Qualitative Methods Exam 2016 - IBP · PDF fileFinal Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016 1 Qualitative Methods Exam 2016 Final Exam – Assignment Two Copenhagen Business School –

Final Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016

1

Qualitative Methods Exam 2016

Final Exam – Assignment Two

Copenhagen Business School – International Business and Politics

Christian Mathias Brynjolf Bohn.

Mark Michael Tuborg Boesen.

Sarah Nørby Larsen

Dag-Yero Midtvåge Diallo.

12 December 2016

STU count: 33.943

Total pages: 15 (19 including front page and bibliography)


2

Assignment Two The US government has hired us to analyse the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their children in USA.

We have decided to base our qualitative research project on a case-study research design, and it includes

one main research question as well as multiple sub research questions. As a data-collection strategy, we

have decided on ethnography, which we subsequently compare to qualitative interviewing. To analyse the

collected data, we have chosen a grounded theory approach. In the end, we contrast it to the narrative

analysis method. Throughout the assignment, we are exclusively focusing on the research methodology.

A Clear Research Question When conducting quantitative as well as qualitative research, it is highly recommendable to develop research

questions in order to guide the research process. Generally, qualitative research tends to be more open-

ended than quantitative research, but since very open-ended research is risky and can lead to the collection

of too much data, Bryman (2016, 78) advices researchers to formulate research questions in either case.

Since we have already been given the overall research area (the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their

children in USA) as well as the focus areas of interest (migrant’s values, their experience of living in the USA,

and the children’s living situation), we will focus our attention on formulating the research questions.

According to Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016, 40), the key to success in a qualitative research project is the

researchers ability to not only formulate, but continuously reformulate and redefine the research questions.

Preferably, this takes place several times during the research process in order to reduce the width and

complexity of the study. Still, the research questions do have great value in the early phases of the study as

well by setting boundaries on the study, giving it a specific direction and increased coherence (Silverman

2013). However, that requires that the research questions are workable, which means not being too broad

or specific. According to Silverman (2013), at the same time they must also be answerable, interconnected,

and substantively relevant. Bryman (2016, 83) adds to this by stating that all research questions should be

clear, researchable, have some connection(s) with established theory and research, be linked to each other,

be able to make an original contribution to the topic, and be neither too broad nor too narrow. We will


3

therefore formulate our research questions with those criteria in mind. Since the aim of this assignment is to

focus on the research methodology – not to engage with the literature related to the theme – we will base

our research questions exclusively on the material provided in the exam.

Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016, 42) describes three kinds of research questions, the so-called what, how, and

why questions. While 'what' questions are descriptive and focus on describing situations and processes, the

'how' and 'why' questions focus on causes and consequences with the aim of answering or explaining

something in qualitative terms. We have therefore decided to include research questions of all kinds in our

study in order to cover the relevant aspects of the research area. Since the exam explicitly states that the

assignment must contain a clear research questions, we have formulated one main research question as well

as multiple sub research questions, while taking into account the points made by the different authors in the

text above:

Main research question:

What motivates illegal Mexican migrants with children to stay, work and live in USA?

Sub research questions:

What are the hopes and dreams of illegal Mexican migrants with children in USA?

What are their fears and concerns related to their concrete living and working situation?

How are the values and beliefs of illegal Mexican migrants with children shaped by their specific living

and working situation?

How do illegal Mexican migrants perceive the American society to be treating them, depending on

their concrete living and working situation?

How to they justify raising their children in a foreign country illegally?

Why are illegal Mexican migrants with children choosing to stay, work and live in USA, despite the

many challenges related to their status as illegal migrants?

Do the choices and actions of illegal Mexican migrants with children differ from those without

children?


4

An Evaluation of the Usefulness of the Case-study Research Design To evaluate the usefulness of the case-study as a research design, it is necessary to understand the role and

purpose of a research design. In the pre-production phase of a research project, the research design is used

to secure a strict structure, plan, and strategy (de Vaus 2001: 16). Similar links can be drawn to a work plan,

but the research design encompasses more than just that. As de Vaus states:” The function of a research

design is to ensure that the evidence obtained enables us to answer the initial question as unambiguously as

possible. (de Vaus 2001: 9)” Hence, a research design is a tool that helps to understand how a research

question is answered as convincingly as possible by outlining the clear purpose of the project before

conducting the research. For our research project, this means that the case-study research design should

guide the selection of a research strategy when analysing the life of illegal Mexican migrants.

