Social Work Research Test 2

Front 1

research process

Back 1

i. problem formulation/research question->research design development->collect data (sampling and survey methods)->process and analyze data->interpret the results->write it up.

Front 2

philosophical paradigms

Back 2

positivism
constructivism/relativism

Front 3

positivism

Back 3

(nature of reality- there are universal, essential truth universality of reality/facts, reality/facts are prior to and independent of theory, relationship between knower to known-they are independent. Knower can objectively assess the reality through observation and experiment.)

Front 4

what are the criticisms of positivism?

Back 4

observation is fallible and theory-laden. Cannot ignore the role of culture. So much of what was regarded universal truth has been proven wrong. It was used to justify colonialism. Cannot predict anyway because world never operates under conditions of complete closure like in labs or in hypothetical situations.

Front 5

What are the strengths of positivism?

Back 5

this approach might work relatively better in the field of “hard science.” It is difficult to deny that this approach made significant contribution in the advancement of knowledge.

Front 6

constructivism/relativism

Back 6

(nature of reality-there is no universal, essential truth. Reality is socially constructed. Our observation is also influenced by what we already know. Relationship between the knower and the known-they are never independent but very dependent. What knowers know prior to observation causes/influences/controls what they observe and how they interpret.

Front 7

what are the criticisms of constructivism/relativism?

Back 7

there are materials prior to human existence, cannot answer what the criteria/standards of truth are.

Front 8

what are the strengths of constructivism/relativism?

Back 8

it made ‘hard science’ pause and provided a new way of thinking which contributed a lot to post-positivism, realism, pragmatism, and critical theory in terms of the influence of culture on science. It could liberate some members of the society who feel inadequate, by helping them understand that it is not them, but it is the society. This particular point of view helps social workers to be non-judgmental.

Front 9

what are specific research methods?

Back 9

quantitative and qualitative

Front 10

quantitative methods

Back 10

objective, deductive (theory->hypothesis->observation->confirmation), forms hypotheses prior to data collection. To produce precise and generalizable findings.

Front 11

qualitative methods

Back 11

subjective, inductive logical process (observation->pattern->hypothesis->theory) , seeks to generate hypotheses, more flexible than quantitative methods, deeper understandings of the meanings of human experience.

Front 12

deductive process

Back 12

Deductive: theory->hypothesis->observation->confirmation.

Front 13

inductive process

Back 13

Inductive: observation->pattern->hypothesis->theory.

Front 14

hypothesis

Back 14

: need to distinguish concepts, attributes, variables, and constants. Should be value-free, narrow, specific, clear, has more than one possible answer, can be answered by observable evidence (testable), addresses the decision-making needs of agencies or practical problems in social welfare, significance for guiding social welfare policy or social work practice.

Front 15

types of variables

Back 15

IV, DV, control, mediating, moderating

Front 16

independent variable

Back 16

exogenous variables, influence, cause, or affect the phenomenon being studied, proceed the dependent variable in time, not determined within the system under investigation; the causes of them lie outside that system. Classic e.g., background characteristics of individuals, such as race/ethnicity, sex, age, region.

Front 17

dependent variable

Back 17

endogenous variables, variables most interesting to researchers, influenced by independent variables, determined within the system under investigation, e.g. student achievement scores, patient blood pressure, etc.

Front 18

mediating variable

Back 18

intervening variable, a variable that comes between IV and DV in the causal chain. A variable that comes between IV and DV in the causal chain. Conceptually, it is the transformation process/change mechanism when stimuli effects behavior.

Front 19

moderating variable

Back 19

not influenced by IV but that can affect the strength or direction of the relationship between the IV and DV. There is an interaction between IV and Mod V on DV; Mod V moderates the relationship between IV and DV. When a variable moderates the relationship between two other variables, that variable is said to be a moderator. The moderator variable and the variable whose relationship it moderates with the dependent variable are also called interacting variables.

Front 20

control variable

Back 20

did you control for…conclusions can be radically different when confounding or lurking variables are controlled (in other words, “held constant,” or “partialled out”).

Front 21

types of relationships between variables

Back 21

no relationship, correlational, causal, linear, non-linear, curvilinear

Front 22

correlational v. causal

Back 22

correlation between the number of roads built in Europe and the number of births in the US is not causal. There could be a common cause for both. What could it be? World economy?

