qualitative research methods in social work

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Qualitative Methods in Social Work Research

• Deborah K. Padgett - New York University, USA
• Description

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

“Padgett is the ultimate ‘pro’ researcher, methods expert, and communicator. This is the one book you need for master's study, professional practice research, doctoral study, and your continuing research agenda!”

“Dr. Padgett’s text Qualitative Methods in Social Work Research is informative and easy for students to read and understand. The book offers clear advice to students about how to design and execute qualitative research studies.” 

“Padgett uses her extensive experience to expertly achieve two seemingly contradictory ends: educate about the conceptual underpinnings of qualitative research methods, and provide the concrete steps needed to carry them out. As a research discipline that is often not fully understood by many, Qualitative Methods in Social Work Research will be appreciated by academics and students alike.”

“Padgett knows how to make students and even lecturers curious about qualitative methods and she copes in her book very well the gap between an overview and a deeper understanding of research methods.”

The book offers a good overview of qualitative methods that can be used within and beyond the field of social work- I think students struggling with the aims and methods of qualitative research can find it very helpful

A very informative and accessible resource for research and teaching!

Received too late for current class. However, I would strongly recommend this text for any social research methods class. The book is filled with excellent examples and wonderful suggested readings at the end of each chapter. This is one of the most comprehensive approaches to qualitative research methods I have ever read. I believe this text would serve upper-division undergraduates and grasduate stduents very well.

• Expanded discussions of the six most commonly used qualitative approaches address ethnography, grounded theory, case study analysis, narrative approaches, phenomenological approaches, and action-oriented research.
• Additional comprehensive coverage of topics includes action-oriented research, innovations in visual (photography and video) and Internet/online data collection, and recent advancements in meta-syntheses and implementation science.
• Early introductions on ethical issues and strategies for rigor cover emotional issues for both researchers and study participants.
• More in-depth discussion on cross-cultural and cross-language research prepares readers for engagement in community and multinational research.   
• Data collection techniques in one chapter create a single point of reference for students and faculty to find examples of coding, use of ATLAS.ti software (including screenshots), codebook development, and online data collection.
• A broad multidisciplinary perspective rooted in social work is applicable to other practice professions such as nursing, education, family and community medicine, public health, psychology, and public administration.
• An emphasis on practical use is seen through exemplars of qualitative studies, information on computer software for qualitative data analysis, and detailed guidelines for writing a qualitative research proposal (Appendix).
• Specific illustrative case examples from the literature and the author’s own research aid readers in understanding concepts.
• A straightforward and conversational style makes this book accessible and engaging for readers.
• Chapters thoughtfully organized follow the sequence of conducting a qualitative study, encouraging proper application of representative research methods.

Sample Materials & Chapters

For instructors, select a purchasing option, related products.

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation

Social Work

• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Social Work Research Methods

Introduction.

• History of Social Work Research Methods
• Feasibility Issues Influencing the Research Process
• Measurement Methods
• Existing Scales
• Group Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Evaluating Outcome
• Single-System Designs for Evaluating Outcome
• Program Evaluation
• Surveys and Sampling
• Introductory Statistics Texts
• Advanced Aspects of Inferential Statistics
• Qualitative Research Methods
• Qualitative Data Analysis
• Historical Research Methods
• Meta-Analysis and Systematic Reviews
• Research Ethics
• Culturally Competent Research Methods
• Teaching Social Work Research Methods

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Community-Based Participatory Research
• Economic Evaluation
• Evidence-based Social Work Practice
• Evidence-based Social Work Practice: Finding Evidence
• Evidence-based Social Work Practice: Issues, Controversies, and Debates
• Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs
• Impact of Emerging Technology in Social Work Practice
• Implementation Science and Practice
• Interviewing
• Measurement, Scales, and Indices
• Meta-analysis
• Occupational Social Work
• Postmodernism and Social Work
• Qualitative Research
• Research, Best Practices, and Evidence-based Group Work
• Social Intervention Research
• Social Work Profession
• Systematic Review Methods
• Technology for Social Work Interventions

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Child Welfare Effectiveness
• Immigration and Child Welfare
• International Human Trafficking
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Social Work Research Methods by Allen Rubin LAST REVIEWED: 28 April 2017 LAST MODIFIED: 14 December 2009 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195389678-0008

Social work research means conducting an investigation in accordance with the scientific method. The aim of social work research is to build the social work knowledge base in order to solve practical problems in social work practice or social policy. Investigating phenomena in accordance with the scientific method requires maximal adherence to empirical principles, such as basing conclusions on observations that have been gathered in a systematic, comprehensive, and objective fashion. The resources in this entry discuss how to do that as well as how to utilize and teach research methods in social work. Other professions and disciplines commonly produce applied research that can guide social policy or social work practice. Yet no commonly accepted distinction exists at this time between social work research methods and research methods in allied fields relevant to social work. Consequently useful references pertaining to research methods in allied fields that can be applied to social work research are included in this entry.

This section includes basic textbooks that are used in courses on social work research methods. Considerable variation exists between textbooks on the broad topic of social work research methods. Some are comprehensive and delve into topics deeply and at a more advanced level than others. That variation is due in part to the different needs of instructors at the undergraduate and graduate levels of social work education. Most instructors at the undergraduate level prefer shorter and relatively simplified texts; however, some instructors teaching introductory master’s courses on research prefer such texts too. The texts in this section that might best fit their preferences are by Yegidis and Weinbach 2009 and Rubin and Babbie 2007 . The remaining books might fit the needs of instructors at both levels who prefer a more comprehensive and deeper coverage of research methods. Among them Rubin and Babbie 2008 is perhaps the most extensive and is often used at the doctoral level as well as the master’s and undergraduate levels. Also extensive are Drake and Jonson-Reid 2007 , Grinnell and Unrau 2007 , Kreuger and Neuman 2006 , and Thyer 2001 . What distinguishes Drake and Jonson-Reid 2007 is its heavy inclusion of statistical and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) content integrated with each chapter. Grinnell and Unrau 2007 and Thyer 2001 are unique in that they are edited volumes with different authors for each chapter. Kreuger and Neuman 2006 takes Neuman’s social sciences research text and adapts it to social work. The Practitioner’s Guide to Using Research for Evidence-based Practice ( Rubin 2007 ) emphasizes the critical appraisal of research, covering basic research methods content in a relatively simplified format for instructors who want to teach research methods as part of the evidence-based practice process instead of with the aim of teaching students how to produce research.

Drake, Brett, and Melissa Jonson-Reid. 2007. Social work research methods: From conceptualization to dissemination . Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

This introductory text is distinguished by its use of many evidence-based practice examples and its heavy coverage of statistical and computer analysis of data.

Grinnell, Richard M., and Yvonne A. Unrau, eds. 2007. Social work research and evaluation: Quantitative and qualitative approaches . 8th ed. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Contains chapters written by different authors, each focusing on a comprehensive range of social work research topics.

Kreuger, Larry W., and W. Lawrence Neuman. 2006. Social work research methods: Qualitative and quantitative applications . Boston: Pearson, Allyn, and Bacon.

An adaptation to social work of Neuman's social sciences research methods text. Its framework emphasizes comparing quantitative and qualitative approaches. Despite its title, quantitative methods receive more attention than qualitative methods, although it does contain considerable qualitative content.

Rubin, Allen. 2007. Practitioner’s guide to using research for evidence-based practice . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

This text focuses on understanding quantitative and qualitative research methods and designs for the purpose of appraising research as part of the evidence-based practice process. It also includes chapters on instruments for assessment and monitoring practice outcomes. It can be used at the graduate or undergraduate level.

Rubin, Allen, and Earl R. Babbie. 2007. Essential research methods for social work . Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks Cole.

This is a shorter and less advanced version of Rubin and Babbie 2008 . It can be used for research methods courses at the undergraduate or master's levels of social work education.

Rubin, Allen, and Earl R. Babbie. Research Methods for Social Work . 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks Cole, 2008.

This comprehensive text focuses on producing quantitative and qualitative research as well as utilizing such research as part of the evidence-based practice process. It is widely used for teaching research methods courses at the undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral levels of social work education.

Thyer, Bruce A., ed. 2001 The handbook of social work research methods . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

This comprehensive compendium includes twenty-nine chapters written by esteemed leaders in social work research. It covers quantitative and qualitative methods as well as general issues.

Yegidis, Bonnie L., and Robert W. Weinbach. 2009. Research methods for social workers . 6th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

This introductory paperback text covers a broad range of social work research methods and does so in a briefer fashion than most lengthier, hardcover introductory research methods texts.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Social Work »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Adolescent Depression
• Adolescent Pregnancy
• Adolescents
• Adoption Home Study Assessments
• Adult Protective Services in the United States
• African Americans
• Aging out of foster care
• Aging, Physical Health and
• Alcohol and Drug Abuse Problems
• Alcohol and Drug Problems, Prevention of Adolescent and Yo...
• Alcohol Problems: Practice Interventions
• Alcohol Use Disorder
• Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias
• Anti-Oppressive Practice
• Asian Americans
• Asian-American Youth
• Autism Spectrum Disorders
• Baccalaureate Social Workers
• Behavioral Health
• Behavioral Social Work Practice
• Bereavement Practice
• Bisexuality
• Brief Therapies in Social Work: Task-Centered Model and So...
• Bullying and Social Work Intervention
• Canadian Social Welfare, History of
• Case Management in Mental Health in the United States
• Central American Migration to the United States
• Child Maltreatment Prevention
• Child Neglect and Emotional Maltreatment
• Child Poverty
• Child Sexual Abuse
• Child Welfare
• Child Welfare and Child Protection in Europe, History of
• Child Welfare Practice with LGBTQ Youth and Families
• Children of Incarcerated Parents
• Christianity and Social Work
• Chronic Illness
• Clinical Social Work Practice with Adult Lesbians
• Clinical Social Work Practice with Males
• Cognitive Behavior Therapies with Diverse and Stressed Pop...
• Cognitive Processing Therapy
• Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy
• Community Development
• Community Policing
• Community-Needs Assessment
• Comparative Social Work
• Computational Social Welfare: Applying Data Science in Soc...
• Conflict Resolution
• Council on Social Work Education
• Counseling Female Offenders
• Criminal Justice
• Crisis Interventions
• Cultural Competence and Ethnic Sensitive Practice
• Culture, Ethnicity, Substance Use, and Substance Use Disor...
• Dementia Care
• Dementia Care, Ethical Aspects of
• Depression and Cancer
• Development and Infancy (Birth to Age Three)
• Differential Response in Child Welfare
• Digital Storytelling for Social Work Interventions
• Direct Practice in Social Work
• Disabilities
• Disability and Disability Culture
• Domestic Violence Among Immigrants
• Early Pregnancy and Parenthood Among Child Welfare–Involve...
• Eating Disorders
• Ecological Framework
• Elder Mistreatment
• End-of-Life Decisions
• Epigenetics for Social Workers
• Ethical Issues in Social Work and Technology
• Ethics and Values in Social Work
• European Institutions and Social Work
• European Union, Justice and Home Affairs in the
• Evidence-based Social Work Practice: Issues, Controversies...
• Families with Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual Parents
• Family Caregiving
• Family Group Conferencing
• Family Policy
• Family Services
• Family Therapy
• Family Violence
• Fathering Among Families Served By Child Welfare
• Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders
• Field Education
• Financial Literacy and Social Work
• Financing Health-Care Delivery in the United States
• Forensic Social Work
• Foster Care
• Foster care and siblings
• Gender, Violence, and Trauma in Immigration Detention in t...
• Generalist Practice and Advanced Generalist Practice
• Grounded Theory
• Group Work across Populations, Challenges, and Settings
• Group Work, Research, Best Practices, and Evidence-based
• Harm Reduction
• Health Care Reform
• Health Disparities
• Health Social Work
• History of Social Work and Social Welfare, 1900–1950
• History of Social Work and Social Welfare, 1950-1980
• History of Social Work and Social Welfare, pre-1900
• History of Social Work from 1980-2014
• History of Social Work in China
• History of Social Work in Northern Ireland
• History of Social Work in the Republic of Ireland
• History of Social Work in the United Kingdom
• HIV/AIDS and Children
• HIV/AIDS Prevention with Adolescents
• Homelessness
• Homelessness: Ending Homelessness as a Grand Challenge
• Homelessness Outside the United States
• Human Needs
• Human Trafficking, Victims of
• Immigrant Integration in the United States
• Immigrant Policy in the United States
• Immigrants and Refugees
• Immigrants and Refugees: Evidence-based Social Work Practi...
• Immigration and Health Disparities
• Immigration and Intimate Partner Violence
• Immigration and Poverty
• Immigration and Spirituality
• Immigration and Substance Use
• Immigration and Trauma
• Impaired Professionals
• Indigenous Peoples
• Individual Placement and Support (IPS) Supported Employmen...
• In-home Child Welfare Services
• Intergenerational Transmission of Maltreatment
• International Social Welfare
• International Social Work
• International Social Work and Education
• International Social Work and Social Welfare in Southern A...
• Internet and Video Game Addiction
• Interpersonal Psychotherapy
• Intervention with Traumatized Populations
• Intimate-Partner Violence
• Juvenile Justice
• Kinship Care
• Korean Americans
• Latinos and Latinas
• Law, Social Work and the
• LGBTQ Populations and Social Work
• Mainland European Social Work, History of
• Major Depressive Disorder
• Management and Administration in Social Work
• Maternal Mental Health
• Medical Illness
• Men: Health and Mental Health Care
• Mental Health
• Mental Health Diagnosis and the Addictive Substance Disord...
• Mental Health Needs of Older People, Assessing the
• Mental Illness: Children
• Mental Illness: Elders
• Microskills
• Middle East and North Africa, International Social Work an...
• Military Social Work
• Mixed Methods Research
• Moral distress and injury in social work
• Motivational Interviewing
• Multiculturalism
• Native Americans
• Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders
• Neighborhood Social Cohesion
• Neuroscience and Social Work
• Nicotine Dependence
• Organizational Development and Change
• Pain Management
• Palliative Care
• Palliative Care: Evolution and Scope of Practice
• Pandemics and Social Work
• Parent Training
• Personalization
• Person-in-Environment
• Philosophy of Science and Social Work
• Physical Disabilities
• Podcasts and Social Work
• Police Social Work
• Political Social Work in the United States
• Positive Youth Development
• Postsecondary Education Experiences and Attainment Among Y...
• Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
• Practice Interventions and Aging
• Practice Interventions with Adolescents
• Practice Research
• Primary Prevention in the 21st Century
• Productive Engagement of Older Adults
• Profession, Social Work
• Program Development and Grant Writing
• Promoting Smart Decarceration as a Grand Challenge
• Psychiatric Rehabilitation
• Psychoanalysis and Psychodynamic Theory
• Psychoeducation
• Psychometrics
• Psychopathology and Social Work Practice
• Psychopharmacology and Social Work Practice
• Psychosocial Framework
• Psychosocial Intervention with Women
• Psychotherapy and Social Work
• Race and Racism
• Readmission Policies in Europe
• Redefining Police Interactions with People Experiencing Me...
• Rehabilitation
• Religiously Affiliated Agencies
• Reproductive Health
• Restorative Justice
• Risk Assessment in Child Protection Services
• Risk Management in Social Work
• Rural Social Work in China
• Rural Social Work Practice
• School Social Work
• School Violence
• School-Based Delinquency Prevention
• Services and Programs for Pregnant and Parenting Youth
• Severe and Persistent Mental Illness: Adults
• Sexual and Gender Minority Immigrants, Refugees, and Asylu...
• Sexual Assault
• Single-System Research Designs
• Social and Economic Impact of US Immigration Policies on U...
• Social Development
• Social Insurance and Social Justice
• Social Justice and Social Work
• Social Movements
• Social Planning
• Social Policy
• Social Policy in Denmark
• Social Security in the United States (OASDHI)
• Social Work and Islam
• Social Work and Social Welfare in East, West, and Central ...
• Social Work and Social Welfare in Europe
• Social Work Education and Research
• Social Work Leadership
• Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries Contributing to the Cla...
• Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries contributing to the fou...
• Social Work Luminaries: Luminaries Who Contributed to Soci...
• Social Work Regulation
• Social Work Research Methods
• Social Work with Interpreters
• Solution-Focused Therapy
• Strategic Planning
• Strengths Perspective
• Strengths-Based Models in Social Work
• Supplemental Security Income
• Survey Research
• Sustainability: Creating Social Responses to a Changing En...
• Syrian Refugees in Turkey
• Task-Centered Practice
• Technology Adoption in Social Work Education
• Technology, Human Relationships, and Human Interaction
• Technology in Social Work
• Terminal Illness
• The Impact of Systemic Racism on Latinxs’ Experiences with...
• Transdisciplinary Science
• Translational Science and Social Work
• Transnational Perspectives in Social Work
• Transtheoretical Model of Change
• Trauma-Informed Care
• Triangulation
• Tribal child welfare practice in the United States
• United States, History of Social Welfare in the
• Universal Basic Income
• Veteran Services
• Vicarious Trauma and Resilience in Social Work Practice wi...
• Vicarious Trauma Redefining PTSD
• Victim Services
• Virtual Reality and Social Work
• Welfare State Reform in France
• Welfare State Theory
• Women and Macro Social Work Practice
• Women's Health Care
• Work and Family in the German Welfare State
• Workforce Development of Social Workers Pre- and Post-Empl...
• Working with Non-Voluntary and Mandated Clients
• Young and Adolescent Lesbians
• Youth at Risk
• Youth Services
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [66.249.64.20|109.248.223.228]
• 109.248.223.228

