Qualitative inquiry growth

The qualitative researcher as bricoleur

While constructing the research design for my doctoral dissertation, Denzin and Lincoln’s (2000a, 1998) comparison of the qualitative researcher to a bricoleur, piqued my interest in the notion. It their opinion, the qualitative researcher inevitably has to piece together different representations of a complex situation from the data collected. The research results that emerge—from whatever strategies, methods and analyses that were employed—represent the bricolage of the researcher.

Kerstetter (2010) explains that “bricolage is a French term for which there is no suitable English equivalent”. wiseGEEK (n.d.) clarifies that “someone who practices bricolage is known as a bricoleur”; a term that originates the French bricole, meaning a trifle, an odd job, a jack of all trades, a skilful handy person. It means the gathering of readily available objects and methods. The bricoleur makes due with what is at hand to create something. Saki (n.d.) elaborates that “often the materials used were not originally intended for this use”. Inevitably the bricoleur’s skill set expands over time, as does the stockpile of tools and materials. The bricoleur gets a feel for what types of things may come in useful and for what can be used for different types of projects. “Bricolage is inventiveness”, states Saki (n.d.) it is about creating a new use for old things. A bricoleur looks at the potential functions of things and figures out how those functions can be used in a different way to create something. “Bricoleurs are creative problem solvers”, states Saki (n.d.), they derive immense pleasure from figuring out how to fix something without having to go out and buy a part. She concludes that bricoleurs are needed “so that we can find new ways when old ways don't work”; and that it is “a good idea to spend some time with a real bricoleur and to notice his or her use of things that are sitting around”.

The primary objective of a qualitative researcher is to let the voices of the researched speak. To do this inventive research and data collecting methods might be employed.

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2000a). Introduction: the discipline and practice of qualitative research (pp. 1-28). In Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) (1998). The landscape of qualitative research, theories and issues. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Groenewald, T. 2003. The contribution of co-operative education in the growing of talent. D Phil dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg. Electronically retrieved 4 January 2013 from: https://ujdigispace.uj.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10210/106/ThomasGroenewaldDessertationJuly2003.pdf?sequence=1

Kerstetter, M. 2010. Bricolage, Bricoleur: What is It? Kerstetter’s blogspot: The Bricoleur. Tuesday, 2 November 2010. Electronically retrieved 4 January 2013 from: http://markerstetter.blogspot.com/2010/11/bricolage-bricoleur-what-is-it.html

Saki, S. n.d. Bricolage and a Bricoleur. Literacy Methods. Electronically retrieved 4 January 2013 from: http://literacymethods.wikispaces.com/Bricolage+and+a+Bricoleur

wiseGEEK. n.d. What is Bricolage? wiseGEEK—clear answers for common questions. Electronically retrieved 4 January 2013 from: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-bricolage.htm

Research visions

Gary Shank (2002) elaborates on three ways of enabling seeing what would not ordinarily be seen, namely by making use of a mirror; a window; and a lantern.

The use of a mirror enables the enquirer to view what s/he ordinarily cannot. Shank revisits the Latin origin ‘speculum’, meaning reflector or mirror; and makes a case for reflective-based empirical enquiry originally being speculative.

Windows, as transparent portions of walls enables looking through. Shank points out that a microscope is a special kind of window that gives a magnified view of small things; whereas a telescope gives a magnified view of distant things. Both enhance the way of seeing. However, if the lens or pane is smudged then a true view is not feasible. The more the window restricts the view, the more bias/distorted the view. Because of uncertainty the enquirer can only be relatively sure, therefore the reliability, validity and generalisablility of the results of an enquiry. An aim of research is to eliminate error. Therefore the emphasis on transparent recording and reporting in research.

Lanterns enable the shedding of light in dark corners—illumination. Qualitative researchers have been crafting conceptual tools to achieve insight and understanding. The goals of qualitative research “are insight, enlightenment, and illumination” (Shank, 2002:11). Qualitative researchers are concerned with meaning: “searchers and discoverers and reconcilers of meaning where no meaning has been clearly understood before”—“a systematic empirical inquiry into meaning”.

Shank, G.D. 2002. Qualitative research—a personal skills approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.

 A second revised and updated edition is available

Giving the ‘captive mind’ voice

“’It's the way things are’ was a common retort from my grandmother when she could not explain to me why we were living in a yard that was as big as the palm of my hand”, writes Tshepo wa Mamatu about an entirely different matter.

