Page 46 - DLIS401_METHODOLOGY_OF_RESEARCH_AND_STATISTICAL_TECHNIQUES

Unit 2: Research Design

1. Entering the Field Notes

Depending on sampling procedure, a research site is selected and observations will be made
and questions asked within the natural setting.
(a) The Role of the Field Researcher

(1) complete participant: the researcher is covertly present in the field and fully participates
as if he is a member of the community under investigation; the problems are ethical, your
mere presence might affect what goes on, and there are practical problems (e.g., when and
how to leave the field?); (2) participant-as-observer: the researcher participates yet his identity
is known; (3) observer-as-participant: the researcher observes and his identity is known; the
latter two, since identity is known, may affect what’s going on in the field, and it could cause
the researcher to be expelled from the field; (4) complete observer: the researcher merely
observes and his identity is not known.
(b) Preparing for the Field and Sampling in the Field
Start with a literature review (as always), then research yourself, why are you interested?,
what will you bring to the field?, etc. Then search for informants, gate-keepers, and make a
good impression (or simply join the group you want to study).
Establishing rapport is very important, and if your identity is known, it is important to tell
them what you are there for (although you may choose to lie). Then sample in the field (see
above). Remember that the overall goal of field research is to acquire the richest possible data.
2. In-Depth Interviewing
(a) In-Depth Interviewing versus Questionnaire
While standardized questionnaires are typically, though not necessarily, employed in quantitative
research, in-depth or unstructured interviewing is closely associated with qualitative field
research. Like any interview, an in-depth interview can be defined as a “conversation with a
purpose”: an interview involves a talk between at least two people, in which the interviewer
always has some control since s/he wants to elicit information. In survey interviews, the
purpose of the conversation is dominant, especially when it involves the testing of hypotheses
(a relationship between two or more variables). In-depth interviewing, in comparison, takes
the “human element” more into account, particularly to explore a research problem which is
not well defined in advance of the observation process. In-depth interviewing does not use a
questionnaire, but the interviewer has a list of topics (an interview-guide) which are freely
explored during the interview, allowing the respondent to bring up new issues that may prove
relevant to the interviewer. The in-depth interviewer is the central instrument of investigation
rather than the interview guide.
(b) Procedure of In-Depth Interviewing
The procedure of in-depth interviewing first involves establishing a relationship with the
respondent: even more than is the case with questionnaires, it is crucial that the interviewer
gains the trust of the respondent, otherwise the interview will hardly reveal in-depth insight
into the respondent’s knowledge of, and attitudes towards, events and circumstances. Since
the kind of information elicited in the interview is not pre-determined in a questionnaire,
tape-recording (and negotiation to get permission) is appropriate. The role of the in-depth
interviewer involves a delicate balance between being active and passive: active because she/
he guides the respondent tactfully to reveal more information on an issue considered relevant,
passive because the interviewer leaves the respondent free to bring up issues that were unforeseen
but nevertheless turn out to be relevant. Since the interviewer should talk, listen, and think
during the interview, his/her experience and skill greatly contributes to the quality of the
research findings. Note that in a field research, the interview can be formal or informal: in

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 41