• Help & FAQ

Qualitative methods in social work research

• Strategies to Reduce Inequality
• Social Work

Research output : Book/Report › Book

Publication series

• Social service
• Socialt arbete

Access to Document

• http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0813/2008011023.html

Fingerprint

• work research Social Sciences 100%
• qualitative method Social Sciences 68%
• social work Social Sciences 61%
• research method Social Sciences 31%
• qualitative research Social Sciences 31%
• nursing Social Sciences 30%
• psychology Social Sciences 27%
• resources Social Sciences 17%

T1 - Qualitative methods in social work research

AU - Padgett, Deborah

N1 - Includes bibliographical references and index

N2 - "Revised and updated, this essential resource - Qualitative Methods in Social Work Research - promotes new ways of thinking by offering new perspectives and collecting the most up-to-date information on qualitative research methods. With this Second Edition, noted author and researcher Deborah K. Padgett continues to deliver a highly readable, tightly woven book that helps humanize data in a meaningful way, linking experiences and perceptions to ideas relevant to a multitude of disciplines." "This multidisciplinary text is essential for advanced students and researchers in social work, nursing, community psychology, and other practice-based disciplines."--Jacket

AB - "Revised and updated, this essential resource - Qualitative Methods in Social Work Research - promotes new ways of thinking by offering new perspectives and collecting the most up-to-date information on qualitative research methods. With this Second Edition, noted author and researcher Deborah K. Padgett continues to deliver a highly readable, tightly woven book that helps humanize data in a meaningful way, linking experiences and perceptions to ideas relevant to a multitude of disciplines." "This multidisciplinary text is essential for advanced students and researchers in social work, nursing, community psychology, and other practice-based disciplines."--Jacket

KW - Social service

KW - Socialt arbete

SN - 1412951933

SN - 1412951925

SN - 9781412951920

SN - 9781412951937

T3 - Sage sourcebooks for the human services

BT - Qualitative methods in social work research

PB - Sage Publications

CY - Thousand Oaks, CA

Social Work Research Methods That Drive the Practice

Social workers advocate for the well-being of individuals, families and communities. But how do social workers know what interventions are needed to help an individual? How do they assess whether a treatment plan is working? What do social workers use to write evidence-based policy?

Social work involves research-informed practice and practice-informed research. At every level, social workers need to know objective facts about the populations they serve, the efficacy of their interventions and the likelihood that their policies will improve lives. A variety of social work research methods make that possible.

Data-Driven Work

Data is a collection of facts used for reference and analysis. In a field as broad as social work, data comes in many forms.

Quantitative vs. Qualitative

As with any research, social work research involves both quantitative and qualitative studies.

Quantitative Research

Answers to questions like these can help social workers know about the populations they serve — or hope to serve in the future.

• How many students currently receive reduced-price school lunches in the local school district?
• How many hours per week does a specific individual consume digital media?
• How frequently did community members access a specific medical service last year?

Quantitative data — facts that can be measured and expressed numerically — are crucial for social work.

Quantitative research has advantages for social scientists. Such research can be more generalizable to large populations, as it uses specific sampling methods and lends itself to large datasets. It can provide important descriptive statistics about a specific population. Furthermore, by operationalizing variables, it can help social workers easily compare similar datasets with one another.

Qualitative Research

Qualitative data — facts that cannot be measured or expressed in terms of mere numbers or counts — offer rich insights into individuals, groups and societies. It can be collected via interviews and observations.

• What attitudes do students have toward the reduced-price school lunch program?
• What strategies do individuals use to moderate their weekly digital media consumption?
• What factors made community members more or less likely to access a specific medical service last year?

Qualitative research can thereby provide a textured view of social contexts and systems that may not have been possible with quantitative methods. Plus, it may even suggest new lines of inquiry for social work research.

Mixed Methods Research

Combining quantitative and qualitative methods into a single study is known as mixed methods research. This form of research has gained popularity in the study of social sciences, according to a 2019 report in the academic journal Theory and Society. Since quantitative and qualitative methods answer different questions, merging them into a single study can balance the limitations of each and potentially produce more in-depth findings.

However, mixed methods research is not without its drawbacks. Combining research methods increases the complexity of a study and generally requires a higher level of expertise to collect, analyze and interpret the data. It also requires a greater level of effort, time and often money.

The Importance of Research Design

Data-driven practice plays an essential role in social work. Unlike philanthropists and altruistic volunteers, social workers are obligated to operate from a scientific knowledge base.

To know whether their programs are effective, social workers must conduct research to determine results, aggregate those results into comprehensible data, analyze and interpret their findings, and use evidence to justify next steps.

Employing the proper design ensures that any evidence obtained during research enables social workers to reliably answer their research questions.

Research Methods in Social Work

The various social work research methods have specific benefits and limitations determined by context. Common research methods include surveys, program evaluations, needs assessments, randomized controlled trials, descriptive studies and single-system designs.

Surveys involve a hypothesis and a series of questions in order to test that hypothesis. Social work researchers will send out a survey, receive responses, aggregate the results, analyze the data, and form conclusions based on trends.

Surveys are one of the most common research methods social workers use — and for good reason. They tend to be relatively simple and are usually affordable. However, surveys generally require large participant groups, and self-reports from survey respondents are not always reliable.

Program Evaluations

Social workers ally with all sorts of programs: after-school programs, government initiatives, nonprofit projects and private programs, for example.

Crucially, social workers must evaluate a program’s effectiveness in order to determine whether the program is meeting its goals and what improvements can be made to better serve the program’s target population.

Evidence-based programming helps everyone save money and time, and comparing programs with one another can help social workers make decisions about how to structure new initiatives. Evaluating programs becomes complicated, however, when programs have multiple goal metrics, some of which may be vague or difficult to assess (e.g., “we aim to promote the well-being of our community”).

Needs Assessments

Social workers use needs assessments to identify services and necessities that a population lacks access to.

Common social work populations that researchers may perform needs assessments on include:

• People in a specific income group
• Everyone in a specific geographic region
• A specific ethnic group
• People in a specific age group

In the field, a social worker may use a combination of methods (e.g., surveys and descriptive studies) to learn more about a specific population or program. Social workers look for gaps between the actual context and a population’s or individual’s “wants” or desires.

For example, a social worker could conduct a needs assessment with an individual with cancer trying to navigate the complex medical-industrial system. The social worker may ask the client questions about the number of hours they spend scheduling doctor’s appointments, commuting and managing their many medications. After learning more about the specific client needs, the social worker can identify opportunities for improvements in an updated care plan.

In policy and program development, social workers conduct needs assessments to determine where and how to effect change on a much larger scale. Integral to social work at all levels, needs assessments reveal crucial information about a population’s needs to researchers, policymakers and other stakeholders. Needs assessments may fall short, however, in revealing the root causes of those needs (e.g., structural racism).

Randomized Controlled Trials

Randomized controlled trials are studies in which a randomly selected group is subjected to a variable (e.g., a specific stimulus or treatment) and a control group is not. Social workers then measure and compare the results of the randomized group with the control group in order to glean insights about the effectiveness of a particular intervention or treatment.

Randomized controlled trials are easily reproducible and highly measurable. They’re useful when results are easily quantifiable. However, this method is less helpful when results are not easily quantifiable (i.e., when rich data such as narratives and on-the-ground observations are needed).

Descriptive Studies

Descriptive studies immerse the researcher in another context or culture to study specific participant practices or ways of living. Descriptive studies, including descriptive ethnographic studies, may overlap with and include other research methods:

• Informant interviews
• Census data
• Observation

By using descriptive studies, researchers may glean a richer, deeper understanding of a nuanced culture or group on-site. The main limitations of this research method are that it tends to be time-consuming and expensive.

Single-System Designs

Unlike most medical studies, which involve testing a drug or treatment on two groups — an experimental group that receives the drug/treatment and a control group that does not — single-system designs allow researchers to study just one group (e.g., an individual or family).

Single-system designs typically entail studying a single group over a long period of time and may involve assessing the group’s response to multiple variables.

For example, consider a study on how media consumption affects a person’s mood. One way to test a hypothesis that consuming media correlates with low mood would be to observe two groups: a control group (no media) and an experimental group (two hours of media per day). When employing a single-system design, however, researchers would observe a single participant as they watch two hours of media per day for one week and then four hours per day of media the next week.

These designs allow researchers to test multiple variables over a longer period of time. However, similar to descriptive studies, single-system designs can be fairly time-consuming and costly.

Graduate research methods in social work

(2 reviews)

Matt DeCarlo, La Salle University

Cory Cummings, Nazareth University

Kate Agnelli, Virginia Commonwealth University

Copyright Year: 2021

ISBN 13: 9781949373219

Publisher: Open Social Work Education

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Laura Montero, Full-time Lecturer and Course Lead, Metropolitan State University of Denver on 12/23/23

Graduate Research Methods in Social Work by DeCarlo, et al., is a comprehensive and well-structured guide that serves as an invaluable resource for graduate students delving into the intricate world of social work research. The book is divided... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

Graduate Research Methods in Social Work by DeCarlo, et al., is a comprehensive and well-structured guide that serves as an invaluable resource for graduate students delving into the intricate world of social work research. The book is divided into five distinct parts, each carefully curated to provide a step-by-step approach to mastering research methods in the field. Topics covered include an intro to basic research concepts, conceptualization, quantitative & qualitative approaches, as well as research in practice. At 800+ pages, however, the text could be received by students as a bit overwhelming.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

Content appears consistent and reliable when compared to similar textbooks in this topic.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

The book's well-structured content begins with fundamental concepts, such as the scientific method and evidence-based practice, guiding readers through the initiation of research projects with attention to ethical considerations. It seamlessly transitions to detailed explorations of both quantitative and qualitative methods, covering topics like sampling, measurement, survey design, and various qualitative data collection approaches. Throughout, the authors emphasize ethical responsibilities, cultural respectfulness, and critical thinking. These are crucial concepts we cover in social work and I was pleased to see these being integrated throughout.

Clarity rating: 5

The level of the language used is appropriate for graduate-level study.

Consistency rating: 5

Book appears to be consistent in the tone and terminology used.

Modularity rating: 4

The images and videos included, help to break up large text blocks.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

Topics covered are well-organized and comprehensive. I appreciate the thorough preamble the authors include to situate the role of the social worker within a research context.

Interface rating: 4

When downloaded as a pdf, the book does not begin until page 30+ so it may be a bit difficult to scroll so long for students in order to access the content for which they are searching. Also, making the Table of Contents clickable, would help in navigating this very long textbook.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

I did not find any grammatical errors or typos in the pages reviewed.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

I appreciate the efforts made to integrate diverse perspectives, voices, and images into the text. The discussion around ethics and cultural considerations in research was nuanced and comprehensive as well.

Overall, the content of the book aligns with established principles of social work research, providing accurate and up-to-date information in a format that is accessible to graduate students and educators in the field.

Reviewed by Elisa Maroney, Professor, Western Oregon University on 1/2/22

With well over 800 pages, this text is beyond comprehensive! read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

With well over 800 pages, this text is beyond comprehensive!

I perused the entire text, but my focus was on "Part 4: Using qualitative methods." This section seems accurate.

As mentioned above, my primary focus was on the qualitative methods section. This section is relevant to the students I teach in interpreting studies (not a social sciences discipline).

This book is well-written and clear.

Navigating this text is easy, because the formatting is consistent

Modularity rating: 5

My favorite part of this text is that I can be easily customized, so that I can use the sections on qualitative methods.

The text is well-organized and easy to find and link to related sections in the book.

Interface rating: 5

There are no distracting or confusing features. The book is long; being able to customize makes it easier to navigate.

I did not notice grammatical errors.

The authors offer resources for Afrocentricity for social work practice (among others, including those related to Feminist and Queer methodologies). These are relevant to the field of interpreting studies.

I look forward to adopting this text in my qualitative methods course for graduate students in interpreting studies.

Table of Contents

• 1. Science and social work
• 2. Starting your research project
• 3. Searching the literature
• 4. Critical information literacy
• 5. Writing your literature review
• 6. Research ethics
• 7. Theory and paradigm
• 8. Reasoning and causality
• 9. Writing your research question
• 10. Quantitative sampling
• 11. Quantitative measurement
• 12. Survey design
• 13. Experimental design
• 14. Univariate analysis
• 15. Bivariate analysis
• 16. Reporting quantitative results
• 17. Qualitative data and sampling
• 18. Qualitative data collection
• 19. A survey of approaches to qualitative data analysis
• 20. Quality in qualitative studies: Rigor in research design
• 21. Qualitative research dissemination
• 22. A survey of qualitative designs
• 23. Program evaluation
• 24. Sharing and consuming research

Ancillary Material

About the book.

