been addressed by using teams of
researchers to read cases or make observations. To ensure validity of interviews or observations,
some qualitative researchers use the technique of member validation, in which the respondent
is given a copy of the observations or interview to provide feedback (Schaffir & Stebbins, 1991).
Although quantitative researchers are likely to address threats to validity through such techniques
as random selection of participants and the use of controls, qualitative researchers are more
likely to address validity throughout the data collection and analysis processes. As qualitative
researchers review more cases, seeking common themes and patterns and testing emerging
hypotheses, they are in essence working to ensure validity (Maxwell, 1992).
Qualitative researchers also confront issues of reliability and validity through triangulationthe
use of different strategies to approach the same topic of investigation. Some researchers use
multiple measures of the same phenomenon. For example, to measure self-concept, investigators
may use a standardized instrument such as the Harter Self-Perception Profile (Harter, 1985) as
well as the Twenty-Statements Test (Kuhn & McPartland, 1954), an open-ended measure.
Observations of multiple comparison groups, cross-site analyses, and acquisition of multiple
viewpoints of the sample phenomena are all techniques used to improve the reliability of
findings (Jick, 1983). In data analysis, coding teams with high interrater reliability scores are
used to code each interview and thus improve reliability of findings (Miles & Huberman, 1984).
Ethical Issues
Due to the subjective nature of data collection, interpretation, and analysis in qualitative
research, there appear to be more ethical dilemmas and concerns with confidentiality associated
with this method than with quantitative research. A qualitative researcher interviewing femaleheaded families on welfare, for example, may gather data on unreported financial support from
fathers. Despite assurances of confidentiality, participating families may feel at risk when they
reveal such support to the researcher. It is the researcher's ethical responsibility to maintain
confidentiality, but there have been cases in which research data have been subpoenaed. Despite
attempts to protect respondents through the use of pseudonyms, identities sometimes may be
decoded.
The security of sensitive and potentially identifiable research materials contained on computer
disks, in mainframes, and on paper is a persistent issue. When several people are involved in text
analysis and the development of coding schemes, or in grant-funded projects that require
databases to be made available to other researchers to conduct secondary analyses of computergenerated or stored data, there are risks associated with the confidentiality of data. The issue of
who has rights to the data has not been resolved (Fielding & Lee, 1992).
The deception of respondents by researchers is an ethical issue in ethnographic studies. For
instance, in some studies of people living in homeless shelters, a researcher has become a
participant, interacting with residents while giving them the impression that the researcher too is
homeless. Some researchers have responded to the ethical issue in this type of data gathering by
taking on the role of participant-as-observer, in which the identities of the researchers are known
to the respondents (Rubin & Babbie, 1993).
Diversity
Qualitative methods are particularly appropriate for use with people who are more comfortable
responding in an interview format than to a standardized survey questionnaire. Davis (1986)
suggested that the gender of respondents should be a consideration in selecting a research
strategy because many women may prefer qualitative research techniques to quantitative
approaches because they prefer opportunities to discuss subjects in context.
Myers (1977) suggested that some members of ethnic groups, low-income populations, or others
who may be socially distant from the researcher are more likely to participate in the in-depth
interviews characteristic of qualitative research than to complete a structured questionnaire or
survey. To enhance the validity of results in research with diverse populations, research questions
must be clearly constructed and must not be subject to different cultural interpretations. Also, due
to the subjective nature of qualitative research it is important for the researcher to continually
engage in self-examination to be certain that his or her own biases and stereotypes are not
influencing the interpretation of the findings. Conversely, because qualitative analysis allows
researchers to explore in depth all factors that might affect a particular issue, this strategy permits
sensitive consideration of the complexities of human diversity (Marlow, 1993).
Use of Computers
Recent advances in computer technology let qualitative researchers rapidly and efficiently gather,
enter, and retrieve data. Some qualitative researchers take computer notebooks to the field, in
which they enter notes directly (Babbie, 1986; Pfaffenberger, 1988). Although many wordprocessing packages and database managers allow for simple word or phrase searches, specific
qualitative analysis programs for text retrieval, such as Ethnograph, ZyIndex, or Word Cruncher,
create word lists, count frequency of occurrences, create indexes, and attach key words to words
in text (Tesch, 1992).
Some qualitative researchers use computer programs to do a reliability check during data
analysis. For example, after completing a personal search of a document for specific words or
issues, a computer program is used to double-check the accuracy of the original analysis. Despite
the advantages of computerized analysis, qualitative researchers engaged in theory construction
must also undertake ongoing exploration of the data to identify patterns and categories that may
be used as key words for computer searches.
FUTURE OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Qualitative research methodology is receiving growing acceptance in the social work research
community. Qualitative methods are becoming particularly popular among researchers working
on family issues. A Qualitative Family Research Network was formed in the late 1980s, and an
increasing number of social workers and family researchers exchange ideas on qualitative
methodologies (Gilgun, 1990). Another indicator of the growing acceptance of qualitative
research in social work practice is the recently established journal Research on Social Work
Practice, which seeks manuscripts based on qualitative studies as well as on a combination of
qualitative and quantitative research.
Clearly, quantitative and qualitative methodologies have different strengths and weaknesses, and
the strategy taken should depend on the nature of the question being investigated. In many
instances, both qualitative and quantitative approaches can be used in the same study. For
example, standardized measures might be used to collect data in conjunction with open-ended
interview questions. It is possible to code interview data using both qualitative and quantitative
techniques and to report the results of both the qualitative and quantitative analyses of the same
data set (McRoy et al., 1988). Qualitative strategies need not be limited to small-scale studies.
Daly (1992) reported a technique for applying grounded theory principles in the design and
analysis of a large national survey on adoption trends.
The close compatibility of qualitative research methods with social work practice techniques is
likely to lead to greater use of qualitative strategies in practice evaluation. As more social work
researchers network and refine and publish qualitative studies that clearly specify the techniques
used, qualitative methodology is likely to receive even greater acceptance among social workers.