Qualitative Methods: The Commonly Used Set
Three slides define five methods and one slide defines four approaches. Between them they are the longest run of definitions in the week — and no method among them is given a drawback, a duration, a data volume or a worked example.
The five methods, as the deck defines them
Three consecutive slides carry the title Commonly used methods. Everything the source supplies for each method is in the table below — definition, elaborations and hedges. Where a column is empty, nothing is supplied.
THE FIVE METHODS AND EVERYTHING ATTACHED TO EACH
| Method | The source's definition | What else the slide attaches |
|---|---|---|
| Participant observation | "the researcher becomes part of the context being observed" | Four issues, named only. A requirement to be accepted as "one of us". |
| Direct observation | "The researcher doesn't become a participant in the context but tries to remain unobtrusive" | Watching; often uses technology to record; observations focused on certain people or situations; does not take as long as participant observation. |
| Unstructured interviewing | "direct interaction between the researcher and respondent(s)" | Four points of difference from structured interviewing, including one stated drawback. |
| Case studies | "an intensive study of a specific context or person" | "Uses a combination of methods including direct observation, unstructured interviewing." |
| Documentation | "Written materials and other documents from organisational records" | Eight kinds of document, given as examples. Data "consist of excerpts from documents summarised to record and preserve context". |
Five methods. The source states no count, gives no numbering, and presents the set with no ranking or selection rule.
Participant observation and the requirement to become "one of us"
Four issues are named. Read them as the questions the method raises, because that is all the source does with them.
- How to enter the context.
- Role as a participant.
- Collection and storage of field notes.
- Analysis of data.
Direct observation, and the only duration claim in the week
Direct observation is defined against participant observation rather than in its own right: the researcher "doesn't become a participant in the context but tries to remain unobtrusive". Preserve the hedges — the researcher tries to be unobtrusive, and often uses technology.
- "The researcher is watching and often uses technology to record observations."
- "The observations are focussed on certain people or situations."
- "Does not take as long as participant observation because of the more distanced relationship."
Unstructured interviewing, defined by what it lacks
The definition is one line — "direct interaction between the researcher and respondent(s)" — followed by four points distinguishing it from structured interviewing.
- "no formal structured instrument or protocol, although there are some guiding questions"
- "interviewer is free to guide the conversation in any direction of interest that may come up"
- "particularly useful for exploring a topic broadly"
- "more difficult to analyse interview data, especially when summarising across respondents."
Case studies and documentation
These two share a slide and each carries a defect worth knowing before you build a design on it.
WHAT EACH DEFINITION LEAVES OPEN
| Definition | The problem | What you have to decide yourself |
|---|---|---|
| Case studies | No case-selection criterion, no number of cases, no boundary rule. "A specific context or person" is the whole of the guidance. | How the case is chosen, how many, and where the case stops. |
| Documentation — scope | The definition restricts the source to "organisational records" and then lists journals, letters, artistic works and photographs, which are not organisational records. | Whether your documentary sources have to be organisational at all. |
| Documentation — operation | Data are to "consist of excerpts from documents summarised". An excerpt is verbatim; a summary is not. The instruction is to do both to the same material. | Which operation you actually performed, and how you recorded the difference. |
| Documentation — boundary | Written responses to open-ended surveys are classed here as documentation. The earlier week's grid lists self-completion questionnaires and documentary analysis as two separate methods. | Which method category your survey responses belong to, given that the source allocates them to two. |
Eight kinds of document are named. The source's hedge is "including", so the eight are examples and not a closed list.
The four key terms on the preceding slide
One slide earlier the deck gives four terms under the heading Key terms. They are reproduced here because three of the five methods above depend on them, and because the slide's own groupings do not hold.
The four terms, quoted
- Ethnography
- "study of the culture of a defined group". "Most common approach is participant observation where the researcher becomes part of context and takes extensive notes".
- Phenomenology
- "emphasizes individual interpretation of experiences and perceptions of reality".
- Field research
- "a broad approach to qualitative research or a method of gathering data. The researcher moves into the situation and takes extensive notes that are coded and analysed in various ways".
- Grounded theory
- "theory is grounded in observation - it is a complex iterative process. New observations lead to new linkages leading to revisions in the theory and more data collection."
What none of the five comes with
This is the finding that matters most for a practitioner choosing between them. The set is defined and not evaluated.
Choosing between them on a live project
Because the source supplies no selection rule for this set, the routing below is built from the distinctions the definitions themselves make — the researcher's position, the data's form, and the one drawback the slides state. It is this handbook's synthesis, not the source's instruction.
What the definitions themselves imply
What to carry forward
- Five methods are defined: participant observation, direct observation, unstructured interviewing, case studies and documentation. The definitions are usable; the evaluations are absent.
- Participant observation requires the researcher to be accepted as "one of us", and the study notes name that same embeddedness as a principal source of bias.
- Unstructured interviewing is defined against a structured method the source never describes, and concedes a protocol inside the bullet that denies one.
- Case study and documentation both leave scope decisions to you — case boundaries and selection on one side, organisational scope and excerpt-versus-summary on the other.
- Of the four key terms, two cannot be distinguished from each other, one is defined circularly with no stopping rule, and one is never mentioned again.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between participant observation and direct observation here?
The researcher's position. In participant observation the researcher becomes part of the context; in direct observation the researcher does not participate and tries to remain unobtrusive, watching and often recording with technology. The source adds only that direct observation does not take as long.
How many cases make a case study?
The source does not say. Its whole definition is an intensive study of a specific context or person, using a combination of methods. No case-selection criterion, case count or boundary rule appears anywhere, so those decisions are yours to make and to state.
Is ethnography the same as participant observation?
The material gives two incompatible answers. The earlier research design week lists them in one combined cell as a single method; the qualitative week makes participant observation the most common approach within ethnography and then defines it separately as a method in its own right.
Does the source say when to stop collecting data under grounded theory?
No. Grounded theory is described as a complex iterative process running from new observations to new linkages to revisions to more data collection, with no stopping rule stated. Theoretical saturation is not named anywhere in the material.
Can I use these five as my method catalogue?
As a set of definitions, yes. As a basis for choosing between methods, not on its own — the source attaches no benefits, drawbacks, durations, data volumes or worked examples to four of the five, and a different slide in the same deck names three entirely different techniques as the typical ones.
References and source attribution
- Supplied teaching source, Week 9: The nature of qualitative research — slide deck, slides 12-15 (key terms and the commonly used methods) and slide 7 (characteristics of the qualitative approach).
- Supplied teaching source, Week 7: Research Design — slide 13, the ten-method grid in which ethnography and participant observation share one cell and structured, semi-structured and unstructured interviewing are listed without definitions.
- Supplied teaching source, Week 9 study notes — the strengths and limitations of qualitative methods, including researcher embeddedness as a source of bias.
- Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (eds) 2005, Handbook of qualitative research, 3rd ed., Sage. Cited in the Week 9 study notes for the definition of qualitative research that names participant observation and case studies as its characteristic methods.
- Merriam, S. 2009, Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation, Jossey-Bass. Listed in the Week 9 references of the supplied source.
Suggested questions for Ask KEVOS
- Which of the five methods suits a study I cannot get insider access to?
- What exactly does the source say about becoming accepted as one of the group?
- How do ethnography, field research and participant observation relate in this material?
- What do I have to decide myself before running a case study under these definitions?
- Why do two slides in the same deck name completely different qualitative techniques?