“When any group within a large, complex civilisation significantly dominates other groups for hundreds of years, the ways of the dominant group (its epistemologies, ontologies and axiologies), not only become the dominant ways of that civilisation, but also these ways become so deeply embedded that they typically are seen as ‘natural’ or appropriate norms rather than as historically evolved social constructions.” (Scheurich & Young, 1997: 7 quoted by Chilisa, 2011: 45).

Chilisa (2011: 7-8) cites Fanon (1967) and Ngungi wa Thiong’o (1986) when referring to the process of “colonization of the mind”, which involves the stripping of marginalised groups from their ancestral culture and heritage.

The term postcolonial is highly contested, indicates Chilisa (2011: 12). Some read the ‘post’ to mean colonialism came to an end, whereas others perceived the term to include all indigenous people that experienced struggle and resisted suppression of their ways of knowing.

A space is advocated for “where those who suffered European colonial rule and slavery, the disenfranchised and dispossessed, can reclaim their languages, cultures, and ‘see with their own eyes’ the history of colonization, imperialism, and their new form” (Chilisa, 2011: 12). She calls it an “in-between space” with a “culture-integrative research framework” and “third-space methodologies” (Chilisa, 2011: 25).

Chilisa, B. 2011. Indigenous Research Methodologies. Los Angeles: Sage.

Four Rs: Responsibility Respect Reciprocity and Rights

The postcolonial researcher must be guided by the four Rs—says Chilisa (2011: 7) citing Ellis and Earley (2006), Louis (2007), Weber-Pillwax (2001) and Wilson (2008)—namely: “accountable responsibility, respect, reciprocity, and rights and regulations of the researched”. Chilisa (2011) elaborates on the assumptions about the nature of reality, knowledge and values within the postcolonial indigenous research paradigm; emphasising the multiple relations and many connections human beings are having with their community, the living and nonliving—stretching from birth to death and beyond. “An indigenous paradigm comes from the fundamental belief that knowledge is relational” states Chilisa (2011: 21) and “knowledge is shared with all of creation”. The four Rs therefore comprise:

• Relational accountable responsibility, which implies that all parts of the research process are indeed related and that the researcher is accountable to all.
• Respectful representation includes the researcher’s way of listening, of paying attention, of acknowledging, and for creating spaces for the voices of the Other and their knowledge systems.
• Reciprocal appropriation entails that research must be conducted in such a way that both the communities researched and the researcher derive benefits. The ethical dimension of ownership of intellectual property is emphasised.
• Rights and regulations during the research process include, but is not limited to “ethical protocols that accord the colonized and the marginalised ownership of the research process and the knowledge produced” (Chilisa, 2011: 22). Not misappropriating what is not yours as researcher for the taking.

Chilisa, B. 2011. Indigenous Research Methodologies. Los Angeles: Sage.

The uncritical imitation by the captive mind

To what extent are Euro-Western research methodologies relevant to people that were formerly colonised, historically marginalised, or previously oppressed? It is argued by Chilisa (2011) and other cited by her, that Euro-Western research methodologies do not embrace indigenous knowledge production or systems; instead these methodologies often disconnects, exclude and silence. The colonialised ‘Other’ includes broad categories such as: non-Western, third world, developing, underdeveloped, First Nations, indigenous peoples, third world women, and African American women. What is needed is an emancipation form generations of being silenced; being reduced to captive minds; being stripped of ancestral culture and replaced by Euro-Western culture; argues Chilisa (2011). What is needed is research methodologies that are not perpetuating binary opposites of superior versus inferior; of sameness and ‘Othering’. The researcher must fulfil the role of provocateur and of transformative healer.

Chilisa, B. 2011. Indigenous Research Methodologies. Los Angeles: Sage.

Postcolonial indigenous research relates to transformative paradigm

Bagele Chilisa (2011: 38) explains that postcolonial indigenous research methodologies share assumptions with the transformative research paradigm. By adopting decolonisation and indigenisation aims, postcolonial indigenous research methodologies emphasise transforming conventional ways of knowledge production by being inclusive of multiple knowledge systems. Decolonised and indigenised research methodologies do not necessary derive theory from written texts “but can be inferred by the researcher from oral traditions, stories, legends, language, and artefacts” (Chilisa, 2011: 39). The researcher, in postcolonial indigenous methodologies, further “has a duty to retrieve from the oral texts, perspectives, concepts, and theories that form conceptual and theoretical frameworks for research studies, rationale, and justification for selected data-gathering techniques, data analysis, and research finding dissemination strategies".

