Qualitative Research Methods in Marketing The Research Plan

  • Slides: 66
Download presentation
Qualitative Research Methods in Marketing ” The Research Plan and Research Process” Sammy Toyoki

Qualitative Research Methods in Marketing ” The Research Plan and Research Process” Sammy Toyoki Hedon Blakaj

Session Objective • The aim of this session is to learn the principles of

Session Objective • The aim of this session is to learn the principles of how to develop an empirically based research plan • The overarching objective, then, is to prepare you for the rigors involved in creating a high-standard MSc Thesis 2 -

Overview of research plan & qualitative research process 3 -

Overview of research plan & qualitative research process 3 -

Research plan and research process • The research plan and research process should unfold

Research plan and research process • The research plan and research process should unfold hand-in-hand: − The research plan represents a systematic effort to map out and develop the main theoretical and conceptual boundaries of the overall investigation − Its should follow the structure and argumentation logic of a thesis or article introduction (a ‘miniature’ version of the research) − The research process depicts how the plan is actually carried out − The idea is to iterate between each dimension of the research plan and the research process until a cohesive whole forms (which can then be expanded into ‘full size’ research report, i. e. your MSc manuscript) 4 -

Research plan steps (how to write it up) Research Process (how to carry it

Research plan steps (how to write it up) Research Process (how to carry it out) “Introduction” -Research Idea (what is this research about? ) - Positioning (gap; context; problem) Positioning: -Identify research gap -Identify research context -Identify research problem “Theoretical Background” - Review of relevant existing theory Developing theoretical understanding: - Read select literatures - Develop ‘interpretative framework’ “Methodology” - Research philosophy - Methods Methodology: - Critical appraisal of data-collection methods -Conducting collection of data “Findings” -Main themes Data-analysis and Interpretation: -Organizing and coding data into themes -Giving meaning to themes Further interpretation: - Higher abstraction and embedding of themes “Discussion” -Discussing themes in broader context “Conclusions(s)” -Arguing for the relevance and importance of delivered insight Formulating contribution(s)

Research Plan and Research Process • There are two traditional ‘starting points’ for the

Research Plan and Research Process • There are two traditional ‘starting points’ for the research process: 1. Positioning-based: Finding a gap in existing literature and then proceeding to fill this gap (i. e. identify phenomenon, context and research problem… then collecting data etc…). This is approach illustrated in the above slide (recommended for you) 2. Data-driven: Forming theoretical pre-understanding of a topic of interest, and then, through systematic data-analysis developing theory on this basis (strongly emergent, also known as the Grounded Theory approach) 6 -

Positioning-based research process (recommended) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context

Positioning-based research process (recommended) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context (relevant setting and subjects) 3. Formulation of methodology and collection of relevant data 4. Analysis of data (and reading of literatures) 5 b. Collection of further data 7 1. Interpretation of data (conceptual and theoretical work) 2. Further interpretation / writing up findings/ 5 a. Tighter specification of the discussion / conclusions research problem and sub question(s) -

Data-driven research process (‘Grounded Theory’) 7. Develop (local) theory 6. Look for patterns 5.

Data-driven research process (‘Grounded Theory’) 7. Develop (local) theory 6. Look for patterns 5. Form Categories 4. Collect data 3. Ask Questions 2. Select research context 1. Form a theoretical pre-understanding of a topic of interest 8 -

Qualitative research as a process Regardless of whether one chooses a positioning-based or data-driven

Qualitative research as a process Regardless of whether one chooses a positioning-based or data-driven approach - the general gist of the qualitative research process is a case analysis of a ‘bounded system’ - contextualized within a larger historical and cultural framework - Its objective is not to formulate a universal general theory - but rather to shed new light on a historical moment through the case being analyzed (Alasuutari 1996) 9 -

Hourglass model of theorizing The research process could be depicted in the shape of

