Qualitative Data Analysis Lecturer/Convenor: Richard Boateng, PhD. Email: richard@pearlrichards.org Office: UGBS RT18 (rooftop) Arguments with Qualitative Data Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 1
Class Website www.vivaafrica.info Use the class website WEEKLY, ask/comment on the articles, and JOIN the FACEBOOK Please Add your name and the course code Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 2
Learning Objectives This session seeks to discuss how to construct and present analytical explanations on the basis of qualitative data. Making an argument is the construction of a perspective, an interpretation, or a line of reasoning or analysis and, significantly, it requires this to be a relational process, in which the researcher is continually thinking about and engaging with those to whom the argument is being made as well as, of course, the grounds on which they think the argument stands. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 3
Reading Mason. J. (2003). Making convincing arguments with qualitative data. In Qualitative researching (pp. 173 204). Thousand Oaks, CA; SAGE Publications. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 4
Making Arguments Arguments are sets of ideas which are expressed and how they are constituted, in writing or in other forms, is fundamental Making convincing arguments depends upon the assumption that there are no self-evidently correct answers to intellectual puzzles or social phenomena So researchers must show others what led them to suppose that their argument was appropriate or persuasive. Making an argument therefore involves working out how to construct, communicate, support and substantiate it. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 5
Different Types of Arguments To argue convincingly, you need to understand: What kinds of explanations or arguments can I build from my data? What kinds are outside the scope of my analysis? What do I want the explanation or argument to do? TYPE 1 Arguments about how something has developed You will construct a developmental argument if you want to explain how social phenomena, social relationships, social processes and so on have developed or come to be. Describe a detailed, contextual and multilayered interpretation of the developmental processes. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 6
TYPE 2 Different Types of Arguments Arguments about how something works or is constituted These arguments provide mechanical arguments that focus on how social phenomena and processes operate or are constituted. This is because of the rich, contextual and local nature of most qualitative investigation which is done in messy contexts. TYPE 3 Arguments about how social phenomena compare Comparative arguments aim to draw some explanatory significance from a specified set of comparisons and therefore the logic of explanation is tied up with the mechanism of comparison. In Qual. Research, our sensitivity to context maximizes the chances of developing fully meaningful points of comparison. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 7
TYPE 4 Different Types of Arguments Arguments about causation and prediction Causal arguments are usually framed in terms of the effects of variables on each other However, that is not the focus of qualitative research. Causality focuses on detail, complexity and contextuality, and. not expecting to find a cause and an effect in any straightforward fashion. Prediction is concerned with how and why social phenomena or processes happen in particular circumstances and particular ways can certainly support predictive ideas about how those things might vary in different contexts. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 8
TYPE 1 How to Argue Arguing evidentially ( I can make this argument because I can show you the relevant evidence.) If this is your argument, you will be concerned to demonstrate that you have marshalled and assembled your evidence carefully and appropriately. You will need to be clear about the basis on which you suppose your data constitute evidence. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 9
TYPE 1 How to Argue Arguing evidentially Mobiles and Market women in Ghana In Case A, AA uses her phone s calendar functionality to schedule the times to supply her customers who need tomatoes. In Case B, customers are able to monitor delivery times of goods and plan for contingencies through text messages. This communication medium creates a borderless environment or redefines the place factor in transacting business with customers and creating more personalized services for them. Personalized services lead to deepened relationships, which can contribute to customer loyalty and retention. Williamson (1981) refers to this phenomenon of deepened relationships as asset specificity, a transaction characteristic which depict customers locked into a transaction for a considerable time. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 10
TYPE 2 How to Argue Arguing interpretively or narratively ( I can make this argument because I can show you that my interpretation or my narrative is meaningful or reasonable.) If this is your argument, you will be concerned to show that your interpretation is sensitive, appropriately nuanced, and valid. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 11
TYPE 2 How to Argue Arguing interpretively or narratively Mobiles and Market women in Ghana Economic empowerment is evident in both case studies presented above. For example, Grace stated that:[...] I am able to send simple text messages to inform customers on maize prices and delivery times. AA also emphasized that: [...] Therefore, I do not need to be at the market everyday yet still make my money. In this respect, the findings suggest that the women traders have gained some economic empowerment in improved income from cost reduction, decision making and control in managing the uncertainty in transactions with trading partners and customers. Thus, the transformational impact observed is the economic empowerment for the traders. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 12
TYPE 4 How to Argue Arguing reflexively or multivocally ( I can make this argument because I can make you aware of a meaningful range of perspectives, experiences and standpoints, including my own. ) If this is your argument, you will be seeking to show a sensitivity to a range of interpretations and voices in your data, and a willingness to critique and question your own as well as those of others. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 13