Front 23

linear v. non-linear

Back 23

positive and negative, curvilinear)

Front 24

limitations of correlational analysis

Back 24

i. Limitations of correlation analysis: curvilinear relationship truncated or restricted range, bivariate outliers.

Front 25

degree of control

Back 25

experimental, quasi-experimental, non-experimental

Front 26

number of subjects in a study

Back 26

single vs. group

Front 27

nature of data

Back 27

quantitative, qualitative, mixed

Front 28

quantitative

Back 28

used mostly in quantitative methods. Things that are quantifiable (things you can count, rank-temperature, depression score, age etc.)

Front 29

qualitative

Back 29

data used in qualitative methods. Data that are not easily reduced to numbers. Meanings. E.g. transcript of a focus group, face-to-face in-depth interviews.

Front 30

mixed

Back 30

a design for collecting, analyzing, and mixing both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study or series of studies to understand a research problem. Improves genearlizability (representativeness) with deep and contextual understanding of the phenomenon of interest. (classification according to emphasis-qual, quant, equal; according to sequence-qual first, quant first, concurrent).

Front 31

time-dimension

Back 31

cross-secitonal
longitudinal

Front 32

purpose of study

Back 32

exploratory, explanatory, descriptive, evaluative

Front 33

exploratory

Back 33

to provide beginning familiarity with the topic/area. Typical when a researcher is examining a new interest, when the subject is relatively new and unstudied, usually with a small sample, non-representative (insufficient to provide conclusive answers to research questions, e.g. a survey via unstructured, open-ended interviews with recent alumni and their agency supervisors and administrators to obtain preliminary sense of the extent to which their graduates were utilizing research in their practice.

Front 34

descriptive

Back 34

to describe situations or events (US census).

Front 35

explanatory

Back 35

takes the description further and explains why. (why a battered woman return or not return to a violent partner).

Front 36

evaluative

Back 36

to evaluate social policies, programs, and interventions. Could be done via exploration, description, and explanation.

Front 37

construct an instrument

Back 37

to develop an test measurement instruments that can be sued by other researchers or by practitioners as part of the assessment or evaluation aspects of their practice. The question at hand is whether a measurement instrument is useful and valid to be applied in practice and research.

Front 38

external validity

Back 38

generalizability= to draw a general conclusion from particular instances. Dealt with sampling. How do we know what we learn from a sample of people can be applied to the whole population.

Front 39

internal validity

Back 39

: logical validity of the causal inferences, dealt with research design.

Front 40

what is sampling

Back 40

i. Selecting a group of people/objects (sample) from those who we want to study (population) in order to find out population characteristics (parameter) based on sample characteristics (statistic).

Front 41

when is a sample not necessary?

Back 41

ii. A sample is not necessary when we can ask everybody the question we want answered, then, we are dealing with the whole population and a sample is not necessary. If everyone were alike, a sample would not be necessary.

Front 42

population

Back 42

(those who we want to study, those who we want to generalize the findings to),

Front 43

sample

Back 43

(a special subset of the population, those who are actually in the study, we observe them for purposes of making inferences about the nature of the total population itself. Chief criterion of quality-the degree to which it is representative, the extent to which the characteristics of the sample are the same as those of the population from which it was selected),

Front 44

parameter

Back 44

(population characteristics, summary description of a given variable in a population),

Front 45

statistic

Back 45

(sample characteristics, summary description of a variable in a sample),

Front 46

sampling frame

Back 46

(difference between the true population parameter and the estimated population parameter, even the most carefully selected sample won’t provide a perfect representation of the population from which it was selected. there will always be some degree of sampling error. even if you are able to identify perfectly the population of interest, you may not have access to all of them, even if you do, you may not have a complete and accurate enumeration or sampling frame from which to select, even if you do, you may not draw the sample correctly or accurately, even if you do, they may not all come and they may not all stay)

Front 47

how to decrease sampling error

Back 47

i. One way to decrease sampling error is to increase the n of your study. Negative relationship/association between sampling error and sample size.

Front 48

probability sampling

Back 48

(most effective method for selection of study elements. avoids researchers biases in element selection. permits to estimate sampling error).