Hourglass model of theorizing The research process could be depicted in the shape of an hourglass. One starts out with a rather broad theoretical and structural framework (either through ‘positioning’ or ‘theoretical pre-understanding’) that places a particular case in a larger context and that also validates the choice of that particular study. The actual fieldwork can be located in the epicenter of the hourglass: One analyzes in detail a very specific, closely defined object of study as a world of its own. The final phase of the study, where one assesses and discusses the results of the study within the broader framework (i. e. data-analysis and interpretation), forms the bottom of the hourglass” (Alasuutari 1996) 1 0 -

Hourglass model of theorizing Developed either through ‘positioning’ or ‘theoretical preunderstanding’ Theoretical framework Local

Hourglass model of theorizing Developed either through ‘positioning’ or ‘theoretical preunderstanding’ Theoretical framework Local explanation Application to other contexts, Theoretical generalization 1 1 -

What is local explanation/theory? • A theoretical frame presents a general viewpoint and is

What is local explanation/theory? • A theoretical frame presents a general viewpoint and is applicable to a number of cases, whereas the object of a study is a particular case, whose details can only be given a local explanation” (Alasuutari 1996, 376 -377) 1 2 -

Understanding the research plan & qualitative research process in more detail 1 3 -

Understanding the research plan & qualitative research process in more detail 1 3 -

1. Introduction: Research Idea • As in any research manuscript, the ‘Introduction’ comprises of

1. Introduction: Research Idea • As in any research manuscript, the ‘Introduction’ comprises of a synthesis of the main aspects of the overall research • The statement “What is this research about” should crystallize succinctly the idea of the research. − − It is important to note that this statement commonly derives its final form relatively late in the research process - only once the ‘interpretation’ stage has been completed (see ‘arrow’ in the next slide) Nevertheless, this should not stop you from writing up a tentative statement to start with (it will evolve many times as the research process unfolds over time) For example, “This research is about how consumers seek a sense of sovereignty in organizational environments that encroach on personal freedom and sense of individuality” Try to formulate your research idea as a ‘story’ (and then expand on this through the research process 1 4 -

Research plan steps (how to write it up) Research Process (how to carry it

Research plan steps (how to write it up) Research Process (how to carry it out) “Introduction” - Research Idea (what is this research about? ) - Positioning (gap; context; problem) Positioning: -Identify research gap -Identify research context -Identify research problem “Theoretical Background” - Review of relevant existing theory Developing theoretical understanding: - Read select literatures - Develop ‘interpretative framework’ “Methodology” - Research philosophy - Methods Methodology: - Critical appraisal of data-collection methods -Conducting collection of data “Findings” -Main themes Data-analysis and Interpretation: -Organizing and coding data into themes -Giving meaning to themes Further interpretation: - Higher abstraction and embedding of themes “Discussion” -Discussing themes in broader context “Conclusions(s)” -Arguing for the relevance and importance of delivered insight Formulating contribution(s)

Introduction: Positioning • All introduction sections should explicate in a clear and systematic fashion

Introduction: Positioning • All introduction sections should explicate in a clear and systematic fashion how the given research is positioned. • The three primary dimensions of positioning are: − − − Research gap Research context Research problem/question 1 6 -

What is a research gap? • Crudely put, a research gap refers to the

What is a research gap? • Crudely put, a research gap refers to the absence of (important) knowledge in a given research domain • A research gap may be theoretical, contextual or methodological: − − − ‘theoretical’: the lack of knowledge of ‘consumer sovereignty’ that does not have as its referent point the ‘marketplace’ but institutional regimes ‘contextual’: no consumer research study has focused on the role of consumption in the context of total institutions ‘methodological’: no existing consumer research has studied the issue of sovereignty through Foucauldian discursive theory (i. e. disciplinary subjection) • To address and ‘fill’ a research gap through systematic inquiry is to make a research contribution (so, select the ‘gap’ with the potential contribution in mind!!) 1 7 -

What kinds of phenomena might a ‘theoretical’ or ‘contextual’ research gap refer to (excluding

