Women's Decision-Making And Factors Affecting Their Choice Of ...
Women's Decision-Making And Factors Affecting Their Choice Of ... Women's Decision-Making And Factors Affecting Their Choice Of ...
each other and may influence each other. The interview situation is therefore specific to the moment and the people involved. The interpersonal dynamics of the interaction should be taken into consideration during the time of the interview, and subsequently during the analysis (Dey 1993; Kvale 1996; Sapsford and Jupp 1996). Kvale (1996) argues that the reciprocal influence of interviewer and interviewee on a cognitive and emotional level is not necessarily a source of error, but can be a strong point of qualitative research interviewing. The emphasis therefore should not be on reducing the impact of the interaction, but rather to recognise and apply the knowledge gained from the interpersonal interaction. Maykut and Morehouse (1994) maintain that if the knower and the known are interdependent, there must be integrity between how the researcher experiences the participants in the study, how the participants experience the situation and their participation in it, and how the results are presented. Logic is the third category, and it deals with principles of demonstration or verification. Pertinent questions about the logic of inquiry are: Are causal links between bits of information possible? What is the possibility of generalisation (Maykut and Morehouse 1994)? The view of the naturalistic approach is that events shape each other, and that multidirectional relationships can be discovered within situations. Qualitative research is context sensitive, that is, a phenomenon is studied in all its complexity and within a particular situation and environment. Generalisation of a qualitative theory would therefore be restricted within the same context, but should fit all scenarios that may be identified in the larger population. The theory is also considered applicable beyond the immediate group to similar situations, questions, and problems (Morse 1999c). To demonstrate generalisability of qualitative research, a study on privacy conducted in an all- 75
male nursing home is used (Applegate and Morse 1994). In that study respect for privacy norms occurred whenever people treated one another as they would treat another human being, friend or stranger. If they treated one another not as humans, but objects, then violation of privacy norms occurred. This meant that the type of inter-personal relationships provided the context in which privacy norms are respected or violated. Results are considered applicable to any context in which the problem of privacy violation is a concern. The last category, teleology, is concerned with questions of purpose. The main questions are: What is the contribution of research to knowledge? What is the purpose of research? The contribution of the naturalistic inquiry to knowledge is through its discovery of salient propositions by observation and careful inspection of patterns, which emerge from the data (Maykut and Morehouse 1994). The discovery comes from the carefully selected, usually small sample in a qualitative inquiry, which is studied in-depth. The sample size in a qualitative study is relatively small; 6-8 participants for homogenous samples, and 12-20 for maximum variations (Zyzanski, McWhinney, Blake et al 1992). Each participant is selected purposefully for the potential contribution they can make to the emerging theory (Kvale 1996; Mason 1996; Patton 1990). The selection ensures that the theory is comprehensive, complete, saturated, and accounts for negative cases (Morse 1999b). The purposeful selection of participants for the contribution they could make in a research study is called theoretical sampling (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Hammersley 1985; Miles and Huberman 1994; Strauss 1987; Strauss and Corbin 1990) and is the cornerstone in qualitative research. 76
- Page 25 and 26: The Expert Maternity Group gathered
- Page 27 and 28: • The woman and, if she wishes, h
- Page 29 and 30: Chapter 2: Risk perception Chapter
- Page 31 and 32: From the health practitioner's pers
- Page 33 and 34: 1979), is a second approach to unde
- Page 35 and 36: normative factor. The individual's
- Page 37 and 38: and then choose the place they cons
- Page 39 and 40: example, they worried that the valu
- Page 41 and 42: they can easily imagine or recall a
- Page 43 and 44: are not necessarily chosen because
- Page 45 and 46: make decisions that are not necessa
- Page 47 and 48: Chapter 3: Systematic review of fac
- Page 49 and 50: considered. Primary research design
- Page 51 and 52: If the question of the review is no
- Page 53 and 54: Cochrane Database of Systematic rev
- Page 55 and 56: Table 2: Search terms used Search t
- Page 57 and 58: Table 3: Journals that were hand se
- Page 59 and 60: solely on the basis of the study re
- Page 61 and 62: they were recruited, at what stage
- Page 63 and 64: ,,, ... .g eD .E 0 o 4,7; (.5 g .5
- Page 65 and 66: -o -cs •b a) ..o ,:" .., -0 ti-,
- Page 67 and 68: Quality of studies included in the
- Page 69 and 70: ole to play in their preferences fo
- Page 71 and 72: The next chapter discusses methodol
- Page 73 and 74: observable behaviour are used (Holl
- Page 75: known? What roles do values play in
- Page 79 and 80: The procedure ensures a vigorous se
- Page 81 and 82: investigation have for the particip
- Page 83 and 84: In method triangulation, different
- Page 85 and 86: the context being studied. They fur
- Page 87 and 88: access to all settings, and the dat
- Page 89 and 90: access participants' private accoun
- Page 91 and 92: There is an argument for analysing
- Page 93 and 94: analysis, asking additional questio
- Page 95 and 96: that while such an approach can nev
- Page 97 and 98: Chapter 5: Qualitative Study of Wom
- Page 99 and 100: potential participants, as well as
- Page 101 and 102: either. Three months passed, there
- Page 103 and 104: The interview was transcribed the s
- Page 105 and 106: elevant. The environment of the hom
- Page 107 and 108: wanted to explore. Consequently, th
- Page 109 and 110: Most women offered coffee or tea, a
- Page 111 and 112: All women who participated in the s
- Page 113 and 114: The process of analysis was iterati
- Page 115 and 116: h4,u husbovzi would sou thnt lie fe
- Page 117 and 118: transcripts and compared them with
- Page 119 and 120: ecause they previously had short un
- Page 121 and 122: Figure 2: Analysis mind map Hospita
- Page 123 and 124: quotation in the transcript, denote
- Page 125 and 126: itiust put me off of birth, fuLL st
each other and may influence each other. The interview situation is therefore<br />
specific to the moment and the people involved. The interpersonal dynamics of<br />
the interaction should be taken into consideration during the time of the interview,<br />
and subsequently during the analysis (Dey 1993; Kvale 1996; Sapsford and Jupp<br />
1996). Kvale (1996) argues that the reciprocal influence of interviewer and<br />
interviewee on a cognitive and emotional level is not necessarily a source of error,<br />
but can be a strong point of qualitative research interviewing. The emphasis<br />
therefore should not be on reducing the impact of the interaction, but rather to<br />
recognise and apply the knowledge gained from the interpersonal interaction.<br />
Maykut and Morehouse (1994) maintain that if the knower and the known are<br />
interdependent, there must be integrity between how the researcher experiences<br />
the participants in the study, how the participants experience the situation and<br />
their participation in it, and how the results are presented.<br />
Logic is the third category, and it deals with principles of demonstration or<br />
verification. Pertinent questions about the logic of inquiry are: Are causal links<br />
between bits of information possible? What is the possibility of generalisation<br />
(Maykut and Morehouse 1994)? The view of the naturalistic approach is that<br />
events shape each other, and that multidirectional relationships can be discovered<br />
within situations.<br />
Qualitative research is context sensitive, that is, a phenomenon is studied<br />
in all its complexity and within a particular situation and environment.<br />
Generalisation of a qualitative theory would therefore be restricted within the<br />
same context, but should fit all scenarios that may be identified in the larger<br />
population. The theory is also considered applicable beyond the immediate group<br />
to similar situations, questions, and problems (Morse 1999c). To demonstrate<br />
generalisability of qualitative research, a study on privacy conducted in an all-<br />
75
Change language