Chilisa, B. 2011. Indigenous Research Methodologies. Los Angeles: Sage

Postcolonial research pradigm - what does it mean?

Politicised youth in South Africa often angrily voice insults of colonialism and imperialism. Firmly believing in qualitative research principles such as giving voice, respecting, and responsible analysis; I needed to understand postcolonial research.

Bagele Chilisa (2011: 13-14) describes decolonisation as “a process of centering the concerns and worldviews of the colonized Other so that they understand themselves through their own assumptions and perspectives” and involves:

• Liberating the ‘captive mind’ from oppressing conditions
• “restoration and development of cultural practices, thinking patterns, beliefs, and values that were suppressed but are still relevant and necessary”

Chilisa, B. 2011. Indigenous Research Methodologies. Los Angeles: Sage.

‘Sensitivity to the importance of sensemaking processes’

Global-wide business calls for a research methodology with integrity to bridge distance. Noorderhaven (2004: 85) argues that “the hermeneutic approach to social reality and social research” is indeed a suitable methodology. Derived from the Greek word ‘hermeneuein’—meaning to explain; put in words or translate—philosophical hermeneutics pertains to the act of understanding phenomena as signs. “It is not enough to observe the signs; their meaning should also be established” for interpretation to be efficacious.

Noorderhaven (2004: 92) illustrates the “application of hermeneutic methodology” by means of a number of published clinical studies about close collaboration of international business alliances. It is important to note that none of the illustrative case studies were deliberately hermeneutic, however, observes Noorderhaven “the researchers show a remarkable sensitivity to the importance of sensemaking processes within the alliances/joint ventures”. He focusses on three aspects, namely:

• The influence the initial expectations and conditions of alliances forming
• The various cycles of collaborative sense-making—the going through hermeneutic circles, namely from understanding single elements to understanding the whole—within alliances that are under way, including impediments to shared meanings
• The researcher’s interpretations in addition to those of the incumbents—what Giddens (1984: 284) names ‘double hermeneutic’ (cited by Noorderhaven 2004: 95) contribute to sense-making. The goal of hermeneutic analysis—according to Hans-Georg Gadamer (1999) who rejects the traditional hermeneutical rule denouncing interpretations that were not implied by the writer (cited by Noorderhaven 2004: 95)—“is not to take for granted the interpretations and meanings produced by incumbents”.

Noorderhaven, N.G. 2004. Hermeneutic methodology and international business research, 84-104. In R. Marschan-Piekkari & C. Welch (Eds). 2004. Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Differentiating between research methodology and method

Noorderhaven (2004: 91) clearly differentiates between research methodology and research method. A research “methodology is a system of ontological and epistemological assumptions on which research is to be based”; whereas “a research method is a particular strategy for collecting and analysing data”.

Noorderhaven, N.G. 2004. Hermeneutic methodology and international business research, 84-104. In R. Marschan-Piekkari & C. Welch (Eds). 2004. Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Dirt under fingernails = good qualitative participants

Johanson (2004: 4) shares "the lesson we learned for the future was to always avoid staff who are not in the front line. They have time but no experience. It is only those who have 'dirt under their fingernails' who understand where the important problems lie."

Johanson, J. 2004. Theory is not reality. In Marschan-Piekkari, R. & Welch, C. (Eds) 2004. Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Short guide to writing qualitative research articles

A student mailed me a document that contains a record of literature the student found and considered to be relevant to a study being undertaken—sadly the student regard it as the first draft of the literature chapter of a thesis.

Art Carden (Assistant Professor of Economics and Business at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee) published a very short guide and template for writing excellent research papers, which I adapted slightly for qualitative research purposes. He emphasises that “No matter where you are in your intellectual journey, the ability to assemble and analyze large amounts of complex information is a skill that can pay large dividends both in monetary terms and in terms of your overall satisfaction with life.”

Rural chickens roaming into country roads — a short guide to writing qualitative-research articles

Abstract

The Abstract is usually 100-150 words long and written last.  The abstract tells the reader what you have done and why it is important.  Your abstract tells the reader what you did, how you did it, and what it implies. Here, you’re share what you found engaging with chickens and their environment—substantiated anecdotally and that it implies we have to re-evaluate our understanding of chicken roaming into country roads.