Front 49

random selection

Back 49

each element has an equal chance of selection independent of any other event in the selection process. Procedure: use table of random numbers, computer random number generator or mechanical device.

Front 50

logic of probability sampling

Back 50

probability theory enables researchers 1) to calculate the parameters and 2) to make judgments of how likely it is that the estimated parameters will accurately represent the actual parameters. Chief principle: every member of the total population must have some known nonzero probability of being selected into the sample. Purpose: to select a set of elements from a population in such a way that descriptions of those elements actually portray the total population from which the elements are selected. Random selection is the key in this process.

Front 51

types of probability sampling

Back 51

simple random, systematic, stratified, multi-stage cluster

Front 52

simple random

Back 52

random selection (each element has an equal chance of selection independent of any other event in the selection process. procedure: use table of random numbers, computer random number generator or mechanical device).

Front 53

systematic

Back 53

assign a number to every unit in sampling frame (1 to N), decide sample size that you want or need (n), N/n=k the interval size, randomly select a number from 1 to k, then take every kth unit, assumes that the population is randomly ordered, if not, by accident, we might draw a non-probability sample, not much different from the simple random sampling, advantages-easy.

Front 54

stratified

Back 54

AKA, quota RS, to insure representation of each strata—(sometimes oversample smaller population groups). Involves dividing the population into smaller subgroups, called strata, and then drawing separate or random or systematic samples from each stratum. Addresses sampling error on certain variable used for stratification: e.g., in a sample stratified by ethnicity, the sampling error on this variable is zero.

Front 55

multi-stage cluster

Back 55

AKA multi-stage RS, area sampling. the final units to be included in the sample are obtained by first sampling larger units (clusters) in which smaller units are contained. divide population into clusters, randomly sample clusters, randomly sample individual units from selected clusters.
1. first stage: select a sample of areas, e.g. census tracts
2. intermediate stage(s): select sample of smaller areas within each area selected in first stage.
3. final stage: select sample of units from each area selected in previous step.

Front 56

non-probability sampling

Back 56

(the use of procedures to select a sample that does not involve random selection, main issues-likely to misrepresent the population, may be difficult or impossible to detect this misrepresentation).

Front 57

reliance on available subjects

Back 57

“man on the street,” college psychology majors, available or accessible clients, volunteer samples, problem-risky. we have no evidence for representativeness->generalization suffers, still useful.

Front 58

purposive or judgmental

Back 58

AKA, judgmental sampling, investigator uses judgment and prior knowledge to choose people for the sample who would best serve the purpose of the study. Deliberately sampling an extreme group. deviant case sampling, studying cases that don’t fit into fairly regular patterns of attitudes and behaviors.

Front 59

quota

Back 59

quota (or stratified) RS without random selection. dividing a population into various categories and setting quotas on the number of elements to be selected from each category. once a quota is reached, no more elements from that category are put in sample. interviewers select the sample—interview people until they have met all of the quotas on each variable.

Front 60

snowball

Back 60

one person recommends another, who recommends another, who recommends another, etc. good way to identify hard-to-reach populations, for example, homeless persons, undocumented immigrants.

Front 61

survey research methods

Back 61

self-administered questionnaires, online surveys, interview surveys, telephone surveys

Front 62

self-administered questionnaires

Back 62

i. Self-Administered Questionnaires (Mail distribution and return, cover letters, Follow-up mailings, Response rates, Ways to improve response rates): return rates(=response rate): the higher the response rate, the less significant response bias (acceptable is 50%, good 60%, very good 70%).
1. self-administered questionnaires; drop-off- how the dorm dwellers at your university feel about the lack of availability of vegetarian cuisine in their dorm dining halls. you expect a low response rate. you might want to tell them about your research in person, the benefits that might come from their responses, and to answer their questions about your survey. you would pick a time of day when you are sure that the majority of the dorm residents are home, and then work your way from door to door.
2. improve response rate: well written cover letter, follow-up mailings, offering to share the survey results, pay respondents, raffle, incentives should not coerce participation.

