Section 5 Qualitative Research
外语教学定量研究
Qualitative and Quantitative Procedures in Data Collection and Analysis (Allwright and Bailey 1991: 66)
• Quantitative data collection/quantitative analytic procedures: Computing statistical comparisons of learners’ test scores to see if there are any significant differences between groups Quantitative data collection/qualitative analytic procedures: Judging numeric data qualitatively, e.g., evaluating English test scores to determine acceptable levels of proficiency Qualitative data collection/quantitative analytic procedures: Tabulating the observed frequency of occurrence of certain linguistic structures in transcripts of classroom interaction Qualitative data collection/qualitative analytic procedures: Summarizing written field notes to yield prose profiles of various teachers in an observational study
qualitative research method
qualitative research methodQualitative research is a type of social science research method that focuses on understanding the subjective experiences, opinions, and perspectives of individuals. It is a form of exploratory research that aims to uncover the deeper meaning of human behavior and beliefs. This approach is often used in fields such as sociology, anthropology, psychology, and education.Step 1: Identifying research questionThe first step in conducting qualitative research is to identify the research question or problem that you wish to investigate. This can be done through literature review, observations, and conversations with stakeholders. The research question should be clear, concise, and specific to the topic of interest.Step 2: Selecting Participants and SamplingThe next step is to select the participants for the study. Qualitative research often involves small groups of participants or individuals, and sampling strategies are aimed at selecting a diverse range of people who can provide rich and varied perspectives on the research question or topic. The sampling method used in qualitative research is often non-probability, meaning participants are selected based on specific characteristics or criteria.Step 3: Data CollectionData collection in qualitative research is typically done through unstructured or semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and observations. Researchers aim togather as much data as possible to provide a comprehensive understanding of the topic being investigated. This approach allows for flexibility in data collection, as researchers can probe for more information based on participants' responses.Step 4: AnalysisQualitative data analysis involves interpreting and making sense of the data collected. This can be done through various methods such as thematic analysis, grounded theory analysis, and narrative analysis. Researchers aim to identify recurring themes and patterns within the data that arerelevant to the research question or problem being investigated. Data analysis is an iterative process wheredata is reviewed, coded, and organized until the researcher achieves data saturation, meaning that they have gathered enough information to answer the research question.Step 5: Reporting FindingsThe final step in qualitative research is reporting the findings. The results of the study should be communicated ina clear, concise, and accessible manner. This can be done through a range of mediums such as academic articles, reports, and presentations. The findings should be supported by evidence and convey the perspectives and experiences of the participants.In conclusion, qualitative research is a valuable toolfor exploring complex social phenomena. It provides insight into the subjective experiences of individuals and can aid in understanding social and cultural dynamics. By following the steps outlined above, researchers can develop a robust study that offers meaningful insights into the topic being investigated.。
qualitative research 研究方法
MethodologyThis study is set in the qualitative research paradigm as defined by Strauss and Corbin (1990) to refer to research about “persons’ lives, stories, behaviour…organizational functioning, social movements or interactional relationships” (p.17). The methods used in this study were influenced by the constructs of grounded theory where the purpose is to “reveal participants’ views, feelings, intentions, and actions as well as the contexts and structures of their lives” (Charmaz, 2006, p.26) in order to form ideas from the data. That is, my goal was to understand the writing challenges for students from the perspectives of both students and instructors and in doing so, I needed to consider the social, individual and educational factors that contribute d to the participants’ opinions.I chose interviews as my main data gathering instrument, as according to Creswell (1997), these “play a central role in the data collection in a grounded theory study” (p.122) and I relied on emergent design, integral to a grounded theory study (Charmaz, 2006), where “one begins with an area of study and what is relevant to that area is allowed to emerge” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p.23), to design a set of questions that served as a guide for conducting semi-structured interviews with the participants (see Appendix 1 and 2). The interview questions followed the participants’ train of thought and at times, wandered from the pre-scripted questions I had prepared.ParticipantsAll participants in this qualitative study were