What kinds of phenomena might a ‘theoretical’ or ‘contextual’ research gap refer to (excluding methodological gaps)? • Pretty much anything that asks the axiological questions of what, how, why, when and where… Level of analysis (i. e. level of phenomenon) Units of analysis (what type of phenomenon) Practices (ways of doing and saying things) − − Individual(s) within a cultural context Group(s) within a cultural context Organization(s) within a cultural context Discursive formations within a cultural context Behaviors (activities and their intentions) Understandings (beliefs, values, norms etc. ) Planning and strategies (purposeful practices) Processes (sequences of activities) Discursive practices (speech acts) • For example, a given ‘research gap’ may imply inquiry into: − − − How individual consumers might practice a given form of consumption within their cultural context How groups might interact with one another within their cultural context How an organization might maintain and reproduce a given management practice within their cultural context

How to identify a gap (positioning-based approach) • Read through scientific journal articles that

How to identify a gap (positioning-based approach) • Read through scientific journal articles that focus on an area of inquiry that is of interest to you • High-quality articles usually state explicitly in the ‘Conclusion’, ‘Future Research’ or ‘Limitations’ section potential research gaps to be studied (these are taken more seriously in quantitative research, whereas in qualitative research they are commonly perceived as ‘lip service’ to realist conventions of journals) • An alternative avenue is to read through the key articles of a given research stream or ‘debate’ and discern the research gap yourself (most common approach, and recommended for your work too) 1 9 -

Example - finding a gap (and contributing to it) • In his paper ‘Why

Example - finding a gap (and contributing to it) • In his paper ‘Why Brands Cause Trouble’, Douglas Holt (2002) demonstrates his chosen research gap by first discussing two specific perspectives (i. e. theories) to consumer resistance: − “Jeff Murray and Julie Ozanne (1991) develop a model of consumer culture steeped in Horkheimer and Adorno's critical theory (1996). ”- - In a series of essays spanning more than a decade, Fuat Firat and Alladi Venkatesh (sometimes joined by Nikhilesh Dholakia) have developed a view of consumer culture and resistance that culminates in their advocacy of liberatory postmodernism (Firat and Dholakia 1998; Firat and Venkatesh 1995” 2 0 -

Example - finding a gap (and contributing to it) • In a subsequent second

Example - finding a gap (and contributing to it) • In a subsequent second passage, he then points out the weaknesses of these current theories: − “Both theories [Murray and Ozanne; Firat and Venkatesh] are premised upon the same root metaphor for thinking about consumer culture and resistance. - - So both theories espouse a radical politics in which people are able to emancipate themselves from market domination to the extent that they are able to free themselves from its cultural authority” 2 1 -

Example - finding a gap (and contributing to it) • Finally, Holt explains his

Example - finding a gap (and contributing to it) • Finally, Holt explains his contribution related to the aforementioned theories: − “I will offer a critique and revision of these perspectives that begins with individual case studies of the everyday consumption practices that these theories describe. Then I will expand the analysis to develop a macroscopic historical account that challenges Firat and Venkatesh's (1995) narrative. - - I offer an alternative framework that seeks to explain the social tensions that animate contemporary branding” • The contribution thus lies in offering a critical evaluation and revision of these perspectives based on Holt’s own empirical findings 2 2 -

Class Interaction • What is the gap(s) in your research area? 2 3 -

Class Interaction • What is the gap(s) in your research area? 2 3 -

Research context While the research gap refers to a given (understudied or wholly overlooked)

Research context While the research gap refers to a given (understudied or wholly overlooked) phenomenon the research seeks to describe, understand or explain (thus answering the question ‘What are you researching? ’)… the research context refers to the actual setting in which this chosen phenomenon can be studied in the most favorable terms (i. e. making the phenomenon visible and understandable) The research context may be a bounded setting (i. e. place) such as a supermarket or marketing department − It may also be an unbounded setting such as a culture (i. e. surfing culture) or a demographic (i. e. a given group of consumers) − 2 4 -

How to select a research context? • ”For scholars, good theory always builds on

How to select a research context? • ”For scholars, good theory always builds on prior theory; contexts are comprehended through theoretical lenses” (Arnould, Price and Moisio, p. 106) • In other words, contexts are not chosen or studied for the sake of phenomena alone but for the potential theoretical insight or contribution it might offer • It is a common mistake to start the research process by choosing an interesting context. Instead, you should first focus on the research gap and research problem, and then select a context that will enable you to foreground the potential theoretical insight emerging through this positioning. • ’Foregrounding’ refers to the strategic selection of context that has the aim of making the phenomenon that is of theoretical interest visible (’bringing to fore’)

