04.05.2013 Views

MICHAEL DEMPSEY - Cranfield University

MICHAEL DEMPSEY - Cranfield University

MICHAEL DEMPSEY - Cranfield University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

of the analysis of the interview data with what senior officials were<br />

engaged with in other circumstances.<br />

Webb et al (1981) note the overdependence on a single, fallible<br />

method of research such as interviews. No research method, they say,<br />

is without bias. ‘Interviews and questionnaires must be supplemented<br />

by methods testing the same social science variables but having<br />

different methodological weaknesses’ Lincoln (1980) points to six<br />

factors bearing on the accuracy of records and cites Clark (1967) as a<br />

source for critical questions about the origins and usefulness of<br />

documents – including history, completeness, the circumstances of its<br />

production, the author, the intended audience, the purpose, sources of<br />

information, bias and so on. Appendix 1 lists the documents included in<br />

this research with answers to as many as possible of these questions<br />

tabulated. The intention is to be as transparent as possible about the<br />

circumstances of each document so that readers of this thesis can<br />

judge for themselves the extent to which they can be relied on. The<br />

submission is that, taken with the interview data, the documentary<br />

evidence is a helpful form of triangulation.<br />

Another potential source of bias in qualitative research relates to the<br />

representative nature of the data presented. Bryman (1988:77) notes<br />

that (inter alia) extended transcripts ‘would be very helpful in order to<br />

allow the reader to formulate his or her own hunches about the people<br />

who have been studied and how adequately the ethnographer has<br />

interpreted people’s behaviour in the light of the explication of their<br />

systems of meaning’. This danger has been addressed in the following<br />

three ways:-<br />

1. Wherever possible, extended quotations are presented in the<br />

four case studies. The quantity of data presented in those<br />

chapters is unusually voluminous. This is quite deliberate, with<br />

the intention of allowing the reader to understand, as far as<br />

possible, the context of the quotation and ‘where the interviewee<br />

is coming from.’ This is regarded as an important design issue in<br />

theoretical terms, despite its resulting in extended case studies.<br />

To facilitate the narrative, ‘signposts’ have been inserted in the<br />

form of headers, confirming the topics that the interviewees are<br />

addressing.<br />

2. NVivo is particularly helpful in enabling the researcher to check<br />

on the context of a piece of data whilst working with it. If there is<br />

any question that it might be out of context, a click with the<br />

mouse enables surrounding text to be brought up into the report<br />

being studied. If there is any concern that, for any reason,<br />

coding has been inadequate and more or less data should be<br />

available on a particular topic, or relevant to a particular<br />

quotation, searches can be undertaken which, in effect, produce<br />

freshly coded text. So the researcher can continually check that<br />

the data selected is being used correctly<br />

3. Back up reports have been taken throughout the coding process<br />

71

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!