situated at a medium sized Canadian University within the Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences. They included five second year individual students, a group of nine first year students and five professors. My sampling of participants was strategic, as is suggested by Geisler (2004) to be a more defensible means(rather than merely convenient sampling) with which to “guide (my) choice of cases within a site” (p.18). I first used criterion-based sampling that “specif(ied) a certain relevant criteria” (Geisler, 2004, p.18), in choosing the study participants. Thus, the student participants were drawn from first and second year, which enabled me to acquire perceptions from first year students on their current experiences and comparative reflections from second year students on their experiences with academic writing in the first and second year. The professors are instructors of both first year seminars and regular first year courses, which are described below. This duality provided an opportunity to gather data on their perceptions of students’ writing needs from each of these classroom environments.After choosing the samples based on these criteria, I then used a stratified sampling strategy to “take advantage of knowing something about the existing variations in a site” (Geisler, p.18) and chose both student and instructor participants from a variety of disciplines. This choice allowed me to compare the perceptions of professors and students on a disciplinary basis. Further stratifying amongst the second year students based on varying first year experiences allowed for examination of a variety of pedagogical environments that could affect first year students’ writing ability. These experiences included enrollment in one of the following:(1) First Year Experience, which is an innovative attempt to facilitate the transition for first year students to university by providing smaller classes (maximum 100 students) that are enmeshed ina cluster of four pre-determined courses and then a fifth course of the student’s choice(2) First year seminar, either within or outside of the FYE, which provides an even smaller environment of approximately 25 students where the instructor is expected to provide greater focus on writing development.(3) Mandatory writing course, which is established as one semester of an English literature course.(4) Academic Support Program, which provides the opportunity for university study to students whose high school grades were below the acceptable standard.(5) Regular first year course, which does not have any particular focus on writing and in this study, may have up to 100 students enrolled.The study participants and programs of study are identified by a pseudonym in this thesis for the purposes of maintaining confidentiality. The participants are described as follows: Student Participants. “I mean even if I get a good mark I think that anytime you get a mark less than perfect there has to be a comment or else why didn’t you get perfect?” (March 25, 2009). Alana is 19 years old and English is her first language. Her major is Human Rights and her minor is Mass Communications. Alana is more interested in Mass Communications than Human Rights and plans to switch her major accordingly for next year. Alana was an above average student in high school where she was on the honour roll for two years. Her grades were lower in math and the sciences than in the arts or social science courses as she claimed “they (those subjects) just came easier to me.” Both of her parents have university degre es and they encouraged her to go to university. Alana described herself as an active reader who enjoys reading popular fiction in her spare time. In addition to reading, Alana is a competitive dancer, works as a server in a restaurant and is a volunteer with a local youth organization. Alana was selected for this study as she had participated in a mandated first year writing course at the university she previously attended.“I think it’s (writing) one of the cornerstones of education in university” (February 25, 2009). Ryan is 20 years old and English is his second language, which he began learning at theage of 7. His major is History and his minor is Applied Language Studies. He described himself as a motivated student who is interested in learning about the discipline of history. Ryan described his high school academic experience as “pretty good” and he did not perceive any major problems adapting from high school to university. Both of his parents have university degrees and they expected him to go to university. Ryan enjoys reading, particularly fiction, listening to music, boxing, working out at the gym, camping, cycling, reading the news and surfing the Internet. Ryan was chosen for this study as he participated in a first year seminar outside of the First Year Experience program.