Interim analysis:

In each phase, and after in-depth familiarisation, an interim analysis process was used to inform the subsequent phase by enhancing the topic guide and adjusting my expectations of the knowledge of MGE research among the research participants in each phase. Interim analysis was used in the early stages to gain an initial understanding of what could emerge as themes from the collected data after Phases One and Two. In general, Interim analysis provides qualitative research with the ability to generate preliminary hypotheses about collected data, the ability to go back and refine the questions and pursue inquiries in more depth. Interim analysis in the context of this thesis was used strictly to empower the empirical arm of this project by giving the ability to check and interpret the data to develop general, more realistic expectations for further data collection from phase to phase. (Pope et al., 2006).

140 5.2.5.2 Observation Data Analysis:

It is important to acknowledge that in observation work the data have already been reflected upon through the process of writing up the field notes. Despite the best efforts to report only the concrete facts, ideas are generated and impressions are gained during the observation stage itself. These early interpretations of what is witnessed have been perceived by some commentators to complicate the relationship between data collection and analysis (Ives & Damery, 2014). To overcome that challenge, as I described in Subsection 5.2.2 Phase One- Observation, I remained focussed on the main aim of the observations, which was to witness the actual behaviour of the stakeholders in their natural environment in a rigorous way. This dictated writing the field notes using dispassionate description as much as possible, as described by Allen (2010), (as cited in Ives & Damery (2014)).

The analysis approach was selected to answer specific research questions. The strategy was to use data coding, which enables normative claims to be assessed and analysed. Therefore, the approach, in general, was very pragmatic insofar as it was aimed at exposing the normative values from the interpretation of the observed practice. In this phase, I used Wolcott’s (1994) approach of describing, analysing and interpreting the collected data. Creswell (2012) recommended such an approach to analyse observations, field notes or ethnography reports, because this approach gives the researcher the ability to better understand the culture dynamics. Although my thesis is not based on pure ethnographic methodology, Phase One was designed to include passive observations, to understand how MGE research takes place within the Saudi culture.

141 The first step was describing the data to allow the reader to see the events through my eyes by way of narrating, in as much detail as possible, both the setting and the events (Wolcott, 1994). In this step, I produced the field notes from what I could remember after each observation session (see Appendix 1 for an example) with the limited help of very few but, as I thought during the observation, essential preliminary field notes. These limited preliminary field notes were written during the observation in Arabic language with only codes and abbreviations. They were only used to help drafting as detailed as possible field notes and were shredded after the final field notes were produced. The field notes formed the data that were analysed.

It was important to be fact-oriented rather than interpretive at this early stage.

The second step was analysing the data through a sorting procedure (Wolcott, 1994; Creswell, 2012). This included highlighting patterns and events in the observed setting in a way that provided answers to the research question concerning the adherence of Saudi researchers to the Saudi research guidelines. The highlighted patterns were then coded in preparation for interpretation.

The third step was interpretation, which was a means to going beyond the scope of the collected data in order to understand what the data were actually saying (Wolcott, 1994; Creswell, 2012). In this step I used Wolcott’s (1994) interpretation stage to make sense of the coded patterns and to suggest themes to explain those patterns.

142 5.2.5.3 Phase Two analysis:

The final, more comprehensive analysis for Phase Two was a pragmatic reasoning through inductive-deductive logic (LeCompte and Schensul, 1999; Hatch, 2002; Marshall and Rossman, 2010, Creswell, 2012). The inductive, or bottom-up, approach was used after each phase. It allowed the data to develop suggested themes without the influence of any theory-testing approaches in a way similar to that described by Notley, Green & Marsland (2014). Such an approach revealed the need to work extensively with the data to abstract the inherited normative assumptions in the forms of themes; this also meant that I had to go back and forth between the data and the emerging themes until a thorough and robust set of themes was developed.

Deductive reasoning was mainly employed in Phases Two and Three. A top-down approach was used to test emerging themes against the collected data, in the sense that themes that emerged from the interim analysis of Phase One were used to explore data collected from Phase Two, and the interim themes that emerged from Phase Two were used to explore data collected from Phase Three(Creswell, 2012).

In Phase Two, the most appropriate approach, given the nature of this phase, was to engage in data interpretation to allow a data-guided analysis or bottom-up approach, following the pragmatic approach of thematic analysis, as suggested by Notely, Green & Marsland’s (2014) approach. This was done as follows:

 Familiarisation: Reading and rereading the data was the first step. During this

extensive familiarisation process, I tried to gain an overview of the study that was broader than any interviews. I sought to understand what the participants were trying to say while considering the normative assumptions that may

143 guide their responses. Examining the data in this way gave me a sense of the richness, depth and diversity of the data and guided the process of conceptualising, which helped prepare for the coding step.

 Coding: After this familiarisation step, I started to organise a coding system.

The coding was done so as to reflect the meanings in parts of the data (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996). In certain cases, the same portion of text was coded in two different ways depending on what the participants stated and how I understood what was stated, which might give more weight to a statement than what was intended (Miles and Huberman, 1994). I started first with free coding - coding the data as I read through them. I then transferred the codes into NVIVO software version 10.

 Theme development: The codes and concepts were allowed to emerge into

themes by grouping codes and concepts in a way that provided explanations for the data segments.

 Thematic networks: The themes at this stage were starting to take a more

mature shape, by connecting them and trying to find similarities and differences for better understanding of what was said in the interviews.

 Integration and interpretation: interpreter approach allows explanations of

those themes through the ‘reflexive stage of thematic analysis’ (Notley, Green & Marsland, 2014, p333).

During the analysis progressing stage, I managed to ‘shuttle back and forth between conceptual speculation, reflection, reading, data collection and analysis’

144 (Williams, 2004, p77), especially in the steps of ‘thematic network’ and ‘integration and interpretations’ steps for a more thorough and reliable data analysis.