Using the survey procedure and interview technique.pdf

Table 1: Procedural steps and phases associated with the survey Procedural steps Phase 1. Theoretical conceptualisation of the topic under study. 2. Formulation of one or more hypotheses 3. Design of the data collection instrument 1. Planning 4. Identification of target population/ Sample design 2. Field administration 5. Data collection 6. Data capture 7. Data analysis (Content analysis – qualitative technique or statistical analysis – quantitative technique) 9. Interpretation of data 3. Data processing, analysis and documentation 11. Documentation of results (Report writing) surveys, scientists usually use one or both of the two basic qualities of data derived from two types of variables, namely quantitative variables; and/or qualitative variables. The distinction between quantitative and qualitative variables is important as it often calls for different data collection techniques and has a direct impact on the type and design of the data collection instrument that will ultimately be used in the survey. Therefore, it is important to make sure that the researcher understands the difference between the two qualities of information, when to use it and how to interpret it. Because of the type of information needed in most of the natural science disciplines like Physics and Engineering, the focus usually falls on quantitative variables (that can be empirically measured), whilst researchers in the social sciences are less restricted to the use of only quantitative variables. Though, it is also true that in practice, social scientists often use both quantitative and qualitative variables in a single research project. Whatever the use, it is important to know that the decision as to which one of the two or both forms of data the researcher would need, lies with the nature of the topic under investigation; the research setting (circumstances under which the research is to be conducted); and the type of information that is needed to elude the question(s) that were asked that lead to the specific research topic. Quantitative data Quantitative data refers to the use of variables that can be characterised in numerical terms. This type of variable is common in the natural sciences, where numbers, formulae and rigid exact physical laws play an important role. Variables such as mass, distance and time are typical quantitative measurements in the natural sciences. This type of variable D.B. Jarbandhan & De Wet Schutte 671 was also introduced into the social sciences via the positivist tradition pioneered by August Compte, a French sociologist, during middle 1800s. The underlying argument of the positivist approach is that social life is, like physical laws, also governed by underlying laws and principles that can be discovered with methods that are traditionally associated with physical techniques (Welman and Kruger, 2001:7,8; Babbie 1992:258). Typical quantitative variables in the social sciences are variables like income, fertility rate and education level. Quantitative information is usually easily accessed through large sample surveys on representative populations. Like in the physical sciences, quantitative data in the social sciences is also associated with statistical inference. In short, if the researcher can make meaningful calculations with the information in some or other way, it is quantitative data. Research based on quantitative data, as it is used in the social sciences, is often described as outsider in data. That is that one of the researcher’s claims is to be objective and that the researcher positions him-/herself outside the study object and look from outside into the subject under study. This tends to give useful and well targeted information, especially when the structured questionnaire technique is used. At the same time the data may be considered as clinical information that does not necessarily exactly reflect the human nature. It is sometimes too unemotional and derived from the respondent’s real human experience and reduces human behaviour to merely categories that is eluded with statistical inference. It is exactly this notion that made social scientists search for a different kind of information to shed some light from another angle in search of understanding and getting to the truth behind what drives human behaviour and attitudes. This search resulted in an alternative/complementary approach in human sciences inquiry, namely to use qualitative data. Qualitative data As already mentioned, the qualitative research approach developed in reaction to the dehumanising and too clinical positivistic approach. It is argued that if one really want to understand human behaviour, the researcher must get closer to it (Bless and Higson–Smith, 1995:100). That is exactly what the qualitative data collection techniques strive to do. The use of qualitative variables refers to a research design that uses data that is not suited for statistical inference. That means that it is not possible to quantify the data collected. Qualitative researchers are concerned with understanding the context in which behaviour occurs, not just the statistical extent to which it occurs (Babbie 1992:258). The assessment may be more subjective in that the dependent variables are not necessarily defined in empirical terms. In fact, qualitative researchers are not concerned with a few narrowly defined variables that impact on a phenomenon, but are concerned with the description and interaction of multiple variables, sometimes over a period of time. In qualitative research there is less concern with isolating variables in highly constraint situations