We designed our book to help graduate social work students through every step of the research process, from conceptualization to dissemination. Our textbook centers cultural humility, information literacy, pragmatism, and an equal emphasis on quantitative and qualitative methods. It includes extensive content on literature reviews, cultural bias and respectfulness, and qualitative methods, in contrast to traditionally used commercial textbooks in social work research.  

Our author team spans across academic, public, and nonprofit social work research. We love research, and we endeavored through our book to make research more engaging, less painful, and easier to understand. Our textbook exercises direct students to apply content as they are reading the book to an original research project. By breaking it down step-by-step, writing in approachable language, as well as using stories from our life, practice, and research experience, our textbook helps professors overcome students’ research methods anxiety and antipathy.  

If you decide to adopt our resource, we ask that you complete this short  Adopter’s Survey  that helps us keep track of our community impact. You can also contact  [email protected]  for a student workbook, homework assignments, slideshows, a draft bank of quiz questions, and a course calendar. 

About the Contributors

Matt DeCarlo , PhD, MSW is an assistant professor in the Department of Social Work at La Salle University. He is the co-founder of Open Social Work (formerly Open Social Work Education), a collaborative project focusing on open education, open science, and open access in social work and higher education. His first open textbook, Scientific Inquiry in Social Work, was the first developed for social work education, and is now in use in over 60 campuses, mostly in the United States. He is a former OER Research Fellow with the OpenEd Group. Prior to his work in OER, Dr. DeCarlo received his PhD from Virginia Commonwealth University and has published on disability policy.

Cory Cummings , Ph.D., LCSW is an assistant professor in the Department of Social Work at Nazareth University. He has practice experience in community mental health, including clinical practice and administration. In addition, Dr. Cummings has volunteered at safety net mental health services agencies and provided support services for individuals and families affected by HIV. In his current position, Dr. Cummings teaches in the BSW program and MSW programs; specifically in the Clinical Practice with Children and Families concentration. Courses that he teaches include research, social work practice, and clinical field seminar. His scholarship focuses on promoting health equity for individuals experiencing symptoms of severe mental illness and improving opportunities to increase quality of life. Dr. Cummings received his PhD from Virginia Commonwealth University.

Kate Agnelli , MSW, is an adjunct professor at VCU’s School of Social Work, teaching masters-level classes on research methods, public policy, and social justice. She also works as a senior legislative analyst with the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC), a policy research organization reporting to the Virginia General Assembly. Before working for JLARC, Ms. Agnelli worked for several years in government and nonprofit research and program evaluation. In addition, she has several publications in peer-reviewed journals, has presented at national social work conferences, and has served as a reviewer for Social Work Education. She received her MSW from Virginia Commonwealth University.

Contribute to this Page

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples

What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples

Published on June 19, 2020 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Qualitative research involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data (e.g., text, video, or audio) to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a problem or generate new ideas for research.

Qualitative research is the opposite of quantitative research , which involves collecting and analyzing numerical data for statistical analysis.

Qualitative research is commonly used in the humanities and social sciences, in subjects such as anthropology, sociology, education, health sciences, history, etc.

• How does social media shape body image in teenagers?
• How do children and adults interpret healthy eating in the UK?
• What factors influence employee retention in a large organization?
• How is anxiety experienced around the world?
• How can teachers integrate social issues into science curriculums?

Table of contents

Approaches to qualitative research, qualitative research methods, qualitative data analysis, advantages of qualitative research, disadvantages of qualitative research, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about qualitative research.

Qualitative research is used to understand how people experience the world. While there are many approaches to qualitative research, they tend to be flexible and focus on retaining rich meaning when interpreting data.

Common approaches include grounded theory, ethnography , action research , phenomenological research, and narrative research. They share some similarities, but emphasize different aims and perspectives.

Note that qualitative research is at risk for certain research biases including the Hawthorne effect , observer bias , recall bias , and social desirability bias . While not always totally avoidable, awareness of potential biases as you collect and analyze your data can prevent them from impacting your work too much.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Each of the research approaches involve using one or more data collection methods . These are some of the most common qualitative methods:

• Observations: recording what you have seen, heard, or encountered in detailed field notes.
• Interviews:  personally asking people questions in one-on-one conversations.
• Focus groups: asking questions and generating discussion among a group of people.
• Surveys : distributing questionnaires with open-ended questions.
• Secondary research: collecting existing data in the form of texts, images, audio or video recordings, etc.
• You take field notes with observations and reflect on your own experiences of the company culture.
• You distribute open-ended surveys to employees across all the company’s offices by email to find out if the culture varies across locations.
• You conduct in-depth interviews with employees in your office to learn about their experiences and perspectives in greater detail.

Qualitative researchers often consider themselves “instruments” in research because all observations, interpretations and analyses are filtered through their own personal lens.

For this reason, when writing up your methodology for qualitative research, it’s important to reflect on your approach and to thoroughly explain the choices you made in collecting and analyzing the data.

Qualitative data can take the form of texts, photos, videos and audio. For example, you might be working with interview transcripts, survey responses, fieldnotes, or recordings from natural settings.

Most types of qualitative data analysis share the same five steps:

• Prepare and organize your data. This may mean transcribing interviews or typing up fieldnotes.
• Review and explore your data. Examine the data for patterns or repeated ideas that emerge.
• Develop a data coding system. Based on your initial ideas, establish a set of codes that you can apply to categorize your data.
• Assign codes to the data. For example, in qualitative survey analysis, this may mean going through each participant’s responses and tagging them with codes in a spreadsheet. As you go through your data, you can create new codes to add to your system if necessary.
• Identify recurring themes. Link codes together into cohesive, overarching themes.

There are several specific approaches to analyzing qualitative data. Although these methods share similar processes, they emphasize different concepts.

Qualitative research often tries to preserve the voice and perspective of participants and can be adjusted as new research questions arise. Qualitative research is good for:

• Flexibility

The data collection and analysis process can be adapted as new ideas or patterns emerge. They are not rigidly decided beforehand.

• Natural settings

Data collection occurs in real-world contexts or in naturalistic ways.

• Meaningful insights

Detailed descriptions of people’s experiences, feelings and perceptions can be used in designing, testing or improving systems or products.

• Generation of new ideas

Open-ended responses mean that researchers can uncover novel problems or opportunities that they wouldn’t have thought of otherwise.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Researchers must consider practical and theoretical limitations in analyzing and interpreting their data. Qualitative research suffers from:

• Unreliability

The real-world setting often makes qualitative research unreliable because of uncontrolled factors that affect the data.

• Subjectivity

Due to the researcher’s primary role in analyzing and interpreting data, qualitative research cannot be replicated . The researcher decides what is important and what is irrelevant in data analysis, so interpretations of the same data can vary greatly.

• Limited generalizability

Small samples are often used to gather detailed data about specific contexts. Despite rigorous analysis procedures, it is difficult to draw generalizable conclusions because the data may be biased and unrepresentative of the wider population .

• Labor-intensive

Although software can be used to manage and record large amounts of text, data analysis often has to be checked or performed manually.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Chi square goodness of fit test
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

There are five common approaches to qualitative research :

• Grounded theory involves collecting data in order to develop new theories.
• Ethnography involves immersing yourself in a group or organization to understand its culture.
• Narrative research involves interpreting stories to understand how people make sense of their experiences and perceptions.
• Phenomenological research involves investigating phenomena through people’s lived experiences.
• Action research links theory and practice in several cycles to drive innovative changes.

Data collection is the systematic process by which observations or measurements are gathered in research. It is used in many different contexts by academics, governments, businesses, and other organizations.

There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:

• Prepare and organize your data.
• Review and explore your data.
• Develop a data coding system.
• Assign codes to the data.
• Identify recurring themes.

The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 12, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/qualitative-research/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, qualitative vs. quantitative research | differences, examples & methods, how to do thematic analysis | step-by-step guide & examples, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Neurol Res Pract

How to use and assess qualitative research methods

Loraine busetto.

1 Department of Neurology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany

Wolfgang Wick

2 Clinical Cooperation Unit Neuro-Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany

Christoph Gumbinger

Associated data.

Not applicable.

This paper aims to provide an overview of the use and assessment of qualitative research methods in the health sciences. Qualitative research can be defined as the study of the nature of phenomena and is especially appropriate for answering questions of why something is (not) observed, assessing complex multi-component interventions, and focussing on intervention improvement. The most common methods of data collection are document study, (non-) participant observations, semi-structured interviews and focus groups. For data analysis, field-notes and audio-recordings are transcribed into protocols and transcripts, and coded using qualitative data management software. Criteria such as checklists, reflexivity, sampling strategies, piloting, co-coding, member-checking and stakeholder involvement can be used to enhance and assess the quality of the research conducted. Using qualitative in addition to quantitative designs will equip us with better tools to address a greater range of research problems, and to fill in blind spots in current neurological research and practice.

The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of qualitative research methods, including hands-on information on how they can be used, reported and assessed. This article is intended for beginning qualitative researchers in the health sciences as well as experienced quantitative researchers who wish to broaden their understanding of qualitative research.

What is qualitative research?

Qualitative research is defined as “the study of the nature of phenomena”, including “their quality, different manifestations, the context in which they appear or the perspectives from which they can be perceived” , but excluding “their range, frequency and place in an objectively determined chain of cause and effect” [ 1 ]. This formal definition can be complemented with a more pragmatic rule of thumb: qualitative research generally includes data in form of words rather than numbers [ 2 ].

Why conduct qualitative research?

Because some research questions cannot be answered using (only) quantitative methods. For example, one Australian study addressed the issue of why patients from Aboriginal communities often present late or not at all to specialist services offered by tertiary care hospitals. Using qualitative interviews with patients and staff, it found one of the most significant access barriers to be transportation problems, including some towns and communities simply not having a bus service to the hospital [ 3 ]. A quantitative study could have measured the number of patients over time or even looked at possible explanatory factors – but only those previously known or suspected to be of relevance. To discover reasons for observed patterns, especially the invisible or surprising ones, qualitative designs are needed.

While qualitative research is common in other fields, it is still relatively underrepresented in health services research. The latter field is more traditionally rooted in the evidence-based-medicine paradigm, as seen in " research that involves testing the effectiveness of various strategies to achieve changes in clinical practice, preferably applying randomised controlled trial study designs (...) " [ 4 ]. This focus on quantitative research and specifically randomised controlled trials (RCT) is visible in the idea of a hierarchy of research evidence which assumes that some research designs are objectively better than others, and that choosing a "lesser" design is only acceptable when the better ones are not practically or ethically feasible [ 5 , 6 ]. Others, however, argue that an objective hierarchy does not exist, and that, instead, the research design and methods should be chosen to fit the specific research question at hand – "questions before methods" [ 2 , 7 – 9 ]. This means that even when an RCT is possible, some research problems require a different design that is better suited to addressing them. Arguing in JAMA, Berwick uses the example of rapid response teams in hospitals, which he describes as " a complex, multicomponent intervention – essentially a process of social change" susceptible to a range of different context factors including leadership or organisation history. According to him, "[in] such complex terrain, the RCT is an impoverished way to learn. Critics who use it as a truth standard in this context are incorrect" [ 8 ] . Instead of limiting oneself to RCTs, Berwick recommends embracing a wider range of methods , including qualitative ones, which for "these specific applications, (...) are not compromises in learning how to improve; they are superior" [ 8 ].

Research problems that can be approached particularly well using qualitative methods include assessing complex multi-component interventions or systems (of change), addressing questions beyond “what works”, towards “what works for whom when, how and why”, and focussing on intervention improvement rather than accreditation [ 7 , 9 – 12 ]. Using qualitative methods can also help shed light on the “softer” side of medical treatment. For example, while quantitative trials can measure the costs and benefits of neuro-oncological treatment in terms of survival rates or adverse effects, qualitative research can help provide a better understanding of patient or caregiver stress, visibility of illness or out-of-pocket expenses.

How to conduct qualitative research?

Given that qualitative research is characterised by flexibility, openness and responsivity to context, the steps of data collection and analysis are not as separate and consecutive as they tend to be in quantitative research [ 13 , 14 ]. As Fossey puts it : “sampling, data collection, analysis and interpretation are related to each other in a cyclical (iterative) manner, rather than following one after another in a stepwise approach” [ 15 ]. The researcher can make educated decisions with regard to the choice of method, how they are implemented, and to which and how many units they are applied [ 13 ]. As shown in Fig.  1 , this can involve several back-and-forth steps between data collection and analysis where new insights and experiences can lead to adaption and expansion of the original plan. Some insights may also necessitate a revision of the research question and/or the research design as a whole. The process ends when saturation is achieved, i.e. when no relevant new information can be found (see also below: sampling and saturation). For reasons of transparency, it is essential for all decisions as well as the underlying reasoning to be well-documented.

Iterative research process

While it is not always explicitly addressed, qualitative methods reflect a different underlying research paradigm than quantitative research (e.g. constructivism or interpretivism as opposed to positivism). The choice of methods can be based on the respective underlying substantive theory or theoretical framework used by the researcher [ 2 ].

Data collection

The methods of qualitative data collection most commonly used in health research are document study, observations, semi-structured interviews and focus groups [ 1 , 14 , 16 , 17 ].

Document study

Document study (also called document analysis) refers to the review by the researcher of written materials [ 14 ]. These can include personal and non-personal documents such as archives, annual reports, guidelines, policy documents, diaries or letters.

Observations

Observations are particularly useful to gain insights into a certain setting and actual behaviour – as opposed to reported behaviour or opinions [ 13 ]. Qualitative observations can be either participant or non-participant in nature. In participant observations, the observer is part of the observed setting, for example a nurse working in an intensive care unit [ 18 ]. In non-participant observations, the observer is “on the outside looking in”, i.e. present in but not part of the situation, trying not to influence the setting by their presence. Observations can be planned (e.g. for 3 h during the day or night shift) or ad hoc (e.g. as soon as a stroke patient arrives at the emergency room). During the observation, the observer takes notes on everything or certain pre-determined parts of what is happening around them, for example focusing on physician-patient interactions or communication between different professional groups. Written notes can be taken during or after the observations, depending on feasibility (which is usually lower during participant observations) and acceptability (e.g. when the observer is perceived to be judging the observed). Afterwards, these field notes are transcribed into observation protocols. If more than one observer was involved, field notes are taken independently, but notes can be consolidated into one protocol after discussions. Advantages of conducting observations include minimising the distance between the researcher and the researched, the potential discovery of topics that the researcher did not realise were relevant and gaining deeper insights into the real-world dimensions of the research problem at hand [ 18 ].