According to Bryman, there are five essential types of research designs: Experimental design, cross-sectional

design, longitudinal design, comparative design, and case study design (Bryman 2016: 50). Different research

designs carry different advantages and disadvantages that should be considered when choosing which one

to apply for a research project. For instance, the experimental design is very robust and trustworthy, but on

the other hand it is limited by its manipulation of the independent variables as the design involves intervening

in a specific situation. In the same way, the cross-sectional design is apt for uncovering variation between

cases, but lacks the detailed and intensive analysis of a single case. These types of research designs should

be perceived as ideal types, in that actual research designs rarely follow this stringent divide (Gerring 2004:

10). Often a research design can embrace several of these types and display more than one feature. A case-

study can for instance display both longitudinal and cross-sectional features. Since the case study is the

chosen research design for this paper, our primary focus will be engaged on this type of design.

There is much discussion on how to define the term “case study”. To name a few of the most prominent

scholars, Robert Yin defines it as a qualitative method in that it has a small sample size, N, and that the

research is ethnographic or otherwise related to field observations (Yin 1994: 137). Harry Eckstein argues

slightly different that a case study should be defined as a research of a single case. For the investigation of


5

this paper, the definition of Gerring is arguably the most suitable, as he describes it as:” an intensive study of

a single unit for the purpose of understanding a larger class of similar units" (Gerring 2004: 1). By this

definition, our case study can be conducted as an intensive study of a community of illegal Mexican migrants

for the purpose of understanding a larger class of illegal Mexican migrants in USA.

The case study research design possesses several advantages when answering a research question. It is an

excellent way of generating holistic knowledge in depth, and it provides a framework to present complex

issues in an accessible format (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016: 131). Applied to our case, this offers a way to

identify and categorize the values of the illegal Mexican migrants by conducting an intensive in-depth study

of them in their social setting, which is the exact purpose of this paper. In contrast, the weaknesses of the

case study are inherently linked to its external validity or generalizability (Bryman 2016: 390). In analysing a

specific setting or community, as explored later in this assignment, the findings cannot necessarily be

generalised to the wider population, as it is nearly impossible to find an identical social setting. This challenge

to the case study conflicts with the definition of Gerring earlier stated in this paper, and it is a recurring

discussion within the field of qualitative methods that should be paid careful attention to. To determine

whether our findings in a single community can be applied to the rest of the US with certainty, we would

have to conduct an abundance of additional case-studies and compare them to each other, which would be

a very costly process. As this approach bear more sign of a cross-sectional design than a case-study design, it

would further go against the original task ordered by the US government.

Having a clear outline of the purpose of a research design as well as the strengths and weaknesses of a case

study, this paper will now evaluate the usefulness of the case study as a research design on these premises.

As the research question in this paper sets out to understand a particular group of people and their values,

experience of living in USA, and their children’s living situation, the research design must be applicable in

uncovering these exact elements and deliver as unambiguous an answer as possible. Through an intensive

study of a single case, in our case a community illegal Mexican migrants, we can understand a larger class of


6

similar units, which is why we can answer the main focus areas of the US government in our analysis. Thus,

several arguments support the notion that the case study is a useful research design that can help the US

government. However, as previously mentioned the external validity of the case-study is still an important

element that might make the case-study a less useful research design.

Finally, it is important to note that the case-study is an ideal type of research design, and that the case study

in this assignment would most likely contain elements from longitudinal design as well, simply because the

data-collection strategy would be conducted over a longer period of time. However, since we have not been

given any information about resources and/or a specific time schedule for the research project, we will not

dive into the specifics regarding the length of the study.

A Data-collection Strategy Having decided on a case-study research design, we now need to determine which data-collection strategy

to employ. Multiple strategies exist, such as qualitative interviewing, focus groups and ethnography (Bryman

2016, 377-378). When choosing the strategy, it is important to keep in mind the objective of the research

project to ensure that the data collection strategy that most effectively answers the research questions is

the one chosen (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 82). The data collection is in many ways the most important

part of the entire research project, as poor data will lead to poor and weak conclusions (Bryman 2016, 10).