I. Introduction

The introduction sets the stage of your study for your readers. You tell the audience what you did and why it is important.  An introduction might say that previous generations of scholars believed that chickens roaming into country roads because they were not fenced in.  Your paper shows that the chickens are roaming country roads to feed.  In the introduction, you give a brief outline of the argument and the evidence used to support it.  As much fun as it is to write long, twisting narratives filled with subtlety and nuance, it is important to remember that a research paper on any topic is not a romance or mystery novel.  Your readers are not reading for leisure.  They are reading because they think your ideas are worth considering and factoring into their own research and decisions.

II. Literature Review

The literature review places your research in context.  You aren’t the first person to ask why the chickens roam country roads.  What questions did previous researchers ask and what conclusions did they reach?  What questions remain unanswered?  How does your idea fit? In this case, previous scholars have also argued, for example, that cattle roam country roads.  Is this relevant for your research?  Why or why not?  As tempting as it is, don’t include too much in the literature review.  The literature review is a place to highlight relevant contributions that address the question you are asking and to show how your contribution either fills gaps in our knowledge by answering questions we haven’t answered yet or creates gaps in our knowledge by showing that something we thought we knew is false.  What does the reader take from the literature review?  Is it a sense of the important questions that others have asked and how your research helps answer them?  Or does the reader just come away with the knowledge that you’ve read a lot of stuff?  Revise the latter until it becomes the former. Do not merely reflect what others published, do a thorough synthesis of relevant literature.

III. Research—objective and methods

Qualitative research is often undertaken as precursor to quantitative. This section lays out the logical reasons for why the research was undertaken. It might elaborate the hunch/es likely to apply.  Road-roaming is dangerous, and people have never explained what is so attractive for the chickens about roaming country roads.  The truthfulness and credibility of qualitative research is very important—the methods employed must be clear and the biases (ontology & epistemology) of the researcher declared. It is further important to explain how the data had been acquired (e.g. through chickens interviewed, observation of chickens while they roamed the roads or focus groups conducted with chickens), stored and analysed.

IV. Evidence

Here you report and explain the evidence you will use to substantiate why you came to the conclusion that chickens roam country roads to feed.  Evidence can be anecdotal, narrative, descriptive or even statistical.  Keep in mind that statistical evidence can enrich qualitative data. You would probably present the themes that arose from the qualitative data analysed, or maybe you may have found personal papers of chickens, perhaps a diary or a series of letters, in which they elaborate what kinds of seeds they found and when.

V. Conclusion

The conclusion summarizes your results and lays out very carefully exactly what needs to be done next. It is likely that your conclusion will be tentative.  However, a well-written conclusion will elucidate the next steps (for example, doing a survey among chickens roaming country roads) that need to be taken before we can be absolutely certain as to whether the chickens roaming the road is to feed or if there are other reasons.

Where does literature fit in Grounded Theory?

Grounded Theory is about research grounded in the data systematically obtained through social research. The researcher is required to enter the lived-world and observe the environment, behaviours, words, actions and interactions. Symbols are intrinsic to the micro-social interaction.

The main thrust of Grounded Theory is to bridge the gap between theoretically ‘uninformed’ empirical research and empirically ‘uninformed’ theory says Goulding (2002). Often Grounded Theory is often chosen when a topic of interest has been relatively neglected or overlooked in the accumulation of the relevant body of knowledge. The mission is to build theory from the ‘ground’. However, a researcher never starts with a completely blank sheet. The threat of prior knowledge when entering the field is a prior predisposition even if not consciously.

A postgraduate student wanting to use grounded theory therefore need to know the scope of literature in the field fairly well and identified / became aware of a particular gap. The literature cannot be avoided, as it is usually an essential component of a research proposal.

Grounded Theory is not limited to one source of data (as some qualitative methods) but may include “secondary data, life histories, interviews, introspection, observations and memos” (Goulding, 2001:56). Reading is not neglected either, the researcher maintains theoretical sensitivity by connecting ideas to the theory being developed. Once the theory has substance the researcher will deliberately do literature searches to test own theory against.