“I expect the professors to give a very clear definition of what their expectations are so that I’m not going off in a direction that won’t be beneficial towards the end product” (February 26, 2009). Danielle is 39 years old and both English and French are her first languages. Her major is Political Science and her minor is Religion. She is a highly motivated student and anticipated that a background in political science would give her a better knowledge base from which to understand the historical component of present day political issues and the Religion courses would help her to understand the perspectives of other people’s cultures. Danielle was an average achieving student in high school and did not find it very challenging. Her mother did not finish high school and her father completed one year of college. Her parents are impressed and supportive of Danielle’s decision to return to school. Danielle enjoys reading, particularly books of a philosophical nature. When she’s not a full time student during the academic year, Danielle is an officer in the Canadian Forces, specifically in the field of logistics for the army where she engages in military training during the summer months. Danielle was selected for this study as she participated in a first year seminar within the First Year Experience program.“She kinda directed us through it and showed…like…this is one of the perfect papers, we didn’t really go over it in detail but she definitely gave us access” (February 27, 2009). Paul is 22 years old and English is his first language. He took two years off between high school and university and now feels highly motivated to be in school. His major is philosophy, which he believes he is well suited for as he claims this discipline allows him the freedom to argue his opinions rather than regurgitating facts. Paul enjoys school and is intending to do graduate work in this discipline. Paul was not a high achieving student in high school due to lack of motivation and is grateful that his teachers encouraged him to go to university. His parents were also encouraging, as his father, who has a university degree and his mother, who is in the midst of attaining one, both value higher education. Paul enjoys reading for interest but is consumed with academic reading during the school year. He also plays guitar and video games, enjoys on-line chatting and hanging out with friends. Paul was selected for this study as he was enrolled in the First Year Experience program in first year but did not take a first year seminar.“First year was harder, obviously, and I didn’t have that much to go on…because in high school you don’t do anything, you really don’t” (March 14, 2009). Sarah is 19 years old and her first language is English although she was living in an Arabic speaking environment for the first two years of her life. Her major is Sociology, which she does not seem to have much interest in. She feels there is too much of a focus on writing assignments, which she finds cumbersome and research methods, which she finds boring. She intends to stay with Sociology as she does not know what else to do. Sarah was not motivated in high school and her performance reflected that. Her parents, who both have university degrees, were very supportive of Sarah going to university. Sarah enjoys reading, drawing, painting, playing guitar, editing online music videos and hangingout with friends. She was selected for this study as she participated in the Academic Support Program for first year.In addition to the identified second year students, there was a focus group of nine First Year Experience students in a first year seminar (in English) who participated in an open discussion within the context of their classroom. Initially, I was to observe this class during regular class instruction but their professor had suggested that I conduct an open discussion with the students about their writing needs. She had offered this opportunity as the students had completed their writing assignments for the year and therefore, she did not anticipate much relevant discussion in her class regarding writing instruction.Faculty Participants. The professors range in teaching experience from five to twenty-five years and in the disciplines of English, Philosophy, Language Studies, Psychology and History. They all currently teach first year students both within first year seminars and outside. In addition, four of the five participants have also taught these seminars within the First Year Experience program.DataThe university ethics committee approved this study and I prepared and had completed consent forms for the participants. The data gathering instruments used in this study included: (1) interviews, (2) class discussion, and (3) samples of students’ academ ic writing. Pre-designed questions guided the interviews and class discussion, yet the semi-structure nature of the interviews allowed for divergences as necessary (see interview questions in Appendix 1 and 2).The writing samples that were used included two graded papers from each second year student; one they had written in first year and one in second year, which facilitated our discussion on their writing styles, changes to their writing that may have occurred between firstand second year and written instructor feedback that may have hindered or helped their writing. An additional aim for the collection of student texts was for the purposes of data triangulation, which Tashakkori & Teddlie (1998) refer to as a technique of data collection to study the same phenomenon within the same study (p.18). Furthermore, Lincoln and Guba (1985) insist on triangulation as a requirement to shed some validity on study revelations: “As the study unfolds and particular pieces of information come to light, steps should be taken to validate each against at least one other source (for example, a second interview) and/or a second method (for example, an observation in addition to an interview). No single item of information . . . should ever be given serious