All three strategies have strengths and weaknesses that enhance or decrease the quality of the gathered

data. Qualitative interviewing allows the researcher to control the setting, the questions and the general

direction of the answers, however, the chance of observing behaviour and interaction is drastically limited

(Bryman 2016, 494). In focus groups, the researcher is able to ask questions in addition to observing the

individuals and their interaction with each other, but the individuals might feel pressured by peers or

superiors and therefore provide adjusted answers (Bryman 2016, 501). Finally, the ethnographic strategy is

a way of infiltrating a society, a group of people, or a specific environment by embedding oneself in their

settings. The idea is to get as close to the participants, in this case the illegal Mexican migrants, in their natural


7

social setting (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016, 150). The researcher thus plays an important role in this specific

type of study, as the level of involvement far exceeds a standard interview or questionnaire (Dargie 1998,

67). According to Dargie, the primary advantages of the ethnographic approach over the other two strategies

is the opportunity to experience events as they happen and conduct casual interviews with people in their

natural environments, which allows a deeper study of the participants and their lives (Dargie 1998, 66). That

is why we believe that the ethnographic data-collection strategy is the best fit to our particular project and

offers the best way of answering our research questions.

Since more than 80% of Mexicans are of Roman Catholic belief, we have decided to conduct our ethnographic

approach in a religious community (CIA 2016). In the city of Escondido in Southern California, the St. Mary

Parish Church conducts all masses and services in Spanish under Roman Catholicism (St. Mary Parish Church

2016). Therefore, this is where we will conduct the ethnographic research. Having now selected our case

community, we need to sample units within this case. There are two main approaches to this process:

probability sampling and purposive sampling. The former is a more quantitative way of ensuring a random

population of participants, where they all have the same probability of being chosen. The purposive sampling

is taking place as a non-probability sampling simultaneously on two levels: on content level and on participant

level (Bryman 2016, 408-409). When evaluating the data collected, these two levels must be included. To

ensure a triangulation process it is important to continuously evaluate the data from multiple sources, in

addition to gathering further data for a greater validity (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 88). Since the

purposive sampling offers the best way to ensure the correct and necessary participants in our study, that is

the sampling method we will use in our ethnographic approach.

Before conducting the actual ethnographic study, we need to determine the access level. This is essential,

since it determines to which degree a researcher is able to cover a given society or group, and thus planning

the access and understanding the complexity of the church society is crucial to what types of data can be

gathered (Van Maanen & Kolb 1985, 11). In our case, the aim is to get access to the lives of families visiting


8

the church. To reach that goal, the researcher can apply multiple tactics: The researcher can use friends or

contacts to help gain access. As an alternative, the researcher can try to get the support of someone within

the organization, called "sponsors", to vouch for the researcher. Lastly, the researcher can get access through

"top management" or senior people, called "gatekeepers". We recommend seeking out the support of a

gatekeeper in this particular case for numerous reasons: Arriving in the church without any pre-established

relation to the participants might raise suspicion to the nature of the study. Secondly, if a gatekeeper like the

minister is well known and respected within the society, the inclusion processes will shorten and reduce

suspicion, as he or she will have vouched for the intentions of the study. (Bryman 2016, 437). Even with the

help of a gatekeeper, it is highly unlikely that a researcher will obtain full access to the lives of the families,

as he inevitably remains an external figure (Bryman 2016, 248). However, the longer the researcher is

embedded in the church society and becomes a more familiar face, the higher the chances are of observing

natural occurring behaviour. Thus, the families will find the presence of the researcher less awkward, and it

is then up to the researcher to engage and take advantage of the trust she has built. (Dargie 1998, 68).

After establishing the access with the gatekeeper, the researcher must decide to which degree she should

embed herself. In this case, we decide to go in as a participating observer, which entails participating in core

activities, such as masses and gatherings, without being a full member. This offers the opportunity to get as

close to the participants as desired, without directly affecting their behaviour (Bryman 2016, 435).

Communities like the St. Mary Parish Church also host numerous events other than masses, during which the

researcher will be able to engage and build trust (St. Mary Parish Church 2016). Since the overall task is to

understand the life of the illegal families, it is particularly important that the researcher does not affect the

participants and their answers and behaviour. There is a potential risk of this happening, if the participants

become too aware of the research project and who the project is for (the US government). That is why it is

also important to consider either conducting overt or covert ethnography. As the title implies, a covert

researcher does not disclose her intentions, more so not the fact that she is a researcher. This is kept a secret

to ensure unfiltered observations in the field and perhaps being let even closer to the participants, where


9

non-adjusted behaviour can be observed (Bryman 2016, 427). However, there are certain limitations as to

what information can be extracted when operating covertly. For instance, when talking to people in and

around the church community, it becomes difficult to ask direct questions without revealing the intention of

the researcher, and taking field notes might be impossible at certain times. When operating overtly on the

other hand, this will not be a challenge. If the participants know the researcher and her intentions, she will

be able to record conversations and take notes in the church (Bryman 2016, 440). This is a huge advantage,

since well-structured field notes as well as ethnographic interview transcripts are extremely valuable, as the

longevity of the study can make it difficult to remember all sessions and events experienced (Mack et al.