Front 63

online surveys

Back 63

3. Tips: via email with a link, through a website (survey monkey).

Front 64

interview surveys

Back 64

3. higher response rates than mail surveys, minimizes “don’t know” or “no answers” responses, allows interviewers to observe respondents while asking questions. Interviewing doesn’t automatically mean collection of qualitative data.

Front 65

advantages of online surveys

Back 65

1. Advantages: quick and inexpensive (no need for manual data entry), ideal for some populations.

Front 66

disadvantages of online surveys

Back 66

2. Disadvantages: no representativeness, technological problems, could be regarded as spam mail (lowering the response rate).

Front 67

the role of the survey interviewer

Back 67

1. role: ask questions orally and record/mark the answers

Front 68

telephone surveys

Back 68

iv. Telephone Surveys (Computer-assisted telephone interviewing)
1. CATI: interviewer uses computer to read questions, and to enter responses (data).

Front 69

strengths of survey research

Back 69

i. Strengths: useful in describing the characteristics of a large population, make large samples feasible, flexible-many questions can be asked on a given topic (many variables), flexibility in analysis, same questions asked of all respondents.

Front 70

weaknesses of survey research

Back 70

ii. Weaknesses: often relies on self-reported answers, standardization may yield superficiality, doesn’t deal with context, many respondents are forced to select certain categories that are not most appropriate, often cannot be modified in the field, cannot establish causality without doubt (difference from experiments)

Front 71

what to consider when deciding a survey method

Back 71

i. Best method for describing a population that is too large to observe directly: attitudes and orientation, e.g. public polls.
ii. cost, time, and geographic restriction, sensitivity of research topic (confidentiality and anonymity), complexity of questionnaire, respondents (ability to read and understand the questionnaire), possibility of interviewer bias, response rate.

Front 72

measurement instrument types

Back 72

a. Types (Open-ended and closed-ended, contingency, when to use them)

Front 73

sources of data

Back 73

i. Secondary Analysis (Advantages & limitations of secondary analysis)
ii. Historical records
iii. Systematic observations (structured, unstructured)
iv. Surveys

Front 74

measurement levels

Back 74

nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio

Front 75

quality of measurement (measurement error)

Back 75

i. Systemic measurement error
ii. Random measurement error

Front 76

reliability

Back 76

g. Reliability (closely related to the concept of consistency, does a measurement produce the same results under various conditions? is it dependable, repeatable, consistent? if the person/object hasn’t changed, a reliable measure produces the same results, the more reliable, the less random error.

Front 77

types of reliability

Back 77

test-retest, interobserver, coefficient alpha, split half, understanding SPSS output of reliability analysis

Front 78

test-retest reliability

Back 78

1. Test-retest reliability: to assess the consistency of the measure from one time to another.
a. Measure instrument at two times for multiple persons, computer correlation between the two measures, assumes there is no change in the underlying trait between time 1 and time 2.

Front 79

inter observer reliability

Back 79

2. Interobserver reliability: to assess the degree to which different raters/observers give consistent estimates of the same phenomenon.
a. are different observers consistent? can establish this outside of your study in a pilot study can look at percent of agreement (especially with category ratings), can use correlation (with continuous ratings).

Front 80

coefficient alpha

Back 80

3. Coefficient alpha: to assess the consistency of results across items within a test.

Front 81

split half reliability

Back 81

4. Split half reliability: to assess the consistency of the results of two subtests of a test.

Front 82

validity

Back 82

(the degree of fit between the construct and the instrument/method we are using to measure it. the extent to which an empirical measure adequately reflects the real meaning of the concept under consideration. a measure can be reliable without being valid, but it cannot be valid without being reliable.

Front 83

types of validity

Back 83

face, content, criterion, construct

Front 84

face

Back 84

does it seem reasonable? the measure seems valid “on its face,” a judgment call, probably the weakest form of measurement validity.

Front 85

content

Back 85

check the measure against the relevant content domain. e.g. math skills. also a judgment call. check whether the measure covers the entire range of meanings within a concept, can make this relatively rigorious with a systematic check, what constitutes the content domain? (e.g., self-esteem, parent attentiveness).