like in the experimental procedure, as it is argued that such situations most likely bear little resemblance to real world contexts. This speaks for itself that it is not possible to manipulate data derived from a qualitative variable with statistical techniques. In fact, the 672 Journal of Public Administration • Vol 41 no 3.1 • October 2006 researcher could argue that valid information regarding a specific issue would only be obtained via unstructured interviews (i.e. how people experience their work environment) and in other cases, especially when factual information is needed, via structured interviews (i.e. household expenditure surveys). The structured interview A structured interview is an interview where a respondent is visited by an interviewer that reads the questions from a questionnaire to him/her and writes down his/her responses. The interviewer is usually instructed to ask the questions exactly as it is formulated. This is how the researcher takes maximum control (structures) over the respondent’s frame of reference when responding to questions. This could be typical “yes” or “no” responses to questions, or responses to open-ended questions where respondents are allowed to think within specific parameters when they respond. i.e. how would you describe your work environment? Instruments for structured interviews This type of research instrument has no flexibility. When used with the face-to-face interview technique, it requires that the questions be asked with exactly the same wording and in exactly the same sequence for all the respondents. This standardisation is designed to control response bias by ensuring that the respondents are responding to exactly the same question. For this purposes rigid instructions are often given by the researcher to the interviewers on how to ask the questions in order to improve the quality of the data by minimising measurement error. Needless to mention that this type of data collection instrument requires extensive time and skill to develop. Do’s and don’ts during structured face-to-face interviews • always be friendly and polite; • remember, the researcher is an uninvited guest in conversation with a stranger; • the respondent seldom has any interest in the research, so, be brief, to the point and try to be as acceptable as possible to the respondent from the outset, avoid negative stereotyping (clothes); • make an appointment if the respondent is busy at the specific time; • although refusals are normal, they should be minimised as far as possible. Therefore, always try to convince the respondent to partake in the research; • when open-ended questions are asked, always repeat the response to the respondent, before writing it down, while the respondent must give consent that it is correct, otherwise the researcher deals with the interviewer’s conclusions; • always make sure that the respondent use the relevant frame of reference when he/she responds; • do not probe, unless instructed to do so by the researcher; • refrain from using examples other than appear on the questionnaire, unless the researcher has affirmed it; • use one’s own personality to ask the questions, but be careful in cases where the phrasing of a question is critical for the validity thereof, as the interviewer must stick to the original phrasing of the question; 676 Journal of Public Administration • Vol 41 no 3.1 • October 2006 • show interest in responses, but do not be curious, keep interviews as clinical as possible and do not laugh or be too curious on (for you) unexpected responses; • do not partake in discussions that flow from the topic of the survey or from responses, remember, the questioner should have no opinion on matters, only the respondent has an opinion; • do not show any reaction or emotion to responses from the respondent. The unstructured interview An unstructured interview could take place in various settings, i.e. in the form of a oneon-one interview or a group interview (i.e. focus group discussion) where the interviewer, except for a broad topic announcement, asks no specific questions. The respondent has the freedom to talk about anything within this broad topic. The discussion is usually taped or through notes written down on the content of the discussion. The researcher would analyse the content of the discussion after the discussions when he/ she searches for the essential content that reflects on the purpose of the study. The unstructured interview technique is often used in the historical procedure (i.e. Service delivery by municipalities to the community), or in the case study procedure (i.e. The development of a new Constitution for South Africa). Instruments for unstructured interviews Unstructured instruments are designed to probe extensively in order to extract as much as possible information from the respondent on a specific topic. Unstructured instruments are sometimes also chosen for preliminary and exploratory studies when the research goal includes the discovery of relevant issues. Using this instrument, the researcher has a goal in mind that guides the direction of the remarks made by the respondent, but does not limit the respondent to response options to specific questions. The unstructured interview technique requires highly trained and proficient interviewers and the data emanating from the instrument requires complex data analysis. Do’s and don’ts during unstructured interviews • avoid questions/probing that would provoke a “yes” or “no” response; • the golden rule – the shorter the question, the longer the response; • do not intrude on the respondent’s privacy; • show a interest as a tool for further