The following is a modified excerpt from Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015, pp. 320-321).
The use of transcripts in qualitative research has been discussed elsewhere in Research Design Review (see this February 2017 article), emphasizing the idea that “it is by way of these transcribed accounts of the researcher-participant exchange that analysts hope to re-live each research event and draw meaningful interpretations from the data.” The creation and use of transcriptions, however, take on special meaning in narrative research where the primary goal is to maintain the narrative as a whole unit. To this end, the narrative researcher must decide how best to construct the transcripts so they retain the story as it was told, while also facilitating the researcher’s ability to derive meaning from the data as it relates to the research objectives.
This process might result in any number of transcription formats. For example, Riessman (2008) presents two transcriptions of a conversation she had with a Hindu woman in a study of infertility: One transcription was developed around the “co-construction process” (i.e., the interviewer’s role in the narrative as it was told), and another transcription excluded the interviewer and was Read Full Text
There are certain types of qualitative research studies that employ more than one qualitative research method to explore a particular topic or phenomenon, i.e., the researcher uses multiple methods. These studies generally fall into the category of case study or narrative research, which are both designated by the label of “case-centered research.” The attributes that differentiate these forms of research from other qualitative approaches were discussed in an earlier Research Design Review post (“Multi-method & Case-centered Research: When the Whole is Greater Than the Sum of its Parts”). These differentiating attributes are largely associated with the use of multiple methods to gain a complete understanding of complex Read Full Text
In “‘I Wonder About God’ & Other Poorly-Designed Questions” (Research Design Review, July 25, 2012), it is argued that weak survey question design has a “potentially negative impact on analysis, which in turn leads to wrong conclusions, which in turn leads end users along a path of misguided next steps.” As one of several examples, this article highlights the ambiguity embedded in SurveyMonkey’s “The God Survey”; specifically, the problematic first question that asks how often “I wonder about God.” Poorly-designed questions raise serious concerns about how or if the researcher can legitimately analyze the resulting data (while also tackling issues of reliability and validity), a concern made more profound by the frequent failure to even consider the alternative interpretations respondents may give to survey questions. By failing to Read Full Text