Front 86

construct

Back 86

4. construct: convergent validity and divergent (discriminant) validity. the degree to which a measure corresponds to an external criterion that is known concurrently (cross-sectional). how well it correlates with previously validated measures. e.g. correlation of a new depression scale with BDI. how much a measure relates to other variables as expected within a system of theoretical relationships and as reflected by the degree of its convergent and discriminant validity. based upon a principle that measures of constructs that are related to each other should be strongly correlated.

Front 87

criterion

Back 87

concurrent validity and predictive validity. check the measure against relevant criterion, e.g. predictive validity, concurrent validity, known groups validity.
a. predictive: look at measure’s ability to predict something it should be able to predict (something in the future) (longitudinal). e.g. high SAT scores-> success in college.

Front 88

discriminant

Back 88

a. discriminant validity: based upon a principle that measures of different constructs should not correlate highly with each other.

Front 89

relationship between reliability and validity

Back 89

i. Relationship Between Reliability and Validity (a measure can be reliable without being valid, but it cannot be valid without being reliable.

Front 90

types of statistics

Back 90

a. Types of statistics (descriptive, inferential)
i. descriptive: describe the data collected for a study which is the sample.
ii. inferential: allows us to draw conclusions concerning a population based only on sample data.
iii. we use sample statistics to make inferences, draw conclusions about, a larger population. inferential statistics are draw from samples; they estimate population parameters. we use latin letters (x, s, b) to describe sample statistics, and greek letters to describe population parameters (

Front 91

predictive validity

Back 91

a. predictive: look at measure’s ability to predict something it should be able to predict (something in the future) (longitudinal). e.g. high SAT scores-> success in college.

Front 92

what are the types of statistics

Back 92

descriptive and inferential

Front 93

descriptive stats

Back 93

describe the data collected for a study which is the sample.

Front 94

inferential stats

Back 94

allows us to draw conclusions concerning a population based only on sample data.

Front 95

sample stats

Back 95

iii. we use sample statistics to make inferences, draw conclusions about, a larger population. inferential statistics are draw from samples; they estimate population parameters. we use latin letters (x, s, b) to describe sample statistics, and greek letters to describe population parameters

Front 96

descriptive univerivariate analyssi

Back 96

describe: categorial data (frequency distribution), continuous data (measures of central tendency and variability/dispersion, deviation, variance, standard deviation.

Front 97

relationships among variables

Back 97

bivariate, multivariate

Front 98

effect size

Back 98

(a statistic that portrays the strength of association between variables, thus enabling us to compare the effects of different interventions across studies using different types of outcome measures. might refer to the difference between the means of two groups divided by the standard deviation).

Front 99

substantive significance

Back 99

(practical significant, clinical significance, how significant, meaningful, important a finding is from a practical standpoint.

Front 100

inferential analysis (confidence interval)

Back 100

f. Inferential Analysis (confidence interval): sample statistics (known)->inference->population parameters (unknown, but can be estimated from sample evidence).

Front 101

hypothesis testing

Back 101

(testing group mean differences, testing association using the Pearson’s r- bivariate correlation: relationship between two variables, Pearson’s r: range from -1 to 1

Front 102

testing contributions of independent variables as predictors of a dependent variable using linear and multiple regression

Back 102

(multivariate-one dependent variable, combines different tests: f test (variability) and t-test (comparison of means), calculates the linear relationship between independent variable and dependent variable. calculate each relationship while controlling for the effects of other variables,

Front 103

testing group differences of categorical data

Back 103

(chi-square-categorical data, one independent variable and one dependent variable. logistic regression: similar to multivariate regression but independent variable is categorical, multiple independent variables on one dependent variable)

Front 104

six primary approaches to qualitative research

Back 104

(Phenomenology, Ethnography, Case Studies, Narrative, Participatory Action, Grounded theory)

Front 105

phenomenology

Back 105

focus on subjective experiences (the lived experience of a phenomenon), use prolonged immersion, study participants are individuals who share a particular life experience (e.g. cancer survivors, crime victims, adoptive parents). Analyses of interview data are conducted to find the “essence” or common themes in their experiences. often uses interview data with smaller number of participants (6-10). begins with broad, open-ended questions. multiple interviews with each participant is needed to achieve needed depth. readers should feel as if they have “walked a mile in the shoes of the participants.”

