Essays on Importance of Interaction between Research Participants Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Importance of Interaction between Research Participants" Is a great example of a Management Case Study. Qualitative research is widely used to gather information on different fields of study. Although qualitative research is used in a variety of fields of study, this method is widely used in gathering information on social phenomena (Patton 2002, p. 14). Most social researchers find it suitable and useful to use quantitative research techniques because of the low cost and the fact they provide interesting results. In-depth interviews and focus groups are the most common qualitative research techniques in use in collecting data on social phenomena (Hesse-Biber and Leavy 2010, p.

7). This paper begins by describing in-depth interviews and focus groups as qualitative research methods and providing the conditions for their use. The paper will proceed to describe the advantages and disadvantages of the two techniques and analyze how they have been used in exploring the social phenomenon. In-depth Interview In-depth interviews are one of the qualitative research methods and involve rigorous interviewing a small number of respondents in order to understand the views of the respondents about a given situation (Kvale 1996, p.

42). For instance, in an organizational situation, an in-depth interview can be conducted by a company to understand their perspective as regards why a company is experiencing high employee turnover. In-depth interviews rely on many sources of information that include but not limited to policymakers, employees of an organization, program participants, and members of the community (Kitzinger 1994, p. 103). Types of In-depth Interviews There are various types of in-depth interviews that can be used in qualitative research and can be formal or informal.

The three main categories of in-depth interviews include structured, semi-structured, and unstructured. Structured interviews refer to that interview that involves verbal administration of questionnaires with a list of questions that can be open-ended or closed (Seidman 2015, p. 41). The questions asked are not varied and there are no follow-ups made for further elaboration. Structure interviews are preferred mainly because they can be administered quickly (Patton 2002, p. 25). Besides, such an interview is normally useful when a researcher needs to get clarification on a particular issue and in cases where there are literacy problems with the respondents.

Nevertheless, this type of interview only allows limited responses from participants, which makes it of less use when depth is needed. The other type is semi-structured interviews is that type of interview which involve asking several fundamental questions to assist in understanding areas that need exploration (Kvale 1996, p. 21). Semi-structured interviews are commonly used in fields, such as healthcare because it guides the participants in a study as to what to say (Minichiello 1990, p. 16). The third type is the unstructured interviews that are conducted without following any preconceived organization (Kitzinger 1994, p.

104). Unstructured interviews take a very simple form and progress based on the responses received from the respondent. However, this type of interview has the shortcoming in that it is time-consuming and is usually difficult to manage (Minichiello 1990, p. 21). Therefore, unstructured interviews are mainly considered for use where depth is needed or in cases where there is absolutely nothing known about the subject needed.

References

Britten N 1999, Qualitative interviews in healthcare. In Pope C, Mays N (eds) Qualitative research in health care. 2nd ed. BMJ Books, London.

Chitashvili, M., Javakhishvili, N., Arutiunov, L., Tsuladze, L., Chachanidze, S. 2010. National research on domestic violence against women in Georgia. Final Report, pp. 1-59.

Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P 2010, The practice of qualitative research. SAGE, Thousand Oaks.

Kaar, M 2009, A critical investigation of the merits and drawbacks of in-depth interviews. GRIN Verlag, Berlin.

Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G 2013, Focus groups: from structured interviews to collective conversations. Routledge, Mason.

Kitzinger J 1994, “The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants,” Social Health Illn vol. 16, pp. 103–121.

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A 2014, Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. SAGE Publications, London.

Kvale S 1996, Interviews. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.

Liamputtong, P 2011, Focus group methodology: principle and practice. SAGE, London.

Minichiello, V 1990, In-depth interviewing: Researching people. Longman Cheshire, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Morris, A 2015, A practical introduction to in-depth interviewing. SAGE Publications, London.

Patton, M. Q 2002, Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.

Seidman, I 2015, Interviewing as qualitative research: a guide for researchers in education and the social sciences, 4th ed. Teachers College Press, Sidney.

Skelton, J. A., Irby, M. B., Guzman, M. A., & Beech, B. M 2012, “Children's Perceptions of Obesity and Health: A Focus Group Study with Hispanic Boys,” Infant Child Adolesc Nutr. Vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 289–296. Doi: 10.1177/1941406412446946

Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N 2014, Focus groups. SAGE Publications, Oxford, NY.

Swanberg, J. E., & Loga, T. K 2005, “Domestic violence and employment: A qualitative study,” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 3–17.

Sylvetsky, C., Hennink, M., Comeau, D., Welsh, J. A., Hardy, T., Matzigkeit, L., Swan, D. W., Walsh, S. M., & Vos, M. B. 2013. Youth Understanding of Healthy Eating and Obesity: A Focus Group Study. Journal of Obesity, Vol. 2013, doi: 10.1155/2013/670295

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us