Semi-structured interviews

Hijmans & Kuyper describe qualitative interviews as “an exchange with an informal character, a conversation with a goal” [ 19 ]. Interviews are used to gain insights into a person’s subjective experiences, opinions and motivations – as opposed to facts or behaviours [ 13 ]. Interviews can be distinguished by the degree to which they are structured (i.e. a questionnaire), open (e.g. free conversation or autobiographical interviews) or semi-structured [ 2 , 13 ]. Semi-structured interviews are characterized by open-ended questions and the use of an interview guide (or topic guide/list) in which the broad areas of interest, sometimes including sub-questions, are defined [ 19 ]. The pre-defined topics in the interview guide can be derived from the literature, previous research or a preliminary method of data collection, e.g. document study or observations. The topic list is usually adapted and improved at the start of the data collection process as the interviewer learns more about the field [ 20 ]. Across interviews the focus on the different (blocks of) questions may differ and some questions may be skipped altogether (e.g. if the interviewee is not able or willing to answer the questions or for concerns about the total length of the interview) [ 20 ]. Qualitative interviews are usually not conducted in written format as it impedes on the interactive component of the method [ 20 ]. In comparison to written surveys, qualitative interviews have the advantage of being interactive and allowing for unexpected topics to emerge and to be taken up by the researcher. This can also help overcome a provider or researcher-centred bias often found in written surveys, which by nature, can only measure what is already known or expected to be of relevance to the researcher. Interviews can be audio- or video-taped; but sometimes it is only feasible or acceptable for the interviewer to take written notes [ 14 , 16 , 20 ].

Focus groups

Focus groups are group interviews to explore participants’ expertise and experiences, including explorations of how and why people behave in certain ways [ 1 ]. Focus groups usually consist of 6–8 people and are led by an experienced moderator following a topic guide or “script” [ 21 ]. They can involve an observer who takes note of the non-verbal aspects of the situation, possibly using an observation guide [ 21 ]. Depending on researchers’ and participants’ preferences, the discussions can be audio- or video-taped and transcribed afterwards [ 21 ]. Focus groups are useful for bringing together homogeneous (to a lesser extent heterogeneous) groups of participants with relevant expertise and experience on a given topic on which they can share detailed information [ 21 ]. Focus groups are a relatively easy, fast and inexpensive method to gain access to information on interactions in a given group, i.e. “the sharing and comparing” among participants [ 21 ]. Disadvantages include less control over the process and a lesser extent to which each individual may participate. Moreover, focus group moderators need experience, as do those tasked with the analysis of the resulting data. Focus groups can be less appropriate for discussing sensitive topics that participants might be reluctant to disclose in a group setting [ 13 ]. Moreover, attention must be paid to the emergence of “groupthink” as well as possible power dynamics within the group, e.g. when patients are awed or intimidated by health professionals.

Choosing the “right” method

As explained above, the school of thought underlying qualitative research assumes no objective hierarchy of evidence and methods. This means that each choice of single or combined methods has to be based on the research question that needs to be answered and a critical assessment with regard to whether or to what extent the chosen method can accomplish this – i.e. the “fit” between question and method [ 14 ]. It is necessary for these decisions to be documented when they are being made, and to be critically discussed when reporting methods and results.

Let us assume that our research aim is to examine the (clinical) processes around acute endovascular treatment (EVT), from the patient’s arrival at the emergency room to recanalization, with the aim to identify possible causes for delay and/or other causes for sub-optimal treatment outcome. As a first step, we could conduct a document study of the relevant standard operating procedures (SOPs) for this phase of care – are they up-to-date and in line with current guidelines? Do they contain any mistakes, irregularities or uncertainties that could cause delays or other problems? Regardless of the answers to these questions, the results have to be interpreted based on what they are: a written outline of what care processes in this hospital should look like. If we want to know what they actually look like in practice, we can conduct observations of the processes described in the SOPs. These results can (and should) be analysed in themselves, but also in comparison to the results of the document analysis, especially as regards relevant discrepancies. Do the SOPs outline specific tests for which no equipment can be observed or tasks to be performed by specialized nurses who are not present during the observation? It might also be possible that the written SOP is outdated, but the actual care provided is in line with current best practice. In order to find out why these discrepancies exist, it can be useful to conduct interviews. Are the physicians simply not aware of the SOPs (because their existence is limited to the hospital’s intranet) or do they actively disagree with them or does the infrastructure make it impossible to provide the care as described? Another rationale for adding interviews is that some situations (or all of their possible variations for different patient groups or the day, night or weekend shift) cannot practically or ethically be observed. In this case, it is possible to ask those involved to report on their actions – being aware that this is not the same as the actual observation. A senior physician’s or hospital manager’s description of certain situations might differ from a nurse’s or junior physician’s one, maybe because they intentionally misrepresent facts or maybe because different aspects of the process are visible or important to them. In some cases, it can also be relevant to consider to whom the interviewee is disclosing this information – someone they trust, someone they are otherwise not connected to, or someone they suspect or are aware of being in a potentially “dangerous” power relationship to them. Lastly, a focus group could be conducted with representatives of the relevant professional groups to explore how and why exactly they provide care around EVT. The discussion might reveal discrepancies (between SOPs and actual care or between different physicians) and motivations to the researchers as well as to the focus group members that they might not have been aware of themselves. For the focus group to deliver relevant information, attention has to be paid to its composition and conduct, for example, to make sure that all participants feel safe to disclose sensitive or potentially problematic information or that the discussion is not dominated by (senior) physicians only. The resulting combination of data collection methods is shown in Fig.  2 .

Possible combination of data collection methods

Attributions for icons: “Book” by Serhii Smirnov, “Interview” by Adrien Coquet, FR, “Magnifying Glass” by anggun, ID, “Business communication” by Vectors Market; all from the Noun Project

The combination of multiple data source as described for this example can be referred to as “triangulation”, in which multiple measurements are carried out from different angles to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under study [ 22 , 23 ].

Data analysis

To analyse the data collected through observations, interviews and focus groups these need to be transcribed into protocols and transcripts (see Fig.  3 ). Interviews and focus groups can be transcribed verbatim , with or without annotations for behaviour (e.g. laughing, crying, pausing) and with or without phonetic transcription of dialects and filler words, depending on what is expected or known to be relevant for the analysis. In the next step, the protocols and transcripts are coded , that is, marked (or tagged, labelled) with one or more short descriptors of the content of a sentence or paragraph [ 2 , 15 , 23 ]. Jansen describes coding as “connecting the raw data with “theoretical” terms” [ 20 ]. In a more practical sense, coding makes raw data sortable. This makes it possible to extract and examine all segments describing, say, a tele-neurology consultation from multiple data sources (e.g. SOPs, emergency room observations, staff and patient interview). In a process of synthesis and abstraction, the codes are then grouped, summarised and/or categorised [ 15 , 20 ]. The end product of the coding or analysis process is a descriptive theory of the behavioural pattern under investigation [ 20 ]. The coding process is performed using qualitative data management software, the most common ones being InVivo, MaxQDA and Atlas.ti. It should be noted that these are data management tools which support the analysis performed by the researcher(s) [ 14 ].

From data collection to data analysis

Attributions for icons: see Fig. ​ Fig.2, 2 , also “Speech to text” by Trevor Dsouza, “Field Notes” by Mike O’Brien, US, “Voice Record” by ProSymbols, US, “Inspection” by Made, AU, and “Cloud” by Graphic Tigers; all from the Noun Project

How to report qualitative research?

Protocols of qualitative research can be published separately and in advance of the study results. However, the aim is not the same as in RCT protocols, i.e. to pre-define and set in stone the research questions and primary or secondary endpoints. Rather, it is a way to describe the research methods in detail, which might not be possible in the results paper given journals’ word limits. Qualitative research papers are usually longer than their quantitative counterparts to allow for deep understanding and so-called “thick description”. In the methods section, the focus is on transparency of the methods used, including why, how and by whom they were implemented in the specific study setting, so as to enable a discussion of whether and how this may have influenced data collection, analysis and interpretation. The results section usually starts with a paragraph outlining the main findings, followed by more detailed descriptions of, for example, the commonalities, discrepancies or exceptions per category [ 20 ]. Here it is important to support main findings by relevant quotations, which may add information, context, emphasis or real-life examples [ 20 , 23 ]. It is subject to debate in the field whether it is relevant to state the exact number or percentage of respondents supporting a certain statement (e.g. “Five interviewees expressed negative feelings towards XYZ”) [ 21 ].

How to combine qualitative with quantitative research?

Qualitative methods can be combined with other methods in multi- or mixed methods designs, which “[employ] two or more different methods [ …] within the same study or research program rather than confining the research to one single method” [ 24 ]. Reasons for combining methods can be diverse, including triangulation for corroboration of findings, complementarity for illustration and clarification of results, expansion to extend the breadth and range of the study, explanation of (unexpected) results generated with one method with the help of another, or offsetting the weakness of one method with the strength of another [ 1 , 17 , 24 – 26 ]. The resulting designs can be classified according to when, why and how the different quantitative and/or qualitative data strands are combined. The three most common types of mixed method designs are the convergent parallel design , the explanatory sequential design and the exploratory sequential design. The designs with examples are shown in Fig.  4 .

Three common mixed methods designs

In the convergent parallel design, a qualitative study is conducted in parallel to and independently of a quantitative study, and the results of both studies are compared and combined at the stage of interpretation of results. Using the above example of EVT provision, this could entail setting up a quantitative EVT registry to measure process times and patient outcomes in parallel to conducting the qualitative research outlined above, and then comparing results. Amongst other things, this would make it possible to assess whether interview respondents’ subjective impressions of patients receiving good care match modified Rankin Scores at follow-up, or whether observed delays in care provision are exceptions or the rule when compared to door-to-needle times as documented in the registry. In the explanatory sequential design, a quantitative study is carried out first, followed by a qualitative study to help explain the results from the quantitative study. This would be an appropriate design if the registry alone had revealed relevant delays in door-to-needle times and the qualitative study would be used to understand where and why these occurred, and how they could be improved. In the exploratory design, the qualitative study is carried out first and its results help informing and building the quantitative study in the next step [ 26 ]. If the qualitative study around EVT provision had shown a high level of dissatisfaction among the staff members involved, a quantitative questionnaire investigating staff satisfaction could be set up in the next step, informed by the qualitative study on which topics dissatisfaction had been expressed. Amongst other things, the questionnaire design would make it possible to widen the reach of the research to more respondents from different (types of) hospitals, regions, countries or settings, and to conduct sub-group analyses for different professional groups.

How to assess qualitative research?

A variety of assessment criteria and lists have been developed for qualitative research, ranging in their focus and comprehensiveness [ 14 , 17 , 27 ]. However, none of these has been elevated to the “gold standard” in the field. In the following, we therefore focus on a set of commonly used assessment criteria that, from a practical standpoint, a researcher can look for when assessing a qualitative research report or paper.

Assessors should check the authors’ use of and adherence to the relevant reporting checklists (e.g. Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR)) to make sure all items that are relevant for this type of research are addressed [ 23 , 28 ]. Discussions of quantitative measures in addition to or instead of these qualitative measures can be a sign of lower quality of the research (paper). Providing and adhering to a checklist for qualitative research contributes to an important quality criterion for qualitative research, namely transparency [ 15 , 17 , 23 ].

Reflexivity

While methodological transparency and complete reporting is relevant for all types of research, some additional criteria must be taken into account for qualitative research. This includes what is called reflexivity, i.e. sensitivity to the relationship between the researcher and the researched, including how contact was established and maintained, or the background and experience of the researcher(s) involved in data collection and analysis. Depending on the research question and population to be researched this can be limited to professional experience, but it may also include gender, age or ethnicity [ 17 , 27 ]. These details are relevant because in qualitative research, as opposed to quantitative research, the researcher as a person cannot be isolated from the research process [ 23 ]. It may influence the conversation when an interviewed patient speaks to an interviewer who is a physician, or when an interviewee is asked to discuss a gynaecological procedure with a male interviewer, and therefore the reader must be made aware of these details [ 19 ].

Sampling and saturation

The aim of qualitative sampling is for all variants of the objects of observation that are deemed relevant for the study to be present in the sample “ to see the issue and its meanings from as many angles as possible” [ 1 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 27 ] , and to ensure “information-richness [ 15 ]. An iterative sampling approach is advised, in which data collection (e.g. five interviews) is followed by data analysis, followed by more data collection to find variants that are lacking in the current sample. This process continues until no new (relevant) information can be found and further sampling becomes redundant – which is called saturation [ 1 , 15 ] . In other words: qualitative data collection finds its end point not a priori , but when the research team determines that saturation has been reached [ 29 , 30 ].

This is also the reason why most qualitative studies use deliberate instead of random sampling strategies. This is generally referred to as “ purposive sampling” , in which researchers pre-define which types of participants or cases they need to include so as to cover all variations that are expected to be of relevance, based on the literature, previous experience or theory (i.e. theoretical sampling) [ 14 , 20 ]. Other types of purposive sampling include (but are not limited to) maximum variation sampling, critical case sampling or extreme or deviant case sampling [ 2 ]. In the above EVT example, a purposive sample could include all relevant professional groups and/or all relevant stakeholders (patients, relatives) and/or all relevant times of observation (day, night and weekend shift).

Assessors of qualitative research should check whether the considerations underlying the sampling strategy were sound and whether or how researchers tried to adapt and improve their strategies in stepwise or cyclical approaches between data collection and analysis to achieve saturation [ 14 ].

Good qualitative research is iterative in nature, i.e. it goes back and forth between data collection and analysis, revising and improving the approach where necessary. One example of this are pilot interviews, where different aspects of the interview (especially the interview guide, but also, for example, the site of the interview or whether the interview can be audio-recorded) are tested with a small number of respondents, evaluated and revised [ 19 ]. In doing so, the interviewer learns which wording or types of questions work best, or which is the best length of an interview with patients who have trouble concentrating for an extended time. Of course, the same reasoning applies to observations or focus groups which can also be piloted.

Ideally, coding should be performed by at least two researchers, especially at the beginning of the coding process when a common approach must be defined, including the establishment of a useful coding list (or tree), and when a common meaning of individual codes must be established [ 23 ]. An initial sub-set or all transcripts can be coded independently by the coders and then compared and consolidated after regular discussions in the research team. This is to make sure that codes are applied consistently to the research data.

Member checking

Member checking, also called respondent validation , refers to the practice of checking back with study respondents to see if the research is in line with their views [ 14 , 27 ]. This can happen after data collection or analysis or when first results are available [ 23 ]. For example, interviewees can be provided with (summaries of) their transcripts and asked whether they believe this to be a complete representation of their views or whether they would like to clarify or elaborate on their responses [ 17 ]. Respondents’ feedback on these issues then becomes part of the data collection and analysis [ 27 ].

Stakeholder involvement

In those niches where qualitative approaches have been able to evolve and grow, a new trend has seen the inclusion of patients and their representatives not only as study participants (i.e. “members”, see above) but as consultants to and active participants in the broader research process [ 31 – 33 ]. The underlying assumption is that patients and other stakeholders hold unique perspectives and experiences that add value beyond their own single story, making the research more relevant and beneficial to researchers, study participants and (future) patients alike [ 34 , 35 ]. Using the example of patients on or nearing dialysis, a recent scoping review found that 80% of clinical research did not address the top 10 research priorities identified by patients and caregivers [ 32 , 36 ]. In this sense, the involvement of the relevant stakeholders, especially patients and relatives, is increasingly being seen as a quality indicator in and of itself.

