Methods of data collection

Data collection methods involve a consideration of the best way to collect the information to address the overarching research question and subset of associated research questions (Fawcett & Pockett 2015:52). The methods of data collection include interviews, narrative interviews, participant or non-participant observation, questionnaires, and rating scales (Fawcett & Pockett 2015:52). Historically, interviews and/or focus groups, observations, and document collections have dominated qualitative research practices (Paulus et al 2014:70). This implies that qualitative data is mainly collected in different ways, including through formal interviews, participant observations, and focus groups. A good quality qualitative research study will gather data to answer research questions in a transparent way that convinces the reader of its authenticity, trustworthiness, and rigor (Kelly 2016:5). In order to achieve the above-mentioned, it is imperative for the researcher to decide about a suitable and comprehensive method of data collection at the onset of the study.

The researcher selected the interviews as a way of collecting data from participants for this study based on their convenient and effective nature. This account relates to Carey’s (2012:109) assertions that interviews remain a cheap, convenient, and effective means to collect extensive and rich data within a reasonable period of time.

Research interviews can be seen as a specific form of interaction in which the researcher and interviewee produce language data about beliefs, behaviour, ways of classifying the world, or about how knowledge is categorised (Green & Thorogood 2009:102). According to Fawcett and Pockett (2015:68), about 90% of all social science investigations use a form of interview to gather information from participants.

The type of interview used by the researcher to collect data is the semi-structured interview. Semi-structured interviews integrate a combination of pre-planned and spontaneous questions which allow the researcher to use his/her discretion to ask new questions in response to participants’ answers or body language (Carey 2012:112).

These questions can be asked in any order, depending on the circumstances. When using semi-structured interviews, the researcher is permitted flexibility while maintaining focus. However, it becomes hard for the researcher to maintain consistency, especially if the interviews are conducted by more than one interviewer (Williams 2015:131). Additionally, the researcher has a general plan for the topic to be discussed, but does not follow a fixed order of questions or word these questions in a specific way (Packer 2011:43). Thus, with semi-structured interviews the researcher uses questions from the interview guide, but he/she may come up with follow-up questions when he/she deems it necessary.

It is worth understanding that during the interview a researcher asks questions and listens to participants. Therefore, it is important for the researcher to know exactly the types of research questions to be asked during data collection. According to Alvesson and Sandberg (2013:14), there are four different types of questions that are central during the interviews, namely descriptive, comparative, exploratory, and normative questions.

 Descriptive questions – generate knowledge about what characterises a phenomenon, such as its substance (what it is), function (what it does), and

rationale (why it has certain qualities). A good example of a descriptive question is: “What is your experience of life after divorce?” Participants will respond by describing their post-divorce experiences.

 Comparative questions – produce knowledge about relations between phenomena, such as concomitance (to what extent the two phenomena relate), equivalence (to what extent two phenomena are similar), and difference (how two phenomena differ). An example of a comparative question is: “What kind of support have you sought or received during and after divorce?” In responding to this question, participants compare the kind of support they sought or received from the social workers.

 Exploratory questions – aim to generate knowledge about the contingent relations between phenomena and their attributes. They pursue correlation (whether there is a contingent relation between specific attributes of two phenomena), conditionality (whether that correlation is conditional on additional attributes), and causality (whether X produces a change in Y). An example of an exploratory question is: “How did you experience the services provided to you by the social worker?”

 Normative questions – aim to produce knowledge about how something should be done. These questions are normally about what should be done in order to improve something. An example of a normative question is: “How do you think social work services to divorced persons could be improved?” This question gives participants an opportunity to suggest, from their point of view, what should be done in order to improve services to divorced persons.

Consequently, the richness of an interview is heavily dependent on the researcher’s ability to pose follow-up questions. These follow-up questions are mainly open-ended in nature and they comprise open-ended elaborations, open-ended clarifications, and detailed elaborations (Marshall & Rossman 2016:150). In this study, the researcher mainly used open-ended questions during the interview with the aim of gathering more intense and rich information from participants. Open-ended questions are the most common approach in qualitative research, where interviewees are free to answer and explore queries in their own words and style (Carey 2012:113). With open-ended questions, the researcher was able to afford the participants an opportunity to express themselves freely and from their own frame of reference. In view of that, open-ended

questions give participants the opportunity to respond in their own words, rather than forcing them to choose from fixed responses, as quantitative methods do.

Furthermore, Mack et al (2011:4) postulate that open-ended questions have the ability to evoke responses that are meaningful and culturally salient to the participant, unanticipated by the researcher, and rich and exploratory in nature.

For this study, the open-ended questions sought to explore and describe each participant’s experiences about the nature of social work services to divorced persons and the needs of divorced persons regarding social work services. The open-ended questions posed to participants in this study are given below.

Questions for divorced persons:

1. Would you please share with me your experiences of marital life prior to divorce?

2. What is your experience of life after divorce?

3. How did divorce affect you?

4. Would you share the kind of needs you have experienced after divorce?

5. Kindly describe the challenges you have experienced after divorce?

6. How did you deal with the post-divorce challenges you experienced?

7. Would you share the losses you have experienced as a result of divorce?

8. Would you describe the emotions you have experienced after divorce?

9. What kind of support have you sought or received during and after divorce?

10. Have you sought services from a social worker after divorce? If so, what kind of services did you receive?

11. How did you experience the services provided to you by the social worker?

12. Do you think that social work services should be provided to divorced persons?

Please motivate your answer.