The shared beliefs of Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss include (Goulding, 2001:40):

• The need to get out in the field to get to know what is happening
• Theory is grounded in reality
• Experience is continually evolving for both researcher and participants
• The researched play an active role in shaping the research
• There is an emphasis on change, process and variability of life
• An inter-relationship exists between meaning and action

Goulding, C. 2002. Grounded Theory—A practical guide for management, business and market researchers. London: SAGE.

Shift in consumer research to insights from experiences and meanings

Qualitative research if not just novelistic, entertaining and/or descriptive.

In the introduction to Grounded Theory, Christina Goulding (2002) points out that consumer research shifted away from positivism and measurement to appreciation of insights derived from the experiences and meaning of consumers. On p. 9 she indicates that three shifts took place during the last decade:

• Emphasis on methodology rather than method
• An emphasis on qualitative data
• Research seen as a social process rather than an investigation.

Reading Goulding I realised that mixed methods is about a combination of measurements of hunches/hypotheses and/or literature findings, as well as insights derived from the experiences and meanings of participants.

However, in qualitative research one cannot escape the reality that the researcher is an instrument that filters data through own paradigms. The researcher will always be subjective and the research intuitive and value laden. It is important that there is a fit between the research design and the researcher, with regard to (p. 36):

1. Paradigm—what is the basic belief system or world view of the researcher that defines the nature of her/his world, the individual's place within it and the range of p[possible relationships?
2. Ontology—what is the form and nature of reality and what is there to be known?
3. Epistemology—what is the relationship between the researcher and the would be 'knower' and what can be 'known' about it?
4. Methodological—how can the researcher go about finding out what s/he believes can be known?

Goulding, C. 2002. Grounded Theory—a practical guide for management, business and marketing researchers. London: SAGE.

‘Section-reservoirs’ of a research article

Professor Santy Daya taught his students at Rhodes University that a journal article consists of a number of section reservoirs (Cassim, 2010):

• Introduction
• Materials and methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• Abstract — yes, this is written last, but either appears stand alone or precedes the article in the journal.

Each section above has specific moves of thought, for example the introduction should comprise:

1. Description of the field
2. State what research has been done and by whom
3. Indicate the knowledge gap addressed by the current research
4. Introduce the reader to the study undertaken

Cassim, L. 2010. Last of a three-part series on the secrets of postgrad success. Getting Ahead, Mail & Guardian, 24-30 September 2010: 7. [Download Dr Layla Cassim No 3]

When paradigms are incommensurate

Combined, integrated or mixed research methods (qualitative and quantitative) — to what extend is it simply about use, asks Morgan (2007) at the beginning of an elaborate complex article.

"Paradigms as a way to summarize researchers' beliefs" (Morgan 2007:50) gained popularity as result of Thomas Kuhn, however, a critic found more than 20 ways Khun used the term paradigms. Moore summarises four versions, namely:

1. The worldview or all-encompassing way of thinking about the world, this includes beliefs concerning morals, values and aesthetics. It is a shared understanding of reality with which qualitative researchers approach their enquiry, a set of guiding assumptions.
2. As epistemological stance serving as distinctive belief system, which influences how research questions are asked. Compatibility of methods is important.
3. Shared beliefs among members of a specialist area (a community of practice) of researchers that share consensus about, for example, which methodological procedures are most appropriate and are absorbed in a particular body of technical knowledge.
4. Model examples of research that serve as exemplars for new entrants.

Morgan (2007) focuses attention on another concept gained from Khun, namely incommensurability. [Commensurable means to have the same measure or divisor, for example the numbers 6 and 9 are divisible by 3. Incommensurable therefore implies having no common basis, measure, or standard of comparison.] Different research paradigms may produce findings that are incommensurable with other findings. However, there are often overlaps between different paradigms, resulting in permeable boundaries.

As alternative (to paradigms lost) Morgan advocates the pragmatic approach. He places methodology in the centre and asserts that equal attention should be devoted to "the connection between methodology and epistemology and the connection between methodology and methods" (p. 68). Considerations of methodology should connect epistemology with research design.

Morgan, D.L. 2007. Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained — methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Method Research, 1(1), pp 48-76, January 2007.