How not to assess qualitative research

The above overview does not include certain items that are routine in assessments of quantitative research. What follows is a non-exhaustive, non-representative, experience-based list of the quantitative criteria often applied to the assessment of qualitative research, as well as an explanation of the limited usefulness of these endeavours.

Protocol adherence

Given the openness and flexibility of qualitative research, it should not be assessed by how well it adheres to pre-determined and fixed strategies – in other words: its rigidity. Instead, the assessor should look for signs of adaptation and refinement based on lessons learned from earlier steps in the research process.

Sample size

For the reasons explained above, qualitative research does not require specific sample sizes, nor does it require that the sample size be determined a priori [ 1 , 14 , 27 , 37 – 39 ]. Sample size can only be a useful quality indicator when related to the research purpose, the chosen methodology and the composition of the sample, i.e. who was included and why.

Randomisation

While some authors argue that randomisation can be used in qualitative research, this is not commonly the case, as neither its feasibility nor its necessity or usefulness has been convincingly established for qualitative research [ 13 , 27 ]. Relevant disadvantages include the negative impact of a too large sample size as well as the possibility (or probability) of selecting “ quiet, uncooperative or inarticulate individuals ” [ 17 ]. Qualitative studies do not use control groups, either.

Interrater reliability, variability and other “objectivity checks”

The concept of “interrater reliability” is sometimes used in qualitative research to assess to which extent the coding approach overlaps between the two co-coders. However, it is not clear what this measure tells us about the quality of the analysis [ 23 ]. This means that these scores can be included in qualitative research reports, preferably with some additional information on what the score means for the analysis, but it is not a requirement. Relatedly, it is not relevant for the quality or “objectivity” of qualitative research to separate those who recruited the study participants and collected and analysed the data. Experiences even show that it might be better to have the same person or team perform all of these tasks [ 20 ]. First, when researchers introduce themselves during recruitment this can enhance trust when the interview takes place days or weeks later with the same researcher. Second, when the audio-recording is transcribed for analysis, the researcher conducting the interviews will usually remember the interviewee and the specific interview situation during data analysis. This might be helpful in providing additional context information for interpretation of data, e.g. on whether something might have been meant as a joke [ 18 ].

Not being quantitative research

Being qualitative research instead of quantitative research should not be used as an assessment criterion if it is used irrespectively of the research problem at hand. Similarly, qualitative research should not be required to be combined with quantitative research per se – unless mixed methods research is judged as inherently better than single-method research. In this case, the same criterion should be applied for quantitative studies without a qualitative component.

The main take-away points of this paper are summarised in Table ​ Table1. 1 . We aimed to show that, if conducted well, qualitative research can answer specific research questions that cannot to be adequately answered using (only) quantitative designs. Seeing qualitative and quantitative methods as equal will help us become more aware and critical of the “fit” between the research problem and our chosen methods: I can conduct an RCT to determine the reasons for transportation delays of acute stroke patients – but should I? It also provides us with a greater range of tools to tackle a greater range of research problems more appropriately and successfully, filling in the blind spots on one half of the methodological spectrum to better address the whole complexity of neurological research and practice.

Take-away-points

Acknowledgements

Abbreviations, authors’ contributions.

LB drafted the manuscript; WW and CG revised the manuscript; all authors approved the final versions.

no external funding.

Availability of data and materials

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Part 4: Using qualitative methods

18. Qualitative data collection

Chapter outline.

• Ethical responsibility and cultural respect (5 minute read)
• Critical considerations (3 minute read)
• Preparations for the data gathering process (6 minute read)
• Interviews (20 minute read)
• Focus groups (15 minute read)
• Observations (6 minute read)
• Documents and other artifacts (13 minute read)

Content warning: examples in this chapter contain references to multiple demands on students’ time, loss of employment, sexual assault, trauma-informed care, inpatient psychiatric services, immigration, and the Holocaust.

In this chapter we will explore information to help you plan for and organize your strategy to gather your qualitative data. You will face a number of decisions as you plan this section of your proposal. Gathering qualitative data comes with important ethical and cultural responsibilities. Furthermore, qualitative research can be a powerful tool, but we need to be thoughtful as to how it will be used, as it can as easily become a tool of oppression as one of empowerment. Below are some considerations to help you reflect on some of these dynamics as you plan your study. The first sections apply to every type of qualitative research. Then, we discuss specific strategies to choose from as you plan your qualitative study.

18.1 Ethical responsibility and cultural respect

Learning objectives.

Learners will be able to…

• Explain the special considerations researchers should keep in mind as they design qualitative studies and collect qualitative data
• Determine steps that can be taken to protect participants and exhibit cultural respect during qualitative data collection

Because qualitative data collection so often involves direct contact with human participants and requesting them to share detailed and potentially personally sensitive information with us as researchers, we need to be especially sensitive to ethical considerations. It is a process that requires forethought, planning, and mindful attention throughout. Below are some ethical considerations to help guide you in this activity.

Special limitations to anonymity, confidentiality and ability to remove or withdraw data

Because with qualitative research we are often meeting with people in person to gather data, either from interviews , focus groups , or observations , we clearly can’t guarantee them anonymity . This makes it all the more important to consider what you will do to protect the confidentiality of your participants. This may involve using steps like:

• Using pseudonyms or assigned study identification codes rather than names on study materials
• Stripping all potentially identifying information from transcripts
• Keeping signed informed consent forms separate from other data so the two can’t be linked
• Ensuring that when data is not being used it is appropriately stored and locked so that others outside the research team don’t have access to it
• Ensuring that when data is being used it is not in a space (in person or virtual) where people outside the research team can view it
• Making sure that all members of your research team have been approved by your IRB
• Being very clear in your informed consent who will have access to data and for what purposes

Additionally, at times we will write into our informed consent that participants may withdraw from a study at any time. When a person expresses a desire to withdraw, we remove their data from the study. However, let’s say we conducted interviews and identified a theme that was present in their interview, but was also in a number of other interviews. Their ideas would still be represented in our findings, but we would make sure not to use any quotes or unique contributions from that individual. Also, if a person participates in a focus group, they are part of an interactive dialogue and the discussion is often connected to ideas shared by others as the conversation evolves, making it very hard to completely remove their data. Again, we would respect their wishes by not using any of their direct words, but their presence and contributions shaped the discussion in ways that we won’t be able to excise. It is best to be upfront about this as you are seeking informed consent.

• What steps will you be taking to protect the qualitative data that is shared with you?

Prepare with competence, enter with humility

When we ask people to share their thoughts, feelings, and experiences with us, we need to do so in a way that demonstrates respect and authenticity . This means that we approach participants in a professional manner that reflects both competence as a researcher and that illustrates we have done some preparation to learn about the population ahead of time (that we are not “coming in cold”). Activities that can help to demonstrate this are:

• Speaking with knowledgeable community members regarding the topic, our research design, and important aspects of the community (contemporary and historical) before beginning our data collection)
• Examining previous research and other sources of information regarding the group/community we are interested in work with, or if not available, groups/communities that may be similar
• Using data from the first two bullet points, we design our data collection in a way that is culturally sensitive (e.g. where we ask people to provide data, what tools we use, our wording)
• Preparing research materials (e.g. informed consent forms, recruitment materials, informational sheets) that are accessible and understandable for participants
• Providing information and education about research in general and our research topic specifically

This needs to be tempered with humility. Participants grant us the privilege of allowing us to witness some piece of their life. We need to have humility in knowing that we can never fully understand their experiences because we are not them. In a real sense, we are the learners and they are the teachers. Despite us doing the pre-work discussed above to become more competent in our approach, humility means we will ask the participant directly what is acceptable in respect to our data collection. I believe that when taking a culturally humble approach that we should take at least a little bit of time to understand what research means to the participant and what this particular topic means to the them, again, by asking them directly.

Key Takeaways

• Qualitative data collection involves special considerations to help ensure the privacy, confidentiality, or anonymity of participants because of the the often intimate and detailed information that we are collecting as qualitative researchers.
• Preparing for qualitative data collection requires that we educate ourselves as researchers in advance about the population we will be working with to guide and develop our data collection plan. Furthermore, from the standpoint of cultural humility, we don’t assume that these preparations are adequate. We need to verify with participants what is culturally acceptable to them as individuals.
• As you prepare for data collection planning, what actions do you plan to take to demonstrate preparations for cultural sensitivity and cultural humility?

18.2 Critical considerations

• Assess factors that may impact community members’ perceptions of researchers and their intentions
• Identify opportunities to support greater reciprocity in researcher-participant relationships (especially as it relates to your proposal)

What/whose interests are represented?

Data is a resource that participants own that they choose to share with us. Think about it: When a smartphone app or computer program wants your personal data, you’re usually asked to read a privacy statement and agree to certain terms. Companies are legally required to notify you about their intentions to use the data you may share. And many companies certainly recognize that your data is a valuable resource and seek it out. As researchers, we have similar responsibilities, but with higher ethical standards.

If we are going to ask participants to share this resource, we need to consider why we need it. Clearly, we are invested in this research for some reason, otherwise we wouldn’t be spending our time doing it. Being upfront and genuine with our participants about why this topic is important to us and what we hope comes out of this research is a good first step. We also need to describe to other stakeholders (such as funders or sponsors) who might be involved why we are interested in it. In addition, it is helpful to consider what this research might represent to our participants.

• They may be unsure what to think about the research—This especially may be true if they have had limited exposure to research and/or academia.
• They might be nervous or apprehensive that it could have consequences, either for them individually or for their community
• They might be excited to share their story and may feel as though they are contributing to something larger or some beneficial change

Considering these factors can help us to be more sensitive as we prepare to enter the field for data collection.

Think about your study. Put yourself in the role of research participant.

What information would you want to know?

• About research in general
• About the researcher
• About the research topic

How reciprocal is the arrangement?

Building off the preceding discussion about what research might mean to participants, it is also important to consider the reciprocity in the researcher – participant relationship. We know that we are benefiting from the exchange – we are getting data, research findings, research products and any other advantages or opportunities that might be attached to these. However, the benefits are not always as clear on the participant side of this relationship. Sometimes we are able to provide incentives to honor a participant’s time and contribution to a project, but these are often relatively limited. Participants may also intrinsically value making a contribution to a research project that can eventually help to change or build awareness around something that is important to them, but these are often distant and intangible benefits. While we may not be able to change the fact that we may benefit more from this exchange than our participants, it is important for us to acknowledge this and to consider how this can affect the power differential. We may be asking for a lot, with relatively little to offer in return. This is in contrast to participatory research approaches (which have been discussed elsewhere), in which there is much more of an intentional effort to more equally distribute the benefits of these relationships.

• As a means of developing empathy as a researcher, it is worth considering what the significance or meaning of research is to the populations we are interested in working with. What do we (as researchers) and our projects represent to community members?
• As critical researchers, we need to be considered with the power differences that often exist as we conduct research, especially in the act of asking for data from participants. The request is often lop-sided, with us benefiting considerably more than the participant.

18.3 Preparations for the data gathering process

• Explain important influences to account for in qualitative data gathering
• Organize and document preparatory steps to plan data gathering activities for your qualitative proposal

As you may have guessed from our discussion regarding qualitative research planning and sampling, you have a number of options available for qualitative data gathering, and consequently, a number of choices to make. Your decisions should be driven by your research question and research design, including the resources that are at your disposal for conducting your study. Remember, qualitative research is a labor-intensive venture. While it may not require lots of fancy equipment, it requires a significant investment of people’s time and potentially other resources (e.g. space, incentives for participants, transportation). Each source of data (interviews, focus groups, observations, other artifacts), will require separate planning as you approach data gathering.

Our impact on the data gathering process

In the last chapter, you were introduced to the tool of reflexive journaling as a means of encouraging you to reflect on and document your role in the research process. Since qualitative researchers generally play a very active and involved role in the data gathering process (e.g. conducting interviews, facilitating focus groups, selecting artifacts), we need to consider ways to capture our influence on this part of the qualitative process. Let’s say you are conducting interviews. As you head into the interview, you might be bringing in thoughts about a previous interview, a conversation you just had with your research professor, or worries about finishing all your assignments by the end of the semester! During the interview, you are likely to be surprised by some things that are said or some parts may evoke strong emotions. These responses may lead you to consider pursuing a slightly different line of questioning, and potentially highlighting or de-emphasizing certain aspects. Understanding and being aware of your personal reactions during the data collection process is very important. As part of your design and planning, you may specify that you will reflexively journal before and after each interview in an attempt to capture pre- and post-interview thoughts and feelings. This can help us to consider how we influence and are influenced by the research process. Towards the end of this chapter, after we have had a chance to talk about some of these data gathering strategies, there is a reflexive journal prompt to help you consider how to begin to reflect on the way you as a researcher might impact your work and how you work might impact you.

Decision Point

How will you account for your role in the research process?

• This may be your reflexive journal or you may have other thoughts about how you can account for this.
• Whatever you choose, how will you develop a routine/habit around this to ensure that you are regularly implementing this?

Reflexive Journal Entry Prompt

This is going to be a bit meta, but for this prompt, I want you reflect on the reflecting you are doing for your reflexive journaling.

• Do you see this as a potentially helpful tool for tracking your influence and reactions? What appeals to you? What puts you off?
• If so, how did you develop this mindset?
• If not, how can you strengthen this skill?

When are we done

Finally, as you plan for your data collection you need to consider when to stop. As suggested previously in our discussion on sampling, the concept of saturation is important here. As a reminder, saturation is the point at which no new ideas or concepts are being presented as you continue to collect new pieces of data. Again, as qualitative researchers, we are often collecting and analyzing our data simultaneously. This is what enables us to continue screening for the point of saturation. Of course, not all studies utilize the point of saturation as their determining factor for the amount of data they will collect. This may be predetermined by other factors, such as restricted access or other limitations to the scope of the investigation. While there is no hard and fast rule for the quantity of data you gather, the quality is important; you want to be comprehensive, consistent, and systematic in your approach.

Next, we will discuss some of the different approaches to gathering qualitative data. I’m going to start out with Table 18.1 that allows us to compare these different approaches, providing you with a general framework that will allow us to dive a bit deeper into each one. After you finish reading this chapter, it might be helpful to come back to this table as you continue with your proposal planning.

• As you are preparing to initiate data collection, make sure that you have a plan for how you will capture and document your influence on the process. Reflexive journaling can be a useful tool to accomplish this.
• Be sure to take some time to think about when you will end your data collection. Make this an intentional, justified decisions, rather than a haphazard one.

18.4 Interviews

• Identify key considerations when planning to use interviewing as a strategy for qualitative data gathering, including preparations, tools, and skills to support it
• Assess whether interviewing is an effective approach to gather data for your qualitative research proposal

A common form of qualitative data gathering involves conducting interviews . Interviews offer researchers a way to gather data directly from participants by asking them to share their thoughts on a range of questions related to a research topic. Interviews are generally conducted individually, although occasionally couples (or other dyads , which consist of a combination of two people) may be interviewed. Interviews are a particularly good strategy for capturing unique perspectives and exploring experiences in detail. People may have a host of responses to the request to be interviewed, ranging from flat out rejection to excitement at the opportunity to share their story. As you plan to conduct your interviews you will need to decide on your delivery method, how you will capture the data, you will construct your interview guide , and hone your research interviewing skills.