Front 106

ethnography

Back 106

oldest qualitative approach, focus on an entire cultural group, researcher describes and interprets the shared and learned patterns of values, behaviors, beliefs, and language of a culture-sharing group, holistic perspective: the researcher views all aspects of the phenomenon under study as parts of an interrelated whole. cultural relativism: cultures must be understood on their own terms, not judged by the beliefs and values of other, more powerful cultures.

Front 107

case studies

Back 107

single unit examination, information about an individual case is systematically organized and presented in the form of a narrative summary, case studies in clinical education is to illustrate the application of clinical theories in individual cases. case studies in qualitative research is to develop knowledge requiring systematic processes of data collection and analysis.

Front 108

narrative

Back 108

speaking and writing are forms of meaning-making.
v. focus on the stories told by individuals, how something is said and what is said. typically uses in-depth interviewing to encourage respondents to talk freely about their lives. analyzing data by repeatedly listening to a tape of the interview and scrutinizing the transcript to identify “stories.” from the stories, structural components are then delineated. analyst may examine how respondents “voice” themselves and others indicating social relationships and the meanings attached to them. narrative analytic methods: conversation analysis and discourse analysis

Front 109

participatory action

Back 109

: action research and community-based participatory research: committed to community empowerment and egalitarian partnerships. partnership of equals among researchers and community participants. active participation of all parties. moved away from academic-based, controlled trials to “real-world” interventions in communities. natural fit for qualitative researchers in social work.

Front 110

grounded theory

Back 110

popular, widely accepted across a wide range of disciplines, inductive process of discovering theory from data (data is collected, then hypotheses that are grounded in empirical observations) are developed. more observations are made to see if hypotheses stand; hypotheses are refined, then more observations. process of constant comparisons. typically involves interviews with a moderately sized sample of carefully selected persons (about 20-30). begins with open coding of interview transcripts then gradually create a parsimonious conceptual framework. along the way, researchers employ constant comparative analysis to examine contrasts across respondents, situations, and settings.

Front 111

conversation analysis

Back 111

analyzing the aspects of conversation (e.g. sequencing, turn taking, holding the floor, interruption) that reveal how social roles and identities are manifested during the talk. e.g. analysis of audio-taped transcriptions of conversations between parents and children to offer clues to how interpersonal communication both shapes and reflects social interaction.

Front 112

discourse analysis

Back 112

a technique to identify the social meanings reflected in talk and text. meaning can be ascertained from a variety of indices (e.g., choice of words and idioms, speaking rhythm and cadence, inflection, intonation, gestures, nonverbal utterances).

Front 113

sampling qualitative studies

Back 113

random selection is rarely used, getting a representative sample is NOT a goal, choosing a recursive process, the choices of whom to study are product of what is being found, not the initial plan.

Front 114

theoretical sampling

Back 114

1. theoretical sampling: select similar cases until exhaust the theme and a different type of cases (related to grounded theory) selection of new interviewees should continue until a saturation point is reached, that is, until new interviews yield little additional information.

Front 115

critical incidents sampling

Back 115

2. critical incidents sampling: best success or worst failure

Front 116

maximum variation sampling

Back 116

3. maximum variation sampling: all possible variations

Front 117

data collection

Back 117

i. detailed open-ended interviews (not highly structured or limited responses).
ii. direct observation (or essentially direct via video).
iii. focus group
iv. written documents (work with words and visual data, not numbers).
v. tape recording
vi. various notes by researcher
client logs

Front 118

focus group

Back 118

1. goal: learn about beliefs, attitudes, and opinions about social/psychological/cultural characteristics.
2. capitalizing on “synergistic group effect”
3. inexpensive: staffing and equipment vs. paper and pencil
4. format: groups (no more than 7) of unrelated individuals, group discussion of a topic, 1-2 hours.
5. facilitators: asks specific questions and guides the discussion.
6. low external validity: analytical generalization: connecting case study findings to a particular theory)
7. subjectivity: biases and points of view
8. dependent on researcher’s personal attributes and skills
9. participation can change the social situation.

Front 119

various notes of researcher

Back 119

vi. various notes by researcher: field notes (a running account of what happens or transcriptions of video or audio tapes) personal notes (personal reactions, how you feel, self- reflection, memories, and impressions. methodology notes (description of methods used, reasons for using those methods, ideas for possible changes in methodology. theoretical notes (emergent trends, hypotheses).

