Data Analysis Protocol

The information was processed using a systematic approach to ensure that appropriate themes and categories were created and aligned with the research objective. The following section lists the steps that were followed in order to ensure analytical rigour when analysing the interview data. Hycner’s (1999) guidelines for the qualitative analysis of interview data were followed. These are now described:

 Transcription: The interview tapes were transcribed within one week of each interview session. Mergenthaler and Stinson’s (1992) principles for transcription were applied. Firstly, the morphologic naturalness of the transcript was preserved. This was achieved by keeping the transcription of word forms, the form of commentaries, and the use of punctuation identical to speech presentation. The transcript was an

exact reproduction or verbatim account, consisting of the literal statements of the

interviewees. Ensuring that the text was clearly structured by speech markers

preserved the naturalness of the transcript structure. For the purpose of categorising

and identifying the relevant interview source, quotes transcribed direct from tape were followed by “FGx” where “x” refers to the interview group; for example, a quote

from Focus Group 2 is referenced as “FG2”. Where a response is of a male student it is referenced as (MS) and for a female student (FS). For the purpose of tracking individual quotes, numbers were then applied to both male and female respondents (e.g. MS1, FS1, etc.). The transcriptions were completed as Word Documents, which subsequently facilitated their further examination and coding using Excel.

 Listening to the interview for a sense of the whole: The entire tape was listened to several times and the transcriptions were read a number of times. This provided a sense of the whole interview, a gestalt (Giorgi 1975, p.87) and a context for the emergence of specific units of meaning and themes. Particular attention was paid to the non-verbal and pare-linguistic levels of communication, that is, the intonations, the emphases, and pauses. With repeated reading and listening to the audiotapes, the researcher became familiar with the data to the point of immersion resulting in a heightened level of understanding.

 Delineating units of general meaning: Every word, phrase, sentence, paragraph in the transcript was examined and significant nonverbal communication such as emphasis was noted in order to elicit the participant’ meanings. This was done with as much openness as possible. This process attempted to get at the essence of the meaning expressed, while trying to stay very close to the literal data. In order to provide structure to this approach, Semantic Content Analysis (Stewart and Shamdasani, 2015) was employed. This consisted of three different types of analysis.

1) In the first instance designation analysis was used to determine the frequency with which certain objects (i.e. persons, institutions, or concepts) are mentioned.

2) Secondly, attribution analysis was used to examine the frequency with which certain characterizations or descriptors are used. The emphasis was on adjectives, adverbs, descriptive phrases, and qualifiers rather than the targets of these parts of speech.

3) The final content analysis method employed was assertions analysis, which examined the frequency with which certain objects (persons, institutions, etc.) were characterized in a particular way. Assertions analysis

involved combining designation analysis and attribution analysis. This data was entered into an Excel file and formed the initial attempt to identify linkages among subsequently coded data (Marshall and Rossman (2011).

 First level coding: Providing further structure to the process, coding was conducted in order to identify reoccurring relationships amongst the data. This consisted of bracketing and labelling important words, ideas, phrases, and sentences to identify any patterns. The titles of these first level codes reflected the pattern or relationship that they identified and were allocated by the researcher.

 Delineating units of meaning relevant to the research question: Once the units of general meaning had been noted, they were examined in relation to the research question and theoretical framework, in order to determine whether what the interviewee had said relates to and illuminates the research question.

 Clustering units of relevant meaning: Having examined the list of units of relevant meaning, the researcher then sought to determine if any of the units of relevant meaning naturally clustered together, i.e. whether there seemed to be some common theme that united several discrete units of relevant meaning. According to Hycner such an essence emerges through rigorously examining each individual unit of relevant meaning and trying to elicit what is the essence of that unit of meaning given the context.

 Determining recurring themes from clusters of meaning: Finally, at this stage, it was determined that there were certain recurring topics that express the essence of these clusters. Additional second level codes were established to identify these themes. The titles of these codes reflected the themes that had emerged from the data relating to adolescents’ experiences of cyberbullying and the factors that influenced their reporting responses. These coded themes facilitated a more comprehensive understanding the phenomenon. As a number of themes had emerged, for the purpose of manageability these were condensed into a hierarchal list that was then considered in terms of the theoretical framework on relational aggression. Hycner (1999) notes that if the research has done a good job of bracketing presuppositions, is very open to

the data, and yet utilises a rigorous approaches, the danger of inappropriate subjective judgements creeping in is likely to be minimal.

