Qualitative_data_analysis

WHAT IS QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS? 37
entendre, irony—humour often works by conveying an implicit message. If this
message doesn’t register with its recipient, then the humorist fails to communicate his
or her meaning successfully. We don’t get the joke. (This is different from seeing
the joke, but not finding it funny.) In humour, there is no recovery from this
disaster, and the joke falls flat. But in social research, we can always ask humorists to
explain themselves.
In qualitative analysis there is a strong emphasis on describing the world as it is
perceived by different observers. For some, this is the hallmark of the qualitative
approach, distinguishing it from supposedly ‘positivist’ social science. Setting aside
this ideological debate about ‘legitimate’ methods, we can certainly acknowledge
that qualitative analysis is usually concerned with how actors define situations, and
explain the motives which govern their actions. Though as researchers we may
develop our own concepts for analysing these actions, we want to ensure that this
relates to intentions of the actors involved.
If we were studying dating and mating through the personal ads, then it would
obviously be useful to describe the intentions of the advertisers in submitting ads
and of respondents in replying to them. The intentions and perceptions of subjects
often enjoy a privileged position in qualitative research, because of the access they
can give us to the meaning of action for particular observers. But this does not
entail that meaning is reduced to a personal matter. For example, the meanings of
our personal ads can be examined through a variety of contexts, including the ‘rules
of the game’, its cultural significance, its social organization and its psychological or
economic rewards as well as its personal meaning for participants or audience. Often
our description of these various facets may depend on what the subjects of our
research can tell us about them. But there are also other sources which—through
observation and experience—may give access to the meanings invested in social
action.
There is another sense, too, in which meaning cannot be reduced to a personal
matter. If meaning is inherently ambivalent and context-dependent, we cannot rely
on our subjects’ intentions as an unequivocal guide to interpretation. Our subjects
perceive and define situations, including their own intentions, according to their
understanding of their own motivations, and of the contexts in which they act.
Neither motivations nor contexts are self-evident, and we have to allow for the usual
mix of ignorance and self-deception, delusions and lies. We may sometimes behave
as rational actors whose actions are governed by knowledge, but we also sometimes
behave as social actors whose actions are dictated by drives, impulses, appetites,
instincts and intuitions. Alongside the conscious intellect we must recognize the
subconscious will. The Freudian division between id, ego and superego emphasizes
the inconsistencies and contradictions which characterize the human personality and