consideration unless it can be triangulated” (p. 283). Thus, in this study, I reviewed students’ texts as a means to discover if what the students’ were identifying as writing problems and reasons for such problems, were supported by the texts they produced. ProcedureThe interviews of all of the study participants occurred over a two-month period. I met with each of the individual student participants, on two occasions, each approximately 30 minutes in length. All of the students appeared to be at ease during the interviews and seemingly excited for the opportunity to express their thoughts on this topic. The interviews took place in a private office on the university campus and were audio recorded and later transcribed into MS Word documents, which served as the basis for analytical coding. I also made observational notes that were added to the participants’ documents.The interview questions for the individual student participants were comprised of three parts and were divided over two interviews. The initial interview concentrated on the first and second parts that covered questions on personal history such as language and family background, academic motivation and performance, and extracurricular interests, as well as perceptions onstudents’ academic writi ng needs and the support they have received to meet these needs. The second interview centred on the third part of the questions, which focused on the differences in the students’ writing as per their two provided assignments and corresponding feedback.Prior to the second interview, I read the student’s texts; highlighted the editorial marks, corrections and comments that were made on the papers; and noted differences on style, structure and form between the texts. The second interview had two purposes and was conducted using a discourse based interview approach (Odell, Goswami & Herrington, 1983), “to help uncover writers’ tacit knowledge of, and motivation for, texts” (Prior, 2004, p.196). The first purpose was to see how the students interpreted and were affected by the comments made on their papers and the second, was to gain insight on how the students knew how to write within a particular genre. For example, Sarah had to write a comparative analysis of theoretical approaches to understanding a sociological phenomenon.I met with the focus group of nine first year seminar students on one occasion for approximately 30 minutes. During this time, the professor had purposely exited the classroom to encourage her students to express their thoughts freely. I had arranged the seats in a semi-circle, placing myself at the top-middle position in an attempt to create a more intimate and comfortable environment for the students. The discussion was guided by the following four questions I had prepared: (1) What is the role of writing in the university and the world at large? (2) What are your attitudes about school writing? (3) What are your greatest obstacles to you becoming better writers? (4) What are some sources of help you have received or could receive to improve your writing? In keeping with the emergent design of the study methods, further questions and topics for consideration emerged throughout the discussion.The discussion was audio recorded after having asked the students for their permission to do so. During the discussion, I initiated the questions and asked for the students’ opinions. Five out of the nine students verbally participated in the discussion. I avoided asking specific students their opinions not only because I didn’t know their names but also I intended this discussion to be a comfortable means for the students to express themselves and was not interested in putting anyone on the spot. Before leaving, I invited the students to contact me by email if anyone had some afterthoughts that they’d like to share. For the record, I have not received any further commentary.I met with each of the five professors in their offices on the university campus. We met on one occasion for approximately 40 minutes where the interviews were audio recorded. The interviews focused on the professors’ opinions on the writing needs of first year students and what supports should be in place on campus to meet these needs. All of the participants were seemingly open, comfortable and eager to partake in the interviews.Following the transcription of each interview for both the individual students and the professors, I forwarded the participants a copy of their transcribed session to ensure member checks, which is, according to Lincoln and Guba (1985) “to be the most critical technique for establishing credibility” (as cited in Cresswell, 1998, p.203). The participants reported an overall satisfaction with the text and only requested minor changes to ensure their personal confidentiality.AnalysisStudents’ perceptions of their writing needs are the main focus for this study, therefore I began the analysis with the data that emanated from these participants and then afterwards, compared it to the data from the professors. Geisler (2004) informs us that, “although manystrains of qualitative analysis exist, most involve coding segments of verbal data as a way of locating phenomenon of interest” (p.xix). Therefore to analyze my data for this study, I used the coding premise of Grounded Theory which Strauss & Corbin (1990) define as a theory that is “inductively derived from the study of the phenomenon it represents” (p. 23) with a purpose “to build theory that is faithful to and illuminates the area under study” (p.24). Furthermore, Charmaz asserts that Grounded Theory coding is an essential tool for data analysis, referring to it as “the pivotal link between collecting data and developing an emergent theory to explain these data” (Charmaz, 2006, p.46).Strauss and Corbin (1990) inform us that, “coding represents the operations by which data are broken down, conceptualized, and put back together in new ways” (p.57). For data analysis in this study, I used their method of open coding, which they defined as “the part of analysis that pertains specifically to the naming and categorizing of phenomena through close examination of data” (p.62). At the first stage of the coding process, I followed Strauss and Corbin’s recommendation of making concepts my basic unit of analysis, which entailed labeling phenomena as follows:Taking apart an observation, a sentence, a paragraph and giving each discrete incident, idea or event, a name, something that stands for or represents a phenomenon. Just how do we do this? We ask questions about each one, like: What is this? What does it represent? We compare incident with incident as we go along so that similar phenomena can be given the same name. (p. 63)(See the excerpt from an interview with a student in Figure 1 below as an illustration of this coding).Figure 1: Labeling Data with Descriptive CodesAfter conceptualizing the data, I engaged in Strauss and Corbin’s second suggested stage in the open coding process, discovering categories. Strauss and Corbin describe the categorization stage in the following way: “Once we have identified particular phenomena in the data, we can begin to group our concepts around them. This is done to reduce the number of units with which we have to work. The process of grouping concepts that seem to pertain to the same phenomena is called categorizing” (p. 65). These scholars then suggest that the categories be given conceptual names that are more abstract than the concepts that are grouped under them. For example, in Figure 1, I grouped the identified concepts into a category called clear expectations (See Figure 2 below as a presentation of further conceptual categories identified from the interviews with students).Figure 2: Categorizing ConceptsAfter categorizing the concepts, I began a third stage of coding, which is based on Strauss & Corbin’s (1990) premise of axial coding as “a set of procedures whereby data are put back together in new ways after open coding, by making connections between categories” (p.96) but differs in intent. Strauss and Corbin’s focus is on specifying a sub-category “in terms of the conditions that give rise to it; the context in which it is embedded; the action/interactional strategies by which it is handled…and the consequences of those strategies” (p.97) whereas I have chosen to simply reassemble the identified categories to form overarching themes. I based this strategy on Charmaz’s (2006) suggestion that “those who prefer simple, flexible guidelines-and can tolerate ambiguity-do not need to do axial coding. They can follow the leads that they define in their empirical materials” (p.61). (See Figu re 3 below for an illustration of the overarching themes that resulted from combining the categorized concepts in figure 2).Figure 3: Overarching ThemesIn addition to analyzing the data from the interviews of the participants, I analyzed two samples of written work from each of the second year students using the existing DELNA (Diagnostic English Language Needs Assessment) rating scale as a guide which according to Knoch (2009) includes nine traits (organization, cohesion, style, data description, interpretation, development of ideas, sentence structure, grammatical accuracy, vocabulary and spelling) each consisting of six band levels ranging from four to nine (p.279). (See Appendix 3 for a replication of the DELNA rating scale and Appendix 4 for my analysis of the students’ texts using this scale).。
Qualitative Research
Case study
A study that examines one or more cases in detail by using multiple sources of data. 通过对个案展开深入、详尽的研究来探索个案所属的群体的 特征和特点.
Action study It can be conducted with the assistance of professional researchers in order to improve strategies,practices and knowledge of the environment within which the practice. Phenomenology The research identifies the “essence” of human experiences concerning a phenomenon, as described by participants in a study.
Qualitative Data Analysis
Data analysis in qualitative research is an on-going process involving continual reflection about the data, asking analytic questions, and writing memos throughout the study. It is not sharply divided from the other activities in the process, such as collecting data or formulating research questions. It involves using open-ended data, for the most part. This requires asking general questions and developing an analysis from the information supplied by participants.
如何做定性研究 Qualitative research
Start study with concurrent data collection and analysis. Analysis focused on identifying themes and categories-- similarities in data. Question or purpose may emerge and be refined. Data collection strategies may change
A
12
12
Quota sampling
• Quota sampling begins with two decisions:
– What characteristics? – How many people?
• Characteristics are selected in order to find participants who have experience with or knowledge of the research topic.
