Lecture 08 : Methods Adopted in Social Psychology : Part-VI
Summary
TLDRThis lecture delves into the intricacies of qualitative thematic analysis within social psychology research, highlighting its benefits and drawbacks. It discusses the potential for thematic derailment during in-depth discussions and the challenges of material selection and context weighting. The lecture contrasts this with quantitative content analysis, emphasizing the frequency counts versus illustrative quotations. It introduces the constructionist method, focusing on the sequential construction of meaning in focus group discussions, and concludes with a discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of focus groups, including high ecological validity but potential conformity issues.
Takeaways
- 📚 The lecture discusses methods in social psychology, focusing on qualitative thematic analysis and its drawbacks, such as the potential for codes to mismatch with ongoing discussions.
- 🔍 A key issue in qualitative thematic analysis is selecting relevant material from a vast array of participant responses and conversations.
- 💡 Wilkinson differentiates between quantitative and qualitative analysis, with the former using frequency counts and the latter using illustrative quotations to convey depth of experience.
- 🔑 The constructionist method is distinct, focusing on the process of interaction within a focus group and the local, sequential construction of meaning.
- 🗣️ In constructionist analysis, the environment and sequence of conversation are carefully managed to capture the participants' understanding and behavior.
- 🌟 Focus groups have advantages such as capturing real-life data in a natural setting, offering flexibility, high face validity, and being cost-effective.
- 🚫 Focus groups also have disadvantages, including less control over participants compared to individual interviews and the potential for group conformity or groupthink.
- 👥 Moderators require special skills to stimulate discussions effectively within the focus group setting.
- 🤝 The constructionist method emphasizes the importance of the sequence of turns in conversation and how participants position their responses within that sequence.
- 📈 Quantitative analysis systematically records the number of mentions within each category, while qualitative analysis focuses on the manner of expression of experiences.
- 📝 The script concludes by highlighting the importance of understanding the differences between content analysis, thematic analysis, and the constructionist method in qualitative research.
Q & A
What is the main focus of the lecture 8 in the provided transcript?
-The main focus of lecture 8 is to discuss methods adopted in social psychology, specifically qualitative thematic analysis, its drawbacks, benefits, and the differences between qualitative and quantitative analysis.
What is a major drawback of qualitative thematic analysis mentioned in the transcript?
-A major drawback is the potential for the researcher to lose sight of where the coded data sits within the whole transcript, as the discussion can go in any direction and the coding may mismatch with the ongoing interaction.
How does the transcript describe the process of selecting material for qualitative thematic analysis?
-The transcript describes it as a key issue where the researcher must decide which conversations and responses from participants are most relevant to the theme, considering the large amount of material that can be generated.
What is the importance of giving due weight to the specific context within the material in qualitative thematic analysis?
-It is important because it affects the interpretive repertoire process and the general interpretation of the researcher, helping to ensure that the analysis accurately reflects the experiences and expressions of the participants.
How does the transcript suggest prioritizing participants' orientations in qualitative thematic analysis?
-The transcript suggests that it should be done by selectively quoting participants, emphasizing their in-depth experiences, and giving priority to create an interpretive account by the researcher.
What is the difference between quantitative and qualitative analysis according to Wilkinson as mentioned in the transcript?
-According to Wilkinson, quantitative analysis presents results in frequency counts, while qualitative analysis presents results as illustrative quotations. Quantitative analysis focuses on the number of mentions and their summary, whereas qualitative analysis focuses on the style of expression and sharing of experiences.
What is the constructionist method as described in the transcript?
-The constructionist method is an approach to qualitative analysis that seeks to analyze the process of interaction within a focus group, aiming to expose the local and sequential construction of meaning from the participants' discussions.
How does the constructionist method differ from content and thematic analysis?
-The constructionist method differs by focusing on the direction and sequence of the group discussion, rather than inferring meaning from individual statements, and it emphasizes the constraints and opportunities presented in the turn-by-turn organization of conversation.
What are some advantages of using focus groups as a research method as outlined in the transcript?
-The advantages include being a socially oriented research method capturing real-life data without manipulation, having flexibility, high phase validity, speed in results, and being cost-effective.
