Research Quality

According to Oates (2013) and Denzin & Lincoln (2000), interpretivist research quality is maintained through a set of standards and criteria that are equivalent to those used in positivist research. Table 5. 14 shows the different qualities in a positivist and interpretivist research

Positivism Interpretivism (Current Study)

Table 5.14: Showing Quality in Positivist and Interpretivist Research (Oates, 2013)

140

The below mentioned criteria under interpretivist have been applied to the research study as follows: (Denzin&Lincoln, 2000; Miles et al. 2014; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Oates, 2013;

Saunders et al. 2016; Shenton, 2004)

S/N CRITERIA Application in Current Research

1 Trustworthiness: Refers to the amount of trust that can be placed in the research

Research participants were given assurances that all information collected will be confidential and anonymous, therefore, this made participants more relaxed and willing to discuss freely. Also, this will increase the level of confidence and decrease the possibility of participant’s bias (Saunders et al., 2016). Direct quotations were used rather than summaries.

2 Confirmability: Refers to checking if the findings flow from the data. This can be achieved by an audit trail.

Interview questions were prepared before the interview. Data analysis was based on the data derived from the interviews only.

NVivo software was used to ensure a clear view of the data analysis process. Detailed methodological descriptions were used to show how the themes emerged from data collected (Shenton, 2004) 3 Dependability: Refers to the

recording and documentation of data collection and research process to ensure that the results are consistent across time and researchers.

The research process was documented thoroughly in order to help readers understand the process and repeat it in future work (Shenton, 2004). All the interviews were recorded and transcribed word-by-word. One pilot study was conducted and peer review mechanism was used.

4 Credibility: Ensuring that the research subject had been identified and accurately described so as the findings are credible. It can be improved through prolonged engagement of the researcher with the research problem.

The researcher worked in a LEA (i.e. EFCC) which helped the researcher in developing a familiarity with the participants and the place i.e. ‘prolonged engagement’ (Shenton, 2004). Multiple interviews with different stakeholders were used as a source of triangulation. Research findings were presented in front of key stakeholders in the UK and Nigeria. Participant validation was used in some instances by giving the participants transcript of what they said.

5 Transferability: To check if the data can be generalized

Different stakeholders Interviewed; detailed description of research context (Chapter 2). Field Log kept and maintained.

Table 5.15: Research Quality and Application

141 5.17 Researcher Background

Being interpretivist and subjective in reality, the researcher states their relevant personal background, which will unavoidably impact on the research interpretations. Therefore, in this study the researcher declares his interests and worldviews. The researcher graduated with a Bachelors degree in Information Technology from the American University in Dubai. The researchers’ area of concentration was Network Infrastructure Design and Administration. This provided the researcher a scientific and technical background that instilled a more positivist than interpretivist view. Subsequently, the researcher did a Masters degree in Forensic Computing from Coventry University which expanded the researchers’ scientific background and provided professional knowledge on the role of forensic science in criminal investigation. The thesis centered on the perception of the public on law enforcement in tackling cybercrime and it was a quantitative survey administered online to participants. The researcher worked for about seven years as an IT and Forensic Analyst with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, thereafter left to pursue a PhD degree. Some of the rationale of the study is due to the researcher’s previous working experience in a law enforcement organisation. Over the course of the PhD, the researcher was invited as a speaker and stakeholder to present some of the research findings to the West Yorkshire Police and some stakeholders in Nigeria who are members of the Cybercrime Advisory Council respectively. The researcher decided to conduct an interpretivist qualitative research through interviews as that would give more insight and get more accurate empirical data about cybercrime investigation in Nigeria.

5.18 Conclusion

The methodology chapter explored the different research methodologies which were used in this research and elaborated the chosen methodology for the research as well as justifications for choosing them. Table 5.16 and 5.17 summarises and states the researcher methodological choices. The table shows that the researcher is adapting a relativist philosophy with an interpretivist view. The researcher used both exploratory and explanatory approaches in

classifying the research. The research is an inductive study and exclusively qualitative with data collection techniques involving both primary and secondary data. Data collected was analysed with software called NVivo and validity of data was authenticated through triangulation of data

142

and member validation approaches. Finally, the researcher was guided by good academic practices in adhering to ethical issues throughout the research process.

Table 5.16 showing researchers methodological choices.

S/N Methodological Theoretical Phases Researchers Choice

1 Research philosophy Relativism

2 Research paradigm Interpretivism

3 Research classifications Exploratory and explanatory

4 Research approach Inductive

5 Research choices Qualitative

6 Time horizon Longitudinal

7 Data collection Secondary Primary

Literature review Interviews Documented data Case study

8 Data analysis NVivo

9 Validity, reliability Triangulation; Member validation 10 Ethical issues Privacy, consent & confidentiality etc.

Table 5.16: Researchers Methodological Theoretical Choices

Table 5.17 summarises the choices with explanation and reference page.

