Qualitative Data and Collection Methods

here atomic calculate 18 the characteristics of a proficient soft selective information 1) naturalistic (derived from actual employment or analysis of a subjective info, 2) generous and deep info (t eyelid is, specifics of dynamics of an guidance out or setting finish be discerned or analyzed), 3) subjective ( information should be perceptions of the commonwealth in the environment), 4) credible (that is, the entropy atomic number 18 derived from actual experiences of the people involved the line of descent of data), and 5) confirmable (that is, the data derived may be collaborated by other subjective sources).There is though an superfluous characteristic (but non required) of a technical qualitative data. In whatsoever issues, mixer scientists attribute a good qualitative data based on its transformability into quantitative data (this is though not necessary). Types of Qualitative Data Collection (Qualitative Methods, 2006 uniform resource locator cite d) There argon commandly tetrad qualitative data collection rules that are frequently apply in the social sciences. Here are as follows 1) musician observation, 2) select observation, 3) unstructured interviewing, and 4) scale studies.There are though variations in qualitative data collection systems. In anthropology, ethnography is used as the primary mode of qualitative data collection. In a sense, it is case study on a all-inclusive range (all aspects of a culture are examined and analyzed). In psychology, psychoanalysis methods of qualitative data collection are used to enrol and validate a persons psychological standing or peradventure his/her state of mind. For simplicitys sake, we shall not tackle on these methods. Participant Observation.This method requires that the enquiryer become a actor in an event or the induct universe observed. This approach allows the researcher to eff the specifics as easily as the confined of an activity or the people involved. Without incline or prejudgment, this method becomes more than pronounce when the researcher is accepted as a natural sort of the culture, assuming that the observations are natural phenomena. Here, the researcher collects first-hand qualitative data, and so allows him/her to relate it simultaneously with the event or activity (or culture).Direct Observation. This is a different from the forward method in a number of ways. First, the researcher is not a player in the context or event. The researcher in this case does not in any way mingle or influence the actions of the players in a context or event. Doing so would undermine data au indeedticity as well as validation (see Hawthorne Effect). Second, direct observation is a detached perspective. Technologies replace actual participation as a measuring pawn for validation and procurement of good qualitative data (as presented earlier).Third, the researcher is observing sampled situations or groups of people in no way the research er is immersed in the activity or event. Lastly, direct observations are usually short circuiter in scope than participant observation in terms of data viability as well as practicality. Unstructured Interviewing or In-Depth Interviewing. Here the researcher and the respondent have direct interaction. The researcher usually uses a short guide to his interview questions (unstructured) or center flying field concepts to ask about. The interviewer may ask additional or supporting questions that are relevant or connected to the main occupation of the research.This allows the researcher flexibility in structuring his/her qualitative data as well as representative tools like bodily gestures and seventh cranial nerve expressions. The protocol however in this lineament of method is that the interviewer respects the principle of confidentiality. still information approved by the interviewee can be released to the public or to academic associations. Case Studies. This is the frequently u sed research method in the social sciences (especially in anthropology and sociology). This involves an intensive and extensive study of an separate on a specific milieu.In a sense, this is a combination of structured interview, participant observation, and direct observation. Using all the methods in one setting allows the researcher to get the whole picture of the problem. It also allows him/her to attend the versatiles or factors at play without undermining validity. intimately of the time, if only one method is utilized, in that location is a tendency for variables to be neglect or misrepresented. There was a case when voting behavior was concluded to be attributed to the party sleeper of the group being studied (participant observation was the only method used) note that only one variable was used.When the study was replicated using combinations of methods, party affiliation accounted only 19% of the traffic (when the qualitative data was converted to quantitative data ). Although this is not to say that a combination of data is more desirable or more academically reliable (this would depend on the context of the research problem), it is often famous that this type of method has all the requirements for procuring good qualitative data. Process for Analyzing Qualitative DataQualitative data analysis is composed of tierce general cognitive processes 1) noticing things, 2) collecting things, and 3) thinking about things. These three general processes are connected are related with all(prenominal) other. We shall discuss each of the processes below. Noticing Things. This refers to the general observation of an event or context and the manner by which it is coded. It largely means making observations, writing field notes, tape recording, interviews, gathering documents, etc. When you do this you are producing a record of the things hat you have noticed(Seidel, 19983). Collecting Things. This process is similar to solving jigsaw fixs (Seidel, 1998 5). The data coded are assembled or disassembled into groups. In this way, relations can easily be extracted. sentiment About Things. This is generally the theoretical part of the research process. Each part of the puzzle are examined and related to the main problem. subsequently relationships between variables are stated, they are then referred to the main problem (as well as the specific propositions).