Pragmatic approach in mixed methodology

David Morgan (2007:71) concisely captures the pragmatic alternative to the key issues in social science research methodology a table that summarises a framework:

Research approach:	Qualitative	Quantitative	Pragmatic
Connection of theory and data	Induction	Deduction	Abduction
Relationship to research process	Subjectivity	Objectivity	Intersubjectivity
Inference from data	Context	Generality	Transferability

Morgan acknowledges Michael Patton's 1975 divisions.

In the top row Morgan differentiates induction and deduction and points out that most research methodology text books asserts the connection of theory and data as key distinguishing factor between qualitative and quantitative research. Although such a sharp distinction is useful for teaching beginners research, in reality researchers tend only to be purely inductive or deductive when documenting for publication. The pragmatic version of abductive reasoning "moves back and forth between induction and deduction" (p. 71).

Pure or complete subjectivity and objectivity are theoretical concepts. In reality the researcher often works interchangeably. Therefore the pragmatic approach of intersubjectivity.

The pragmatic approach seeks to transcend the distinction between knowledge that is context-dependent, and knowledge that is universal and generalisable. Morgan argues that researchers must investigate the factors that determines if the knowledge gained is transferable to other settings.

Morgan (2007:73) finds it helpful to think:

• Qualitative research emphasises "an inductive-objective-contextual approach"
• Quantitative research emphasises "a deductive-objective-generalising approach"

When problems are encountered with any of the two absolute extremes, fortunately an alternative is available, namely the:

• Pragmatic approach, which emphasises "the abductive-intersubjective-transferable" possibilities.

Morgan, D.L. 2007. Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained — methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Method Research, 1(1), pp 48-76, January 2007.

Mixing research methods—a conversation towards a negotiated account

Alan Bryman (2007: 22) did a content analysis of 232 articles, published between 1994 and 2003, with 'mixed' research methods. He found that only 18% of the articles succeeded to mix (integrate) qualitative and quantitative methods. He remarks (p. 8):

As result of the efforts of methodologists and researchers, there is nowadays considerable understanding of a variety of issues, such a various ways in which quantitative and qualitative research can be mixed … However, at the same time, the fundamental issue of the degree to which mixed methods researchers genuinely integrate their findings has not been addressed to a significant extent. In other words, how far do mixed methods researchers analyze, interpret, and write up their research in such a way that the qualitative and quantitative components are mutually illuminating? … "genuinely integrate[d]".

Bryman (2007: 9) conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 UK social scientists about "the researcher's views on and practices in relation to the integration of quantitative and qualitative research" and asked during the interviews (p. 10) "whether they found it straightforward to combine their quantitative and qualitative findings". Nine barriers to effective integration emerged:

1. The two sets of findings often documented for different audiences
2. Because of methodological preferences, researchers tend to emphasise what they comfortable with.
3. The structure of research projects sometimes complicates integration.
4. The timelines of either the qualitative or quantitative may be such that the one ends sooner than the other, if not taking place prior to.
5. In addition to No 2, skills specialisation or incapacities may impede integration.
6. The difference in the nature of data results in different ways of writing the results up.
7. Bridging ontological divides are sometimes challenging, for example, objectivist versus constructivist or discursive accounts.
8. Preference of some journals present publication challenges, if a particular methodological bias prevails it is often difficult to get an article accepted that does not fit.
9. "[R]elative absence of well-known exemplars makes it difficult for researchers to draw upon 'best practice' when it comes to combining findings" (p. 19).

Bryman (2007: 19) grouped the first eigth barriers into three types, namely:

Barriers related to intrinsic research aspects	Wider institutional context of mixed method research	Skills and preference of researchers
Structure of research projects (3) Bridging ontological divides (7) Role of timelines (4)	Different audiences (1) Publication issues (8)	Methodological preferences (2) Skills specialisms (5) Nature of the data (6)

The absence of good exemplars, relate to all three types of barriers.

Bryman argues for genuine integration, where qualitative and quantitative findings are mutually informative and talk to each other—a conversation—to construct an negotiated account. The triangulation metaphor has been a hindering factor; it should not be just a matter of testing data against each other, but "about forging an overall or negotiated account of the findings that brings together both components of the conversation or debate" (p. 21).

Bryman, A. 2007. Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Method Research, 1(1), pp 8-22, January 2007.

Road map to postgraduate qualification

Dr Layla Cassim gives tips for postgraduate success, in the second in a series of three articles published in the Mail & Guardian:

• The first article appeared 30 July 2010, in which she emphasised funding and project manage research.
• The second focus on the importance of a well thought out research proposal — Download Secrets of postgrad success - Dr Layla Cassim - MG 27Aug-2Sept2010 — as well as research design and ethodology dcisions.
• The third published 24 September 2010 focussed on academic publication.