What are some disadvantages of focus groups mentioned in the transcript?
-Disadvantages include less control over participants compared to individual interviews, the need for special moderator skills, difficulties in assembling groups, challenges in maintaining a conducive environment, and the potential for group conformity and groupthink.
How does the transcript address the issue of group conformity and groupthink in focus groups?
-The transcript acknowledges that one member may dominate the discussion, leading to conformity and groupthink where other participants may comply with the dominant member's views, which can hinder in-depth analysis.
Outlines
🔍 Challenges in Qualitative Thematic Analysis
The speaker begins by addressing the intricacies of qualitative thematic analysis, highlighting its potential shortcomings. These include the risk of losing sight of the broader context of coded data within a transcript, particularly in dynamic group discussions where the direction can change unpredictably. The speaker also touches on the difficulties in selecting relevant material from a wealth of conversational data, the challenge of attributing appropriate weight to specific contexts, and the dilemma of prioritizing participants' orientations. The resolution to these issues often lies in selective quotations that emphasize participants' experiences, as suggested by Wilkinson, who distinguishes between quantitative and qualitative analyses.
📊 Distinguishing Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis
This section delves into the differences between qualitative and quantitative content analysis, as per Wilkinson's perspective. The quantitative approach is characterized by frequency counts, while qualitative analysis relies on illustrative quotations to convey depth of experience. Both methods use the cause as a unit of analysis and organize mentions under categories or themes. However, quantitative analysis focuses on systematically recording the number of mentions within each category, whereas qualitative analysis captures the manner in which experiences are expressed, giving voice to the participants' emotions and words under each category heading. The constructionist method is introduced as a distinct approach, focusing on the interaction process within a focus group and the sequential construction of meaning.
🏗️ The Constructionist Method in Focus Group Analysis
The constructionist method is explored as an approach to qualitative analysis that examines the interaction process within focus groups. It emphasizes the direction and sequence of the group discussion, aiming to reveal the local and sequential construction of meaning. The method involves creating a cautious environment for data generation, which can be withdrawn when challenged. The focus is on how participants skillfully navigate the constraints and opportunities of the conversation sequence, with the researcher aiming to establish participants' understanding directly from the talk. The method seeks to identify positive aspects of behavior and understand their functions within particular sequences of talk.
🌟 Advantages and Disadvantages of Focus Groups
The final paragraph discusses the advantages and disadvantages of using focus groups as a research method. Advantages include its social orientation, capturing real-life data without manipulation, flexibility, high phase validity, speed of results, and low cost. However, disadvantages include less control over participants compared to individual interviews, the need for special moderator skills, difficulties in assembling groups, challenges in maintaining a conducive environment, and the potential for group conformity and groupthink. The speaker concludes by summarizing the constructionist method's focus on direction and sequence in discussions, providing a structured approach to analyzing focus group conversations.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Qualitative Thematic Analysis
💡Coded Data
💡Focus Group
💡Content Analysis
💡Constructivist Method
💡Interpretive Account
💡Participant Orientation
💡Quantitative Analysis
💡Sequence of Interaction
💡Group Conformity
💡Ecological Validity
Highlights
Discussion of drawbacks and benefits of different kinds of thematic analysis in social psychology research.
Major drawback of qualitative thematic analysis is losing sight of coded data's context within the whole transcript.
Challenge of maintaining connection between codes and interaction during in-depth group discussions.
Issue of themes derailing or being derailed by ongoing conversation in qualitative thematic analysis.
Key issues in selecting relevant material and giving due weight to specific context in qualitative thematic analysis.
Difficulty in prioritizing participants' orientations and responses in interpretive accounts.
Solution to issues through selective quotations from participants' in-depth experiences.
Wilkinson's identification of differences between quantitative and qualitative analysis in content and thematic analysis.
Quantitative analysis presented through frequency counts, qualitative through illustrative quotations.
Unit of analysis and organization using category themes remain common in both content and thematic analysis.
Constructionist method focuses on the process of interaction within a focus group and local sequential construction of meaning.
