DA Week 15

1 / 20
Unlike grounded theory and phenomenology which both have clearly explicated epistemologies or research methods, qualitative descriptive is a generic approach with no alignment to philosophical/theoretical position

But it may be well suited to research needs in allied health fields
Click the card to flip 👆
Terms in this set (20)
a. Different types of purposive sampling, depending on the topic and question, as well as pragmatics of who will be accessed, time, finances
b. This type of research does not require a representative sample. However..... it is important for the researcher to provide specific details of the type of sampling used
a. Content Analysis: (Descriptive)
i. This is descriptive process similar to grounded theory. It starts with:"a process of open coding, grouping similar codes and then collapsing grouped codes into themes ... the researcher should aim for 3-5 themes ... Data analysis should yield a rich description of the participant's views on the topic being explored, allowing the reader a better understanding of another's perspective" (p. 9)
ii. In contrast to grounded theory, the 3-5 themes do not need to be collapsed into a single 'central process or central category'

b. Thematic Analysis: (Interpretive)
i. Similarly starts with open coding, it then "needs to be inductive moving through layers of abstraction and interpretation" "The researcher should keep working at the analysis to 'lift' it to a more conceptual level without losing the richness of the data" (p. 9)
ii. "One strategy to keep the richness is to draw on participant's words for theme names" (p. 9) [= in vivo code names]
a. "Given the broad nature of the qualitative descriptive approach the researcher may employ a range of strategies to establish rigor in the study design" (p. 9), including:
i. Journaling "provide a clear audit trail of methodological decisions" (p. 9) (i.e., memoing)
ii. Member checking
iii. Peer debriefing (i.e., supervisor and discussion with more experienced researchers)

b. Strategies should be selected "that best demonstrate the rigor of the study, rather than employing a multitude of strategies that only superficially address the issue of rigor" (p. 10)
a. Prolonged and persistent observation in the field include building trust with participants, learning the culture, and checking for misinformation that stems from distortions introduced by the researcher or informants. b. Repeated interviews c. Fetterman (1998) contends that "working with people day in and day out, for long periods of time, is what gives ethnographic research its validation and vitality"1. Prolonged engagementa. In triangulation, researchers make use of(1) multiple and different sources of data, and or(2) research methods, and or(3) investigators, and or(4) theories to provide corroborating evidence. Typically, this process involves corroborating evidence from different sources to shed light on a theme or perspective b. Triangulation typically requires THREE (or more) from one of the above categories (i.e., 3 sources of data might include (a) interviews of leaders, (b) interviews of staff and (c) meeting minutes.triangulationa. Peer review or debriefing provides an external check of the research process. The role of the peer de-briefer as a "devil's advocate," an individual who keeps the researcher honest; asks hard questions about methods, meanings, and interpretations. b. Done during data analysis (during research process) - not the same as manuscript peer reviewpeer review or debriefingIn negative case analysis, the researcher refines working hypotheses as the inquiry advances in light of negative or disconfirming evidence. The researcher revises initial hypotheses until all cases fit, completing this process late in data analysis and eliminating all outliners and exceptions1. Negative case analysisa. Clarifying researcher bias from the outset of the study is important so that the reader understands the researcher's position and any biases or assumptions that impact the inquiry. In this clarification, the researcher comments on past experiences, biases, prejudices, and orientations that have likely shaped the interpretation and approach to the study.refclexivity or bracketinga. In member checking, the researcher solicits participants' view of the credibility of the findings and interpretations. This technique is considered by Lincoln and Guba (1985) to be "the most critical technique for establishing credibility" (p. 314). For this validation strategy, I convene a focus group composed of participants in my study and ask them to reflect on the accuracy of the account. I do not take back to participants my transcripts or the raw data, but take them my preliminary analysis consisting of description or themes. I am interesting in their views of these written analyses as well as what was missingmember checkinga. Rich, thick description allows readers to make decisions regarding transferability because the writer describes in detail the participants or setting under study. With such detailed description, the researcher enables readers to transfer information to other settings and to determine whether the findings can be transferred "because of shared characteristics1. Rich, thick narrativea. External audits allow an external consultant, the auditor, to examine both the process and the product of the account, assessing their accuracy. This auditor should have no connection to the study. b. This is typically conducted prior to publication as part of the "peer review" processExternal auditsa. "Align the theoretical orientation with the choice of design, topics and question""The quality of a study begins with topic selection and the development of a research question" b. "Employ sampling and data collection approaches that are a good fit with the desired outcome" c. "Ensure that the approach to analysis is congruent with the methodology" Do not try to do too much - acknowledge limitations d. "Plan strategies for rigor" When designing a study choose and then implement strategies for rigor, rather than trying to establish rigor after data has been collected.What four recommendations do they suggest to establish trustworthiness?Examining these eight procedures as a whole, I recommend that qualitative researchers engage in at least two of them in any given study. Unquestionably, procedures such as triangulating among different data sources (assuming that the investigator collects more than one), writing with detailed and thick description, and taking the entire written narrative back to participants in member checking all are reasonable easy procedures to conduct. They also are the most popular and cost-effective procedures. Other procedures, such as peer audits and external audits, are more time consuming in their application and may also involve substantial costs to the researcher.