The analysis in the research process: Research blocks and moments

The task of analysis is not strange to the research process as a whole. How I have been exposing the analysis begins at the same moment I am thinking about the problem, in the techniques of information gathering, in the recording of the notes. It cannot be reduced to one stage or another step of the investigation. It is important to identify poles or blocks in the research process to the extent that it is a process that does not follow a sequence of steps (Bruyne, et al., 1997). The idea of steps indicates a logical and chronological sequence that makes the proposal rigid. The existence of a set of research and planning experiences allows researcher to summarise a series of poles, blocks or moments that act, alone, as a guide for the process of investigation. For the elaboration of these moments the experiences were taken into account and proposals by (Bosco Pinto, 1978); (Le Boterf, 1980); (UNESCO & UNICEF, 1976, 1977); (Fals Borda, 1977); (Cortazo, 1985) with the objective of adapting the diversity of procedures recommended to the specific characteristics that the researcher will have to face in the study. In qualitative research as Cottle says (2007) it is important to try to make participants see that the investigator seek their words and their responses, and not material for the creation of something that ultimately transcends their words and, therefore, their lives.

According to (Plummer, 1989) when facing an investigation there are four groups of problems that I must consider and that are present at all times, that is, before, during and at the end of the investigation: 1. Scientific / social that refers to justification and the reasons. It revolves around epistemological arguments, 2. Technical / practical that refers to practical issues: the sample, the techniques, the validity, how it happens, 3. Ethical / political, political justification and ethical dilemmas that arise during it, 4. Personnel, the impact of the researcher's personal life on the investigation. In the other hand, the same author points out that in all

142

social research, work field includes five processes that must be taken into account: 1. The preparations, 2. Entry to the field and information gathering, 3. Data storage, 4. Data analysis, 5. Presentation of the data. In the preparation, at first, the entrance to the field, has to do with the permission to enter that space that does not belong to us; how we enter will depend on our research. This is a delicate moment regardless of the place chosen. Field work is extremely complex and although it seems an easy task it is not, so; in principle I observe the immediate situation and the context; it makes us not to lose the view of the theoretical orientation that accompanies the entire research process. The choice of the place, the clear definition of the problems to investigate and the task that I am going to carry out is an arduous task. Our task is continuous and there is a constant negotiation at stake and what I intend to obtain is something difficult to achieve. These preparations include to know the information that is necessary, thinking about the problem that I want to investigate and the motivations that led me to think about that problem, to determine the population to be studied; how to choose, who to choose? This involves two types of strategies: 1. Randomly, where the subject is not chosen but emerges from a broad context (of either way - at some point - I must specify certain criteria), 2. Formal, trying to explain theoretical or methodological criteria for your choice.

Another important aspect is the search for key informants. I must track among trusted people who know the land where I intend to work to contact for this step. How to start that contact? It can be formal, through a request in which the researcher must not only show up but also indicate what he/she intends to do, how he/she would do it, in what this would benefit the subjects and what are the scope of the research. Or, informally, the researcher will resort to acquaintances, to some member of the community and he/she should be very clear in the explanation of his objectives. This type of approach is very fruitful since whoever introduces us will have to explain who we are and our good intentions. Additionally, I must emphasise the importance of the selection of the best instruments that would allow

143

us to obtain the information that we need. The researcher must accommodate the role by entering, remaining and withdrawing the interview place, leaving the subjects free, trying not to interfere with their activities. After leaving the field we should take notes that allow us to establish the relationship between what we have seen and what we have heard, with the theoretical referential in a coming and going, in a spiral shape, where thinking categories are reformulated, re-signified and refined. In this round trip we should not forget the gestures, the relationships between subjects, verbalizations, the location of people, networks. In the other hand, we must consider several aspects when starting our interview work. In first place, the relationship with the subjects, giving participants a clear explanation of what we are looking for, including the motivations for which we are interested in working with them. Also, we have to remember the way we access them, thinking about the others as subjects that implies respect for the other, understanding, avoiding prejudices. Subjects must feel comfortable, not invaded, researchers should remain unnoticed, avoiding making subjects to feel like objects. Researchers should agree with the subjects how the data will be recorded, that is, if they will record, film or simply if they will make a written record. Also, we have to carefully comply the time of the interview, days and hour of meetings, we must consider that the schedule has to be convenient for subjects with whom I intend to work. While in the interview, researcher must listen and strive to create trust situations, guaranteeing confidentiality, discerning between public and private; what it is confidential or a secret.

5.4 Coding

Facing the task of analysing qualitative data means assuming both, academic and ideological positions and faces challenges and difficulties of its nature. The great amount of information, the unrepeatable phenomena, the proximity to common sense, the need to achieve analytical richness and narrative depth, make the