2013, 99). In addition, there will be no risk for the researcher of having her cover blown and thereafter losing

the access entirely if she is already operating overtly. We have therefore decided to assume an overt role.

When considering ethics in qualitative methods, there are four principles to take into account: harm to

participants, lack of informed consent, invasion of privacy and deception (Bryman 2016, 125). These are

essential to the way researchers conduct and report research, since they lay the foundation for building trust

between the researcher and the research community (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 64). Breaking that trust

can have severe consequences for our research project as well. For example, if the families feel that the

researcher is intruding in the local community, it will have negative effects on not only the data collected in

the subsequent sessions, but also on the trust that invited the researcher in in the first place. In addition, if

participants feel violated, they might request that the researcher maculate all data concerning them. When

doing ethnographic research, the lack of informed consent and the invasion of privacy are especially

important, and they are therefore essential to consider in our case. By operating overtly, we are giving the

participants the choice to share information about their lives and to let the researcher in or not. However,

the researcher might gain knowledge during the study, which the participants did not intend to share. This

might happen because of the difficulty in ensuring that every participant in the community is aware and

informed about the researcher's role and her associated intentions (Watts 2011, 305).


10

Finally, as the migrants and their children are living in USA illegally, they might wish to remain anonymous in

the study, which is important for the researcher to respect throughout the entire research project. As Israel

and Hay (2004) observe, if researchers do not keep the names of their participants confidential as well as

what is being told, 'who would talk to them in the future?' (Israel and Hay 2004, 94). This become especially

relevant if the researcher observes or hears about an illegal activity, since this community after all is a

community of migrants illegally living in a foreign country.

These ethical considerations need to be included in the way the researcher operates in the community, how

she engages with the participants, and lastly how the research is written up in the post-field period. When

considering the pros and cons of the data-collection strategy as well as the ethical aspects, we still find the

ethnographic approach with an overt researcher to be the best strategy for this research project. The

enormous value of an honest relationship with the participants will give the researcher the ultimate freedom

she needs to move about within the community and gather the best possible data (Mack et al. 2013, 99).

A Discussion of an Alternative Data-collection Strategy An alternative data-collection strategy is qualitative interviewing, which is probably the most used method

in qualitative research (Bryman 2016, 466). The method encompasses conducting interviews in different

ways with either individuals or groups as participants. Researchers are typically working with three different

types of interviews: structured, semi-structured and unstructured interviews, and most commonly the two

latter in qualitative research (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016, 93). When conducting semi-structured

interviews, it is important to prepare an interview guide tailored to the research questions. By doing so, this

will help to ensure the quality and usability of the data collected and make it easier for the researcher to

control the interview (Bryman 2016, 469).

By applying qualitative interviewing to our case about illegal Mexican migrants, it would be easier to structure

our research, simply because interviewing in an organised setting offers a better opportunity to control the

interview and derive answers particularly relevant to our research questions (Guest et al 2013, 80). In


11

addition, it would require less time and resources to gather that same amount of material compared to an

ethnographic approach. Furthermore, it would be easier for the researcher to record the interviews as well

as trace back the data to the original source (Seidman 2013, 115).

Bryman also argues that qualitative interviewing has its own advantages and disadvantages compared to the

ethnographic method. Firstly, one of the advantages is issues resistant to observation, which encompasses

issues that are not amendable to observation. In our case, this would be an advantage as our research

question sets out to study values, which is an issue resistant to observation since values are hardly visible.

Secondly, interviewing is less intrusive to the participants’ lives, as it does not take up as much time as being

observed for a longer period. In our case, the participants would only be interrupted during the time of the

interview, which they themselves would have agreed to. Finally, the ethical considerations are easier to cope

with, as the participants will be aware of the intentions of the researcher at any time during the interview

(Bryman 2016, 492-494).