The role of context in developing (and understanding) theoretical insight: Types of foregrounding strategy

The role of context in developing (and understanding) theoretical insight: Types of foregrounding strategy • Foregrounding by isolating groups: − selection of a type of consumer group for testing the boundaries of a given theory (i. e. selecting prisoners for understanding the consumption practices of disenfranchised consumers) • Foregrounding by isolating processes: − selection of a temporally, spatially or socially ’bound’ context for examining a particular practical (activity), phenomenological (lived experience) or discursive (e. g ideology; discourse; social structures) process (e. g. Viking Line research) • Foregrounding by isolating variables and relationships: − holding certain variables constant or relaxing them so as to examine a familiar process or phenomenon in a new and ’strange light’ (e. g. assuming that operating an Avatar in the virtual world 5 Street would imply relaxed constraints in terms of social norms, proximity issues, and selfpresentation) • Foregrounding by going to extremes: − Selecting contexts that represent extremity in behavior or énvironment (i. e. social, organizational, institutional). For instance, by studying prisoners’ in Helsinki Prison, various kinds of consumption practices have been identified that have been undetected before (i. e. the time-structuring nature of consumption (Arnould, Price and Moisio 2006)

Class Interaction • What kind of research context would suit your research idea? 27

Class Interaction • What kind of research context would suit your research idea? 27

Research problem (or ‘question’) • The overarching aim of your research is to ‘fill’

Research problem (or ‘question’) • The overarching aim of your research is to ‘fill’ the identified research gap (thus, contributing to existing research). To be able to proceed in this process coherently, you need to formulate a research problem. • The research problem is to be viewed and presented as a question to be answered by the research (it is synonymous with the notion of ‘primary research question, and may be followed by sub-questions). • As such, the research problem serves as a guiding structure for your conceptual thinking… (think of it as a ‘riddle’ to be answered) − − Research Problem: How do prisoners negotiate a sense of self in a highly regulated environment as prison? Sub-questions: § What is the role of consumption in prisoners self-construction? § What kinds of identities do prisoners aspire towards? 2 8 -

Research problem • In qualitative research, ill-suited questions are those that imply causality, prediction,

Research problem • In qualitative research, ill-suited questions are those that imply causality, prediction, quantities or frequencies (Moisander and Valtonen 2006). − For example, do not pose the following types of research problem: § “How many parents would consult their general practitioner when their child has a mild temperature? “ § "What proportion of smokers have tried to give up smoking? ” 2 9 -

How to formulate a research problem? • To formulate a research problem rigourously, one

How to formulate a research problem? • To formulate a research problem rigourously, one must draw from the conventions and principles of one’s research paradigm (see Lec 2) • Due to constructionist underpinnnings of most qualitative research approaches, the appropriate questions tend to ask how and what: − − How do x and y occur (within context c)? How are x and y experienced (within context c)? What kinds of meanings are attached to x and y (within context c)? For example: § “How do parents experience their children's mild temperature? § “What kind of parental practices occur in the context of children having fever? ” § "What kind of meanings do smokers ascribe to smoking an cigarettes? “ 3 0 -

Logic behind formulating a research problem • Once you have initially formulated a research

Logic behind formulating a research problem • Once you have initially formulated a research problem, this serves as an aid to assess various issues such as, for instance: − − − what existing theory is required to shed light on this problem (i. e. creating an interpretive framework) how to analyze and interpret research data so as to answer this problem and ultimately, how to formulate the contributions of your research so as to ‘fill’ the initial research gap sufficiently • In turn, this assessment process may also re-shape the research problem itself. Developing the various research plan dimensions is an iterative process! 3 1 -

Positioning-based research process (recommended) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context

