Doing the data analysis means that the researcher ultimately moves from the collected material into an interpretation of the phenomenon that is being examined (Gibbs, 2002). After each interview, I listened to the interview recording and wrote a summary which helped me to reflect on what I had learned during the interview and give me a general overview of the main ideas the interviewees had expressed. The summary of the interviews was accompanied by writing small memos of the aspects I should pay attention to in the next interviews. Therefore, the data analysis started already while I was collecting the data. Through this, I got a general sense of the collected data on which I was able to reflect. Through simultaneous involvement in data collection and
47 analysis, I was better able to prepare for the interviews that followed by coming up with new and relevant questions. By the end of the eighth interview, I started to feel I was not finding any new information anymore, and therefore I had reached theoretical saturation (Glaser, 1978), but decided for assurance to conduct additional two interviews. By the end of the tenth interview, no new information in relation to the research questions was found, which meant that I had attained the theoretical saturation. After I had collected all the interviews, I moved deeper into understanding the information given by the interview participants. Instead of working through the data manually, by for example, cutting segments of the interviews out and placing them into different categories or moving between different files, I used the qualitative data analysis software program NVivo for assistance in the analysis process. I entered the verbatim transcribed interviews into the NVivo program and continued there with a detailed coding process. Using the program helped me to be faster and more effectively organize data into codes, which in the end of the process formed categories or themes. In the initial coding process, I generated as many ideas as possible inductively from the data. While reading the data, I was giving conceptual labels or names such as ‘Missing everyday support’ or ‘Fearing what the other might be doing’ to each sentence or group of sentences with the same underlying idea so that their meaning remains intact. Unlike coding line by line, this prevented me from getting lost in the data, and not coding paragraphs, which often have many underlying ideas, allowed me to be inclusive and exhaustive in my coding process (Humble, 2012). In NVivo this process is referred to as ‘coding at a new node’. Sometimes this meant that I was able to code information under an already existing code. Yet, most important was that the created label was able to grasp the meaning behind the coded data. Doing this kept me as close to the data as possible so that the analysis would not be as strongly influenced by the literature I had been previously reading and that I would not overlook important information.
After the initial coding, I refined my research questions aiming for clarity and coherence. In the next phase of the coding process I categorized codes into units with higher level of meaning based on my research questions, making sure that I had created new categories or themes which correspond to all the codes clustered together. The codes were reviewed repeatedly. While coding, I was comparing pieces of data with each other for the purpose of not forcing preconceived ideas directly on the data. I
48 grouped codes which were connected to one another into categories reducing their overall amount. As a result of the analysis, I had themes emerged from the data, which made up the structure for the research findings presented in the following section of the thesis. Altogether, I identified 4 general themes.
I am aware of the biased attitude of many qualitative researchers towards the use of qualitative data analysis software: “So ingrained is this view that even though computer programs represent a genuine advancement over manual methods of data analysis and have been designed to help speed up the process, some researchers continue to resist their use’’ (Thompson, 2002: para. 4). Therefore, it needs to be mentioned that the NVivo software program did not analyse or interpret the data for me at any point. I, as the researcher, was still ‘the main tool for analysis’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005) as I was the one giving meaning to the themes that emerged from the data. Moreover, although the codes were built in the program, they were the product of my thinking. The programme was there only to assist me in organising the interview material, in remembering what the interviews are about, and helping me to analyse it systematically (Konopásek, 2008). Using NVivo allowed doing the same procedures than a researcher working with papers, glue, scissors and coloured markers, or a researcher moving between different files, but gave even more options (Konopásek, 2008).
In treating the interview material, I have used a combination of both a naturalist and constructionist epistemological approach. The naturalist approach “seeks rich descriptions of people as they exist and unfold in their natural habitats”, while the constructionist approach seeks to show “how a sense of social order is created through talk and interaction” (Gubrium & Holstein, 1997: 5). In this way I have seemingly positioned myself as a researcher between two opposites. As both of these approaches to interview material focus on the daily life of people including the things they experience (Elliot, 2005: 18), which is important for this study, I do not see the need to exclude the one or the other. I am interested both in the interviewees’ life events related to transnational family life, or in other words the ‘facts’ such as the frequency of calling or the regularity behind the face-to-face meetings, highlighted in my analysis by descriptive accounts common to a naturalist approach, but also in the processes how the interviewees give meaning to these occurrences, which is a characteristic of the constructionist approach (Gubrium & Holstein, 1997). As the data analysis is based on ten different interviews and not on a much larger quantity of interviews, I was also able
49 to gain an in-depth understanding not only about the themes that arose in the coding process, but also of each participant (Fink, 2000).
To protect the anonymity of the interviewees, the names presented in the research results section by the interview quotations are pseudonyms. I am aware that different members of a family may perceive their family’s experiences differently. Since the study focuses on the accounts of the partners who remained living in Estonia, while bringing out the results of the analysis I remain aware that they do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the migrant partners, nor the children, as they are based on the subjective perspective of those who stayed living in Estonia. Nevertheless, the experiences of the interviewees challenge current understanding of transnational family life and add new and revealing dimensions to it.
While reporting the research results, I also remain aware of the fact that the roles and responsibilities of family members can change over time, especially when the children grow older. I am also taking into consideration my personal background in interpreting the themes, especially as at the time of the interviews, I had been living for about two and a half years in Finland. In a way, because of this, I was able to relate to some of the migrant partners’ experiences such as travelling between Finland and Estonia or having a limited amount of time to be able to spend in Estonia. Although the study is based on the perspectives of the stay-behind partners, I felt that because of my own experience of living in Finland, I had a good understanding of what the migrant partners may be feeling in some circumstances. This, however, may have caused me to give more attention to parts in the analysis where I encountered similarities to my own experiences. The results of the whole analysis will be presented in the following section.
50
6 Research results
The following section draws on the experiences and perspectives of stay-behind partners of labour migrants for exploring transnational family life. The first two chapters highlight the ways how family relationships are sustained during periods of separation. In the latter two chapters, I will first focus on family life while the stay- behind partner is living alone, and later I will turn to family life in the mutual co- presence of the partners. The first half of the results section also provides a necessary context for understanding how family responsibilities are divided during different temporalities of absence and presence of the partners.