Questionnaires

How was conducted

Reasons

A questionnaire is essentially a structured technique for collecting primary data. It is

generally a series of written questions for which the respondents have to provide the
answers. Care has to be taken in creating a questionnaire, if a survey is well designed, it will
motivate the respondents to give accurate and complete information, as such, it should
provide reliable and relevant data in return. A questionnaire can serve as an inductive
method with the aim to formulate a new theory, where open-ended questions are used to
explore a substantive area. However, researchers may use a questionnaire as a means of
collecting reliable data in a rather deductive approach in order to test existing theory. A
questionnaire thus allows the research to adopt either an inductive or a deductive
approach, or even a combination of these two (Lederman, Abd-El-Khalick, Bell & Schwartz,
2002).

When developing the actual questionnaire, there are three major question types available
to the research. Open ended offers a broad range of responses that help to capture the
flavour of peoples answers while not influencing the outcome of the question by pre-
determining possible responses. On the downside, answers are often difficult to evaluate
and tend to vary in clarity and depth. Dichotomous are used for questions with two possible
opposing outcomes, for example, yes or no. they tend to be easier to answer and require
less effort when interpreting the results. They are directly comparable to answer by other
respondents. Multichotomous questions offer a range of possible answers, similar to a
multiple choice test. They tend to be easier on the respondent and equally on the
questionnaire interpreter later on ("Questionnaire Design", 2002).

If administered correctly, surveys can prove to be an excellent method to obtain

quantitative data about peoples attitude, values, experiences, and past behaviours. Surveys
allow the researcher to gather a significant amount of data at relatively little cost. A
questionnaire distributed by post can be posted to the target group, and the latter can
choose to answer whenever it is most convenient for them. Email acts as another delivery
channel, and can reduce costs even further. Questionnaires allow the researcher to gather
data either to explain different phenomena or to explain cause and effect relationships
among the various variables (Gaffield, Gilbert, Malvitz & Romaguera, 2001).

One of the main drawbacks of questionnaires, especially ones served through the post or
electronic mail, is the often low response rate. Incorrectly or illegibly filled out
questionnaires, or even missing answers, will inevitably influence the quality of the data
obtained, and have the potential to lower the number of usable questionnaires further.
Questionnaires do not offer the researcher the opportunity to follow up ideas and clarify
issues, one of the main strengths of interviews. Considerations need to be given to all
aspects of the questionnaire from design to selecting the correct target group, in order to
obtain the maximum amount of reliable and valuable data. Questionnaires are not
particularly suited for research that requires a significant amount of open ended questions,
for which an interview might be a better method to pursue. Questionnaires might highlight
trends or attitudes, but will fail to explain the underlying reasons for the outcome. A
multimethod approach, whereas the researcher combines surveys with, for instance,
interviews to explain the results, is therefore proposed. Another limitation of surveys can be
found in the structure of the method itself. Fixed choice questionnaires generally assume an
unstated general knowledge of the topic being investigated, and force the respondent to
answers questions that he or she might be ignorant of, have a different understanding of
based on personal perception, or which are influenced by exogenous factors such as
education, culture, age, or societal status. A questionnaire has no means of correcting this,
the outcome might thus be slightly biased at best, or plainly misleading (Conigrave, Hall &
Saunders, 1995).

In order to consider the ethical validity of questionnaires, several points need to be

considered. Whether the participation of the subject is truly voluntary. Whether consent to
participate in the study has been obtained, or proxy consent is required. Questionnaire not
completed by the authentic subjects. Information provided participants before obtaining
their informed consent to participate in the research. Contents of the questionnaire. Roles
and limitations of a research ethics committee. Matters to be included in a report and
publication of the result (Asai, 2003).
Interviews
How was conducted

Reasons

Interviews can take advantage of social cues such as voice, intonation, and body language,
these can give the interviewer a lot of extra information that can be added to the verbal
answer of the interviewee on a question. The value of social cues depends on what the
interviewer wants to know from the interviewee. On the other hand, this visibility can lead
to unpleasant interviewer effects, when the interviewer guides, with his or her behaviour,
the interviewee in a unique direction. There is no significant time delay between question
and answer, the interviewer and interviewee can directly react to what the other says or
does. The interviewer must concentrate much more on the questions to be asked and the
answers given. Interviews can be tape recorded, this is more accurate than writing out
notes, but tape recording also comes with the danger of not taking any notes during the
interview. A disadvantage of tape recording is the time a transcription of the tape recording
consumes, one hour of tape could take five or six hours to transcribe. The interviewer can
create a good interview ambience. Interviews can take a lot of effort time and cost and, for
a large research project, can be impossible for one researcher (Opdenakker, 2006).

