Article Critique
Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups
Summary
The paper by Kitzinger (1995), introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, runs a focus group, and analyzes results. The article is number 5 in a series of 7 articles that describe nonquantitative techniques and their value in health research. The author describes focus groups as a type of group interview capitalizing on communication between participants to generate data. Therefore, people are encouraged to talk to each other, ask questions, comment on each other’s experiences, and exchange anecdotes.
Critique
In qualitative research, data cannot be easily reduced to numbers since it relates to people’s social world, behaviors, and concepts. Therefore, this method helps understand the beliefs, attitudes, and opinions of people through interactions. The researcher has to bring people together to obtain the required data. The challenge lies in obtaining consent due to the unpredictability of interaction and discussion that will take place. Consent helps create clear terms and expectations in the participant, which may be hard to achieve. This research method is less straight forward for the respondents to revoke consent than face-to-face interviews (Vermeire et al., 2002). Confidentiality and anonymity may also be a problem since the researcher has limited control over what will be said during the discussions.
The research brings people from diverse backgrounds together, and through the use of semi-structured questions, the participants are stimulated to start a discussion. Carefully planned discussions are used in the study to ensure that the participants remain within the topic of study. The interactions that are generated through the discussions are of prior importance to the methodology. Unlike interviews, more data may be collected from the participants since the discussions are not limited to what is asked; body language, attitudes are also considered. In most cases, the participants may be needed to attend a series of discussions that may be tiresome. Some may drop out before the study is completed affecting the outcomes of the research (Freeman, 2006).
This method is less reliable compared to questionnaires since individuals may hold off information in Infront of other people for fear that they may be judged. The findings are collected and reported as a group and not an individual within a group. This may greatly undermine the opinions of some participants in the groups. A large volume of information is collected from the groups that may be tiresome to collect and compute. Even though the sessions are recorded, sorting through data and summarizing may take a long time. However, if the researcher is able to identify the themes and how they relate to the research variables within the sample population, a valid conclusion can be made. Sometimes, opinion change may occur during the group discussions, which may affect the outcomes and necessitate further research leading to more concrete suggestions; however, this may make the research process longer. Several methods can be used to code data and analyze it, such as the QDA data miner that will help group the qualitative data into the identified themes and categories.
This method is the best approach to highlight the priorities, attitudes, understanding frameworks, and languages of participants. It encourages the participants to explore and generate their own questions and their analysis from common experiences. It is also the best approach to identifying the cultural values and the norms of a group. Hence, it helps provide insight into the operation of group social processes in knowledge articulation. The data collected from this study cannot be termed as more or less authentic compared to data collected through another method. Still, there are particular types of questions that this methodology is best suited, for example, experiences and attitudes which cannot be collected through other data methods like interviews and questionnaires.
Conclusion
Focus groups are mainly being used in healthcare research. The method involves bringing a group of people together and listening to their views, believes, and observing their attitudes. The generation of data and analysis may be cumbersome due to the large volume of data collected from the discussions. However, the method is straight forward and best-suited for social research that other methods like questionnaires are less appropriate.
Case-based Research
Summary
Case studies are founded on an in-depth analysis of an event, a group, or a single individual to explore the causes of basic principles (Press Academia, 2018). In return, the case study approach offers a systematic way to approach an issue, collect and analyze data as well as report results. Case-based research should be used to justify the study topic and help the readers be better acquainted with the study topic. This research methodology also exists within a structured qualitative paradigm.
Critique
The methodology is described beginning with the appropriate research issues by selecting and analyzing cases of data based on theoretical as well as literal replication to help evaluate the quality of research. According to Hancock & Algozzine (2017), a case study can be used in both quantitative and qualitative research and can be used for both scientific inquiries and social research. Nonetheless, a lot of details can be collected that would not normally be collected using other research designs, and hence, the data is richer. Case studies also employ other research methods to show how data can be collected; these include questionnaires, interviews, and observations (Harrison et al., 2017).
The proponents of the method argue that it is comprehensive and can be used for a wide spectrum of problems. On the other hand, the critiques argue that a study of a small number of cases can offer no support in establishing the generality of the findings. Others believe that cases biases findings, and hence case studies should be used as an exploratory tool (Daniel, 2017). Nonetheless, one is likely to carry forward mistakes reported on the cases used in the previous cases selected for a study.
The meaningfulness and validity that is generated from this qualitative inquiry have to do with the richness of information of the selected cases and the capability of the researchers. Reinforcing research with peer-reviewed articles will make the work reliable. While using a case study, the researcher should outline the method of data collection, including the sample size. By so doing, the readers will able to follow what was done during the research easily.
When an in-depth and holistic investigation is needed, the case study is the ideal methodology. It is suited for experimental and quasi-experimental studies, and the data analysis and collection hide some details. This makes it easy to focus on a subject matter and also do analysis where only the desired data will be analyzed (Tellis, 1997). This makes the results less generalize and hence applicable in real life.