Data in constructionist method is generated and withdrawn within a cautious environment.
Turn-by-turn organization of conversation and speakers' skillful attention to constraints and opportunities in constructionist method.
Constructionist method allows researcher to establish participants' own understanding displayed directly in the talk.
Advantages of focus group discussions including natural interaction, flexibility, high face validity, and low cost.
Disadvantages of focus groups such as less control, need for moderator skills, difficulty in assembling groups, and risk of group conformity.
Constructionist method's unique approach to qualitative analysis with a focus on conversation direction and sequence.
Transcripts
Hello friends, welcome back.
I will continue my discussion with focus group in lecture 8, that is methods adopted in social
psychology.
In the previous discussion, I have talked about qualitative content analysis and qualitative
thematic analysis.
In this discussion, I will also talk about some drawbacks and benefits of different kind
of thematic analysis.
So the major drawback of qualitative thematic analysis is that it can lose sight of where
the coded data sit within the whole transcript.
This is but natural that whenever a group discussion is being initiated by the moderator,
then the discussion can go in any direction.
So maybe initially the codes have been identified by the moderator or the researcher and initial
collection of codes is being done.
With the gradual process of in-depth discussion, the coding can mismatch with the ongoing interaction
and the researcher can lose sight of the connection between the codes and the interaction.
So this becomes a major drawback of qualitative thematic analysis.
Initially the themes can be identified by the researcher but with the gradual process
of in-depth discussion and conversations, the themes can derail or the ongoing conversation
can derail the identified themes of the researcher.
So this becomes the drawback of qualitative thematic analysis.
There are also some other key issues in qualitative thematic analysis such as how to select the
material to present.
Now when the discussion goes on, there can be unnumber of conversations and responses
given by the participants.
How to pick those relevant material to be researched that becomes a key issue in qualitative
thematic analysis.
The other is how to give due weight to the specific context within the material was generated.
Even the material that is being transcribed generates a number of material of conversation.
How to relate and choose which conversation is more relevant to the theme that becomes
a difficult task in qualitative thematic analysis because so many themes generates, so many
codes generate, so many conversations generate.
How to give more weightage to one particular conversation and less weightage to another
because it can affect the interpretive repertoire process and at the same time in general interpretation
of the researcher.
And the other is how best to prioritize participants orientations in presenting an interpretive
account.
Because any individual participant is being studied, then how to identify and prioritize
that which participant has better orientation to understand or reflect the own problems
that becomes a major issue in qualitative thematic analysis because every participant
response is very important in its own way.
But how to prioritize that which participant has given a more relevant response because
every participant's response is relevant in its own way.
But it becomes difficult to for the researcher to decide and give more priority to one particular
orientation of the participant.
Therefore, we can say that according to Wilkinson, these issues are usually answered by selective
quotations from what participants says.
So, the only solution to these issues is that how every participant answers all the questions
or in the during the conversation in a very selective manner.
There can be any particular response of the participant that emphasizes the participants
experience, in-depth experience.
For instance, any participant would say that chemotherapy during the treatment of breast
cancer was cruciating or it was crucial.
I somehow survived.
So, all these words which are being quoted by the participants in during the conversation
that helps in selecting the quotations of the participants and then giving priority
to create an interpretive account by the researcher.
So, this is how these issues are being resolved.
But definitely these issues also becomes a drawback of qualitative thematic analysis.
Thus, Wilkinson helpfully provided two different analyses, the quantitative and qualitative.
Although it is qualitative, but definitely Wilkinson has identified a thin line difference
between qualitative and quantitative analysis which marks a major difference also between
these two types of methodology.
The results of the quantitative context analysis are present in content analysis are presented
in frequency counts.
As I told mentioned in the previous discussion that the responses can be also be tabulated
to a certain point of time.
We can identify the frequency or the counts to one particular response that is through
content analysis where responses can be quantified based on frequency distribution.
While the results of qualitative analysis are presented as illustrative quotations that
is about thematic analysis.
In content analysis still there are chances to quantify the responses based on frequency.
One particular word is recurring under a particular theme or code or the participant.
