Basics Of Qualitative Research-Corbin
#notesFromPaper Year : Tags : grounded theory Authors: Corbin Strauss
https://methods.sagepub.com/book/basics-of-qualitative-research/n2.xml
Chapter 2
choosing a topic of interest is tough since narrowing the problem down enough to be workable is tough
This book probably won’t be a good guide on how to actually do interviews
Think about how you are going to deal with silence.
Start with simple questions to make the participant feel comfortable
qualitative research - reflexivity
It’s impossible to be objective in qualitative research. What is better is to be “sensitive” - to pick out relevant issues and present participants in a way they’d want to be presented.
How do you perceive an event? How does a participant perceive it differently? Are there comparable events that you can relate to?
“Are these concepts truly derived from data or am I imposing these concepts on the data because I am so familiar with them?”
Chapter 3
Analysis and interpretation are not exact sciences, and require one to be immersed in the data.
qualitiative research - analysis depth
analyze data immediately after collecting it, that way future interviews or data collection can be modified based on those insights. This sort of “microanalysis” can allow us to quickly get rid of irrelevant possibilities and revise interpretations as necessary. Don’t interpret anything at this point (don’t explain why certain events happened any why others didn’t, don’t create an overarching explanatory scheme.), explore all possibilities.
Chapter 4
Details how to ask questions, including various kinds of questions and their benefits (e.g. sensitizing questions, theoretical questions, etc.)
Researchers ought to understand participants through “theoretical comparisons”, aka comparing their experiences to something the researcher themselves can understand. (basically just use metaphors you dolt)
in-vivo code is when you use the participants own words as part of the code.
Chapter 5
A context is formed from conditions -> interactions / emotions -> consequences
A context is never in a vacuum, but surrounded by micro and macro effects, some of which may not be visible to individual participants.
A process is a series of interconnected actions and effects. Think about the connections, and how the dynamics would be different if slight variables were changed.
A description tells you about something, but a theory tells you ‘why’ something. A theory has predictive power about the effects of changing variables.
A theory should be reviewed for internal consistency, must have every category filled out in property and dimension (when additional data doesn’t add to this, it is known as saturation), and must be concise (shouldn’t try and describe everything in the universe). An obvious but overlooked way to validate a theory is to go back to the original data and see if the theory explains the data.
Chapter 6
Talked about memos and field notes, and tbh a lot of it I didn’t care for because I like my Obsidian setup.
field notes -> memos -> full analysis
Memos can be a good way of knowing when a category has reached saturation - when your memos aren’t adding anything new.
Argues that diagrams (esp. diagrams about conceptual frameworks) are good, but tbh I haven’t seen a conceptual diagram that I like so… (Including the ones in the chapter itself)
It does have some good examples of memos though, describing the kinds of things you should note down when making a good memo.
Chapter 7
Talked about theoretical sampling, and built on Chapter 6’s discussions on saturation. I don’t think it added too much, but may be worth revisiting for its discussions on edge cases (e.g. when you sample with a team)
Theoretical sampling is about not redefining your sample, but rather organically building around concepts. You analyze, collect, analyze, collect, until saturation.
Section 2
(not an official section, but the book just mentions that its taking a turn)
Chapter 8
Break the data into manageable pieces -> Take these pieces of data and explore them for ideas -> Give ideas conceptual names that stand for and represent the ideas contained in the data.
First reading, take no notes.
Don’t just create labels and put data under those labels. Each label (concept) ought to reflect on what the data is indicating. Write memos.
Higher level concepts (themes) apply to various people, whereas lower level concepts are details for subsets that build up to the higher level concepts.
Interesting chapter in just seeing how the researcher’s conception of vietnam was built up memo after memo.
Chapter 9
Uses the analysis in Chapter 8 to create a structured interview template.
Chapter 10
Reading further primary sources, but this time in the context of the memos and concepts already written. Furthermore, this chapter broadens by focusing on the larger historical context surrounding the war and placing primary sources within that context.
Chapter 11
About understanding process in the data.
Chapter 12
Focuses on integration - pulling research threads together into constructing a plausible explanatory framework about the experience of combatants in Vietnam.
I wonder if the theory they’ve created is actually overly broad, possibly applicable to other wars than the Vietnam war (and therefore less useful…)
validating qualitative research
Chapter 13
Maybe don’t present on everything? If your presentation is short, it may be worth just focusing on specific subconcepts.
Chapter 14
More on validating qualitative research
Be clear in the purpose of your research. Description, or theory building?