Delivery method

As technology has advanced, so too have our options for conducting interviews. While in-person interviews are generally still the mainstay of the qualitative researcher, phone or video-based interviews have expanded the reach of many studies, allowing us to gain access to participants across vast distances with relatively few resources. Interviewing in-person allows you to capture important non-verbal and contextual information that will likely be limited if you choose to conduct your interview via phone or video. For instance, if we conduct an interview by phone, we miss the opportunity to see how our participant interacts with their surroundings and we can’t see if their arms are crossed or their foot is fidgety. This may indicate that a certain topic might make them particularly uncomfortable. Alternatively, we may pose a question that makes a smile come across their face. If we are interviewing in person, we can ask a follow-up question noting the smile as a change in their expression, however, it’s hard to hear a smile over the phone! Additionally, there is something to be said for the ability to make a personal connection with your interviewee that may help them to engage more easily in the interview process. This personal connection can be challenging over the phone or mediated by technology. As an example, I often offer to my students that we can meet for “virtual” office hours using Zoom if it is hard for them to get to campus. However, they will often prefer to come to campus, despite the inconvenience because they would prefer to avoid the technology.

Regardless of which method you select, make sure you are well prepared. If you are meeting in person, know where you are going and allow plenty of time to get there. Remember, you are asking someone to give up their time to speak with you, and time is precious! When determining where you will meet for your interview, you may choose to meet at your office, their home, or a neutral setting in the community. If meeting somewhere in the community, do consider that you want to choose a place where you can reasonably assure the participant’s privacy and confidentiality as they are speaking with you. In most instances, I try to ask participants where they would feel most comfortable meeting. If you are speaking over phone or video, make sure to test your equipment ahead of time so that you are comfortable using it, and make sure that both you and the participant have access to a private space as you are speaking. If participants have minor children, plan ahead for whether the children should stay in the same space as the interview. If not, you may need to arrange child care or at least discuss child care with participants in advance. We also want to be mindful of how we are situated during an interview, ideally minimizing any power imbalances. This may be especially important when meeting in an office, making sure to sit across from our participants rather than behind a desk.

Capturing the data

You will also need to consider how you plan to physically capture your data. Some researchers record their interviews, using either a smartphone or a digital recording device. Recording the exchange allows you to have a verbatim record, which can allow the researcher to more fully participate in the interview, instead of worrying about capturing everything in writing. However, if there is a problem with recording – either the quality of the recording or some other equipment malfunction, the researcher can be up the proverbial creek without a paddle. Additionally, using a recording device may be perceived as a barrier between the researcher and the participant, as the participant may not feel comfortable being recorded. If you do plan to record, you should always ask permission first and announce clearly when you are starting and stopping the recording. If you will use recording equipment, be sure to test it carefully in advance, and bring backup batteries/phone charger with you.

The alternative to recording is taking field notes. Field notes consist of a written record of the interview, completed during the interview. You may elect to take field notes even if you are recording the interview, and most people do. This allows us to capture main ideas that stand out to us as researchers, nonverbal information that won’t show up in a recording, and some of our own reactions as the interview is being conducted. These field notes become invaluable if you have a problem with your recording. Even if you don’t, they provide helpful information as you interpret the data you do have in your transcript (the typed version of your recording).

If you are not recording and are relying completely on your notes, it is important to know that you are not going to capture every word and that you shouldn’t try. You want to plan in advance how you will structure your notes so that they make sense to you and are easy to follow. Try to capture all main ideas, important quotes that stand out, and whenever possible, use the participant’s own words. We need to recognize that when we paraphrase what the person is stating, we are introducing our ‘spin’ on it – their ideas go through our filter. We likely can’t avoid some of this, but we do want to minimize it as much as possible. Part of how we do this when we are relying on field notes is to take our interview notes and create expanded field notes , ideally within 24 hours of the interview. The longer you wait to expand your field notes, the less reliable they become, as our memory fades quickly! Much like they sound, expanded field notes take our jottings from the interview and expand them, providing more detail regarding the context or meaning of the statements that were captured. Expanded field notes may also contain questions, comments, or reactions that we, as the researcher, may have had to the data, which are usually kept in the margins, rather than in the body of the notes.

Below are a few resources to learn more about taking quality field notes. Along with the reading, practice, practice, practice!

Resources to learn more about capturing your Field Notes:

Deggs, D., & Hernandez, F. (2018). Enhancing the value of qualitative field notes through purposeful reflection .

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2008). Qualitative guidelines project: Fieldnotes .

University of Southern California Libraries. (2019). Research guides: Organizing your social sciences research paper, writing field notes .

Wolfinger, N. (2002). On writing fieldnotes: Collection strategies and background expectancies.

Interview guide

The questions that you ask during your interview will be outlined in a tool called an interview guide . Along with your interview questions, your interview guide will also often contain a brief introduction reminding the participant of the topics that will be covered in the interview and any other instructions you want to provide them (note: much of this will simply serve as a reminder of what you already went over in your informed consent, but it is good practice to remind them right before you get started as well). In addition, the guide often ends with a debriefing statement that thanks the participant for their contribution, inquires whether they have any questions or concerns, and provides contact and resource information as appropriate. Below is a brief interview guide for a study that I was involved with, in which we were interviewing alumni regarding their perceptions of advanced educational needs in the field of social work and specifically their thoughts about practice doctorate of social work (DSW) degrees/programs.

Some interviews are prescribed or structured, with a rigid set of questions that are asked consistently each time, with little to no deviation. This is called a structured interview . More often however, we are dealing with semi-structured interviews , which provide a general framework for the questions that will be asked, but- contain more flexibility to pursue related topics that are brought up by participants. This often leads to researchers asking unplanned follow-up questions to help explore new ideas that are introduced by participants. Sometimes we also use unstructured interviews . These interview guides usually just contain a very open-ended talking prompt that we want participants to respond to. If we are using a highly structured interview guide, this suggests we are leaning toward deductive reasoning apporach—we have a pretty good idea based on existing evidence what we are looking for and what questions we want to ask to help us test our existing understanding. If we are using an unstructured guide, this suggests we are leaning toward an inductive reasoning approach—we start by trying to get people to elaborate extensively on open-ended questions to provide us with data that we will use to develop our understanding of this topic.

An important concept related to the contents of your interview guide is the idea of emergent design . With qualitative research we often treat our interview guide as dynamic, meaning that as new ideas are brought up, we may integrate these new questions into our interview guide for future interviews. This reflects emergent design, as our interview guide shifts to accommodate our emerging understanding of the research topic as we are gathering data. If you do plan to use an emergent design approach in your interviews, it is important to acknowledge this in your IRB application. When you submit your application, you will need to provide the IRB with your interview guide so that they have an idea of the questions you will be discussing with participants. While using an emergent approach to some of your questions is generally acceptable (and even expected), these questions still should be clearly relevant and related to what was presented in your IRB application. If you find that you begin diverging into new areas that are substantively different from this, you should consider submitting an IRB addendum that reflects the changes, and it may be a good idea to consult with your IRB to see if this is necessary.

Designing interview questions and probes

Making up questions, it sounds easy right? Little kids are running around asking questions all the time! However, what you quickly find when conducting research is that it takes skills, ingenuity and practice to craft good interview questions. If you are conducting an unstructured interview, you will generally have fewer questions and they will be quite broad. Depending on your topic, you might ask questions like:

• Tell me about a time…
• What was it like to…
• What should people understand about…
• What does it mean to…

If your interview is more structured, your questions will be a bit more focused, but with qualitative interviewing, we are still generally trying to get people to open up about their experiences with something, so you will want to design questions that will help them to do this. Probes can be important tools to help us accomplish this. You can think of probes as brief follow-ups that are attached to a particular question that will help you explore a topic a bit further. We usually develop probes either through existing literature or knowledge on a topic, or we might add probes to our interview guide as we begin data collection based on what previous participants tell us. As an example, I’m very interested in research on the concept of wellness. I know that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) has adopted a heuristic tool, The Wheel of Wellness , that outlines eight dimensions of wellness based on research by Swarbrick (2006). [1] When interviewing participants with the broad, unstructured question “What does wellness mean in your life?”, I might use these eight dimensions that are spokes of this wheel (i.e. emotional, spiritual, intellectual, physical, environmental, financial, occupational, and social) as probes to explore if/how these dimensions might be relevant in the lives of these participants. Probes suggest that we are anticipating that certain areas may be relevant to our question.

Here are a few general guidelines to consider when crafting your interview questions.

Make them approachable

We are usually relatively unfamiliar with our participants, at least on a personal level. This can make sitting down for an interview where we might be asking some deep questions a bit awkward and uncomfortable, at least at first. Because of this, we want to craft our questions in such a way that they are not off-putting, inadvertently accusatory or judgmental, or culturally insensitive. To accomplish this, we want to make sure we phrase questions in a neutral tone (e.g. “Tell me what that was like”, as opposed to, “That sounds horrible, what was that like”). To accomplish this, we can shift perspectives and think about what it would be like for us to be asked these questions (especially by a stranger). Pilot testing is especially important here. You should plan in time for this, both conducting pilot testing and incorporating feedback on questions. Pilot testing involves you taking your questions on a dry-run with a few people outside of your sample. You might consider testing these out with peers, colleagues, or friends to get their perspective. You might want to get feedback on:

• Did the question make sense to them?
• Did they know what information you were looking for and how to respond?
• What was it like to be asked that question?
• What suggestions do they have for rephrasing the question (if it wasn’t clear)?

Also, if we are conducting interviews on topics that may be particularly hard for people to talk about, we will likely want to start out with some questions that are easier to address prior to getting into the heavier topics.

Make them relatable

Unlike surveys, where researchers may not be able to explain the meaning of a question, with interviews, we are present to help clarify questions if needed. However, ideally, our questions are as clear as possible from the beginning. This means that we avoid jargon or technical terms, we anticipate areas that might be hard to explain and try to provide some examples or a metaphor that might help get the point across, and we do our homework to relay our questions in an appropriate cultural context. Like the discussion above, pilot testing our questions can be very helpful for ensuring the relatability of our questions, especially with community representatives. When pilot testing, do your best to test questions with a person/people from the same culture and educational level as the future participants. What sounds good in our heads might make little sense to our intended audience.

Make them individually distinct, but collectively comprehensive

Just like when we are developing survey questions, you don’t want to ask more than one question at the same time. This is confusing and hard to respond to for the participant, so make sure you are only asking about one idea in each question. However, when you are thinking about your list of questions, or about your interview guide collectively, ensure that you have comprehensively included all the ideas related to your topic. It’s extremely disheartening for a qualitative researcher that has concluded their interviews to realize there was a really important area that was not included in the guide. To avoid this, make sure to know the literature in your area well and talk to other people who study this area to get their perspective on what topics need to be included. Additional topics may come up when you pilot test your interview questions.

Interview skills

As social workers, we receive much training regarding interviewing and related interpersonal skills. Many of these skills certainly transfer to interviewing for research purposes, such as attending to both verbal and non-verbal communication, active listening, and clarification. However, it is also important to understand how a practice-related interview differs from a research interview.

The most important difference has to do with providing clarity around the purpose of the interview. For a practice-related interview, we are gathering information to help understand our client’s situation and better meet their needs. The interview is a means to provide quality services to our clients, and the emphasis is on the client and resources flowing to them. However, the research interview is ideologically much different. The interview is the means and the end. The purpose of the interview is to help answer the research question, but most often, there is little or limited direct benefit to the participant. The researcher is largely the beneficiary of the exchange, as the participant provides us with data. If the participant does become upset or is negatively affected by their participation, we may help facilitate their connection with appropriate support services to address this, such as counseling or crisis numbers (and indeed, this is our ethical obligation as a competent researcher). However, counseling and treatment is not our responsibility when conducting research interviews and we should be very careful not to confuse it as such. If we do act in this way, it creates the potential for a dual relationship with the interviewee (participant and client) and puts them in a vulnerable situation. Make sure you are clear what your role is in this encounter.

Along with recognizing the focus of your role, here is a checklist of general tips for qualitative interviewing skills:

• Approach the interview in a relaxed, but professional manner
• Be observant of verbal, nonverbal, and contextual information
• Exhibit a non-judgmental stance
• Explain information clearly and check for comprehension
• Demonstrate respect for your participants and be polite
• Utilize much more listening and much less talking
• Check for understanding when you are unclear, rather than making assumptions
• Know your materials and technology (e.g. informed consent, interview guide, recording equipment)
• Be concise, clear and organized as you are taking notes
• Have a structured approach for what you need to cover and redirect if the conversation is losing focus
• Be flexible enough so that the interview does not become impersonal and disengaging due to rigidity of your agenda
• Data collection through interviewing requires careful planning for both how we will conduct our interviews (e.g. in person, over the phone, online) and the nature of the interview questions themselves. An interview guide is an important document to develop in planning this.
• Qualitative interviewing uses similar skills to clinical interviewing, but is markedly different. This difference is due in large part to the very different purpose of these two activities.

Let’s get some practice!

Thinking about your topic, if you were to use interviewing as an approach for data collection, identify 4 interview questions that you would consider asking about your topic. Make sure these are open-ended questions so that your participants can elaborate on them.

• Interview question 1:
• Interview question 2:
• Interview question 3:
• Interview question 4:

Now pilot these. Ask a peer to read these questions and think about trying to answer them. You aren’t interested in their actual answers, you want feedback about how these questions were.

• Were they understandable and clear?
• Were they potentially culturally insensitive or offensive in any way?
• Are they something that it seems reasonable that someone could answer (especially with a researcher they likely don’t know previously)?
• Are they asked in a way that are likely to get people to elaborate (rather than just give a one-word answer)?
• What suggestions do they have to address all/any of these areas?

Based on your peer feedback, re-write your four questions incorporating their suggestions.

• Revised interview question 1:
• Revised interview question 2:
• Revised interview question 3:
• Revised interview question 4:

Resources for learning more about conducting Qualitative Interviews.

Baker, S. E., & Edwards, R. (2012) National Centre for Research Methods review paper: How many qualitative interviews is enough?

Clifford, S. Duke University Initiative on Survey Methodology at the Social Science Research Institute (n.d.). Tipsheet: Qualitative interviews.

Harvard University Sociology Dept. (n.d.). Strategies for qualitative interviews .

McGrath et al., (2018). Twelve tips for conducting qualitative research interviews .

Oltmann, S. M. (2016). Qualitative interviews: A methodological discussion of the interviewer and respondent contexts .

A few exemplars of studies employing Interview Data:

Ewart‐Boyle, S., Manktelow, R., & McColgan, M. (2015). Social work and the shadow father: Lessons for engaging fathers in Northern Ireland .

Flashman, S. H. (2015). Exploration into pre-clinicians’ views of the use of role-play games in group therapy with adolescents .

Irvin, K. (2016). Maintaining community roots: understanding gentrification through the eyes of long-standing African American residents in West Oakland .