Front 120

various roles of the observer

Back 120

i. complete participant: an insider, become full participant in activity, helps minimize distinction/ difference between researcher and participants.
ii. complete observer: an outside view, a fly on the wall
iii. variations in between: start as an outsider and move to membership. or change to outsider role at end to verify hypothesis generated as a participant.

Front 121

emic perspective

Back 121

: trying to adopt the beliefs, attitudes, and other points of view shared by the members of the culture being studied.

Front 122

etic perspective

Back 122

maintaining objectivity as an outsider and raising questions about the culture being observed that wouldn’t occur to members of that culture.

Front 123

recording observations

Back 123

written documents (work with words and visual data, not numbers), tape recording, various notes by researcher-field notes, personal notes, methodology notes, theoretical notes.

Front 124

qualitative vs. quantitative research

Back 124

i. qualitative: inductive, holistic, subjective/insider centered, process oriented, relativistic paradigm, goal is to understand actor’s view, discovery oriented, relative lack of control. exploratory and explanatory.
ii. quantitative: hypothetical/deductive, particularistic, objective/outsider centered, outcome oriented, positivistic paradigm/worldview, goal is to find facts and causes, verification oriented, attempt to control variables, confirmatory.

Front 125

qualitative data analysis

Back 125

(introspection: examine your own thought. and feelings, natural and crucial process; critical reasoning).

Front 126

coding

Back 126

(categorizing behaviors into a limited number of categories; computer assisted analysis). open coding, development of a codebook, axial coding, develop categories, subcategories.

Front 127

logical pitfalls of codign

Back 127

provincialism, going native: losing own sense of identity, emotional reactions, hasty conclusion: any alternatives?, suppressed evidence.

Front 128

strengths of coding

Back 128

: depth of understanding (superficial vs. in depth), understanding world view of respondents, attempts to avoid pre-judgments, flexibility and openness, inexpensive: staffing and equipment vs. paper and pencil.

Front 129

weaknesses of coding

Back 129

generalizability? (analytical generalization: connecting case study findings to a particular theory).

Front 130

subjectivity of coding

Back 130

biases and points of view. dependent upon researcher’s personal attributes and skills. participation can change the social situation.

Front 131

trustworthiness of coding

Back 131

reactivity (researchers presence in the field distorts the naturalism of the setting and consequently the things being observed. researcher biases: what researchers perceive or how they selectively observe. respondent biases: social desirability.

Front 132

minimizing the threats of coding

Back 132

strategies for rigor- prolonged engagement: reactivity and respondent’s biases, triangulation: corroboration between two or more sources, peer debriefing and support, auditing, member checking, negative case analysis.

Front 133

similarities between coding and social work practice

Back 133

: begin where the client is. focus on perceptions of the informant. attempt to understand environmental context. try to avoid imposing preconceived ideas or theories.

Front 134

creating codes

Back 134

: analysis began with open coding, which is the examination of minute sections of text made up of individual words, phrases, and sentences. the language of the participants guided the development of code and category labels, which were identified with short descriptors, known as in vivo codes, for survival and coping strategies. these codes and categories were systematically compared and contrasted, yielding increasingly complex and inclusive categories.

Front 135

memoing

Back 135

use of analytic memos (questions, musings, and speculations about the data and emerging theory). analytic memos compiled and an analytic journal was kept for cross-referencing codes and emerging categories.

Front 136

discovering patterns

Back 136

axial coding, selective coding, creating codes and categories

Front 137

axial coding

Back 137

puts data “back together in new ways by making connections between a category and its subcategories.”-> from this process, categories emerged and were assigned in vivo categories labels.

Front 138

selective coding

Back 138

the integrative process of “selecting the core category, systematically relating it to other categories, validating those relationships [by searching for confirming and disconfirming examples], and filling in categories that need[ed] further refinement and development.”

Front 139

codes and categories

Back 139

3. codes and categories were sorted, compared and contrasted until saturated (i.e. until analysis produced no new codes or categories and when all of the data were accounted for in the core categories).

Front 140

grounded theory method

Back 140

a qualitative research approach that begins with observations and looks for patterns, themes, or common categories.