Whereas in thematic analysis there are illustrative quotations which gives in-depth meaning to
their experiences, which gives social account of every particular participant.
Although both the analysis mentions a cause as the unit of analysis and organize these
mentions using category theme.
That unit of analysis will remain the same because that is the cause of the discussion,
cause of the problem and how those causes are being identified under different themes
that is very much common in both the kind of analysis that is content analysis and thematic
analysis.
Further quantitative analysis systematically records the number of mentions within each
category summarizing what these mentions are.
While in qualitative analysis records the words in which the mentions are couched.
Couched here means in what manner the experience, the words, the emotions are been expressed
by the participants presenting them as quotations under each category heading.
So, this is again a thin line difference between qualitative and quantitative analysis in content
analysis the number of mentions in terms of frequency.
And summarizing those frequency that this is the percentage that the people have identified
this kind of feeling.
Whereas in qualitative thematic analysis that analysis based on the records of the words
which are mentioned based on the style of expression or sharing of experiences by the
participants.
It is couched that means the way the experiences have been shared by the participants and presenting
them those quotations under every different category heading.
So, this is how Wilkinson has identified the difference between qualitative and quantitative
analysis based on content analysis and thematic analysis.
The other third method is constructionist method.
This has a very different meaning to understand which we have discussed till now about qualitative
content analysis and qualitative thematic analysis.
This is something way different from the other two methods we have discussed because when
we are talking about constructionist methods.
The most basic understanding about this method is that whenever the participants engage in
any kind of in depth discussion then there is some kind of direction or sequence of discussion
that catches or connect from one topic to another to the other third and participants
try to connect the dots which gives out a different meaning.
So, there is sense of construction of meaning to that particular experience.
So, when we are talking about constructionist method it is an approach to qualitative analysis
that seek to analyze the process of interaction within a focus group.
Here the process is the direction in which the group discussion takes on and how there
is a sequence in that interaction rather than inferring meaning from what one person says
and the aim is to expose the local and sequential construction of meaning.
Local and sequential here means local what instantly participants tend to express and
how those local experiences or expressions are forming into a sequence.
There is a series or connection of dots among all those expressions that comes out to be
another way of discussion of the participants.
In this method the data is generated within a cautious environment and subsequently withdrawn
when challenged.
A particular environment is been created in the focus group discussion by the moderator.
It can be a particular topic, research topic, it can be a particular trigger, trigger of
emotion and how participants are discussing or revealing their own feelings, emotions,
ideas and opinions about that particular topic that makes the environment very cautious and
as soon as the discussion becomes derailed then immediately the discussion can be terminated
or it can be withdrawn.
This approach makes sense within the turn by turn organization of any conversation.
There can be a way to channelize the communication within the focus group that one participant
first of all participant A will be given a chance to express then participant B, C and
D and there is a direction and sequence of interaction that plays within the group itself.
So, the focus group speakers skillfully attend to the constraints and opportunities presented
by positioning of what they say within a sequence of turns.
So, here the focus group speakers skillfully attend the constraints and opportunities presented
by the positioning of what they say within a sequence of turns.
So, whenever there is a turn by turn way to give opportunity to every focus group speaker
or the participant they make it a point to be very cautious of what they respond.
This is constructionist method.
I repeat that the focus group speakers skillfully attend to the constraints and opportunities
presented to them by positioning of what they say within a sequence of turns.
When there is a sequence there is a direction given to that interaction then even the participants
becomes cautious enough that how to constraint and how to evolve or respond to a particular
event.
So, this makes a constructive way to analyze human behavior while identifying important
aspects of the responses and controlling not to respond in a particular manner.
So, this is a nature of constructionist method used in qualitative analysis where the participants
are also constrained and at the same time they seek opportunity to express themselves
in a very directional manner because there is a sequence of conversation that takes place
within the group itself.
The researcher can establish participants own understanding as displayed directly in
the talk.
When there is a sequence of interaction then even researchers can establish participants
own understanding.
Participants themselves become so conscious what to speak and what not to speak which
can give a very concrete structure to that discussion.
In other words we can say that the statements with positive thinking are treated as actions
and seek to understand their functions in particular sequences of talk.