18.5 Focus groups

• Identify key considerations when planning to use focus groups as a strategy for qualitative data gathering, including preparations, tools, and skills to support it
• Assess whether focus groups are an effective approach to gather data for your qualitative research proposal

Focus groups offer the opportunity to gather data from multiple participants at once. As you have likely learned in some of your practice coursework, groups can help facilitate an environment where people feel (more) comfortable sharing common experiences which can often allow them to delve deeper into topics than they may have individually. As people relate to what others in the group say, they often go on to share their responses to these new ideas – offering a collaborative synergy. Of course, similar to the research vs. clinical interview described above, the purpose of the focus group is much different than that of the therapeutic, psychoeducational, or support group. While other elements (e.g. information sharing, encouragement) may take place, the aim of the focus group must remain anchored in the collection of data and that should be made explicitly clear so participants have accurate expectations. As a cautionary note, the advantages discussed above should be the reason you choose to use a focus group to collect data. You should not choose to conduct a focus group solely out of convenience. Focus groups require a considerable amount of planning and skill to execute well, so it is not reasonable to think that just because a focus group allows you to collect data from multiple participants at once that it is an easier option for data gathering.

Group assembly

Assembling your focus group is an important part of your planning process. Generally speaking, focus groups shouldn’t exceed 10-12 participants. When thinking about size, there are a couple things to consider. On the lower end, you do want enough participants so that they don’t feel pressure to be constantly speaking. I f you only have a couple of focus group members, it loses most of the collective benefit of the focus group approach, as there are few people to generate and share ideas. On the higher end, you want to avoid having so many participants that not everyone gets to be heard and the group conversation becomes unwieldy and hard to manage.

As you are forming your group, you want to strike up a balance between heterogeneity (difference) and homogeneity (sameness) between your group members. If the group is too heterogeneous, then opinions may be so polarized that it is hard to have a productive conversation about the topic. People may not feel comfortable sharing their opinion or it may be difficult to gain a common understanding across the data. If the group is too homogeneous, then it may be hard to get much depth from the data. People may see the topic so similarly that we don’t gain much information about how differing perspectives think about the issue. You generally want your group composition to be different enough to be interesting and produce good conversation, but similar enough that members can relate to each other and have a cohesive conversation. Along these lines, you also need to consider whether or not your participants know each other. Do they have existing relationships? If they do know each other, we need to anticipate that there may be existing group dynamics. This may influence how people engage in discussion with us. On one hand, they may find it easy to share more freely. However, these dynamics may inhibit them from speaking their mind, as they might be concerned about repercussions for sharing within their social network.

As a final note on group composition, sometimes we make decisions on group members’ characteristics based on our topic. For instance, if we are asking questions about help-seeking and common experiences after (heterosexual) sexual assault, it may be challenging to host a mixed-gender group, where participants may feel triggered or guarded having members of the opposite gender present and therefore potentially less open to sharing. It is important to consider the population you are working with and the types of questions you are asking, as this can help you to be sensitive to their perceptions and facilitate the creation of a safe space. Other issues, such as race, age, levels of education, may require consideration as you think about your group composition.

Related to feelings of safety, the setting you select for your focus group is an important decision. Much like with interviews, we want participants to feel as comfortable and at-ease as possible, however, it is perhaps less common to use someone’s home for the purpose of a focus group because we are often bringing together people who may not know one another. As such, try to select a place that feels neutral (e.g. some people may not feel comfortable in a church or a courthouse), accessible, convenient, and that offers privacy for participants. If you are working with a particular group or community, there may be a space that is especially relevant or familiar for people that may work well for this purpose. A c ommunity gatekeeper or other knowledgeable community member can be an excellent resource in helping to identify where a good spa ce might be. Seating in a circle will help participants to share more easily. Focus group organizers often provide refreshments as an incentive and to make participants feel more comfortable. If you decide to provide refreshments, be sensitive to issues like common dietary restrictions and cultural preferences.

Roles of the researcher(s)

Ideally, you are conducting your focus group with a co-researcher. This is important because it allows you to divide up the tasks and makes the process more manageable. Most often, one of you will take on the main facilitator role, with responsibilities for providing information and instructions, introducing topics, asking follow-up questions and generally structuring the encounter. The other person takes on a note-taking/processing role. While not necessarily silent, they likely say very little during the focus group. Instead, they are focused on capturing the context of the encounter. This may include taking notes about what is said, how people respond or react, other details about the space and the overall exchange as a whole. They will also often be especially attentive to group dynamics and capturing these whenever possible. Along with this, if they see that certain group members are dominating or being left out of the conversation, they may help the facilitator to address or shift these dynamics so that the sharing is more equitable. Finally, if something arises where a participant becomes upset or there is an emergency where they need to leave the room, having a co-researcher allows one of you to remain with the group, while the other can attend to the person in distress. For consistency sake, you may want to maintain roles throughout data collection. If you do decide to alternate roles as you conduct multiple focus groups, it is important that you both conduct the respective roles as similarly as possible. Remember, research is about the systematic collection of data, so you want your data collection to follow a consistent process. Below is a chart that offers some tips for each of these roles.

Focus group guide and preparations

As in your preparation for an interview, you will want to spend considerable time developing your focus group guide and the questions it contains. Be sure the language you use in your questions is appropriate for the educational level of your participants; you will need to use vocabulary that is clear and not “jargon”. At the same time, you also want to avoid talking down to your participants. You will probably want to start with some easier, non-threatening questions to help break the ice for the group and help get folks comfortable talking and sharing their input. Be prepared to ask questions in a different way or follow up with probes to help prod the conversation along if a question falls flat or fails to elicit a dialogue. In addition, you will want to plan introductions, both to the study and to one another. Usually we stick to first names, and occasionally during introductions, participants will share how they are connected to the topic of the research. Just like in many practice-related groups, facilitators usually take time to review group norms and expectations before getting started with questions. Some common norms to discuss are:

• Not talking over other participants
• Being respectful of other participants’ contributions
• All people are expected to participate in the conversation
• Not pressuring people to respond to a question if they are uncomfortable
• Using respectful language and avoiding derogatory, discriminatory or accusatory language or tone
• Not using electronic devices and silencing cell-phones during the focus group
• Allowing others ample time to contribute to the conversation and not dominating the discussion

Another expectation to address that is especially important to include is confidentiality . It is important to make clear to participants that what is shared in the group should be kept confidential and not discussed outside the context of the focus group. Additionally, it is important to let participants know that while the researchers ask all participants to protect the confidentiality of what is shared, they can’t guarantee that will be honored. Below figure 18.4 offers an example of a focus group guide template to help you think about how to structure this type of document.

Capturing your data

Finally, as with interviews, you will need to plan how you will capture the data from your focus group(s). Again, you may choose to record the focus groups, take fie ld notes, or use a combination of both. There are some special considerations that apply to these choices when using a focus group, however. First, if recording, anticipate that it may be especially challenging when transcribing the recording to determine who said what. In addition, the quality of the recording can become a challenge. Despite requests for individuals to speak one at a time, inevitably there will be spots where there are multi ple people talking at once, especially with an animated group. Additionally, do test the recording devices, ideally in the space you will be using them. You want to make sure that it can pick up everyone’s voice, even if they are soft-spoken and seated a distance from the device. If you are relying solely on a recordi ng and there is a problem with it, it can be difficult to surmount the barriers this can pose . If this occurs with an interview, while not ideal, you can re-interview a person to replace the information, but re-creating a focus group can be a logistical night mare. When taking field notes , it is a good practice to make a quick seating chart at the beginning so you can make quick references for yourself of who is saying what (see Figure 18.5). Regardl ess of what system you use to stay organize d in taking these notes, make sure to have one that works for you. The conversations will likely happen more rapidly and will include multiple voices, so you will want to be prepared in advance.

• Focus groups offer a valuable tool for qualitative data collection when the topic we are exploring might best be understood through a group discussion that helps participants verbally process and consider their experiences, thoughts, and opinions with others.
• Details like focus group composition, roles of co-facilitators, and anticipation of group norms or guidelines require our attention as we prepare to host a focus group.

Reflexive journal prompt

How do you feel about conducting a focus group?

• What about it is appealing
• What about it seems challenging
• Would you prefer to be the main facilitator or the observer (and why)?
• What might make using a focus group a good choice for your specific research question?
• What might make using a focus group a poor choice for your specific research question?

Resources to learn more about conducting Focus Groups.

Leung, F. H., & Savithiri, R. (2009). Spotlight on focus groups .

Duke, ModU (2016, October 19). Powerful concepts in social science: Preparing for focus groups, qualitative research methods

Onwuegbuzie et al. (2009). A qualitative framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research .

Nyumba et al. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation .

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2008). Qualitative Guidelines Project: Focus groups.

A few exemplars of studies employing Focus Groups:

Foote, W. L. (2015). Social work field educators’ views on student specific learning needs .

Hoover, S. M., & Morrow, S. L. (2016). A qualitative study of feminist multicultural trainees’ social justice development .

Kortes-Miller, K., Wilson, K., & Stinchcombe, A. (2019). Care and LGBT aging in Canada: A focus group study on the educational gaps among care workers .

18.6 Observations

• Identify key considerations when planning to use observations as a strategy for qualitative data gathering, including preparations, tools, and skills to support it
• Assess whether observations are an effective approach to gather data for your qualitative research proposal

Observational data can also be very important to the qualitative researcher. As discussed in Chapter 17 , observations can provide important information about context, rea ctions, behaviors, exchanges, and expressions. The focus of observations may be indi viduals, i nteractions between people or within groups, environments or settings, or events like artistic expressions (e.g. plays, poetry readings, art shows), public forums (e.g. town hall meetings, community festivals), private forums (e.g. board meetings, family reunions), and finally, your reactions or responses as the researcher to any and all of these. We will be discussing a variety of different types of qualitative designs in Chapter 22 , including ethnography. Observational data is especially important for ethnographic research designs. 

Researcher engagement

Observational data gathering is a more indirect form of data collection when compared with previous methods we have discussed. With both interviews and focus groups, you are gathering data directly from participants. When making observations, we are relying on our interpretation of what is going on. Even though we are often not directly interacting with people, we generally have an ethical responsibility to disclose that we are gathering data by making observations and gain consent to do so. That being said, there are some instances where we are making observations in public spaces, and in these instances disclosure may not be necessary because we are not gathering any identifiable information about specific people. These instances are rare, but if you are in doubt, consult with your IRB.

Even though I just suggested that making observations is often a more indirect form of data gathering, it does exist on a continuum. If utilizing observational data, you will need to consider where you fall on this continuum. Some research designs situate the researcher as an active participant in the community or group that they are studying, while other designs have the researcher as an independent and detached onlooker. In either case, you need to consider how your presence, either involved or detached, may influence the data you are gathering. This requires us to think of this on a more individual or micro level (how do the individuals we are directly observing perceive us) and a more mezzo or even macro level (how does the community or group of people we are studying collectively feel about our presence and our research)? Are people changing their behavior because of your presence? Are people monitoring or censoring what they say? We can’t always know the answers to these questions, but we can try to reduce these concerns by making repeated observations over time, rather than using a one-time, in-and-out data gathering mission. This means actually spending time within the community that is the focus of your observation. Taking the time to make repeated observations will allow you to develop a reasonable framework of understanding, which in turn will empower you to better interpret what you see and help you determine whether your observations and interpretation are consistent.

Observational skills

When gathering observational data, you are often attending to or taking in many different dimensions. You are potentially observing:

• the context of the environment
• the content of what is being said
• behaviors of people
• affective or emotional aspects of interactions
• sequences of events
• your own reactions to what is being observed

To capture this information, you will need to be keenly aware, focused, and organized. Additionally, you need to make sure you are capturing clear descriptions of what is going on. Remember, notes that seem completely logical and easy to understand at the time you are taking them can become vague and confusing with the passage of time and as you gather more and more data. Part of the clarity of your description often involves taking a non-judgmental approach to documenting your observations. While this may seem easy, judgments or biases frequently slip into our thinking and writing (unbeknownst to us). Along with a non-judgmental stance, researchers making observations also attempt to be as unobtrusive as possible. This means being conscious of your behaviors, your dress and overall appearance. If you show up wearing a suit and tie, and carrying a clipboard while everyone else is wearing jeans and t-shirts, you are likely to stick out like a sore thumb. This is also likely to influence how participants respond and interact with you. Know the environment that you are making your observations in, with a goal of blending in as much as possible.

Observational data is most often captured using field notes. Using recordings for observational data is infrequently used in social work research. This is especially true because of the potential for violations of privacy and threats to confidentiality that recordings (video or audio) may pose to participants. Mirroring our discussion above, when taking field notes, make sure to be organized and have a plan for how you will structure your notes so they are easy to interpret and make sense to you. Creswell (2013) [2] suggests capturing ‘descriptive’ and ‘reflective’ aspects in your observational field notes. Table 18.3 offers some more detailed description of what to include as you capture your data and corresponding examples.

For the purposes of qualitative research, our observations are generally unstructured or more naturalistic . However, you may also see mention of more systematic or structured observations. This is more common for quantitative data collection, where we may be attempting to capture or count the frequency with which a specific behavior or event occurs.

• Observational data collection can be an effective tool for gathering information about settings, interactions, and general human behavior. However, since this is gathered strictly through the researchers own direct observation, it is not a source of data on people’s thoughts, perceptions, values, opinions, beliefs or interpretations.
• There are a range of aspects that we may want to take note of while we are observing (e.g. the setting, interactions, descriptions of people, etc.).
• While we are making our observations, we generally want to do so as inconspicuously and non-judgmentally as possible.

Resources for learning more about conducting Qualitative Observations.

Kawulich, B.B. (2005, May) Participant observation as a data collection method .

Kawulich, B.B. (2012). Collecting data through observation . In C. Wagner, B. Kawulich, & M. Garner (Eds.), Doing social research: A global context ( 150-160). New York: McGraw Hill.

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2008). Qualitative Guidelines Project: Observations .

Sliter, M. (2014, June 30). Observational methods: Research methods.

A few exemplars of studies employing qualitative observations:

Avby et al. (2017). Knowledge use and learning in everyday social work practice: A study in child investigation work .

Wilkins et al. (2018). A golden thread? The relationship between supervision, practice, and family engagement in child and family social work .

Wood et al. (2017). The “gray zone” of police work during mental health encounters: Findings from an observational study in Chicago .

18.7 Documents and other artifacts

• Identify key considerations when planning to analyze documents and other artifacts as a strategy for qualitative data gathering, including preparations, tools, and skills to support it
• Assess whether analyzing documents and other artifacts is an effective approach to gather data for your qualitative research proposal

Qualitative researchers may also elect to utilize existing documents (e.g. reports, newspapers, blogs, minutes) or other artifacts (e.g. photos, videos, performances, works of art) as sources of data. Artifact analysis can provide important information on a specific topic, for instance, how same-sex couples are portrayed in the media. They also may provide contextual information regarding the values and popular sentiments of a given time and/or place. When choosing to utilize documents and other artifacts as a source of data for your project, remember that you are approaching these as a researcher, not just as a consumer of media. You need to thoughtfully plan what artifacts you will include, with a clear justification for their selection that is solidly linked to your research question, as well as a plan for systematically approaching these artifacts to identify and obtain relevant information from them.

