AMANDA HYNAN FINAL THESIS PDF

Giddings (2006) expresses concerns and criticisms over a mixed methods approach.
She acknowledges it may have potential for creating more complex research designs
but voices concern that whilst being hailed as a third way it is actually a disguised
form of positivism, although she concedes within a more modest postpositivist shape.
Denzin and Lincoln (2005) suggest it may side-line qualitative techniques to a
secondary position by moving away from the interpretive foundation.
In the current research project, the exploratory and inductive nature of a qualitative
approach was considered the best fit for the research aspiration to explore the
experiences of young adults with physical disabilities and complex communication
needs for accessing the internet and online social media. Bryman (2001) discusses the
merits of a qualitative approach when studying attitudes as people are capable of
attributing meaning to their environment and collecting rich data from their
perspective is vital for creating understanding within a contextual framework.
3.3.3. Discussion of three common qualitative approaches
Holloway and Todres (2003) consider the distinctions and flexibility between three
common qualitative approaches, phenomenology, grounded theory and ethnography.
Table 1 is a summarised adaptation of their table that appeared in the Qualitative
Research journal.
Table 1: Table illustrating the distinctions of three common qualitative approaches and areas of
flexibility with other qualitative approaches (Adapted from Holloway and Todres (2003).
Phenomenology Grounded Theory Ethnography
The goal: to describe
linguistically actual situations at a
general and unique level.
The goal: to develop a theory
grounded in the data which
explains how activities fit together
and how participants take an active
role
The goal: to describe
and understand a
particular cultural
setting through the
diversity and voices of
the participants
67