Researcher Inconsistency

Ethnography: How Observer Inconsistency Impacts Quality Outcomes

The following is a modified excerpt from Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015, pp. 212-213).

To safeguard the Credibility of the data generated from ethnographic research, it is Observer inconsistencyimportant that the observer conduct observations in a manner that does not vary greatly across observation events. Regardless of the nonparticipant or participant role (overt or covert), the observer must be trained to understand why consistency matters and how inconsistency may result in unacceptable levels of unwarranted variation in the data.

Maintaining consistency can present a particular challenge in ethnography, where the unpredictability of naturally occurring events can make it difficult to maintain constant focus on the key elements related to the research objectives. Although the participants and the specific activities themselves will change from observation event to observation event, it is critical to the quality of data gathering that, for each observation, the observer concentrates on identifying and recording the behaviors, conversations, contextual factors, and other elements pertaining to the priority areas of observation (determined in the research design phase) and constructs of interest.

For example, in an in-person study to observe the use of a recreational park area among community residents on various days and times of the week, the observer must give deliberate attention to each component of the park relevant to the research objectives. If the observer focuses their observation on the children’s playground on some days, the soccer field on other days, and occasionally on the hiking trails, the research results will fail to provide a realistic assessment of residents’ use of the community park.

Although the ever-changing, unpredictable nature of ethnography—and its ability to challenge the observer’s attention to key variables—is a leading cause of inconsistent data collection, the quality of an observer’s observation may also vary due to inadequate training or personal reasons such as sickness or fatigue. Regardless of the cause, the ethnographer should strive for consistency across all observations by making sure that observers understand and are trained on the following:

  • Research objectives, including background information on the topic and how the results of the research will be used.
  • Specific areas or elements of observation that are prioritized, including the rationale for their priority status.
  • Specific constructs or issues that are prioritized, including the rationale for their priority status.
  • Observation grid, including how it is designed to be used (as both a recording and a reflexive device), how to complete the grid, and how to add important but unanticipated observational components to the grid.
  • Types of observation sites the observer will be working in and how identifying the particular elements of observations of interest may be difficult in some instances—for example, observing a hiking trail at the community park may be narrow and congested—requiring the observer to work rigorously to stay alert and, in addition to taking in the scene as a whole, be ever mindful of the key elements in the observations related to the research objectives.
  • Ways to deal with stress and fatigue on the job.

 

Roller, M. R., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied qualitative research design: A total quality framework approach. New York: Guilford Press.

Mitigating Researcher-as-instrument Effects

Unique attributes of qualitative research-Researcher as instrument

There are 10 unique attributes associated with qualitative research.  These were discussed briefly in an article posted in this blog back in 2013.  One of the most fundamental and far-reaching of these attributes is that the qualitative researcher is the “instrument” by which data are collected.  The data-gathering process in qualitative research is facilitated by interviewer or moderator guides, observation grids, and the like; however, these are only accessories to the principal data collection tool, i.e., the researcher or others on the research team.

As the key instrument in gathering qualitative data, the researcher bears a great deal of responsibility for the outcomes.  If for no other reason, this responsibility hinges on the fact that this one attribute plays a central role in the effects associated with three other Read Full Text

The Recipe for Quality Outcomes in Qualitative Research Includes a Healthy Dose of Consistency

The impact of bias (in various forms) on research outcomes is well-documented. In Research Design Review alone, there are many articles related to this issue; bias in the world of both quantitative – such as “Ask Someone a Question, You’ll Get an Answer” and Dose“Accounting for Social Desirability Bias in Online Research” – as well as purely qualitative – “Selection Bias & Mobile Qualitative Research” and “Visual Cues & Bias in Qualitative Research” – research.   One of the more significant sources of bias in qualitative research is the researcher, i.e., the in-depth interviewer, focus group moderator, or observer in ethnography. This bias is specifically addressed in the RDR article “Interviewer Bias & Reflexivity in Qualitative Research,” which highlights the importance of the reflexive journal to help address “the bias that most assuredly permeates the socially-dependent nature of qualitative research.”

An interviewer may bias research outcomes in any number of ways. For instance, he or she may allow personal beliefs or expectations to skew how questions are asked and/or Read Full Text