How to Argue TYPE 4 Arguing reflexively or multivocally Mobiles and Market women in Ghana Concerning the level of education and usage behavior, all respondents who had no formal education actively used mobile phones in all the stages of trading (see Figure 3). Noting that the number of respondents with no formal education was only 13 percent of the sample, it is inconclusive to suggest a significant impact of education on mobile phone usage. However, the innovative use of calculators in trading was observed. 12 out of the 18 traders (9 percent of total respondents) with no formal education claimed to use calculators in trading activities. This ability to identify basic functions in mobile phones and integrate them in trading activities is arguably a function of the some level of education and the perceived ease of using the mobile phones they owned. On further enquiry, these traders intimated that they often received help from their children, friends, relatives and sometimes customers in learning some of the functions of mobile phones, especially with simple text messages, calculators, and use of calendars as reminders. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 14
Data and Argument Positivist Approach Connections in Observed data become variables for explanation Realist Approach empirical observations can be explained by underlying mechanisms that are not directly observable in themselves. Interpretive Approach interpretations of meanings, experiences, accounts, actions, events, can be developed into explanations and understandings Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 15
Theory and Argument As Coffey and Atkinson put it: Theories are not added only as a final gloss or justification; they are not thrown over the work as a final garnish. They are drawn on repeatedly as ideas are formulated, tried out, modified, rejected, or polished (1996: 158). Role 1 Deductive Reasoning Theory comes first, before empirical research and analysis, and is tested on or measured against data. The theory is not derived from data in this version. If you are developing theory in this way, you will have stated clear hypotheses in advance, and your analytical task will be to measure or match up your data against these. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 16
Role 1 Theory and Argument Deductive Reasoning Theory comes first, before empirical research and analysis, and is tested on or measured against data. The theory is not derived from data in this version. If you are developing theory in this way, you will have stated clear hypotheses in advance, and your analytical task will be to measure or match up your data against these. Also called the hypotheticodeductive method, whereby theoretical propositions or hypotheses are generated in advance of the research process, and then modified usually through a process of falsification by the empirical research. This is often characterized as moving from the general to the particular. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 17
Role 2 Theory and Argument Inductive Reasoning Theory comes last and is developed from or through data generation and analysis. If you are developing theory in this way, you will probably begin the process of analysis whilst data generation is under way, and use a version of theoretical sampling to augment this. You will scrutinize your data so that you can develop explanations which appear to fit them. like inductive reasoning, where the researcher will develop theoretical propositions or explanations out of the data, in a process which is commonly seen as moving from the particular to the general. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 18
Role 3 Theory and Argument Abductive and Retroductive Reasoning Theory, data generation and data analysis are developed simultaneously in a dialectical process. If you are developing theory in this way, you will devise a method for moving back and forth between data analysis and the process of explanation or theory construction. theory data Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 19
Role 3 Theory and Argument Abductive and Retroductive Reasoning Others have conceptualized abductive reasoning as moving back and forth between our own data, our experience, and broader concepts (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996). Retroductive research strategy, which falls somewhere between roles 1 and 2, in that it begins with data but theorizes a model of an underlying mechanism which might have produced patterns seen in the data, and then works backwards from the data towards verifying or otherwise that model. The model will include some kind of statement about how if it is correct it might operate under different circumstances, and what the empirical manifestations would look like, so that it can in effect be empirically tested. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 20
Theory and Argument What happens in practice it is worth pointing out that most research strategies in practice probably draw on a combination of these approaches. Are there pure forms of, for example, inductive, deductive, abductive or retroductive reasoning are ever actually practised. I would also argue that researchers with widely differing theoretical orientations do actually engage in the practice, associated with abductive reasoning, of moving back and forth between data, experience and wider concepts, whether or not they always explicitly recognize this as part of their research strategy. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 21
Empirical and Theoretical Generalization Empirical Generalization is based on a logic whereby you are able to make generalizations from an analysis of one empirical population (say, your sample) to another, wider, population (say, all adults in Ghana), on the basis that your study population was statistically representative of that wider population. Theoretical Generalization encompasses a range of strategies based on differing logics, some of which look more obviously theoretical than others. Show that you have tested out your developing explanation by trying out alternative explanations, and in particular by looking for negative instances. Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 22
Miles and Huberman s Data Analysis Transcendental Realism Data reduction, data display and drawing and verifying conclusion Photo Illustrations from Getty Images www.gettyimages.com 23