For instance every member of the group where women suffered from breast cancer while they
are sharing their experiences may be based on their own experiences they will constraint
themselves not to share a particular information or experience rather they would also share
at the same time that how they build up their own willingness to cope up with that problem
that chronic illness and how they have evolved as a new person.
So, there is a possibility for the researcher to identify the positive aspects of behavior
and how that behavior is reflected in their action.
So, this gives a sequence or sequential way of conversation among members because participants
also become very conscious of share experience and what not what they can display directly
and how it is being identified in form of their behavior, in form of their responses
and in form of their action.
So, this is how constructions method involve focus group conversations or discussion in
a very concrete and structured manner as the term implies constructionist method.
Next comes advantages of focus group.
There are certain advantages of focus group as well.
The technique is a socially oriented research method capturing real life data in the social
environment.
There is no manipulation in the environment.
There is no manipulation or no information is being concealed from the participants and
participants tend to interact and behave in a very natural course of action.
It has flexibility, it has high phase validity, it has speed results and it is low in cost.
As it implies since no manipulation is being done in the environment.
So, there is lot of flexibility in the environment as well as in the cost because no cost is
required to manipulate the environment and at the same time people are free to respond
in their own way.
And the most important advantage is that it has high phase validity which entails that
this is a most powerful advantage of focus group while gaining insights into the nature
of human affairs with lot of complexity.
Whatever the researcher purports to measure he or she is measuring the same in a very
natural setting in a very rich complex environment and how they are gaining insights, natural
insights of human behavior.
So, this is the most advantageous point of focus group that it has high phase validity.
What we are seeing?
We are observing and we are sharing the same thing with the participants and the participants
with the researcher.
The other disadvantages of focus group are that the researcher has less control on the
participants than the individual interviews that is the difference also.
That in interviews there is a controlled environment and in focus group there is no control on
the participants and the environment and the interviewer or the researcher has to completely
depend on the natural responses that the responses come to them and how they handle those responses
in a very raw manner.
Moderators require lot of special skills to stimulate those discussions for in depth analysis.
There is a difference between groups and within the groups or between groups.
For example, if any researcher wants to make a comparative analysis between two types of
groups regarding one social problem then it can be found that the two groups are not aligning
on the same wavelength and there can be some troubles which can be created by any particular
group.
At the same time groups are difficult to assemble because it is very difficult to convince group
members to be part of the study and to what extent they are true to their experiences
and responses.
The other is that a discussion must be conducted in a conducive environment.
There has to be a complete consent between the researcher and the participant that whatever
response they will give they are true to the best of their knowledge and how those responses
will be helpful to the researcher.
The most important significant problem that has been identified as a disadvantage of the
focus group is that sometimes there is problem of group conformity and group think as well.
When people are discussing within the group maybe one member would dominate the discussion
then first of all the other members will not get enough chance and time to express their
own ideas, opinions, feelings and experiences.
And sometimes also when any member dominates the discussion then there is a tendency of
conformity and group think also arises and the other participants tend to comply with
what one dominating member is saying so.
So all these problems can also create a hindrance or obstruction in analyzing the in or making
an in depth analysis of the themes or the content that is being reflected in the conversations
or group discussions of the focus group.
So these are the advantages and disadvantages of focus group along with the discussion of
qualitative thematic analysis, content analysis and constructionist method.
Where to identify?
Constructionist method is one of the most different method from thematic and content
analysis because in constructionist method there is a particular direction that is being
offered to the discussion so that the responses are being collected to one particular topic
and direction.
So, the conversation is not haywired it is sequential and it is related to previous and
the forthcoming conversation.
So I end up my discussion here.
Thank you so much.
I will meet you in the next class.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
浏览更多相关视频
How do focus groups work? - Hector Lanz
Ch 2 1 Types of Research
Practical Research 2 Lesson 1: Introduction to Quantitative Research
Data Collection and Analysis Procedure
L3: Composition of Artificial Intelligence | Advantages, Disadvantages of Artificial Intelligence
Qualitative Data Analysis 101 Tutorial: 6 Analysis Methods + Examples
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)