• Your Questions
– If flexible format… list of things to be sure to talk about
– To get rich data: PROBE AND FOLLOW
• You and the Interview: attending, listening, thinking, taking
A
10
Sampling in Qualitative Studies
qualitative research 定义
qualitative research 定义题目：质性研究的定义及研究步骤引言：质性研究是一种研究方法，用于探索、解释和理解各种社会现象和现象背后的意义。
相较于定量研究，质性研究注重描述和解释，强调对社会群体的观察和理解，通过对少数个案的深入研究，从而揭示广泛认知的现象背后的复杂性和内涵。
本文将围绕质性研究的定义和研究步骤进行详细探讨。
定义：质性研究是一种研究方法，通过收集、分析和解释非数值数据，如文字、图像和声音等，来理解和解构社会现象。
质性研究强调对研究对象的真实性和完整性的理解，并试图揭示其背后的情感、行为和观念。
质性研究着重于社会群体的观察和理解，注重获得深入、具体的信息和见解。
研究步骤：1. 问题提出与研究设计质性研究首先需要明确研究问题，该问题应在研究范围内具有一定的局限性。
接下来，研究者需要制定合适的研究设计。
常见的研究设计包括个案研究、现场观察、访谈和文本分析等。
2. 数据收集质性研究通过多种方式收集非数值数据。
其中，常用的数据收集方法包括深入访谈、焦点小组讨论、观察和文献研究。
研究者在此阶段应遵循研究设计，并确保数据收集的透明性和可靠性。
3. 数据分析质性研究的数据分析主要包括数据整理、编码、分类和解释等步骤。
数据整理是将收集到的各类数据整理和排序。
编码是将数据归类到某个具体主题或模式中。
分类是对编码进行整合和建立次序。
解释则是对分类后的数据进行解释和理解。
4. 结果呈现质性研究的结果呈现通常以论文、报告或演示形式进行。
研究者需要准确地呈现研究结果，包括背景、目的、方法、分析和结果等。
结果呈现应突出质性研究的独特性，注重具体案例的描述和解释。
5. 结果验证结果验证是质性研究的一个重要环节。
在该步骤中，研究者需要通过交叉验证、同行检查和深入讨论等方式，确保研究结果的可靠性和有效性。
结论：质性研究是一种重要的研究方法，用于深入探索和理解社会现象的复杂性和背后的意义。
通过清晰明确的研究问题和研究设计，合理有效地收集和分析数据，并准确地呈现研究结果，我们能够获得有关社会现象的新见解和新理解。
教育研究中质的研究方法QualitativeResearchinEducation
3）定义重要概念
“某农村贫困地区学生辍学的现状如何？” – “农村”？ – “某农村”？ – “贫困”？ – “地区”？ – “学生”？ – “辍学”？ – “现状”？
4）确定研究内容
“某农村贫困地区学生辍学的现状如何？”
1）这些学生是如何辍学的？（过程、事件、原因） 2）他们是如何看待辍学的？（对辍学本身的评价， 辍学对自我概念、人际关系、个人前途的影响 等）？ 3）其他人（父母、同学、教师、校长、邻居等）是 如何看待这些学生的辍学的？对他们来说，辍学 具有什么教育意义、发展意义，社会意义和经济 意义？ 4）辍学造成了什么后果？（对辍学生本人，对家庭， 对社区，对学校，对当地社会经济发展）
提出研究问题的一般步骤
1）确定研究现象 2）聚焦研究问题 3）定义重要概念 4）确定研究内容 5）探讨研究问题与研究其他部分的关系
提出研究问题举例 确定研究现象：学生不愿意当小组长 下面的研究问题是否合适？ 1、当小组长与性别之间是什么关系？ 2、当小组长与社会责任感之间有何关系？ 3、学生是如何看待“当小组长”的？“当 小组长”对他们意味着什么？ 4、在学生们看来，什么是“当小组长”？ 5、为什么学生不愿意当小组长？
研究目的
研究背景
研究问题
研究方法
研究效度
练习
写下一个目前你最关心的现象 从该现象中提炼出一个可以操作的研究
问题 将该问题修改成可以使用质的方法进行 研究的问题 与你身边的学员交流，对研究问题作进 一步修改，直到双方满意为止。 全体讨论该问题是否适合作质的研究
课外作业
阅读文献 设计一个小型的研究项目，提出
质的研究问题举例
1、“后进生”是如何成为“后进生”
的？ 2、什么是“后进生”？教师、“好学 生”、“后进生”是如何看待“后进 生”现象的？ 3、教师在课堂上是如何对待“后进生” 的？其行为对“后进生”的学习有什 么影响？
如何做定性研究 Qualitative research电子教案
Selecting participants...