143 Table 5:17: Researchers methodological choices

S/N Phases Researchers Choice Justification Ref. Page

1 Research Philosophy Relativism Due to the fact that different observers would have varied views which are interpreted differently at various times and various places.

p.94 2 Research Paradigm Interpretivism Cybercrime has multiple realities; data collected

is subjective; study is inductive and is collecting qualitative data.

p. 103 3 Research

Classifications

Exploratory and Explanatory Explorative to gain insights and Explanatory to understand variables of the research topic.

p. 105 4 Research Approach Inductive In-depth Study and less emphasis on

generalization

p. 115 5 Research Choices Qualitative Semi-structured + Secondary Data p. 124 6 Time Horizon Cross- Sectional Cybercrime studied in different contexts (i.e.

UK & NG) over the same period of time

p. 116 7 Data Collection Secondary Primary Study requires collection of original data from

source; primary data not readily available.

Interviews used to gain an in-depth

understanding of phenomenon. Case study used to validate data collected from secondary sources.

8 Sampling Technique Criterion Sampling Compatible with research because it gives the entire population an equal opportunity to be considered based on certain criteria.

p. 128 9 Data Analysis NVivo Allows researcher to create themes, group

responses, categorized journal articles and map out research strategies effectively

p. 131 10 Validity, Reliability Triangulation, Participant or Member

Validation

Triangulation adds depth, breadth and richness to the data collected.

p. 134 11 Ethical Issues Privacy, Consent & Confidentiality. Robson (2002) 10 questionable practices were

avoided and Saunders et al. (2012) ‘general

ethical issues’ were adhered to. p. 136

144 CHAPTER 6: PILOT STUDY

This chapter presents the pilot study which was conducted, the justifications for conducting it and its impact on the current research.

6.1 Introduction

Hundley and Teijlingen (2001) refer to pilot study as a mini version of a full scale study as well as the specific pre-testing of a particular research instrument such as a questionnaire or an interview. Pilot studies are a vital component of a good research design, however, it does not guarantee the success of the main study but can increase the likelihood of its success.

The term pilot study is usually used in two ways in social science research. It can refer to feasibility studies which are ‘small scale versions, or trial runs, done in preparation for the major study’ (Polit, Beck & Hungler, 2001). However, Baker (1994:182) argues that a pilot study can also be the pre-testing or ‘trying-out’ of a particular research instrument. Gomm (2009:245) defines a pilot study as a ‘feasibility study, which is preliminary research carried out to support the planning of a more substantial study through’:

a. Discovering what is of interest in a research setting b. Choosing between alternative settings

c. Looking for possible difficulties which have to be overcome d. Carrying out ethical appraisal of the proposed research e. Conducting risk assessment

f. Testing research instruments and techniques (Gomm, 2009)

Saunders et al. (2016:723) also define a pilot test ‘as a small-scale study to test a questionnaire or interview checklist to minimise the possibility of respondents having difficulties in answering the questions. They further argue that a pilot study minimises data recording problems as well as some assessment of the questions’ validity and the reliability of the data that will be collected.

Pilot studies have certain limitations such as the possibility of making inaccurate predictions or assumptions on the basis of pilot data; problems arising from contamination; and problems related to funding (Polit. et al, 2001).

145 6.2 Justification of the Pilot Study

Hundley and Teijlingen (2001) have summarised the reasons for conducting pilot studies as follows:

a) Developing and testing adequacy of research instruments b) Assessing the feasibility of a full-scale study or survey c) Design a research protocol

d) Assessing whether the research protocol is realistic and workable e) Developing a research question and research plan

f) Determining what resources are needed for a planned study g) Assessing the likely success of proposed recruitment approaches

The preliminary interview questions were tested on five (5) participants within one organization to achieve the following objectives:

a. Testing the clarity of the interview questions b. The estimated schedule for each interview c. The conduciveness of the Interview venue

d. The use of the voice recorder to record the interviews

e. The effectiveness of the adopted interview approach (i.e. Face-to-face, semi-structured) 6.3 Observations from the Pilot Study

The following observations were made during the pilot study. The observations helped in identifying areas that needed improvement or questions that needed to be changed, removed or added. The observations are as follows:

a. The pilot study allowed the researcher to refine the research questions and amend them.

b. The pilot allowed the researcher to know how comfortable the respondents were with the interview being recorded. Most respondents were comfortable with the interview being recorded.

c. The researcher was able to know that the face-face semi-structured interview approach was very effective as most respondents were willing to discuss freely with the interviewer. This also allowed the researcher to observe facial expressions and non-verbal cues.

146

d. The researcher also realised that most participants had questions surrounding the ethics of the research and the researcher was able to explain to them their rights as codified in the

‘participant consent forms’ distributed before each interview.

e. The researcher observed that the participants were more comfortable with choosing the venue and timing that suited their schedules.

f. The researcher also observed that scheduling and time management was at the liberty of the participants. Therefore, the researcher had to keep on modifying the schedule to fit with the respondent’s schedules.

g. The feedback from the pilot study allowed the participant to properly prepare for the main data collection process, which improved the overall quality of the interview question as well as the validity of the research.