Data Collection and Analysis of Research Question Two, Three and Four

Research question two: Did the branding strategies used by political parties in Rossendale and Darwen during the 2015 General Election result in voters having an overall positive or negative perception of the party’s political product offering?

Research question three: Is one element of the political product offer more influential and effective in terms of managing voter’s perceptions of the overall party than the others?

Research question four: Do voters view commercial branding more positively or negatively than political branding?

In order to obtain and understand voters views and perceptions of political party brands, five focus groups were held. A focus group is a small panel of people led by a moderator, to focus discussion on the topic in hand and usually lasts for between one and two hours. Focus groups allow the moderator to focus and guide the group in an exchange of perceptions, feelings, ideas and experiences on the specific topic of branding in politics (Blumberg, Cooper and Schindler, 2014). Focus groups also enable the moderator to observe interactions between respondents thus gaining richer, more in depth, information on the subject matter (Bryman and Bell, 2015) as well as allowing data to be gathered in a more economical and time effective manner (Blumberg, et al, 2014) These advantages were the primary motivation for undertaking qualitative focus groups rather than using other methods such as interviews or quantitative questionnaires.

Each focus group had between six and eight participants, the suggested amount for effective data collection (Stewart and Shamdasani, 2015). The focus groups were split into age categories; ages 18-30, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60 and 61+. This allowed the researcher to, firstly, divide the participants into manageable group sizes and, secondly, to determine if age is a factor in the way voters respond to political branding.

Every focus group was held in the same location with the room set up in the same way. Identical materials, hand outs and focus group schedules were used for each group. The focus group was designed to last between 60 and 90 minutes and split into four different tasks, outlined in the focus

33 group design schedule, see Appendix 2 - Focus group design schedule. Similar to the interview design schedule, the conceptual model of political brand equity (Ahmed, et al. 2015) and the political offer model (Butler and Collins, 1994) were both utilised in the structuring of the tasks and questions. The focus groups were designed to help understand how effectively the three key elements of the political brand were managed during the 2015 General Election by seeking to understand awareness, image and perception to understand brand strength and equity.

In order to ensure that the most valid and appropriate sample of participants was used in the research, 'self-selection' and 'purposive' sampling methods were used. Self-selection sampling is a volunteer sampling technique which allows participants to identify their desire to take part in the research (Saunders, et al, 2016). The researcher used social media, email and leaflets to publicise the research to potential participants (see Appendix 3 - Letter of invitation to take part in the research). Participants then contacted the researcher by the email or phone number provided expressing their desire to take part. Purposive sampling was used to ensure the sample would best enable the researcher to answer the research question. Purposive sampling required the researcher to use their judgment to ensure that the research used a clearly defined sample (Clark-Carter, 2010), in this case people who lived in the constituency of Rossendale and Darwen at the time of the 2015 general election and were of voting age or above. The research is specifically focused on voters in Rossendale and Darwen and therefore it was extremely important that the sample reflected this.

The discussions within the focus groups were all recorded and then transcribed to enable the

researcher to code and analyse the data. Thematic analysis, a qualitative descriptive approach, was used throughout the research. Thematic analysis is a useful method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns and themes (Vaismoradi, Turunen and Bondas, 2013). The researcher followed the 6 processes of data analysis in thematic analysis developed by Braun and Clarke (2006). This involves firstly becoming familiar with the data through transcription and reading; generating initial codes; searching for themes; reviewing the themes; naming the themes and, finally, writing,

discussing and concluding the results. Appendix 5 outlines the open, axial and selective codes which were used to develop the overall themes that are discussed in greater detail in Chapters 4 and 5.

Table 3: 6 processes of data analysis in thematic analysis

Process Methodology

1.) Familiarising with data Transcribing data, reading and rereading the data, noting down initial ideas

2.) Generating initial codes Coding interesting features of the data

systematically across the entire data set, collating data relevant to each code.

34 all data relevant to each potential theme.

4.) Reviewing themes Checking if the themes work in relation to the coded extracts and the entire data set, generating a thematic map.

5.) Defining and naming themes Ongoing analysis for refining the specifics of each theme and the overall story that the analysis tells, generating clear definitions and names for each theme.

6.) Producing the report The final opportunity for analysis. Selection of vivid, compelling extract examples, final analysis of selected extracts, relating back of the analysis to the research question and literature, producing a report of the analysis.

(Braun and Clarke, 2008)