• It is fraught with difficulties in identifying and selecting an appropriate number of participants who can provide useful information about the particular topic and setting being studied
Sampling and data collection determined by theoretical saturation. Analysis based on narrative description
Selecting participants...
• The goal is to get the deepest possible understanding of the setting being studied
To develop detailed understanding
wife/husband, Therapist/disabled,… etc.
Qualitative Research Goals
• Meaning: how people see the world • Context: the world in which people act • Process: what actions and activities people do • Reasoning: why people act and behave the way they do
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
WHEN TO USE --- AND WHEN NOT TO USE --- QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
8. Reducing bias and Errors in Qualitative research
WHEN TO USE --- AND WHEN NOT TO USE --- QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Qualitative Research is: An excellent tool to lay the foundation of category and brand strategic understanding Valuable to provide ongoing input to continuously build on, and improve products and marketing bundles. The key motivation in using qualitative research should be: What can I learn to make (the Product, the advertising, the marketing bundle -- whatever is being researched) BETTER? As such it is a learning,exploring, probing process. It should NOT be a judgmental “go/no go” tool: decisions on which concept, product, or advertising to ultimately launch are extremely important and require a quantitative validation among the appropriate consumer sample.
UNDERSTANDING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Course Outline
1. What is qualitative research 2. Guideline for When use it and when not use it 3. Basis for qualitative research
4. Where is qualitative research appropriate
5. Qualitative research used for product development
6. Varieties of Qualitative research and when to use it
WHEN TO USE --- AND WHEN NOT TO USE --- QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
WHERE IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH APPROPRIATE? Qualitative research should be used for (Cont.) 8. Exploring various marketing bundle alternatives (e.g., name, packaging, promotional ideas). Importantly, qualitative research can be used for preliminary screening and refining bundles; final selection, however, should be based on quantitative research. 9. Questionnaire development for major studies -- to be sure we are using the right consumer language, capturing the full range of consumer responses, etc.
2
WHEN TO USE --- AND WHEN NOT TO USE --- QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
WHERE IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH NOT APPROPRIATE? 1. As a “cheap quantitative test.”If you cannot afford the correct sample sizes for a valid quantitative test, don’t fool yourself into thinking that three group sessions can give you “better information than none.” 2. In fact, you can be grossly misled if you use qualitative research inappropriately. Depending on the business issue, you either must fund the appropriate quantitative test or accept that you will be proceeding based on judgment alone. Qualitative is a developmental tool-not the final decision maker.
WHAT IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH?
It is an important research tool to: Obtain a deeper understanding of consumers’ beliefs and underlying motivations Uncover consumers’ emotional benefits obtained from using different products and different brands Get beyond the functional or superficial reasons for consumer’ beliefs, attitudes, and behavior Get key people involved in the marketing process -- product managers, agency creative executives,etc. listening to our customers, seeking ways to make our brands more appealing and more differentiated Actively explore ideas and develop hypotheses.
WHEN TO USE --- AND WHEN NOT TO USE --- QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
WHERE IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH APPROPRIATE? Qualitative research should be used for: 1. Exploring the range of consumer attitudes and beliefs 2. Understanding the reasons for consumers’ underlying motivations 3. Observing and understanding behavioral regimes 4. Getting deeper insight into consumer perceptions of brand equities and images 5. Ideas and hypothesis generation 6. Concept development 7. Developing and refining advertising ideas and and the reason for behaviors executions
WHAT IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH?
2
Qualitative research is very often misused; it is critical to making the correct business decisions and that we understand its power and its limitations.
WHEN TO USE --- AND WHEN NOT TO USE --- QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
WHERE IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH NOT APPROPRIATE?
2
3. In accord with understanding that qualitative is a developmental, not final decision-making tool: qualitative should not be the final validation of major bundle elements (e.g., advertising, packaging). These should be validated on the basis of quantitative research. 4. Qualitative should not be used just to “feel better” or “get a warm fuzzy feeling.” If you are faced with a decision, make it on the basis of quantitative research, or take the responsibility that you are making a decision based on judgment (depending on the issue and the insights that are available to support the decision). A focus group used to make you “feel better” is without real focus and can be worse than no research at all.