Positioning-based research process (recommended) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context (relevant setting and subjects) 3. Formulation of methodology and collection of relevant data 4. Analysis of data (and reading of literatures) 5 b. Collection of further data 3 2 1. Interpretation of data (conceptual and theoretical work) 2. Further interpretation / writing up findings/ 5 a. Tighter specification of the discussion / conclusions research problem and sub question(s) -

Class Interaction • What kind of research problem would suit your research? 3 3

Class Interaction • What kind of research problem would suit your research? 3 3 -

Theoretical Background • Also known as the ‘literature review’ • This review should comprise

Theoretical Background • Also known as the ‘literature review’ • This review should comprise of: − A comprehensive, well-organized, objective and critical review of existing theory related to the research − Written in such a way that it leads to an informed explication of the chosen ‘interpretive framework’ − Contrary to common understandings, the review should not produce a ‘model’ depicting or summarising existing theory (induces misconception of need to ‘verify’ this model through data when the point is to ‘interpret’!!) − Any ‘models’ should be placed in the finding section 3 4 -

Theoretical Background • This comprises of existing theory regarding the chosen topic. There are

Theoretical Background • This comprises of existing theory regarding the chosen topic. There are two primary uses for existing theory: 1. Enables informed positioning of the research (i. e. theoretical pre-understanding / ‘Chart One’): • It is through knowledge of existing theory that you will understand what has already been studied and what has not (thus, providing background formulating the ‘research gap’ and ‘research problem’) 2. Provides for materials for setting up your ‘interpretive framework’ (Chart Two): - What theory is used and how the interpretive framework is formulated will depend largely on the emergent themes and meanings in your data (initial indications usually arise during first rounds of data-analysis).

The Role of Theory in Research Chart One Chart Two Forming theoretical pre understanding

The Role of Theory in Research Chart One Chart Two Forming theoretical pre understanding Data-analysis and Interpretation 1. Positioning: Forming further theoretical understanding and Interpretive Framework Positioning: Data-analysis and Interpretation Data-collection 3 6 - Data-collection

What is an Interpretive Framework? − Theory [that we start with] is an interpretive

What is an Interpretive Framework? − Theory [that we start with] is an interpretive framework: a set of concepts that offer a way of looking at the research phenomena (Silverman 1993) − “A theory [as a frame] - - does not present a prediction of the results; it only suggests a particular, explicitly defined framework within which the details of a case and the data can be assessed” (Alasuutari 1996, 376) 3 7 -

How to construct an interpretive framework? • There is no single or straightforward answer

How to construct an interpretive framework? • There is no single or straightforward answer to this question. • A good ‘rule of thumb’ would be to see what general themes and meanings emerge in the data-analysis – and then read through relevant literatures so as to find a good ‘fit’ between data and theory. • The guiding aim would be to ensure that in analyzing the empirical data, the constructed framework delivers such interpretations that answer the posed research problem sufficiently • The ‘framework’ is written up into the ‘theoretical background’ section only once it’s usefulness has been determined! 3 8 -

Example of an emerging framework • In the analysis of the prison data, I

Example of an emerging framework • In the analysis of the prison data, I noticed how prisoners, in engaging in consumption activities, seemed to subvert marketplace logics to the extent that they were able to attain a sense of ‘consumer sovereignty’: − ‘Consumer sovereignty’ is defined in neo-classical economics as the freedom to make rational choices in the marketplace, which in turn, leads to autonomy and self-determination − As it happens, ‘consumer sovereignty’ is not really possible in the real contemporary marketplace (choice is irrational!). Interestingly, however, it seems to be possible in the context of a total institution. − Based on this finding, I am now building an interpretive framework that juxtaposes neo-classical economics and postmodern critique 3 9 -

Literature review example • Review chapter on ‘Self’ 4 0 -

Literature review example • Review chapter on ‘Self’ 4 0 -

(reading of literatures) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context (relevant

(reading of literatures) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context (relevant setting and subjects) 3. Formulation of methodology and collection of relevant data 4. Analysis of data (and reading of literatures) 5 b. Collection of further data 1. Interpretation of data (conceptual and theoretical work) 2. Further interpretation /writing up findings/ discussion / conclusions 5 a. Tighter specification of the 4 1 - research problem and subquestion(s)