 Thematic Notes: Throughout this data analysis process, thematic notes were written under each piece of data to aid with comprehension and organisation. As Marshall and Rossman (2011) note, writing can help the analyst to create linkages among further coded data. These thematic notes formed an integral aspect of the data analysis process, as along with the coded data, they assisted in the development of understanding of the factors, motivations and concerns that influence gifted adolescents reporting of their cyberbullying experiences.

 Eliminating redundancies: The list of units of relevant meaning was re- examined and those that were clearly redundant to the research question were eliminated. This involved not only the literal content but also the number of times a meaning was mentioned and how it was mentioned. This step of the analysis protocol also ensured that no unit of relevant meaning was overlooked and served as an extra check stage of the process.

 Searching for Alternative Meanings: The data was examined for alternative meanings. Once saturation of the data occurred and patterns emerged repeatedly, the researcher scrutinized the collected information, looking for faulty approaches, and early mistakes (Marshall & Rossman, 2011). This portion of analysis focused on finding information that had not emerged from the initial coding process. A list of alternate meanings from the data was compiled and used it to develop alternate themes. Establishing alternative understanding can facilitate future associations between the most apparent findings and less obvious correlations.

 Identifying general and unique findings: Based on the thematic clusters that emerged from the data analysis and their consideration in relation to the research question and theoretical framework, initial inferences were made which imposed meaning on the interview data. These findings included the following: the definition of cyberbullying behaviour based on individual perception, gender

differences in cyberbullying behaviour and experience of such behaviour, the impact of cyberbullying behaviour, factors influencing non-reporting response and factors influencing choice of reportee.

A final point worth mentioning it that considerable care was taken to ensure that the researcher did not impose his voice on the analysis of findings. Throughout the process of the study, the data was repeatedly analysed to ensure that the analysis and final summation accurately reflected the meaning that had been attributed to it by the participants. Additionally, all findings were presented precisely and the thematic clusters represented the perspective of multiple study participants, rather than any singular view. It has been suggested (e.g. Creswell & Clark, 2011) that in any research study, when multiple data sources are used, the accuracy of the research study increases. This study employed three different forms of qualitative data: (a) demographic profile sheets; (b) semi-structured interviews; and (c) field notes. Finally, the same process was employed to interview and organize the information for all three focus group interviews.

4.8 Summary

This chapter has discussed the methodology that was employed in this study of adolescent non-reporting of cyberbullying and the reasons underlying that decision. It has described the rationale behind the research design and choice of qualitative approach that was adopted. The information was transcribed, coded, and entered into a matrix following an established qualitative data analysis protocol that has been described in detail. This process assisted the researcher with organizing the data for reporting the results and considering implications. Given the nature of the research and age-range of the participants, prior to conducting the study, ethical approval was sought and granted by Dublin City University. The nature of the ethical considerations has also been detailed. In the next chapter, the focus group findings and implications of the research are discussed.

CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS

5.0 Introduction

This chapter outlines the findings obtained from the three focus group interviews that were conducted with adolescent students attending the summer CTYI (Centre for Talented Youth of Ireland) School at Dublin City University. The three focus groups comprised 17, 19 and 23 students respectively (59 in total) aged 13-17 inclusive, with both genders equally represented. The focus group interview guide (Appendix D) encompassed the following issues:

 Experience of cyberbullying,

 Context of cyberbullying experience

 Reasons for not reporting to teachers, parents and adult caregivers  Underlying reasons for choice of reportee.

 Impact of cyberbullying experience.

The FGIs provided interesting and richly detailed insights into the sample’s experience of adolescent cyberbullying and their reasons for non-reporting. Certain findings emerged as consistent themes across all three FGIs. These are categorised into four main topics. The first topic addresses adolescent perceptions of what constitutes cyberbullying. The second topic addresses personal experiences and observations of cyberbullying amongst these groups of adolescents. Topic three addresses the effects of cyberbullying on these groups of adolescents and their observations of effects on those of siblings and friends. Finally, topic four addresses response behaviours to cyberbullying behaviour, specifically the factors that influenced non-reporting response and the rationale behind the adolescent’s choice of reportee. These themes are discussed in sequence and in relation to the extant literature.