13. How do you think social work services to divorced persons could be improved?

14. What kind of advice would you give to other couples that are going through divorce?

Questions for social workers:

1. What is your experience in social work?

2. What kind of cases do you mainly deal with at your organisation?

3. What theoretical approach do you use at your organisation?

4. What is your experience of dealing with cases involving divorced persons?

5. What are the main problems raised by divorced persons?

6. Kindly describe the kind of social work services sought by divorced persons.

7. What kind of social work services do you provide to divorced persons?

8. Do you find the theoretical approach you use when dealing with divorced persons helpful? Kindly motivate your answer.

9. Are you satisfied with the kind of social work services you provide to divorced persons? Kindly motivate your answer.

10. What kind of challenges do you experience in providing services to divorced persons?

11. From your point of view, what should be done to overcome these challenges?

12. Kindly describe when and how you refer divorced persons to other sources.

13. Do you think that social workers should provide services to divorced persons?

14. How do you think social work services to divorced persons could be improved?

The above-mentioned questions helped the researcher to gain an in-depth understanding of the participants’ views regarding the nature of social work services to divorced persons and the needs of divorced persons regarding social work services.

In order to gain a full understanding of the participants’ views on the topic, the researcher applied the necessary interviewing skills. The interviewer’s skills have an important influence on the comprehensiveness and complexity of the information that participants provide.

The researcher also applied the following suggestions by Yin (2011:136-139) on how to conduct a successful qualitative interview:

 Speaking in modest amounts. The researcher implemented this by speaking less and providing an opportunity for participants to speak more through open-ended questions.

 Being non-directive. The researcher allowed participants to share their experiences in their own way and describe the world as they perceive it.

 Staying neutral. This was implemented by ensuring that the researcher’s body language, expressions, and words were carefully kept neutral.

 Maintaining a rapport. The researcher maintained a good rapport with participants and this was done by ensuring that the researcher avoided conversations that might do harm to participants.

 Using an interview protocol. The researcher used the interview guide to ensure that similar questions were asked of all participants, though follow-up questions may have differed depending on participants’ responses.

 Analysing when interviewing. The researcher decided on when to probe for more detail, when to move on to other questions, and when to modify the original plan to accommodate new revelations.

Additionally, the researcher considered the following suggestions by Mack et al (2011:38) regarding what the researcher must do during the interview. The researcher:

 encouraged participants to elaborate on their answers without expressing approval, disapproval, judgement, or bias;

 kept track of the questions, yet let the conversation develop naturally; and

 managed the interview, while still respecting the principle of viewing the participant as the expert.

In order to achieve the above and to gather data from the social workers and divorced persons, the researcher applied the following interviewing skills: rapport building, listening, attending, probing and questioning, and empathising.

a) Rapport building involves the researcher’s ability to quickly create interviewer/participant dynamics that are positive, relaxed, and mutually respectful (Mack et al 2011:38). In so doing, the participants are able to talk freely, openly, and honestly about the research topic. Building a rapport is a close and harmonious relationship in which there is a common understanding (Bronstein et al 2012:1091). A researcher needs to build a good rapport with the participants (Yin 2011:138). With this skill, the researcher was able to create a safe space for participants to feel free to share their experiences. The researcher also avoided conversations that might do harm to participants.

b) Listening is one of the communication skills used in order to understand the experiential world, perceptions, and realities of the person (Grobler et al 2013:49). According to Corey et al (2014:37), “active listening involves absorbing the content, noting gestures and subtle changes in voice or expression, and sensing underlying messages.” In order to communicate effectively, it is essential

to develop good listening skills (Zastrow 2015:169). The researcher used the skill of listening to understand participants’ experiences and perceptions without imposing his frame of reference.

c) Attending is the way in which a facilitator orientates himself/herself physically and psychologically during the interview session in order to enable the person sharing his/her experiences to feel at ease (Grobler et al 2013:47). Through the skill of attending, the message is thus conveyed that the researcher is open to the participant and that he/she can trust the researcher with his/her experiences (Grobler & Schenck 2009:46). Therefore, attending is one of the behaviours that must be practiced throughout the interview session. This skill enabled the researcher to demonstrate that he was present with the participants throughout the interview.

d) Probing and questioning. The researcher should ask open-ended questions to encourage participants to talk and these questions normally begin with ‘what’ and

‘how’ (Creswell 2016:131). In so doing, participants are able to express themselves according to their own understanding and interpretation of the question. Open-ended questions direct the person to a heightened awareness of the moment (Corey et al 2014:39). Open-ended questions place no limit on the reply and give a person a measure of control over the answer (Kadushin, in Mohapi & Schenck 2009:95). The researcher asked for more information and asked for an explanation of ideas. Probes include specific wording, such as the following: “tell me more”, “I need more detail”, “what is an example of that?”,

“could you explain your response more?”, or “what does that mean?” (Creswell 2016:131). Using the skill of questioning and probing, the researcher enabled participants to share their experiences freely and without limit.

e) Empathising means being able to see what the participant’s world is like to him/her (Grobler et al 2013:54). This means that the researcher attempts without prejudice or preconceived ideas to hear and understand the participant, and conveys this understanding to the participant verbally and non-verbally. When expressing empathy, it is essential to mirror what was said in a non-judgemental way that will help the interviewer to grasp the essence of what the other person

is thinking or feeling (Zastrow 2015:208). Moreover, the core of the skill of empathy lies in being able to openly grasp another’s experiences while at the same time maintaining one’s separateness (Corey et al 2014:38). The skill of empathy enabled the researcher to understand participants from their frame of reference without prejudice or preconceived ideas.