In the Getting Ahead insert of the Mail & Guardian of 27 August to 2 September 2010 she also express concern about the quality of supervision.

In an earlier post, I used a butterfly as metaphor of a research design. Dr Cassim emphasise that a research proposal focusses action and comprise:

• Some background to the problem/hypothesis
• A concise literature synthesis (of existing knowledge)
• Indication of the gap in existing knowledge and how this research will fill such
• A clear problem statement
• The research strategy
• Practical procedures and detailed methodology
• Schedule and budget
• Roles and responsibilities of collaborators
• Quality control framework (and ethics)
• A risk analysis and contingency plans

Dr Layla further elaborates on research designs, another aspect I posted about.

She further aswered some questions in the Getting Ahead (p. 7) supplement of the Mail & Guardian of 24-30 September 2010: Download Dr Layla Cassim Answers some Questions

• Doing a PhD part-time
• Juggling a part-time PhD with family and work commitments
• Will a PhD facilitate a career change?

Taking sides, 7th moment in qualitative research

The seventh moment is about critical scholars helping populations to find their own cultural homes. Researchers should convince people to form their own grounded aesthetics within the spaces of their living world. However, taking sides is a complex process:

1. Researchers must qualify (make clear) their own value positions, including the so-called objective facts (ontology) and ideological assumptions (epistemology) attach to that position.
2. Researchers should during the research process listen to the perspectives and voices of many different stakeholders; identify values and claims to objective knowledge of positions contrary to their own and analyze these.
3. Researchers should advocate for the side of the underdog and in so doing should attempt to create a critical, reflexive, moral consciousness about the appeals to ideology and objective knowledge in (2) and point these out as reflecting a particular moral and historical position, for example, researchers may argue that happiness is not derived from particular material objects, that on the contrary desire to possess is largely fermented, if not created, by manufacturers and marketers.
4. Next it is pointed out how such a position may disadvantage and disempower members of a specific group.
5. The researcher should thereafter make an appeal for a participatory, feminist, communitarian ethic— representing new conceptions of care, love, beauty, and empowerment.
6. Then the researcher applies the ethic in (5) to the specifics of a concrete case, demonstrating how the ethic would and could produce social betterment.
7. Next follows a call to action—the researcher engages in concrete steps that would change situations in the future, such as:
   1. teach people how to associate new values to matters that might be marginalized and stigmatized by a larger culture;
   2. demonstrate how particular methods or objects may negatively affect the lives of specific people; and
   3. indicate how particular texts may directly and in-directly misrepresent persons and reproduce prejudice and stereotypes.
8. In advancing this utopia, the critical researcher encourages the seeking of new standards and new tools of evaluation.

Denzin (2001) asserted that critical consumer research in the seventh moment will and must take sides. The aim is to bring the consumer back in, guiding consumers in the development of collective and individual forms of resistance to the consumption cultures of postmodernism. Critical consumer researchers should through storytelling, performance texts, rich local ethnographies, and ethnoscapes help consumers find their own cultural homes. In the seventh moment, society is given an opportunity to come into focus-and hopefully to their rightful being.

Dencin, N.K. 2001. The Seventh Moment: Qualitative Inquiry and the Practices of a More Radical Consumer Research. The Journal of Consumer Research, 28( 2), 324-330, September 2001.

Qualitative researcher not an objective neutral observer

The qualitative researcher does not stand outside or above the study, but is situated within the very processes being studied (or entered to study), observes Denzin (2001: 325). There is not "a God's eye view that guarantees absolute methodological certainty", because research reflects (despite the researcher's best intentions) the values and viewpoints of the inquirer and is theory-laden. Denzin further states that "the days of naive realism and naive positivism are over" and add that "the criteria for evaluating research are now relative".