4. Methodology − This involves the justification of your methodological choices and the description

4. Methodology − This involves the justification of your methodological choices and the description of your data-collection methods: § Methodology refers to your chosen research approach and the philosophical tradition that underpins it § Method refers to to practices, theory, and concepts used in data- collection and data-analysis. Method also refers to such practical issues as choice of research site and research sample (i. e. who to research and to what scope) 4 2 -

Methodological perspective − Methodology will be dictated by the goals and philosophical conventions implied

Methodological perspective − Methodology will be dictated by the goals and philosophical conventions implied in your choice of theory (i. e. research paradigm: see Lecture 2) − How you perceive reality has a bearing upon what kind of research questions you can ask, and what kind of method is appropriate 4 3 -

(reading of literatures) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context (relevant

(reading of literatures) 1. Positioning (research gap and research problem) 2. Selecting Context (relevant setting and subjects) 3. Formulation of methodology and collection of relevant data 4. Analysis of data (and reading of literatures) 5 b. Collection of further data 1. Interpretation of data (conceptual and theoretical work) 2. Further interpretation / writing up findings/ discussion / conclusions 5 a. Tighter specification of the 4 4 - research problem and subquestion(s)

How to assess methodological perspective? • The very basic criteria for all good academic

How to assess methodological perspective? • The very basic criteria for all good academic research is: Conceptual rigor: specification of concepts and theoretical perspective, clarity of research objectives, appropriate treatment of relevant literature − Methodological rigor: appropriate methods (that one’s methodology is in line with ontological and epistemological assumptions), appropriate and sufficient data, rigorous analysis − Contribution to existing research and theoretical debates − 4 5 -

‘Scientific’ criteria for methodological rigor (pertains to ‘positivist’ research) • Traditional scientific principles of

‘Scientific’ criteria for methodological rigor (pertains to ‘positivist’ research) • Traditional scientific principles of assessing the quality of the research are based on (Patton 2002): − Objectivity of the research (i. e. minimizing investigator related bias) − Reliability of analysis processes (i. e. replicability of research by different observers of the same phenomenon) − Construct validity (i. e. is the measurement instrument suitable for measuring the given phenomenon) − Generalizability (i. e. do the research results apply in other contexts) 4 6 -

Why are these concepts problematic? From a qualitative perspective: • Both objectivity and validity

Why are these concepts problematic? From a qualitative perspective: • Both objectivity and validity are problematic because it is believed that knowledge is never value free and that no method can deliver ultimate truth about social phenomena is culturally constructed and laden with power relations • Reliability is problematic because cultural knowledge is contextual, and it is not usually possible to produce consistent measurements of social reality • Generalization, on the other hand, is less problematic from a qualitative research perspective than the above two concepts. This is because qualitative research focuses largely on how people are conditioned by shared cultural conventions and discourses (if contexts share similarities in conditions, it assumed that human action may follow similar patterns)

Qualitative criteria for methodological rigor • There a number of suggested criteria for assessing

Qualitative criteria for methodological rigor • There a number of suggested criteria for assessing qualitative research. Lincoln and Guba (1985) propose the following: Credibility: the research is carried out in thorough manner (and the process in made explicit and transparent) − Dependability: a type of a auditing process carried by the researcher − § For example, the findings are presented to the respondents to ensure their views are correctly understood − Transferability: refers to the ability to make generalizations based on the research findings (requires reflexive disclosure of research context and methodology) 4 8 -

Qualitative criteria for methodological rigor Confirmability: While it is acknowledged that complete objectivity is

Qualitative criteria for methodological rigor Confirmability: While it is acknowledged that complete objectivity is in most cases unattainable the researcher should ensure, as far as possible, that her own personality and values do not effect the outcome (arguable!) − Authenticity or trustworthiness − § The researcher should, for example, attempt to present all relevant viewpoints to the subject matter in a fair manner. 4 9 -

Other suitable evaluative criteria from the constructionist paradigm • Plausibility of interpretations (does this