On the other hand, what really differentiates qualitative interviewing from the ethnographic method is that

people in the former are brought out of their natural social settings and into the settings defined by the

researcher (Guest et al. 2013, 93). This comprises one of the biggest disadvantages of qualitative

interviewing, as we are not able to see through the eyes of the participants and as the participants are more

aware of themselves being objects for research. In our case, this would imply that the participants would be

more aware of how they act and what information they share with the researcher (Bryman 2016, 494-497).

In addition, Guest introduces another disadvantage of qualitative interviewing, which is that “Spending time

working, playing, or living with people will produce data that would require dozens of interviews or focus

groups to uncover” (Guest et al 3013, 82). Due to those advantages and disadvantages of the alternative data

collection strategy just discussed, we still believe that our ethnographic data collection strategy is more

optimal, as the method ensures in-depth data collected directly from the environment of the participants.


12

A Method for Analysing the Collected Data After having conducted our ethnographic data-collection strategy, we now find ourselves with a large

database of unstructured textual material consisting of field notes and interview transcripts from our

observations and casual interviews. Next step is therefore to decide on a method for analysing all the

collected data. However, in contrast to quantitative data analysis, there are very few well-established and

widely accepted rules about how to carry out the analysis of qualitative data (Bryman 2016, 570).

Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016) identifies two general types of qualitative content analysis: Categorization

and interpretation. While the former focuses on categorizing the data with the aim of providing a "holistic

and factual description of the phenomena under study," the second method focuses on "intensive

interpretation with the aim of understanding the meaning of the issues under study" (Eriksson and Kovalainen

2016, 121). Both methods are fitting for a case-study research design, but Eriksson and Kovalainen points out

that categorization is especially useful in extensive case studies, while intensive case studies as well as

ethnographies put more emphasis on interpretation. Since our study is a case of the latter, the interpretation

approach holds the greater value. However, interpretation as an approach is not very specific, which is why

we have sought out other and more detailed methods as well.

According to Bryman (2016), despite the lack of clear-cut rules about how qualitative data analysis should be

carried out some general strategies do exist, among these analytic induction, grounded theory, thematic

analysis, and narrative analysis. He describes these as frameworks to guide the analysis of data and notes

that especially analytic induction and grounded theory are examples of ways in which qualitative and

quantitative data analysis differ. The reason is that these are inherently iterative, meaning that the analysis

begins after only some of the data have been collected, and then that analysis then affects the further

collection of data. These two methods can therefore be strategies for guiding the collection of data as well.

The method we have chosen in order to conduct a qualitative content analysis is that of grounded theory.

Strauss and Corbin (1998) defines the method as "theory that was derived from data, systematically gathered

and analysed through the research process. In this method, data collection, analysis, and eventual theory


13

stand in close relationship to one another" (Strauss and Corbin 1998, 12). In practice, the approach stresses

the importance of allowing theoretical ideas to emerge out of one's data, a so-called inductive method in

contrast to a deductive method that focuses on confirming predefined theories in the data. This is an inherent

advantage of the grounded theory approach, since it makes sure that the emergent concepts are closely

related to the collected data and relevant to the research area, which is why we see the method having great

value for this particular study as well.

Grounded theory as an approach to analysing qualitative data has changed a great deal since the

development of the approach in The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research

(Glaser and Strauss 1967). However, it would be impossible for this assignment to cover all the changes

during the years, and we will therefore focus on clarifying the central processes of the method. These take

place through coding, which entails reviewing the field notes and interview transcripts and giving them labels

that seem to be of theoretical significance or of particular interest to the social world of the migrants being

studied (Bryman 2016, 573). In our case, this process has a specific focus of identifying and coding component

parts relevant to the previously formulated research questions about the life of illegal Mexican migrants and

their children. By systematically examining, comparing and categorizing the data continuously, the grounded

theory approach offers a way to derive concepts and theories about the migrant’s values, their experience

of living in the USA, and their children’s living situation. Eriksson and Kovalainen (2016) describes the

objective of this process as identifying relevant concepts in order to proceed to theoretical statements. By

comparing and contrasting the identified concepts and thereafter defining the categories, it is possible to

specify substantive theory about the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their children. This exemplifies the

strength of the method in terms of providing explanations for the previously formulated research questions.