Denzin (2001: 324) cites Thomas Schwandt's (2000) statement that the notion qualitative research is a "reformist movement that began in the early 1970s in the academy". Flick (2005), however, remarks that the "label 'qualitative research' is used as an umbrella term for a series of approaches to research in the social sciences" and refers to Wilhelm Wundt (1928) that "used methods of description and verstehen in his folk psychology". Flicks further indicates that "increasingly 'hard', experimental, standardising and quantifying approaches have asserted themselves against 'soft', understanding, open and qualitative-descriptive strategies". In the 1960s the "critique of standardised, quantifying social research became relevant again" in American sociology context. In the 1970s this critique was taken up in German discussions. These "led to a renaissance of qualitative research in the social sciences", according to Flick. However, "in the middle of the 1980s, problems of validity and the generalisability of findings obtained with qualitative methods attracted broader attention". Flick cites Denzin and Lincoln (2000) that refer to phases, indicated below—seven moments of qualitative research—which is different from the German-speaking area.

United States	Germany
Traditional period (1900 to 1945)	Early studies (end of nineteenth and early twentieth centuries)
Modernist phase (1945 to the 1970s)	Phase of import (early 1970s)
Blurred genres (until the mid 1980s)	Beginning of original discussions (late 1970s)
Crisis of representation (since the mid 1980s)	Developing original methods (1970s and 1980s)
Fifth moment (the 1990s)	Consolidation and procedural questions (late 1980s and 1990s)
Sixth moment (post-experimental writing)	Research practice
Seventh moment (the future)

Denzin (2001: 325) refers to a "circuit of culture" in which meanings are defined by mass (and lately also social) media and in which the rituals and practices of consumption are anchored. Denzin points out four prime goals of mass media, namely:

1. To create audiences that become consumers of the advertised products.
2. Audiences that while engaged in consumption demonstrate individualism endorsed by the capitalist political system.
3. To create a public opinion that is supportive of the strategic polices of the state.
4. To do everything it can to make consumers as audience members think they are not commodities.

Denzin remarks that "human beings live in a second hand world" in which existence is not "solely determined by interaction or by social acts" and cites Mills' (1963) forceful expression:

The consciousness of human beings does not determine their existence; nor does their existence determine their consciousness. Between the human consciousness and material existence stand communications, designs, patterns, and values which influence decisively such consciousness as they have.

Denzin (2001: 325) remarks that within the circuit of culture, each process becomes a nodal point for critical, interpretive consumer research. Critical researchers should according to Denzin "seek to untangle and disrupt the apparently unbreakable economic and ritual links between the production, distribution, and consumption of commodities". Critical researchers should intervene and expose ways in which the mentioned processes excessively establish the meanings cultural commodities have for human beings.

Denzin (2001: 326) proceeds to present the interpretive criteria of the seventh moment for evaluating critical qualitative work.

1. Nothing is value free, knowledge is power and those who have power determine what is aesthetically pleasing and ethically acceptable. Aesthetics, ethics are blended.
2. Ways of knowing (epistemology) are moral and ethical—involving conceptions of who the human being is (ontology), including how matters of difference are socially organized. There is no objective, morally neutral standpoint.
3. It involves a-give-and-take and ongoing moral dialogue, an ethic of care and an ethic of personal and communal responsibility. Beauty and artistry are valued as well as movement, rhythm, colour, and texture. Differences are celebrated, as is the sounds of many different voices. It expresses an ethic of empowerment.
4. Presumes a community that has shared moral values, including the concepts of shared governance, neighborliness, love, kindness, and the moral good. The ethic declares that all persons deserve dignity and a sacred status in the world.
5. The aesthetic enables social criticism. It helps persons imagine how things could be different and imagines new forms of human transformation and emancipation.
6. It is understood that moral criteria are fitted to the contingencies of concrete circumstances. This ethic calls for dialogical research rooted in the concepts of care and shared governance.
7. Consumer research joins the researcher with the researched in an ongoing moral dialogue. This form of consumer research aims to help people recover, and release themselves, from the constraints embedded in the social media. Doing this research means that the researcher learns to take on the identities of consumer advocate and cultural critic.
8. Interpretive work provides the foundations for social criticism and social action. As a cultural critic, the researcher speaks from an informed moral and ethical position. He or she is anchored in a specific community of moral discourse.

Dencin, N.K. 2001. The Seventh Moment: Qualitative Inquiry and the Practices of a More Radical Consumer Research. The Journal of Consumer Research, 28( 2), 324-330, September 2001.

Flick, U. 2005. Qualitative Research in Sociology in Germany and the US—State of the Art, Differences and Developments. Forum: Qualitative Social Research [Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung], 6(3), September 2005.