Other suitable evaluative criteria from the constructionist paradigm • Plausibility of interpretations (does this make good sense? ) • Convincing arguments (is your point of view persuasive? ) • Evocative representation of research (emotively ‘moving’ writing style and other means of expression) • Is your research interesting (relevant to prevailing concerns)? • Is your research ethically conducted? • And finally, is your research problem devised in a rigorous manner - and moreover, answered in an insightful manner (‘wow’ factor)? 5 0 -

Writing up the Methodology section • ‘Research design’ − Introduction − Presenting rationale of

Writing up the Methodology section • ‘Research design’ − Introduction − Presenting rationale of research design based on established past research designs in similar studies • ‘Context’ − Description and justification of physical and theoretical context of study • ‘Data-collection’ − Description and justification of all aspects regarding collection of empirical material; techniques and tools used; places and times of observation; sample details and so on • ‘Data-analysis’ − Description and justification of the analysis process, including practical issues (e. g. transcription of interviews) and theoretical issues (actual analysis procedures and philosophical assumptions underlying them) 5 1 -

Methodology section example • OS paper on prison 5 2 -

Methodology section example • OS paper on prison 5 2 -

Method (i. e. conducting collection of data) • This refers to the actual data-analysis

Method (i. e. conducting collection of data) • This refers to the actual data-analysis tools used in research, as well as other practical conventions and rules to do with conducting a particular type of research. • Methods (and methodologies) are ways to express particular theoretical positions (i. e. paradigms) • This topic is addressed in more detail in the lecture “Data-analysis and interpretation” 5 3 -

5. Findings, Discussion & Conclusion(s) −The fifth dimension of the research plan reflects the

5. Findings, Discussion & Conclusion(s) −The fifth dimension of the research plan reflects the latter half of thesis structure: § Findings (refers to ‘data-analysis’ and ‘interpretation’) § Discussion (refers to ‘further interpretation’) § Conclusion (refers to ‘contribution’) −These are the dimensions in which you will be able to apply your own wits and imagination to the fullest. Indeed, they are commonly considered as the ‘meat’ of thesis (or journal article), and as such, will dictate the success or failure of the work. 5 4 -

Findings • The Findings section is commonly structured based on the main ‘themes’ found

Findings • The Findings section is commonly structured based on the main ‘themes’ found in the data • These themes are written up (i. e. analyzed and given meaning) using relevant existing theory • So-called ‘abstraction’ level at this stage is moderate: − Give a theoretically minimal account of the data − Rule of thumb: Do not abstract too ‘highly’. Your aim is to represent the data – not to offer new theorization (this is done in the ‘Discussion’). − In other words, the Findings section sets the scene for the Discussion section. − It is usually in this section that ‘models’ are presented (if at all) 5 5 -

Findings (i. e. Data-analysis and Interpretation) • Data-analysis is about organizing and coding empirical

Findings (i. e. Data-analysis and Interpretation) • Data-analysis is about organizing and coding empirical material in light of select existing theory - which, in turn, leads to a preliminary analysis of your data • It should be noted that data-analysis and interpretation, although categorized as separate phases of the research process, occur simultaneously. • The main conceptual difference between the two phases may be explained through the hermeneutic concept of ‘part-whole’: • During data-analysis, isolated empirical data ‘parts’ (i. e. given captures from an interview or ethnographic field notes) are arranged so as to form understandable ‘wholes’ (i. e. themes) • During interpretation, the meaning of these ‘wholes’ or ‘themes’ are discerned 5 6 -

Example of how to write up ‘Findings’ • See OS prison paper 5 7

Example of how to write up ‘Findings’ • See OS prison paper 5 7 -

Discussion • If the ‘Findings’ section is where you give a minimal account of

Discussion • If the ‘Findings’ section is where you give a minimal account of the (reorganized) data – the ‘Discussion’ section is where you interpret this account further while also embedding it into a broader context • Thus, it is in the discussion that you can develop your own insights and theory – while also setting the scene for the potential contribution(s) of the research i. e. the relevance and importance of made arguments (to be explicitly stated in the ‘Conclusion’) 5 8 -

Discussion (i. e. ‘Further Interpretation’) • There is no single, straightforward or systematic way