144

analysis a task that presents itself as an exciting challenge. Discussions and positions about how to analyse qualitative data are numerous; there are those who use computer packages, others who prefer speech analysis; there are those who consider pragmatically that there is no need to go deeper into epistemological issues; or those that – like Miles and Huberman (1994)- are closer to the confluence of diverse theoretical perspectives, others consider that the theoretical framework must precede the analytical and there are those that sustain the combination of the great theory associated with computer techniques; this last posture has been extended profusely - especially - in the United States. I believe that strict systematization is not possible beyond a general orientation and that analysis begins at the same time that researchers are thinking about the problem to be investigated, the techniques to be used, in what to ask, who and how to choose the places, and even at the same time that I plan how to record the notes (Author’s Note). Notes are also constructions that allow even reorienting research. The idea of not separation of actions but of overlapping tasks, supposes that the analysis cannot be reduced to a stage or step of the investigation; analysis is present in all process. It is clear that the challenges and difficulties are related to our perspective, which is based on the understanding of the subjects involved in the investigation; this is the point where the network of relationships between subjects and society is highlighted, between the particular facts and general explanations. Analysing qualitative data is fascinating since it involves discovering the depth of what has been said, of the unsaid, of the expressed, of the gestural, is to make sense of the materials from the most diverse sources; experiences obtained by the researcher during his permanence in the research premises, the documents that are produced by the different actors (visual, written, acted). Thus, different expressions, different situations, like pieces of a puzzle that come together, articulating one by one, in the search for understanding and interpreting the data. One of the most important decisions of qualitative analysis is manifested when the Information obtained must be condensed in order to think about meanings, themes, categories and, finally, conclusions. The information presented is infinite and

145

therefore It must be stored, pre-encoded, encoded, cut, added, examined and considered.

Individual semi-structured audio-recorded interviews were used along with a researcher’s journal and a reflexivity analysis process during data collection in order to record recurring themes and to better understand participants’ constructions of meaning within the answer’s context. The use of contextual grounding is essential to understand the meanings that participants make of their experiences, thus, qualitative researchers can recontextualise their interview-based data by examining contextual issues that may impact the data (Morrow, 1992). The storage of information, in the case of quantitative research, is relatively simple, it does not present great difficulties, but the same does not happen in qualitative research where a bad location in the coding system created can totally change the meaning of the information. The researcher interprets chasing meanings from the stored findings. On the other hand, I understand that the foundation of the exercise itself cannot be separated from the investigative task. Thinking about the activity that is carried out is part of that activity; decide the most appropriate methodological strategy, the theory that includes the case or which will be It is also necessary to ask about the object of study and the position to be adopted when perform the interpretation. I also deduce that this object is not predetermined, it means that it is science that creates the object of study. As Bourdieu states:

“An object of investigation, no matter how partial and partial, may not be defined and constructed but based on a theoretical problem that allows submit to a systematic review all aspects of reality put into relationship by the problems that are raised” (Bourdieu, 1975, p. 47)

But in a sense, the theoretical problem, is subject to ideological political currents in which scientific communities are immersed, both national and globalised. I agree

146

with Becker (1993) when he states that researchers should “feel free” to invent methods and strategies that allow them to unveil the problems which pose to investigate.

“It is like ordering to build your own house. Although there are general principles of construction, there are not two architects that work the same way and there are not two owners with the same needs. In this way, the solutions to the problems of construction must always be improvised” (p. 258)

The readings that I make in my codifications are cuts, interpretations, possible readings. About this, Okley says (1994: 32, in Valles, 1997: 340)

“... writing and analysis comprise a movement between the tangible and the intangible, the cerebral and the sensual, the visible and the invisible”.

During reading, re-reading and interpreting the collected material, I was rediscovering the text along with the meeting of a note that allowed me to reorient the investigation. Own comments are the constant auxiliaries of the researcher remembering places, dates, circumstances, I open more and more paths and lead us to new interpretations. To analyse is to decode words, meanings, senses, gestures, movements, expressions and in decoding I "over coded" as Barthes said (1994) since that over coding no longer deciphers but produces. That is, I understand the theory as a toolbox, and this is very different from understanding it as the signifier. The analyst must perform a microanalysis that is a thorough study of the data. This implies a first interpretation. At this moment the theoretical sensitivity of the researcher is very important to extract the essence of the data, to develop concepts and to establish relationships between them. The data speaks for themselves, the researcher must perform questions such as: How could I interpret

147

what the Interviewee is saying? What is there in this material? Is it important to know what meaning this word has or what it could mean? This microanalysis includes an open coding and an axial coding (Andréu Abela, et al., 2007) and is aimed at finding the meaning of the data.

Open coding

Open coding is an analytical procedure by which data is fractured and opened to bring to light the thoughts, ideas and meanings that they contain in order to discover, label and develop concepts. Discover categories and name them with a code is done in the first moments of the investigation. Inductive steps are followed, such as putting categories to the data without preconditions, establishing a line-by- line analysis, which means not making a panoramic approach but a microscopic one, matching the context where the coding categories or paradigm manifest; this would allow me to rank the categories.

Axial coding

Axial coding occurs when establishing hierarchical relationships with subcategories - properties and dimensions - around a category taken as the axis. You get a scheme that better facilitates the understanding of phenomena and provides a path to configure the central category.

At this point, I must emphasise that coding is not synonymous of analysing. Coding is grouping information into themes and categories that rely on similar concepts and topics. I code from transcripts, documents, testimonies, putting a code outside the

148

paragraphs however some researchers consider easier to number them. Even if I find negative data it must be encoded. A Researcher must procure - constantly – to refine the encodings either suppressing or redefining them. Many times, as in quantitative research I must build a codebook, those codes must be defined, clear and mutually excluding, this allows, when there is more than one researcher, that everyone interprets the same or in the same way; in any case they are tentative codes that - as the analysis progress in the successive reads - are acquiring a greater permanence.

Miles and Huberman (1994) pointed out that there are three types of codes: 1. Descriptive, that require little or no interpretation.

2. Interpretive, which supposes greater interpretation and knowledge of the data.