Conclusion
The case-based methodology is coherent and rigorous based on a justified philosophical position for researchers doing industry or academic research. The method has been presented as rigorous but also coherent and hence appropriate for researchers. The author has done a great job in explaining the research methodology and has made it easy for persons who are not familiar with the case study method to follow. With a clear understanding, there are minimal errors in the approach of this article in relation to the study topic.
Inductive theory generation: A grounded approach to a business inquiry
Summary
The article by Douglas (2003), seeks to demystify grounded theory by establishing a research practice within the comparative business research context. It also integrates the naturalistic examples drawn from authors’ business research implicating the efficacy of this theory in gaining a deeper understanding of business-bound phenomena. The methodology is socially focused, and the key questions on what is happening and why led to the generation of underpinning knowledge and substantive theories.
Critique
The research approach has mostly been referred to but barely used in business research, which is one of the main reasons it is less developed than other methods. It is only applicable in qualitative research where the researcher aims at creating a theory that explains an action, process, or interaction. When used in a study, the approach helps gain a deeper understanding of business bounded phenomena and key questions on what is happening and why it leads to the generation underpinning knowledge and substantive theories. Data must be clearly presented by the researcher from interview notes and existing artifacts and literature. The researchers should have a clear data collection method elaborated or specifically stated, for example, questionnaires, interview schedules, document analysis, etc. The study approach also necessitates the researcher to have an open mind and do away with any preconceived notions on what will be found. When the research is completed, the researcher should be able to examine the theories to see where the new theory belongs in the discipline. This makes this approach a bit complicated compared to other methods like case studies, which involves data analysis and making a conclusion based on data.
The approach needs repeated and extensive sorting through the data, analyzing and re-analyzing it several times to identify a new theory. This makes the approach best suited to research projects where such a phenomenon has been previously explored. In this approach, the investigator is the primary data collection instrument, and this means that he/she must be able to inductively derive the denotation of the data. The outcome will be the theory that is grounded in the data (Hancock & Algozzine, 2017). The research method, therefore, will help come up with an explanation of everyday situations.
Douglas (2003), states that the population or the sample of research should be selected prior to the commencement of the research. The research population is often a crucial element to put in a study since its scope is large. The methods require the researcher to have a well-established sample population. Without limitations on the region or area where the research was carried out, it is less credible than its goals.
Due to the method’s complexity, it is important to consider the purpose of the research first and the method best suited to test the stated (Gabriel, 2013). The theory is based on a formal and systematic process of data collection, analysis, and theory generation. The researchers should ensure that there are no misleading interpretations or inaccuracies from the perceptions of the actors that are being studied in the research.
In addition to that, the approach will support the emergence of conceptual theories that will aid in generating great theories that can address a border-line inquiry or be a part of the ground theory that can be employed in businesses. The principles governing the theory states that the results must be empirical in nature. Therefore, for the research to be set up, it should be limited to empirical data and should be analyzed and explained to help come up with information that can be used to classify the results in a specified discipline.
Inductive theory generation is not a common methodology to be used in research. It is often tiresome and leads to more theories. However, the theory commences from a naturalistic situation, which helps us better understand the nature and rationale of interactions.
Conclusion
Inductive theory generation is still a concept that has been barely employed in many types of research. The method is best suited for business researches and social research. The data analysis section of the research is tedious. It demands analysis and re-analysis of data, after which the researcher will come with a theory and find the most appropriate discipline for it. The theory will emerge from conceptual categories but will be grounded on the data from the study.
References
Daniel, D. (2007). Case study methodology: Fundamentals and critical analysis. Cognition, Brain, Behavior, 11(2), 299.
Douglas, D. (2003). Inductive theory generation: A grounded approach to business inquiry. Electronic journal of business research methods, 2(1), 47-54.
Freeman, T. (2006). ‘Best practice’ in focus group research: making sense of different views. Journal of advanced nursing, 56(5), 491-497.
Gabriel, D. (2013). Inductive and deductive approaches to research. https://deborahgabriel.com/2013/03/17/inductive-and-deductive-approaches-to-research/
Hancock, D. R., & Algozzine, B. (2017). Doing case study research: A practical guide for beginning researchers. Teachers College Press.
Harrison, H., Birks, M., Franklin, R., & Mills, J. (2017, January). Case study research: Foundations and methodological orientations. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (Vol. 18, No. 1).
Hyett, N., Kenny, A., & Dickson-Swift, V. (2014). Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports. International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 9(1), 23606.
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: introducing focus groups. Bmj, 311(7000), 299-302.
Press Academia. (2018). Definition of Case Study. https://www.pressacademia.org/definition-of-case-study/#:~:text=A%20case%20study%20is%20a%20research%20strategy%20and%20an%20empirical,the%20causes%20of%20underlying%20principles.
Tellis, W. (1997). Application of a case study methodology. The qualitative report, 3(3), 1-19.
Vermeire, E., Van Royen, P., Griffiths, F., Coenen, S., Peremans, L., & Hendrickx, K. (2002). The critical appraisal of focus group research articles. The European Journal of General Practice, 8(3), 104-108.