The Research Methods

As indicated previously in the Literature Review, there has been little research conducted about the Rubat buildings of Saudi Arabia, and there is no defined system for measuring the quality of buildings, nor their suitability for the residents.

Therefore, this research adopted a mixed methods approach (interviews, comprehensive review of literature, observation and questionnaire). Questionnaires were used to gather statistical information about the women living in the Rubats; for

Table 3.5 Distribution of Rubats according to the research community areas of Jeddah and the sample of the study

Number of

110

example, their marital status and level of education, along with the features and facilities of each building. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were considered complementary in this study, with statistical analysis used to determine any correlation between the information collected. This allowed the researcher to gather the experiences of the women living in the Rubat, in order to assess fully the suitability of this housing for women.

The summary of the data collection activities is presented in the Table 3.6 below.

Table 3.6 Summary of the Data Collection Activities

Stage Duration Activities during fieldwork

1. November 2011 Selection of case study area Questionnaire revision

2.

December 2011 February 2012

Questionnaire administration Interviews conducted

3. March 2012 Coding of questionnaires 4.

May 2012

October 2012 Data analysis performed

Motivated by this project’s research objectives, this study used several qualitative tools. Table 3.7 explains the various data collection tools and the purpose for which they were used.

111

Table 3.7 The Data Collection Tools used in this Study and Stages Used

Research Method Who Why

To reveal the extent to which the Rubats in their current situation

To reveal the extent to which the Rubats in their current situation

To identify the current design and layout of the Rubat buildings, and to identify to what extent these helped to meet the basic needs of the residents

To identify the current design and layout of the Rubat buildings, and to identify to what extent these helped to meet the basic needs of the residents

To identify the current design and layout of the Rubat buildings, and to identify to what extent these helped to meet the basic needs of the residents

112 3.4.3.5 Collecting Primary Data

As stated in Section 3.3, the methods used to collect primary data included in-depth interviews, questionnaires for the residents, non-participant observations, building audits, drawings and photographs, and a questionnaire on the role played by the bodies responsible for managing the Rubats.

The use of both a questionnaire and an interview occurred during rich interactions with the women in the Rubats, where the researcher used several different methods. They took photographs and drew plans of the building but also took the opportunity to ask women matter-of-fact questions, following a questionnaire, before engaging them in a discussion to understand their story and unpack their experiences, which the women discussed while completing the questionnaire with the researcher.

As a first step in the interview process, the researcher asked basic questions from the questionnaire, like age and marital status; the researcher also ascertained if the concerned person was a legal resident and qualified to respond to the questions.

From that point, the researcher asked the women much more open questions about how they spent their time, how they felt about the Rubats and the support they received (or not), and so forth. Bryman (2004) highlights that the flexibility of this approach makes it popular with researchers and it was considered the most appropriate method for working with this particular group. Most of the women living in the Rubats were elderly and, typically for their generation in Saudi Arabia, had low literacy levels. Moreover, there were a large number of women of different nationalities, whose basic literacy skills may have contributed to their difficulty completing a questionnaire. The residents had the opportunity to ask if there was anything that they did not understand and to talk in more detail about the questions asked.

The aim of the interviews was to collect information that would allow the researcher to achieve the first objective—to gain insights into the residents’ personal, social, economic, educational and health needs.

The interviews concerned the residents’ personal characteristics, their views about the relationship between their needs and the extent to which the Rubat building

113

met those needs, and opinions regarding how the Rubats could be improved.

Therefore, the questions following the questionnaire attempted to assess the individual residents’ need levels to participate in this research. It was designed to explore the reality of the situations residents faced in comparison with their needs. As a measure to establish Rubat buildings’ quality, it was also important to ask residents questions about how long they had lived in the building, and whether they intended to stay in the building and the type of dwelling they occupied, in order to establish their level of satisfaction with their accommodation.

Questions relating to satisfaction also reinforce the opinions offered in social research, as this enables the views of the people experiencing the situation to be represented, rather than those of the researcher. The questions (the questionnaire) comprised five main sections, as listed below.

1. Basic background information, such as age, social situation, nationality, number of individuals living with her, length of residence, educational status and health status

2. Residents’ social status, including questions about their relatives, who they socialise with and how they spend their free time

3. The facilities available in the neighbourhood, including questions to establish how familiar residents are with their surroundings and their level of satisfaction

4. The use of space both indoor and outdoor, the residents’ experience of housing facilities and their levels of privacy

5. The economic situation of residents, including their feelings about their economic circumstances (see Appendix B).

The interviews took place in the room or apartment of the resident in question.

This was done without the use of any recording equipment, despite it being usual practice to ask an interviewee if the conversation can be recorded. However, due to social customs in Saudi Arabia, it was not possible to suggest this option. This meant that all interaction between the researcher and interviewees had to be noted quickly.

The interviewer did this by making brief notes during each interview and then noting more detailed information immediately after the interview had concluded.

114

During the interviews, most residents gave clear statements about their circumstances, their lives and some personal problems; however, some women were reluctant to discuss their economic circumstances, as they did not want to show that they were in need. Conversely, some women were comfortable talking about this subject and stated that they were in need of help. Some residents asked for material assistance from the researcher, such as being a sponsor, or finding someone else able to do this while they sought alternative accommodation. The desire for alternative accommodation arose most often for women who wished to live with their children, since dependents are not allowed to live in the Rubats after reaching the age of 16.