Discussion (i. e. ‘Further Interpretation’) • There is no single, straightforward or systematic way to engage in the further interpretation and embedding of the data themes. It will largely rest on the applied style of writing and ‘representational strategy’: • ‘Further interpretation’ is about making a more detailed interpretation of your research findings, taking it to the next level of abstraction (i. e. ‘higher level of abstraction’) • ‘Embedding’ is about integrating this furthered interpretation into relevant broader discussion, i. e. existing theory and debates regarding the topic • ‘Representational strategy’ involves an ensemble of philosophically and ethically based conventions and rules of writing (i. e. voice; authorship; reflexivity; power etc. ) 5 9 -

Conclusion • The conclusion is where you summarize the main aspects of the study.

Conclusion • The conclusion is where you summarize the main aspects of the study. These may include: − − − Recapping the initial foundations (‘gap’) and objectives of the study (‘research problem’) Findings and discussion (how the research gap has been addressed) New insights and theorization (i. e. contributions) Limitation of the study Future research avenues 6 0 -

What is a research contribution? §A contribution may be a) theoretical b) methodological c)

What is a research contribution? §A contribution may be a) theoretical b) methodological c) contextual (e. g. a new phenomenon) d) practical (contribution derived from application of research outcome(s)) • The most common and ‘strongest’ type of research contribution is theoretical, with journal articles usually focusing on this path, albeit often also reporting secondary contributions in one or more other categories. (see next slide for types of theoretical contribution) 6 1 -

Types of theoretical contribution 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Straight replication Replication and extension

Types of theoretical contribution 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Straight replication Replication and extension Extension of a new theory/method in a new area Integrative review (e. g. , meta-analysis) Develop a new theory to explain an old phenomenon compete one theory against another - classic theory testing Identification of a new phenomenon Develop a grand synthesis - integration Develop a new theory that predicts a new phenomenon (e. g. , theory of relativity) 6. 7. 8. 6 2 -

For next session • Readings • Eriksson, Päivi & Kovalainen, Anne (2008) Qualitative methods

For next session • Readings • Eriksson, Päivi & Kovalainen, Anne (2008) Qualitative methods in business research. Chapter(s): 4 • See ‘Course syllabus’ for supplementary readings 6 3 -

For next session: Assignment 3 – Positioning the Research (max. grade ‘ 20’ points)

For next session: Assignment 3 – Positioning the Research (max. grade ‘ 20’ points) • Describe how you position your own MSc thesis research. You may use the following structure to aid your thinking: − Research Idea: § − − − Think of a phenomenon that is of interest to you and read scientific literature in this area Research gap: § Identify the key articles in the given area or ‘stream’, discern potential research gaps and then select one for your study. If the research gap is not explicitly stated in the article(s), read through them and discern it yourself § Explain the reasoning of this research gap (i. e. through existing theory) Research Context: § Select a suitable research context for studying this research gap phenomenon § Justify the selection of this research context Research Problem: § Formulate a research problem to guide your research § Explain the research philosophy that underlines your research problem § Project what kinds of research findings this research problem might lead to 6 4 -

Assignment 3 continued. . . Practicalities and other issues: • This report should be

Assignment 3 continued. . . Practicalities and other issues: • This report should be between 3 -5 pages in length (Times New Roman, 12 pt, 1, 5 spacing) Submit via My. Courses by Tue 24. 01 16. 15 • Prepare to discuss in groups and with the class what you have formulated • Prepare questions that have puzzled you regarding the research plan, research process or any other related issue (we will try to answer these questions during ‘Question Time’) • Remember – there is no such thing as a stupid question!! 6 5 -

Quality Journals • Note: The journals from which you select the qualitative articles must

Quality Journals • Note: The journals from which you select the qualitative articles must me marketing-related; good choices are, for example: • Journal of Consumer Research; • Consumption; Markets and Culture; • Journal of Consumer Culture; • Marketing Theory; • Journal of Advertising; • Journal of Retailing; • European Journal of Marketing; • Journal of Marketing Management Please note that while Journal of Marketing is a top journal in the marketing discipline, it contains mostly quantitative research. 6 6 -