Reflecting on Your Research Relationship (Exercise 5.1)

I am of the mindset that the relationships a researcher fosters with his or her targets of analysis are the single most important attribute of qualitative research methods. Whereas personality and social skills, things cultivated through life, do not much matter in quantitative research, the ability to obtain data as a bad interviewer is indeed a monolithic obstacle almost impossible to overcome in qualitative research. With practice and through rote memorization, individuals can eventually learn how to compute an ANOVA, simple linear regression, or t test, but it takes an almost innate sensibility to become a good qualitative researcher, something that cannot really be learned in a class or practiced. Courses like this teach skills and technique but do not teach someone how to create rapport with subjects given the indefinite nature of an interview. Although the general sentiment among multiple methodologists I have spoken to seem to be that qualitative research is not more difficult than quantitative research but certainly more time consuming, I would now argue that qualitative research is both more difficult and time consuming in light of the myriad intangibles (e.g., social skills, immediacy) necessary to be successful as a qualitative research methodologist.

The way I present myself to the respondents is an important first step in my venture to build rapport. To put participants at ease, I would select clothes that appear professional but not so much so that it creates a noticeable imbalance between what I am wearing in comparison to them. I would select clothes appropriate to the setting. I would then consider the setting in the room. I would likely organize multiple chairs in sequence, from near to far, allowing the participant to choose their level of physical distance when answering the interview questions.

 Status and power are two important things to consider given that they are practically unavoidable in my research. Because my only pathway to getting data from children and adolescents is through the Department of Education, I am obligated to present my affiliation to students, who then form associations with my position at the University that invariably bias their responses. I have, in the past, tried to mitigate the “outsider effect” and the power difference between participants and me by substitute teaching a few times before the data collection. The repeated contact in a classroom setting appears to disassociate the source credibility from the source for children and adolescents. The way in which I come off as a nice substitute teacher or the mean substitute teacher will also influence how much people will confide in me. I found marked differences in willingness to response to questions when I came to the school as a sterile outside researcher in comparison to when I would first substitute teach at the school and then present my other research intentions.

 The principal ethical consideration I must make is whether the position of a substitute teacher makes inflexible children and adolescent’s idea of voluntary participation. Some students may feel coerced or compelled to complete the study because they come to the conclusion that participation is a component of their grade. To hedge against this potential ethical concern, I would ensure that participants realize they can choose whether they would like to volunteer their time for the study, stressing the notion of volunteerism, and telling participants about their research rights. All of the steps taken in creating a relationship with your target respondents are crucial in the quality and quantity of data researchers get from their data collection methods.