1. The foundations of qualitative research
The nature of qualitative research
Qualitative research is difficult to define clearly and has no paradigm on its own nor does
qualitative research have distinct set of methods or practices that are entirely its own.
Qualitative research is often described as a naturalistic, interpretative approach, concerned with
exploring phenomena and taking the perspectives and accounts of research participants as
starting point.
Qualitative research is often associated with specific kinds of data, usually involving words or
images rather than numbers.
Common characteristics of qualitative research
Aims objectives that are directed at providing an in-depth and interpreted understanding
of the social world of research participants by learning about the sense they make of their
social and material circumstances, their experiences, perspectives and histories.
The use of non-standardized, adaptable methods of data generations that are sensitive to
the social context of the study and be adapted for each participants or case to allow the
exploration of emergent issues.
Data that are detailed, rich and complex
Analysis that retrains complexity and nuance and respects the uniqueness of each
participants or case as well as recurrent, cross-cutting themes.
Openness to emergent categories and theories at the analysis and interpretation stage.
Outputs that include detailed descriptions of the phenomena being researched, grounded
in the perspectives and accounts of the participants.
A reflexive approach, where the role and perspectives of the researchers, reflexivity also
means reporting their personal experiences of the ‘field’.
Ontology positions
Ontology: the nature of the world and what there is to know about it.
Realism: external reality exists independent of our beliefs or understanding.
Variants of realism include:
1. Naïve realism: reality and be observed directly and accurately
2. Cautious realism: reality can be known approximately or imperfectly rather than
accurately
3. Depth realism: reality consists of different levels, empirical domain that is made of up
what we experience through senses. Actual domain that exists regardless of whether or
not its observed. Real domain that refers to underlying processes and mechanism.
, 4. Subtle realism: external reality exists but its not only known through the human mind and
socially constructed meanings.
5. Materialism: a variant of realism which recognizes only material features such as
economic relations or physical features of the world as holding reality. Values, beliefs or
experiences are ‘phenomena’ that is features that arise from but do not shape the material
world.
Idealism: no external reality exists independent of our beliefs and understandings.
1. Subtle or contextual or collective idealism: the social world is made up of representations
constructed and shared by people in particular contexts.
2. Relativism or radical idealism: there is no shared social reality, only a series of different
constructions.
Epistemological positions
Epistemological: how we can know or find out about the social world and the limits to that
knowledge.
Inductive logic: involves building knowledge from the bottom up through observations of the
world, which in turn provides the basis for developing theories or laws.
Deductive logic: top down approach to knowledge. It starts with theory from which a hypothesis
is derived and applied to observations about the world. The hypothesis will then be confirmed or
rejected, thereby strengthening or weakening the theory.
* What is the difference between inductive and deductive logic? The main difference between
inductive and deductive reasoning is that inductive reasoning aims at developing a theory
while deductive reasoning aims at testing an existing theory. Inductive reasoning moves from
specific observations to broad generalizations, and deductive reasoning the other way around.
* Which is better inductive or deductive method? Inductive reasoning makes general, most
probable conclusions about evidence that has been observed. Inductive reasoning may not
always have strong conclusions on the validity of its hypothesis. Deductive reasoning will
always have strong conclusions as to whether the premise is valid or invalid.
Retroductive logic: involves the researcher identifying the structures or mechanism that may
have produced patterns in the data, trying different models for ‘fit’.
Abductive logic: involves abducting a technical account, using the researchers categories from
participants own accounts of everyday activities, ideas or beliefs.
Foundational vs fallibilistic models of research-based knowledge: A foundational models of
research-based knowledge assumes it is possible to mirror ‘reality’ accurately. Fallibilistic model
treats all the knowledge claims as provisional.
Value mediated: hold all that knowledge that is affected by the values of the person who
produces/receives it.
, Correspondence theory of truth: a statement is true if it matches independent reality
Coherence theory of truth: an account is true as a representation of the world if its supported
by several other accounts- if different accounts ‘coherent’ with each other.
Pragmatic theory of truth: beliefs are true if they have practical utility- if believing them is
useful, helpful and productive to people.
pragmatism
In line with this principle that there is an objective reality, research methods within this training
are approached extremely pragmatically. Which research method should be chosen depends on
the research question. Roughly speaking, we distinguish four research methods: If the aim is to
map out what is known about a particular topic (from research), a systematic review (or, if the
data allow, a meta-analysis) of those studies is carried out. If little is known about a subject
because little or no research has yet been done on it, or if the goal is to map thought processes,
cognitions or emotions in detail, then a qualitative study is carried out. If the intention is to
investigate how strongly variables are related, a quantitative survey is carried out. If a causal
link is investigated, an experiment or an extremely well thought-out longitudinal survey is
needed.
Epistemological starting point: correspondence and fallibilism
It follows from our premise that an objective reality exists that truth is defined as the extent to
which a statement is in line with that objective reality. At the same time, we recognize that
reality is so complex and variable that statements like the one we usually encounter are
probably never completely "true." In addition, researchers play a role in the way data is
collected, analyzed and interpreted in both quantitative and qualitative research. That is why
we advocate empathetic neutrality within this program, which translates to the need to be
transparent and explicit about possible biases and to strive to remain as neutral and objective
as possible.
Ontological starting point: realism
We assume that there is an objective reality that can be observed and interpreted. With this
observation there is always a 'measurement error'; perception is never perfect. How accurate
observations are depends, among other things, on what is observed; a scale can measure
weight more accurately than a human. In addition, people also interpret their perception,
which introduces bias (disruption). That interpretation is a consequence of one's memories and
the way people process information, and therefore often differs from person to person. In a
conversation about loneliness, for example, all participants will use a slightly different definition
of loneliness, which is of course largely shared. This does not mean that loneliness does not
exist in objective reality; after all, it is theoretically possible to dissect all possible definitions of
loneliness in their components, to measure them, and thus to map the 'general definition of
loneliness'..
