Qualitative Analysis

Despite the presence of established theories in the research question, there was still an overarching, exploratory inquiry. This was primarily because a study of this nature had not been conducted in this geographical context before. As a result, a theory was generated during data collection and analysis. This theory construction followed a systematic process known as grounded theory. Although grounded theory is typically associated with qualitative studies, it can also be accomplished with data from quantitative studies (Glaser, 1992: 11). As Glaser (ibid) succinctly states, “It’s all data for the analysis”. The process of theory generation for this study began while the quantitative data was being analysed. As numerical patterns on the tourism framework emerged, they were evaluated and then used to develop themes for the interviews. Afterward, the interviews were constantly analysed and explored during and after data collection (Jennings, 2001: 196). Denscombe (2007: 99) argues that this strategy falls in line with the grounded theory approach, which involves the repetitive assessment of themes and concepts. The following paragraphs review how the qualitative data was coded by theme and then analysed.

113

Qualitative data used in the analysis process included the field notes from Delphi rounds one and two and the semi-structured interviews from round two. The analytical process began with the extensive and time-consuming transcription of the interviews and organisation (formal typing) of the field notes (Kvale, 1996: 103). These two steps led to a stronger engagement with the data and are part of a larger process called coding. The central aim behind coding was to break the data down into smaller parts to discover patterns and frequent themes (Creswell, 2003: 192). Coding was done manually by the researcher primarily due to an individual preference. Computer programmes, such as NVivo, are available to enhance the coding process (Creswell 2003: 193). However, these programmes require additional training and are more useful with larger sets of qualitative data (ibid). For example, Creswell (ibid) asserts that computer programmes are particularly useful when there are more than 500 pages of transcripts, which is considerably more than this study acquired. Furthermore, the researcher desired to establish a ‘connection’ with the data by constantly revisiting ideas and themes in a more tangible setting.

Data coding occurs in three distinct steps. This includes open coding, axial coding and selective coding (Creswell, 2003: 191). In relation to the first step, the transcriptions and field notes were colour coded while identifying frequent key words or phrases. Mind maps were also created around central themes, using the sub-categories as the basis for analysis and chapter outlines. Glaser (1992: 38-39) contends that this strategy is called ‘open coding’. Open coding occurs when data is broken down and inspected for “similarities and differences” to generate conceptual meaning (ibid). Once key words or phrases were identified, they were then separated into thematic categories relating to the research question (Glaser, 1992: 39-40). For example, a lack of information was a consistent theme featured throughout the field notes and interview transcripts and was developed into a category. ‘Axial coding’ was then used to group these categories together to compare themes and establish connections (Glaser, 1992: 61-62). Ultimately, ‘selective coding’ was used to extract a “...story from the interconnection of these categories” (Creswell, 2003: 191). Glaser (1992: 75) argues that selective coding begins once a definitive connection between categories evolves into a “core category”. A core category explains a pattern in the data through a generated theory (ibid). After an initial, full coding stage, the data was reviewed again, and again. Notes were constantly recorded during this process to capture thoughts and opinions (Jennings, 2001: 197). This process of constantly comparing allowed for the

114

detailed placement of individual responses within categories and the subsequent exploration of the relationships between these categories.

Following a grounded approach to construct a theory also required the researcher to acknowledge his previous experience and knowledge of tourism in the Rupununi. Indeed, it was this experience and knowledge that initially inspired a study on the research question. As a result, the researcher had some preconceived notions regarding the research problem. Nonetheless, the exploration into theories and methodologies relative to this study created new foundations of previously unknown knowledge for answering the research question. Moreover, the researcher attempted to approach this study with objectivity and to disregard any prior presumptions. The following sub- section examines how triangulation also helped to minimise any bias during data collection.

4.4.3 Triangulation

The inclusion of multiple sources of data for this study has allowed the findings to have more credibility. This was accomplished through the method of triangulation whereby the findings from each method were compared against each other (Finn et al., 2000: 35; Decrop, 1999: 159; Bryman, 1992: 63). Decrop (1999: 158) asserts that based on the “triangle analogy” there should be three different sets of data that are used to converge on a single point of analysis. This study echoes that same support structure and is presented in Figure 4.6.

In general, findings between data sets were compared and also within the data sets themselves. More specifically, the literature, questionnaire responses (Delphi round one) and findings from the interviews (Delphi round two) were all compared against each other in the search for connections and variations. Furthermore, field notes within both Delphi rounds were compared against the main data collection method and also the literature. This included checking the reliability of people’s actions versus their spoken opinions, crediting information from interviews with organisational documents and comparing the perceptions of different stakeholders (Patton, 1987: 161). In addition, DeCrop (1999: 158-159) argues that studying information from these different sources limits both personal and methodological biases and “…opens the way for richer and potentially more valid interpretations” (see also Puczko et al., 2010: 73).

115

Figure 4.6: Triangulation

Triangulation, in conjunction with a constant comparative method, was undertaken from the beginning of the research design through to data analysis (Decrop, 1999: 159). Patton (1987: 161) notes that triangulation during data analysis can be an ambiguous process. He (ibid) cautions that quantitative methods can end up answering different questions than those from qualitative methods. As a result, this can misconstrue the generated theory. However, careful consideration was given to the preliminary and ongoing design of the questionnaire and interview format to ensure this would not be an issue. In the end, the triangulation of the different data sources showed consistent patterns and contributed to the overall credibility of the findings.

4.5 Conclusion

The methodological approach and design for this study were selected to investigate how ecomuseology principles could be used to support STD in the Rupununi. To accomplish this, a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methods was used to explore stakeholder perceptions. This exploration involved deductive (theory measurement) as well as inductive (theory generation) processes. Ultimately, the methodological strategy for this study was created so that a structural profile could be developed about the Rupununi tourism framework and then its processes explored. These actions are manifested in the following two chapters (Five and Six). Chapter Five reviews the facets of the Rupununi tourism structure before Chapter Six then explores areas, or processes, within that structure that were identified as being significant to this research project. Literature Delphi Round One Delphi Round Two Triangulation

117