Interviews can be designed to incorporate methodological strategies to ensure the

trustworthiness of the findings. The interviewer needs to reflect on their own perspective
and have a clear and transparent description of the research process from an initial outline,
through the development of the methods and reporting of findings. In addition, maintaining
a research dairy documenting challenges and issues assisted in maintaining cohesion
between the study’s aim, design and methods (Noble & Smith, 2015).

In order to consider the ethical validity of interviews, several points need to be considered.
It is important that procedures for interviews are laid out in writing, and are clearly
explained to interviewees before interviews proceed. It is expected that interviewees will be
supplied with the written version of these procedures. Interviewees have to be happy with
the location of the interview, and should be offered alternatives. The interviewer should be
aware of issues involving his or her safety when undertaking an interview. Contact details of
places visited on the day of each interview should be left with a friend of colleague.
Confidentiality is an important concern; interviewees should not usually be named. Any
recorded contribution should be used in accordance with the wishes of the interviewee. If
possible, interviewees should give their assent in writing, and if this is not feasible, an
explanation must be given. If the material is to be published or preserved as a public
resource, then permission will need to be explicitly given, preferably in writing (Ethical
Issues in Interviews, 2002).

Observations
How was conducted

Reasons

Other researchers can easily replicate controlled observations by using the same
observation schedule. This means it is easy to test for reliability. The data obtained from
structured observations is simpler and quicker to analyse as it is quantitative, making it a
less time-consuming method compared to naturalistic compared to observations. Controlled
observations are relatively quick to conduct which means that many observations can take
place within a short amount of time, this means a large sample can be obtained resulting in
the findings being representative and having the ability to b generalised to a large
population. Controlled observation can lack validity due to the Hawthorne effect. When
participants know they are being watched they may act differently (McLeod, 2015).

Naturalistic observations are able to observe the flow of behaviour in its own setting; this
creates greater ecological validity. Naturalistic observation is often used to generate new
ideas, because it gives the researcher the opportunity to study the total situation, it often
suggests avenues of enquiry not thought of before. These observations are often conducted
on a micro scale and may lack a representative sample; this may result in the findings
lacking the ability to be generalised to wider society. Natural observations are less reliable
as other variables cannot be controlled, this makes it difficult for another researcher to
repeat the study in exactly the same way. A further disadvantage is that the researcher
needs to be trained to be able to recognise aspects of a situation that are psychologically
significant and worth further attention. With observations, there are not manipulations of a
variable which means cause and effect relationships cannot be established (McLeod, 2015).
In participant observations, it can be difficult to get time or privacy for recording; this is a
problem as they may forget details and are unlikely to remember direct quotations. If the
researcher becomes too involved they may lose objectivity and become bias, there is always
a danger that the researcher will see what they expect to see; this is a problem as they
could selectively report information instead of noting everything they observe, thus
reducing the validity of their data (McLeod, 2015).

With observations, there can be a distortion caused by the composition of the research
group. There are particular groups of people that won’t be willing to talk for a long time
such as individuals who are demotivated, depressed or critically ill. The influence of the
interviewee can affect observations, such as distortion caused by one’s own belief system,
social influence, failing memory, and bad state of health. The process of observations,
interpretation process, analysing process, and interaction between researcher and subject
also have an effect on the validity, credibility, and reliability of research observations
(Lafaille & Wildeboer, 1995).

In order to consider the ethical validity of observations, several points need to be

considered. The researcher's experience. Can the data be collected in any other way? The
importance of the research question. The vulnerability of participants. Anonymity. The
sensitivity of the topic. Intrusiveness and level of risk in the research study. Feasibility of
getting informed consent. The permission for the study been given by the owner of the
venue, event organiser, or manager, for example. Opportunities for individuals to choose
not to participate or have their data withdrawn once they know about the study if this is
feasible. Plasticity of researcher roles if the research involves participant observations.
Opportunities and time for trust to develop between researcher and observed participants
(Ethical Issues Related to Observational Research, 2016).