Generally, researchers view coding as a progression through a series of stages. Bryman (2016) presents two

distinct approaches to this progressive elaboration of concepts and theories developed by Strauss and Corbin

(1990) and Charmaz (2006) respectively. The former distinguishes between open coding, axial coding, and


14

selective coding, while the latter prefers to distinguish between initial coding, focused or selective coding,

and theoretical coding. While the individual steps of the two approaches differ, both of them entails a "basic

understanding of the coding process as involving a movement from generating codes that stay close to the

data to more selective and theoretically elaborate ways of conceptualizing the phenomenon of interest"

(Bryman 2016, 575). We have chosen to explain the usefulness of the Strauss and Corbin approach (1990):

Open coding: During this process, the collected data about the illegal Mexican migrants and their children is

broken down, examined, compared and categorized. This coding phase yields concepts relevant to our

research questions, and those are then turned into categories.

Axiel coding: By making connections between the previously defined categories, our collected data are put

back together in new ways. In this phase codes are linked to context, consequences, patterns of interaction,

and to causes in our collected data.

Selective coding: The core category, which is the central issue or focus in relation to the illegal Mexican

migrants, is identified and systematically related to the other categories. These relationships are then

validated, and further categories are refined and developed.

After having gone through the different steps, the result of using the grounded theory approach will be

various concepts and categories systematically related to form a theoretical framework that explains the

relevant social phenomenon (Strauss and Corbin 1998, 22). In our case, this will sum up to an in-depth

understanding of the life of illegal Mexican migrants and their children in USA. However, the method also

has its weaknesses. Firstly, the approach is rather vague on the difference between concepts and categories,

which reduces its analytical value to the researcher. For example, while Strauss and Corbin (1998) refer to

concepts emerging from the analysis, Charmaz (2000) writes about emerging categories. Secondly, the

presence of multiple versions of grounded theory makes it difficult for the researcher to define it is as a

distinct method for analysing qualitative data as well as apply it in practice (Bryman 2016, 580). Thirdly, the

coding approach to qualitative data analysis entails the risk of losing the context. By coding and plucking out


15

chunks of text from the data, the social setting can be lost in the process. Lastly, Coffey and Atkinson (1996)

argues that the categorization of data into discrete chunks results in fragmentation, so that the narrative

flow of what people say is lost. According to Bryman (2016, 583), sensitivity to this last issue is exactly what

has caused a growing interest in narrative analysis as an alternative strategy for conducting qualitative data

analysis. That is why we have chosen to evaluate exactly that approach in the next section.

A Discussion of an Alternative Strategy for Analysing the Data As an alternative to grounded theory, narrative analysis offers a way for the researcher to organize and

interpret events, happenings and actions described in the field notes and interview transcripts in a way so

that they construct one or more narratives to be interpreted and discussed (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2016,

221). In other words, with narrative analysis the focus of attention shifts from 'what happened?' to 'how do

people make sense of what happened?' (Bryman 2016, 589). This shift takes into account the fact that people

perceive their lives in terms of continuity and process, in contrast to grounded theory that, according to its

critics, neglect the perspective of those being studied, in our case the illegal Mexican migrants and their

children. Among others, Mishler (1986, 77) therefore argues for so-called 'elicited personal narratives', which

provides a way for the researcher to view people's answers as stories that are potential raw material for

narrative analysis. This makes the method relevant for accounts relating to episodes and to the

interconnections between them. Riessman (1993) describes how she became concerned about the

fragmentation of data that results from coding data – one of the weaknesses of grounded theory previously

described – and therefore decided to apply narrative analysis to her data. By doing so, she effectively applied

a narrative approach to materials collected in a conventional way for conventional purposes with the purpose

of uncovering the stories of her participants (Bryman 2016, 590). Other researchers deliberately ask their

participants to recount stories already in the data-collection phase. This reveals two distinct ways of thinking

about narrative analysis: An approach to analyse qualitative data as well as an approach to do this but also

increase the telling of stories from participants.


16

In order to derive meaning from narratives, Coffey and Atkinson (1996) argue that they should be analysed

in terms of the functions they serve for the teller. They describe the aim of this process as to elicit

participants' reconstructed accounts of connections between events and between events and contexts.

Conducting a narrative analysis of qualitative data therefore entails seeking out the forms and functions of

competing as well as complementing narratives among the participants. By piecing together the narratives

that illegal Mexican migrants with children tell themselves and each other, narrative analysis can give a

deeper understanding of how they perceive their life and those of their children in USA. This can potentially

be of great value for the US government, since these stories explain their own views on living illegally in a

foreign country. In addition, this approach holds the potential to reveal hopes and dreams or concerns and

fears of the illegal migrants that the fragmentation of data in the grounded theory approach would miss,

simply because the latter does not take into account those mentioned stories that the migrants employ to

account for events related to different aspects of their life.

