View/Open - ARAN - National University of Ireland, Galway

3.4.3 Rationale for Research Methodology/Strategy
92
Chapter 3 Research Framework
Following this examination of the methodologies/strategies available to the
researcher, the next step involved identifying which methodology would meet the
aims of this research study.
The ethnographic approach would not deliver on the aims of this research. While it
was recognised that it is holistic in its approach and can reveal new understanding of
processes, relationships and connections that may affect resident autonomy, its
rejection for this study was due to its methodological limitations. Barton (2008)
stated that it is important for ethnographers to acknowledge its methodological
limitations, to learn to balance their lived insider perspective against that of their
observer, and to acknowledge the connection between their intimate understanding
of the research aim and the relationship with the research sample and how this might
affect the outcome. Furthermore, ethnography tends to rely on participant
observation but this study needs to gather multiple perspectives from multiple
sources. Thus the research aims could not be achieved using this approach.
Phenomenology was also rejected. Denscombe (2007) explained that the
phenomenological investigation of “homelessness” would focus on the experience of
being homeless but it would not try to measure the extent of homelessness, or
explain the causes. This research study sought to not only understand the experience
of “autonomy”, but to also measure the extent of autonomy and to explain it; thus
phenomenology would not be a suitable methodology for this study.
Grounded theorists believe that the researcher should have no pre-conceived ideas
and generally should not conduct a literature review prior to commencing a study.
However, this researcher worked in residential care for a number of years so already
had an understanding of this care environment. Furthermore, the concept of
autonomy needed clarification from a literature review and subsequent concept
analysis in order to design the data collection tools to conduct the research. Thus
grounded theory was not appropriate for the requirements of this study. Furthermore,
unlike many grounded theorists this study was not aiming to develop a theory but
rather to add to the knowledge that currently exists in relation to resident autonomy.
Denscombe (2007) stated that in using grounded theory there is a danger that data in