probing; • use body language to create a relaxed atmosphere; • use body language to show further interest. e.g. nod of head; • use silences to extract more information on a specific statement; • be sensitive for mannerisms that might irritate the respondent; • make sure that you know the research topic well; • keep eye contact with the respondent; • if notes are made, do not let the writing interrupt the natural flow of the discussion; • always ask permission to tape the conversation before doing so; • conduct interviews in a place where the respondent could feel safe to air his/her views; • inform the respondent of the topic of the discussion and make a firm appointment; D.B. Jarbandhan & De Wet Schutte 677 • always confirm the appointment the day before the discussion; • prepare psychologically for the interview through role-playing facilitation. The semi-structured interview A typical semi-structured interview is an interview that uses a questionnaire with only or various open ended questions that would mould the respondent’s frame of reference, whilst at the same time giving him/her the freedom to respond in whatever way he/ she feels like to respond. This means, whatever the respondent wants to say as an answer to a question, would be accepted as a response. It should be noted that in practice, some structured questionnaires could include semi-structured and/or even unstructured questions. However, this does not mean that it was an unstructured or semi-structured interview, but only that some questions have to be treated as such during the structured interview. Instruments for semi–structured interviews This type of instrument is helpful in exploratory research as well as when considering pilot surveys before the finalisation of a questionnaire (Bless and Higson-Smith, 1995:110). In addition, the semi-structured instrument is appropriate when a researcher is certain as to what he/she wants to know, but still wants to leave some room for exploration as the interview proceeds. Situation during the face-to-face interview As mentioned, the face-to-face interview could be employed as part of the data collection technique using from structured to unstructured measuring instruments. It is important to note that unless the interviewer made prior contact with the respondent and made an appointment for the interview, knocking at a door to fill in a questionnaire means that you are an uninvited guest and a positive impression during the first contact is vital for the respondent’s participation in the survey. It is exactly because of this that some respondents refuse the interviewer entry into the house. Therefore, one of the most important elements in the armour of the interviewer is not to provoke negative first impressions. The interviewer must always remember that first impressions from the side of the respondent are important. Researchers must also take note of this when they select interviewers to work in certain communities. Therefore the interviewer should not play a role in eroding the validity and reliability of responses given by a particular respondent. Congruency on as many as possible elements like age, gender, ethnic group and language. between the interviewer and respondent is advisable. So, do not overstay your welcome. Experience also teaches that an interviewer that is too well known in a community might not be able to get truthful answers from respondents, especially if the questions deal with sensitive issues. Thus, in some cases where congruency does not fully exist, it might enhance the validity and reliability of the responses. However, because of the fact that the interviewer deals with verbal communication, matching should always at least be sought on the issue of language. Turning to the duration of interviews, it should be noted that long interviews often result in a lower response rate, an increase in neutral responses and/or stereotyping in 678 Journal of Public Administration • Vol 41 no 3.1 • October 2006 data collection purposes. Though this article did not venture into the different question types or data collection techniques, it is sufficient to state that doing one thing right in a research project does not mean that the end result would produce valid and reliable information. Proper scientific research involves a series of decisions built on the principles that underlies the different procedures. The aim of this article was to address some of the issues pertaining the interview as a data collection technique within the parameters of surveys. However, one issue is clear. One of the most important, but sometimes neglected areas that determine the quality of any information collected in surveys using the interview data collection technique, lies with the quality of the contact between the researcher and the respondent, whether it is via be self-administrative questionnaires or unstructured face-to-face interviews. BIBLIOGRAPHY Moser, C.A. 1958. Survey methods in social investigation. London: William Heinemann Ltd. Babbie, E. 1994. The Practice of Social Research. (7th Edition). Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Babbie, E. 1992. The Practice of Social Research. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Bless, C. and Higson-Smith, C. 1995. Fundamentals of Social Research Methods. An African Perspective. (2nd Edition). Kenwyn: Juta and Kie. De Vos, A.S. (ed.) 2000. Research at grass roots: A primer for the caring professions. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Welman, J.C. and Kruger, S.J. 2001. Research Methodology. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. D.B. Jarbandhan & De Wet Schutte 681