Not only does the narrative analysis approach offer a way of analysing the narrative flow of what the migrants

say, it also provides a better understanding of the social setting, in other words the context, in which the

migrants are observed. This is something the grounded theory approach risk losing by plucking out chunks of

text and categorizing them, while the narrative analysis approach offer a way of looking at the whole.

However, it is important to note that this does not render the grounded theory method redundant, since

identifying a core category as well as various concepts will still help in formulating relevant theory in order

to understand the life of illegal migrants. In addition, because grounded theory systematically identifies

relevant categories related to the core category during the different steps, we still believe this approach to

hold superior value if we were to choose only one approach. Having outlined an alternative strategy and

compared these two methods of analysing qualitative data, we believe that they complement each other in

a great way, which is why we recommend employing both of them during the data analysis phase in order to

help the US government understand the life of illegal Mexican migrants as fully as possible.


17

Bibliography

Bryman, Alan (2016). Social Research Method (Fifth edition), New York: Oxford University Press

Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved on 9/12/16 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-

world-factbook/geos/mx.html

Charmaz, Kathy (2000). ‘Grounded Theory: Objectivist and Constructivist Methods’, in N. K. Denzin and Y. S.

Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (Second edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage

Publications Ltd.

Charmaz, Kathy (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis.

London: Sage Publications Ltd

Coffey, Amanda and Atkinson, Paul (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research

Strategies. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Ltd

Dargie, C. (1998) "Observation in Political Research: A Qualitative Approach”Politicsvol 18 no 1

Eckstein. Harry (1992) “Case Studies and Theory in Political Science.” In Regarding Politics: Essays on

Political Theory, Stability, and Change. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Eriksson, Päivi and Kovalainen, Anne (2016). Qualitative Methods in Business Research (Second edition).


Gerring, J. (2004) “What is a Case Study and What Is It Good For?” American Political Science Review vol.

98, No. 2 (May) pp 341-354

Glaser, Barney and Strauss, Anselm (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative

Research. Chicago: Aldine

Israel, Mark and Hay, Iain (2004). Research Ethics for Social Scientists. London: Sage Publications Ltd


18

Krogstad, J.M., Passel, S.P., & Cohn, D. (2016). “5 facts about illegal immigration in the U.S.” Retrieved on

9/12/16 from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/03/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-

u-s/

Lincoln, Yvonna and Guba, Egon (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications Ltd

Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K.M., Guest, G., Namey, E. (2013): Qualitative Research Methods: A

Data Collector’s Field Guide. North Carolina: Family Health International

Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved on 8/12/16 from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/

Mishler, Elliot (1986). Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard

University Press.

Morgan, David L.'Focus groups' In: Annual Review of Sociology, 1 January 1996, Vol.22

Riessman, Catherine (1993). Narrative Analysis. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications Ltd

Seidman, Irving (2013). Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the

Social Sciences (Fourth edtion). Teachers College Press

Silverman, David (2013). Doing Qualitative Research (Fourth Edition). London: Sage Publications Ltd

St. Mary Parish Church Escondido 2016. Retrieved on 9/12/16 from http://www.stmaryp.org/mass-times/

Strauss, Anselm and Corbin, Juliet (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and

Techniques. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications Ltd

Strauss, Anselm and Corbin, Juliet (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for

Developing Grounded Theory (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Ltd


19

Van Maanen, J., and D. Kolb. 1985. The Professional Apprentice: Observations on field-work roles in two

organizational settings. In Research in the sociology of organizations, Edited by S. Bachrach and S. Mitchell,

vol. 4, pp. 1-33. Greenwich, CT: JAI

de Vaus, David (2001) ”Research Design in Social Research”, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1-16

Watts, J.H. (2011) "Ethical and Practical Challenges of Participant Observation in Sensitive Health

Research”International Journal of Social Research Methodology vol 14, no 4 (July)

Yin, Robert (1989). Case Study Research: London: Sage Publications Ltd

Yin, Robert (1994). Improving Educational Management through Research and Consultancy, p. 135-156:


Documents

Qualitative Methods Exam 2016 - IBP · PDF fileFinal Exam Qualitative Methods Fall 2016 1 Qualitative Methods Exam 2016 Final Exam – Assignment Two Copenhagen Business School –