Qualitativeresearch (QR) helps us to understand the societal realm of the creation ofthings and to investigate in-depth how things became the way they are. If the studyquestion involves exploring experience of people something, or whatever theirviews are, exploring a new area where issues are not yet understood or properlyidentified (for example before developing questionnaire items), assessingwhether a new service is implementable, looking at ‘ real-life’ context, or asensitive topic where one need flexibility to avoid causing distress and probablyneeds to discuss using qualitative methodology.
Denzinand Lincoln (2000: 3) claim that qualitative research involves an interpretiveand naturalistic approach. Qualitative researchers mine information from reallife settings and deduce meaning from the information given by people. QR’smain concept is to explore people’s life and its approaches generate wordsrather than numbers for research findings (Bowling 2002). Shank (2002: 5) expressesqualitative research as procedure that deals with methodical first hand surveyabout life like situations. By methodical might mean strategic and well-orderedmethod that is cast-off to source data grounded on the participant’sexperiences and to deduce meaning from the findings. Empirical, means that thistype of inquiry is stuck in the world of skill. Inquest into how other investigatorstry to find out how other investigators evaluate their experience.
DeVellis(2006) stated that validity is whereby an apparatus measures anything intendedto be measured. Validity forces reliability of a tool, but a tool can be invalidand reliable. For example, a clock might be five minutes ahead. The clock willbe reliable because it will constantly remain five minutes ahead but will beinvalid because it will be showing incorrect time.
Accordingto Crocker and Algina (2001) Reliability refers to the extent to which studiescan be replicated. It requires that a researcher using the same methods canobtain the same results as those of a prior study. This poses a titanic problemfor researchers concerned with superhuman stories.
When carrying a researchusing qualitative research most of the time it might be challenging to carryout a research using a group of participants in 2017 and expect to get the samegroup and then to get similar responses 2018. It is trick because with timepeople might change their personality and transfer. Qualitativeresearch is unreliable and inherently invalid when the findings of a researchfails to show authority and dependability. The researcher’s bias can also mystifythe interpretation of data which would cause the research to be regarded withdisbelief. According to Leininger (1991: 92) the researcher need to be trustedbefore they even try to come up with correct and trustworthy findings.
Theresearcher’s values might also hinder the outcomes and even the dressing canresult into falsification of the discoveries. Still researcher can undergo in-depthand laborious training before attempting to carry out a research. QR can bereliable and valid if it is combined with quantitative and secondary andprimary research which is called triangulation or methodology pluralism(Brryman, A. 2001). Triangulation has a lot of strong point which are: skill tocross check research findings, may be used as a facilitating tool for exampledata gathered can be used to plan and design a goal oriented questionnaires orsurvey and may support and compliment the research carried out. Triangulationcan also be used to check and scrutinise information from different authors(Thatcher, 2010).
Clandininand Connelly (2000) stated that in QR subjectivity is both outstanding strengthand a possible weaknesses. The research technics that can be used to drawinformation sometimes has weaknesses it comes with and researcher try toovercome it and reap the enormous benefits of setting subjective. Qualitativework requires reflection on the part of researchers both before and during theresearch process, as a way of providing context and understanding for readers. Qualitative methods generally aim tounderstand the experiences and attitudes of participant and the community. Thismethod aim to answer the what, why and how than to answer how many or how muchand to what extent? QR is interested in explaining real life stories.
That isto say, it targets to understand the world in which. It is concerned with the communalfeatures of our world and seeks to answer questions about: Why individualsbehave in certain way, how opinions and attitudes are formed, how people areaffected by the events that go on around them and reason cultures become theway it has. Morethan that though, while not all qualitative researchers are on a mission toproduce ‘ the general picture’ of how things work, the qualitative habit ofintimately connecting environment with explanation means that QR is capable ofproducing very well-founded cross-contextual generalities, rather than aspiringto more fragile de-contextual versions (Payne and Payne 2004). However qualitativeresearching is exciting and important.
It is a highly rewarding activitybecause it engages us with things that matter, in ways that matter. Throughqualitative research one can explore a wide array of measurements of the socialworld, including the texture and weave of everyday life, the understandings, experiences and imaginings of our research participants, the ways that socialprocesses, institutions, discourses or relationships work, and the significanceof the meanings that they generate. can do all of this qualitatively by usingmethodologies that celebrate richness, depth, nuance, context, multi-dimensionality and complexity rather than being embarrassed orinconvenienced by them. QRis subjective, unreliable and invalid. There are limits to the situations that canbe observed according to their natural settings. The presents of the researchercan cause the participants to be uncomfortable, embarrassed, reserved, shy andcausing them to withhold true feelings. This move will cause the researcher tocome up with unreliable findings.
The researcher may misunderstand people’sbehaviour and researcher may miss out while observing and note taking forexample Big Brother Africa group does not necessarily represent the majority ofpeople in Africa. However for observation to be reliable the observer need tobe part of the group to be observed in order for him to be accepted by the restof the group members which will make it possible for the researcher tounderstand the social phenomenon and how it works. Observation can sometimesproduce reliable findings about certain things for example on how people behave(Payne and Payne Ibid).
Useof small groups can cause the researcher to generalise situations and limit theamount of information collected from individuals and bigger group may make theresearch more difficult and will be difficult for the researcher to make senseof the information collected. Small groups will cause the researcher to findidiosyncratic and it will be wrong for the researcher to judge majority of populationusing this research method. However small groups make it possible to make useof participant’s natural feelings, opinions and perceptions. This techniquerequires the researcher to have knowledge and develop skills in the followingareas: group skills, moderating, listening or observing, facilitating andanalysis so that it will be easy to produce a research that will be reliableand trustworthy. QRis subjective and inherently reliable and valid because collection of data istime consuming. The reason why data is collected using small groups.
QR is moreexpensive because sometimes to get better results one need materials forexample when you want to carry out a research on the effects of poverty onschool children in rural remote areas in Zimbabwe. There is need to havetransport to go to those areas. The researcher need to carry food, cloth tothose children, stationary and arrangements to relocate children from veryserious scenario to children’s home. However QR is used to develop concepts andtheories that help us understand the social world.
Which is called inductivemethod. Information is gathered through face to face encounters throughobservation or interview. Examples of method used for data collection in QR areindividual’s interviews, focus groups, observation and action research. Kirk, J., and Miller, M. (1986) stated that QR is interested with the accuracy andtruthfulness of the information to show its validity.
QRis subjective which causes it to be an invalid and unreliable procedures to usewhen you want to carry out a research. Tycross and Shield, 2004 stated that QR hastended to suggest stereotyped objectives for example Masvingo people are notclever or women are best accommodated in the kitchen. Stereotyped objectivesdoes no bring out the truth and research based on this are invalid andunreliable. Reliability in QR is apprehensive with the dependability, immovability and repeatability of the informant’s accounts as well as the investigations’ability to collect and record information accurately (Selltiz, Wrightsman andCook 1976). The repeatability of the results whereby a researcher carried out aresearch for example in 2016 about child headed families and recorded theverdict and if the researcher goes back to the same environment to carry outthe same research in 2017 it might not be possible to come up with the same discoveries. Howeverqualitative research has extraordinary set of strength which is sometimesforgotten in the face of criticisms.
It is ‘ merely’ circumstantial or at best explanatory, and that it is practised in casual and random ways. Conversely qualitativeresearch devours massive potential, and its practitioners face some major tests. It deserves to be done well so that it can make fully justified claims for itsown significance, effectiveness and meaning. Furthermore, it still hasarguments to win and a reputation to build and maintain in the social sciences. Yet it cannot be done by rote or by recipe.
It requires a highly activeengagement from its practitioners, and a great deal of effort – intellectual, practical, physical and emotional. QR is to learn how to proceed, to build andmaintain its own reputation, in a manner which is sensitive to these importantissues, without getting hindered within an ultimately self-defeating debate. QRshould be systematically and rigorously conducted. I do not think there are anyexcuses for a casual or ad hoc approach to qualitative research. This should, however, be distinguished from a rigid or structured approach, which is usuallynot appropriate for qualitative research. QR should be accountable for itsquality and its claims, or to use Clive Seale’s terminology it should be’fallibilistic’ (1999: 6).
However according to Crocker and Algina (2001) thetest developer has a responsibility to “ identify the sources of measurementerror that would be most detrimental to useful score interpretation and designa reliability study that permits such errors to occur so that their effects canbe assessed.” Before booming out a research the researcher need to carry out apretesting or pilot testing and it gives a chance to test an instrument andallows the identification of errors before the instrument is used in theresearch. The instrument can be modified to lessening measurement error.