Obtaining your artifacts

As you begin considering what artifacts you will be using for your research study, there are two points to consider: what will help you to answer your research question and what can you gain access to. In addressing the first of these considerations, you may already have a good idea about what artifacts are needed because you have done a substantial amount of preliminary work and you know this area well. However, if you are unsure, or you need to supplement your existing knowledge, some general sources can include: librarians, historians, community experts, topical experts, organizations or agencies that address the issue or serve the population you will be studying, and other researchers who study this area. In considering access, if the artifacts are public the answer may be a straightforward yes, but if the documents are privately held, you may need to be granted permission – and remember, this is permission to use them for research purposes, not just to view them. When obtaining permission, get something in writing, so that you have this handy to submit with your IRB application. While the types of artifacts you might include are almost endless (given they are relevant to your research question), Table 18.4 offers a list of some ideas for different sources you might consider:

Artifact analysis skills

Consistent with other areas of research, but perhaps especially salient to the use of artifacts, you will require organizational skills. Depending on what sources you choose to include, you may literally have volumes of data. Furthermore, you might not just be dealing with a large amount of data, but also a variety of types of data. Regardless of whether you are using physical or virtual data, you need to have a way to label and catalog (or file) each artifact so that you can easily track it down. As you collect specific information from each piece, make sure it is tagged with the appropriate label so that you can track it back down, as you very well may need to reference it later. This is also very important for honest and transparency in your work as a qualitative researcher – documenting a way to trace your findings back to the raw data .

In addition to staying organized, you also need to think specifically about what you are looking for in the artifacts. This might seem silly, but depending on the amount of data you are dealing with and how broad your research topic is, it might be hard to ‘separate the wheat from the chaff’ and figure out what is important or relevant information. Sometimes this is more clearly defined and we have a prescribed list of things we are looking for. This prescribed list may come from existing literature on the topic. This prescribed list may be based on peer-reviewed literature that is more conceptual, meaning that it focuses on defining concepts, putting together propositions, formulating early stage theories, and laying out professional wisdom, rather than reporting research findings. Drawing on this literature, we can then examine our data to see if there is evidence of these ideas and what this evidence tells us about these concepts. If this is the case, make sure you document this list somewhere, and on this list define each item and provide a code that you can attach when you see it in each document. This document then becomes your codebook .

However, if you aren’t clear ahead of time what this list might be, you may take an emergent approach, meaning that you have some general ideas of what you are seeking. In this event, you will actively create a codebook as you go, like the one described above, as you encounter these ideas in your artifacts. This helps you to gain a better understanding of what items should be included in your list, rather than coming in with preconceived notions about what they should be. There will be more about tracking this in our next chapter on qualitative analysis. Whether you have a prescribed list or use a more emergent design to develop your codebook, you will likely make modifications or corrections to it along the way as your knowledge evolves. When you make these changes, it is very important to have a way to document what changes you made, when, and why. Again, this helps to keep you honest, organized, and transparent. Just as another reminder, if you are using predetermined codes that you are looking for, this is reflective of a more deductive approach, whereas seeking emergent codes is more inductive .

Finally, when using artifacts, you may also need to bring in some creative, out-of-the-box thinking. You may be bringing together many different pieces of data that look and sound nothing alike, yet you are seeking information from them that will allow you tell a cohesive story. You may need to be fluid or flexible in how you are looking at things, and potentially challenge your preconceived notions.

As alluded to above, you may have physical artifacts that you are dealing with, digital artifacts or representations of these artifacts (e.g. videos, photos, recordings), or even field notes about artifacts (for instance, if you take notes of a dramatic performance that can’t be recorded). A large part of what may drive your decisions about how to capture your data may be related to your level of access to those artifacts: can you look at it? Can you touch it, can you take it home with you, can you take a picture of it? Depending on what artifacts we are talking about, some of these may be important questions. Regardless of the answers to these questions, you will need to have a clearly articulated and well-documented plan for how you are obtaining the data and how you will reference it in the future. Table 18.4 provides a list of data gathering activities you might consider, both for documents and for other audiovisual materials.

What types of artifacts might you have access to that might help to answer your research question(s)?

• These could be artifacts available at your field placement, publically available media, through school, or through public institutions
• These can be documents or they can be audiovisual materials
• Think outside the box, how can you gather direct or indirect indications of the thing you are studying

Generate a list of at least 3

Again, drawing on Creswell’s (2013) suggestion of capturing ‘descriptive’ and ‘reflective’ aspects in your field notes, Table 18.5 offers some more detailed description of what to include as your capture your data and corresponding examples when focusing on an artifact.

Resources to learn more about qualitative research with artifacts.

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method .

Rowsell, J. (2011). Carrying my family with me: Artifacts as emic perspectives .

Hammond, J., & McDermott, I. (n.d.). Policy document analysis .

Wang et al. (2017). Arts-based methods in socially engaged research practice: A classification framework .

A few exemplars of studies utilizing documents and other artifacts.

Casey, R. C. (2018). Hard time: A content analysis of incarcerated women’s personal accounts .

Green, K. R. (2018). Exploring the implications of shifting HIV prevention practice Ideologies on the Work of Community-Based Organizations: A Resource dependence perspective . 

Sousa, P., & Almeida, J. L. (2016). Culturally sensitive social work: promoting cultural competence .

Secondary data analysis

I wanted to briefly provide some special attention to secondary data analysis at the end of this chapter. In the past two chapters we have focused our sights most often on what we would call raw data sources . However, you can of course conduct qualitative research with secondary data , which is data that was collected previously for another research project or other purpose; data is not originating from your research process. If you are fortunate enough to have access and permission to use qualitative data that had already been collected, you can pose a new research question that may be answered by analyzing this data. This saves you the time and energy from having to collect the data yourself!

You might procure this data because you know the researcher that collected the original data. For instance, as a student, perhaps there is a faculty member that allows you access to data they had previously collected for another project. Alternatively, maybe you locate a source of qualitative data that is publicly available. Examples of this might include interviews previously conducted with Holocaust survivors. Finally, you might register and join a research data repository . These are sites where contributing researchers can house data that other researchers can view and request permission to use. Syracuse University hosts a repository that is explicitly dedicated to qualitative data . While there are more of these emerging, it may be a challenge to find the specific data you are looking for in a repository. You should also anticipate that data from repositories will have all identifiable information removed. Sharing data you have collected with a repository is a good way to extend the potential usefulness and impact of data, but it also should be anticipated before you collect your data so that you can build it into any informed consent so participants are made aware of the possibility.

Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS)

Some qualitative researchers use software packages known as Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS) in their work. These are tools that can aid researchers in managing, organizing and manipulating/analyzing their data. Some of the more common tools include NVivo, Atlas.ti, and MAXQDA, which have licensing fees attached to them (although many have discounted student rates). However, there are also some free options available if you do some hunting. Taguette Project is the only free and open source CAQDAS project that is currently receiving updates, as previous projects like RQDA which built from the R library are not in active development. Taguette is a young project, and unlike the free alternatives for quantitative data analysis, it lacks the sophisticated analytical tools of commercial CAQDAS programs.

It is unlikely that you will be using a CAQDAS for a student project, mostly because of the additional time investment it will take to become familiar with the software and associated costs (if applicable). In fact the best way to avoid spending money on qualitative data analysis software is to do your analysis by hand or using word processing or spreadsheet software. If you continue on with other qualitative research projects, it may be worth some additional study to learn more about CAQDAS tools. If you do choose to use one of these products, it won’t magically do the analysis for you. You need to be clear about what you are using the software for and how it supports your analysis plan, which will be the focus of our next chapter.

Resources to learn more about CAQDAS.

Maher et al. (2018). Ensuring rigor in qualitative data analysis: A design research approach to coding combining NVivo with traditional material methods .

Woods et al. (2016). Advancing qualitative research using qualitative data analysis software (QDAS)? Reviewing potential versus practice in published studies using ATLAS. ti and NVivo, 1994–2013 .

Zamawe, F. C. (2015). The implication of using NVivo software in qualitative data analysis: Evidence-based reflections .

As you continue to plan your research proposal, make sure to give practical thought to how you will go about collecting your qualitative data. Hopefully this chapter helped you to consider which methods are appropriate and what skills might be required to apply that particular method well. Revisit the table in section 18.3 that summarizes each of these approaches and some of the strengths and challenges associated with each of them. Collecting qualitative data can be a labor-intensive process, to be sure. However, I personally find it very rewarding. In its very forms, we are bearing witness to people’s stories and experiences.

• Artifact analysis can be particularly useful for qualitative research as a means of studying existing data; meaning we aren’t having to collect the data ourselves, but we do have to gather it. As a limitation, we don’t have any control over how the data was created, since we weren’t involved in it.
• There are many sources of existing data that we can consider for artifact analysis. Think of all the things around us that can help to tell some story! Artifact analysis may be especially appealing as a potential time saver for student researchers if you can gain permission to use existing artifacts or use artifacts that are publicly available.
• Artifact analysis still requires a systematic and premeditated approach to how you will go about extract information from your artifacts.

Here are a few questions to get you thinking about the role that you play as you gather qualitative data.

• What are your initial thoughts about qualitative data collection?
• Why might that be?
• What excites you about this process?
• What worries you about this process?
• What aspects of yourself will strengthen or enhance this process?
• What aspects of yourself may hinder or challenge this process?

Decision Point: How will you go about qualitative data collection?

• Justify your choice(s) here in relation to your research question and availability of resources at your disposal
• who will be collecting data
• what will be involved
• how will it be safely stored and organized
• how are you protecting human participants
• if you have a team, how is communication being established so everyone is “on the same page”
• how will you know you are done
• What additional information do you need to know to use this approach?

Media Attributions

• checklist © mohamed_hassan is licensed under a CC0 (Creative Commons Zero) license
• start and finish line © Andrew Hurley is licensed under a CC BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) license
• group talking © Enoz is licensed under a CC BY-NC (Attribution NonCommercial) license
• children watching penguins © Amelia Beamish is licensed under a CC BY-NC (Attribution NonCommercial) license
• Swarbrick, M. (2006). A wellness approach. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 29 (4), 311. ↵
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Chapter 7. Data collection. In J. W. Creswell, Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (3rd ed.), Los Angeles: Sage ↵
• Harris, M. and Fallot, R. (2001). Using trauma theory to design service systems. New Directions for Mental Health Service s. Jossey Bass; Farragher, B. and Yanosy, S. (2005). Creating a trauma-sensitive culture in residential treatment. Therapeutic Communities, 26 (1), 93-109. ↵

A form of data gathering where researchers ask individual participants to respond to a series of (mostly open-ended) questions.

A form of data gathering where researchers ask a group of participants to respond to a series of (mostly open-ended) questions.

Observation is a tool for data gathering where researchers rely on their own senses (e.g. sight, sound) to gather information on a topic.

The identity of the person providing data cannot be connected to the data provided at any time in the research process, by anyone.

For research purposes, confidentiality means that only members of the research team have access potentially identifiable information that could be associated with participant data. According to confidentiality, it is the research team's responsibility to restrict access to this information by other parties, including the public.

Fake names assigned in research to protect the identity of participants.

Numbers or a series of numbers, symbols and letters assigned in research to both organize data as it is collected, as well as protecting the identity of participants.

A process through which the researcher explains the research process, procedures, risks and benefits to a potential participant, usually through a written document, which the participant than signs, as evidence of their agreement to participate.

an administrative body established to protect the rights and welfare of human research subjects recruited to participate in research activities conducted under the auspices of the institution with which it is affiliated

For the purposes of research, authenticity means that we do not misrepresent ourselves, our interests or our research; we are genuine in our interactions with participants and other colleagues.

An approach to research that more intentionally attempts to involve community members throughout the research process compared to more traditional research methods. In addition, participatory approaches often seek some concrete, tangible change for the benefit of the community (often defined by the community).

A research journal that helps the researcher to reflect on and consider their thoughts and reactions to the research process and how it may be shaping the study

The point where gathering more data doesn't offer any new ideas or perspectives on the issue you are studying.  Reaching saturation is an indication that we can stop qualitative data collection.

A combination of two people or objects

An interview guide is a document that outlines the flow of information during your interview, including a greeting and introduction to orient your participant to the topic, your questions and any probes, and any debriefing statement you might include. If you are part of a research team, your interview guide may also include instructions for the interviewer if certain things are brought up in the interview or as general guidance.

Context is the circumstances surrounding an artifact, event, or experience.

Notes that are taken by the researcher while we are in the field, gathering data.

Expanded field notes represents the field notes that we have taken during data collection after we have had time to sit down and add details to them that we were not able to capture immediately at the point of collection.

A statement at the end of data collection (e.g. at the end of a survey or interview) that generally thanks participants and reminds them what the research was about, what it's purpose is, resources available to them if they need them, and contact information for the researcher if they have questions or concerns.

Interview that uses a very prescribed or structured approach, with a rigid set of questions that are asked very consistently each time, with little to no deviation

An interview that has a general framework for the questions that will be asked, but there is more flexibility to pursue related topics that are brought up by participants than is found in a structured interview approach.

Interviews that contain very open-ended talking prompt that we want participants to respond to, with much flexibility to follow the conversation where it leads.

starts by reading existing theories, then testing hypotheses and revising or confirming the theory

when a researcher starts with a set of observations and then moves from particular experiences to a more general set of propositions about those experiences

Emergent design is the idea that some decision in our research design will be dynamic and change as our understanding of the research question evolves as we go through the research process. This is (often) evident in qualitative research, but rare in quantitative research.

Probes a brief prompts or follow up questions that are used in qualitative interviewing to help draw out additional information on a particular question or idea.

Testing out your research materials in advance on people who are not included as participants in your study.

Someone who has the formal or informal authority to grant permission or access to a particular community.

A document that will outline the instructions for conducting your focus group, including the questions you will ask participants. It often concludes with a debriefing statement for the group, as well.

Ethnography is a qualitative research design that is used when we are attempting to learn about a culture by observing people in their natural environment.

Making qualitative observations that attempt to capture the subjects of the observation as unobtrusively as possible and with limited structure to the observation.

The analysis of documents (or other existing artifacts) as a source of data.

unprocessed data that researchers can analyze using quantitative and qualitative methods (e.g., responses to a survey or interview transcripts)

A code is a label that we place on segment of data that seems to represent the main idea of that segment.

A document that we use to keep track of and define the codes that we have identified (or are using) in our qualitative data analysis.

study publicly available information or data that has been collected by another person

in a literature review, a source that describes primary data collected and analyzed by the author, rather than only reviewing what other researchers have found

Data someone else has collected that you have permission to use in your research.

These are sites where contributing researchers can house data that other researchers can view and request permission to use

These are software tools that can aid qualitative researchers in managing, organizing and manipulating/analyzing their data.

Graduate research methods in social work by Matthew DeCarlo, Cory Cummings, Kate Agnelli is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book