The researcher was also asked to contact agencies on their behalf, to ask them to provide food baskets, to book hospital appointments, or to purchase medicine.

At the end of the interview, the researcher allowed time for the interviewee to expand on other topics not necessarily mentioned in the topic guide. This yielded a large volume of very rich and useful information. The women provided their opinions and made suggestions about ways the Rubats could change to support them. This gave the interviewees an opportunity to communicate a detailed account of their experiences in the Rubats as well as their hopes and aspirations towards making the Rubats more accommodating and comfortable. The interviewees were willing to answer all the questions. Each interview lasted two hours, in addition to the time required to transcribe and translate responses.

Non-participant observation was the second type of observation used to collect data. According to Bryman (2004, p. 166), there can be a gap between what people state in interviews and their actual behaviour, which makes observation a useful tool to either support or question what the women said during the interview process. The researcher decided to simply observe the women living in the Rubats, rather than participating herself in their activities, in order to gather information about how they interact with one another in the Rubats. The researcher visited at different times to observe how the space was used, to get an idea of the daily life of the place. The researcher decided that detail was important; therefore, gathering information in a non-structured way was deemed the best option, as it allowed the researcher to collect a significant amount of narrative information.

115

The researcher went to the Rubats and, initially, spoke to the residents as a group, making notes about these women and the stories they shared during these sessions. The researcher also spent some time making sketches and building relationships with the residents, becoming a trusted and familiar face. From this position, she was then able to recruit women to take part in the in-depth interviews.

While the researcher was spending time with the residents, she was also able to observe how the women used the space, and the interaction between the residents.

According to Gillham (2000, p. 49); ‘this is the notion of convergence;

different kinds of evidence bearing upon the same point.’ This helped the researcher assess the adequacy of the spaces available to the residents of the Rubats. Another advantage of this method was the ability to understand the Rubats’ occupants’ social interactions. Many visits were arranged throughout the day to observe the Rubats’

residents’ daily livees. The researcher spent periods of approximately three hours watching the residents’ activities and talking to them, which allowed the researcher to study the use of the spaces in which they lived as well as recording the residents’

concerns and problems. It was noted that most of the residents, specifically the elderly women, preferred to spend most of their time in the bedroom to do their activities, including eating, while some of them preferred spending time in the corridor sitting and preparing coffee. The researcher interacted with the residents by listening to their stories and concerns, which are explained in more details in the results chapter.

Overall, the residents were quite happy to have someone new visiting them and showing interest in their well-being.

Building audits were used to complement the information collected during the in-depth interviews. The building audit was used to compile data on one main point—

evaluation of the Rubats’ environmental and physical conditions.

This building audit was designed to investigate the environmental and architectural conditions of the Rubats. Therefore, it aimed to collect quantitative information about the Rubat buildings’ architectural state, the standard of the interior residential environment of the units, and the environmental conditions external to the buildings. This enabled the researcher to categorise the Rubats in a meaningful way and judge objectively whether a Rubat was of a high or low standard. Using the Maintenance Management Framework Building Condition Assessment (2012)

116

produced by the Queensland Government, and adapting it for use with the Rubat, the researcher created three categories for the Rubat buildings, and their components, to make an objective judgment on their condition. Using this Australian guide was helpful in deciding what was important to evaluate in terms of the building and how it could be done, and also in terms of understanding the quality of the location.

A building or component was categorised as being in a good condition if it met the following conditions: it had no, or only minor, defects, only superficial wear and tear, only minor deterioration of finishes, and no major maintenance was needed.

A building or component was classed as acceptable in this study if it was in a fair condition; some significant defects could be observed; the finishes were worn and needed maintenance; services such as air-conditioning work, but needed maintenance;

and maintenance work was not done immediately or there was work waiting to be done.

Buildings or components were classified as poor if it was in an obviously inferior condition, there were potential issues with the building’s structure, major defects were observed, and services failed frequently. Buildings unfit for human habitation were also classed in this category (Department of Housing and Public Works, Australia, 2012). Further explanation of these categorisations is contained in Appendix D.

This building audit was created to aid the researcher in the investigation of actors that facilitated the achievement of objective 2—to identify the extent to which Rubat buildings’ design met residents’ basic needs. It also identified the reality of the Rubat buildings and their individual building features: for example, access for the disabled, lighting and ventilation. Research looks increasingly towards the satisfaction of residents; how they think and feel about their housing. Kaitilla (1993) states that building features have a strong correlation with the level of housing satisfaction experienced by residents.

In addition, factors such as the characteristics of the residents’ private space, management of the building, and the location and environment of the building, are also important in fostering feelings of satisfaction (Awotona, 1991; Vrbka and

117

Combas, 1993).Taking this into account, the building audit was prepared to determine whether or not a list of building features was found in each of the Rubat buildings;

specifically, the features used for the same purposes as a study conducted by Fadaak and Farhat (1989) that considers the unique structure of buildings found in Saudi Arabia and features that are commonly found.

The current study used Fadaak and Farhat’s (1989) building audit to address the characteristics of the buildings from three different perspectives, as outlined below. Therefore, the findings enabled the researcher to gather a significant amount of detail, not only about these buildings, but also about the surrounding area. It is important to obtain information about the surrounding area and the environment because it may impact on the satisfaction of the residents.

The first building audit was divided into the following three categories: