Understanding Qualitative Methods

This section addresses the fundamental decisions made within methodological design. Firstly, the reason why qualitative methods are employed in the thesis is explained. Then, the differences between positivism and realism, and the basic principles of the empirical approach are spelled out. Finally, it shows how the principles can be applied to research into computer visualisation before presenting the conceptual framework of the research. The methodology adopted in the thesis is then summed up as the interface between case study method, theories of social learning and sustainable planning process and town planning.

The research methods used in social science are, in general, categorised into two kinds, one is a qualitative method and the other is quantitative. Although the division is not clear cut, qualitative research is characterised as being more interested in processes and how and

why questions, while quantitative research is considered as more data-driven, and outcome-oriented social science (Yin, 2003).

This thesis adopts qualitative methods of case studies, semi-structured interviews, and structural analysis. Although there is some criticism of this approach as story-telling, as concrete explanations of events are required, this qualitative research design must be appreciated. While extensive studies, whose main aim is to describe the phenomenon concerned and to generalise findings, are weaker for the purpose of explanation then intensive research design is worth trying. However diverse and typical methods should be complementary rather than competitive since the understanding of ‘what’ is as significant as the understanding of ‘why’ (Sayer, 1992).

Yin (2003) defines the case study methods as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, addresses a situation in which the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident, and uses multiple sources of evidence. Therefore case studies can include quantitative data (numerical measurement) where relevant as well as qualitative evidence. In other words, the case study is not limited to either qualitative or quantitative data and can incorporate both varieties of evidence.

As Yin continues, using case studies as a research strategy comprises an all -

encompassing method – with the logic of design incorporating specific approaches to data collection and data analysis. In this sense, the case study is not merely a data collection tactic. That is, case studies can be based on quantitative or qualitative evidence or any mix of them according to the attributes of the types of data.

Qualitative data is data that cannot readily be converted to numerical values. Such data can be represented by categorical data, by perceptual and attitudinal dimensions not readily converted to numerical values. An answer to the research questions mainly requires a case study using intensive and qualitative research methods. In general, case studies are the preferred strategy when ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions are being posed, when the investigators have little control over events, and when the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within some real-life context.

In this context, in order to evaluate visualisation and identify the value and role embedded within development management, it is necessary to employ qualitative research methods.

Given the nature of the research questions which the thesis asks, more qualitative and intensive forms of research are needed with a heavy reliance on case study, and semi- structured interviews with parties involved in the process.

Since the 1960s, a strong move towards a more qualitative (Blaxter et al., 2001), naturalistic and subjective approach has left social scientists divided between two

competing methods: the scientific empirical tradition, and naturalistic phenomenological mode. In the scientific method, quantitative research methods are employed in principle. Such a scientific approach is often termed nomothetic and assumes social reality is objective and external to the individual. The naturalistic approach to research emphasises the importance of the subjective experience of individuals, with a focus on qualitative analysis.

The research on computer visualisation within a planning context tends to focus on exploring in as much detail as possible, a smaller number of instances or examples which are seen as being interesting, or illuminating, and aims to achieve ‘depth’ rather than ‘breadth’. Moreover, this research will deal with social reality which is regarded as a creation of individual consciousness with meaning and the evaluation of events seen as a personal and subjective construction, such as a focus on the individual cases rather than general law-making.

Therefore, this research into computer visualisation in environmental planning needs to be a qualitative investigation. Moreover, the research employs case study methodology in order to analyse emerging issues of the technology (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1 Research Classification

Research Hierarchy Computer Visualisation in Planning

Research Family Qualitative

Research Approach Case Study (Diverse in computer visualisation and typical planning applications)

3.2.1 Research questions

Based on the empirical approach above (Table 3.1), the case study approach was deemed appropriate. However, before practical data collection is made, the research questions together with the unit of analysis and the number of cases must be clarified.

In terms of general orientation of questions, there are five levels (Yin 2003).

 Level 1: questions asked of specific interviewees  Level 2: questions asked of the individual case

 Level 3: questions asked of the pattern of findings across multiple cases  Level 4: questions asked of an entire study

 Level 5: normative questions about policy recommendations and conclusions, going beyond the narrow scope of this study.

While all these five levels of questions are important, at the data collection stage, the most relevant questions are levels one and two. In the research, there are two main questions asked in the research as well as the case study.

The first research question is how computer visualisation has been implemented in UK

planning. In order to explore this aspect, the following questions needed to be answered.

 Which kinds of planning application have employed the technology?  What types of media are utilised currently in the UK?

 What are the pros and cons of using each visualisation?

In recent years, the computer visualisation has been successfully applied within the UK planning process; therefore, those questions about analysis on the usages in consultation and assessment are already familiarised in practice.

The second question is what are the challenges computer visualisation is facing when

implemented within planning practice? The virtual environment carries much more

interactive information than traditional media. However it is highly technology dependent communication media; therefore, it might not be easy for the general public to benefit from such visualisation. This issue will be dealt with through interviews and questionnaires.

In addition, the credibility of computer visualisation is analysed. Recently, computer generated media have become commonly used within planning practice; however, the issue

of the validity of computer visualisation is sometimes overshadowed by how computer visualisations appear. For computer visualisation to be used within the planning process, the images must be valid and credible. This issue will be dealt with within the semi- structured interviews and technology reviews as part of the modelling experiments.

3.2.2 Unit of analysis

The same case study may involve more than one unit of analysis. This occurs when attention is given to a subunit or in a series of subunits. Such a design can be called an embedded case study design in contrast to a holistic design which uses only one unit of analysis (Yin, 2003).

The unit of analysis of the research is related to the definition of the initial research questions. Computer visualisations are firstly examined with characteristics such as photomontage, real time rendering, and pre-set path simulation being reviewed. This demonstrates the principles in the accuracy, validity, level of detail and also provided current usage of the modern technology in case studies. Therefore computer modelling process and media in each subject area are the main units of analysis (Table 3.2).

Table 3.2 Units of Analysis

Analysis of the individual visualisation elements explains the kinds of media that have been employed in the planning. In this case, the visualisation media used is the unit of analysis. Although the unit of analysis for the implementation of computer visualisation is

Topic

1st Unit

Computer Visualisation Media

Photomontage, Pre-set Path Simulation, Virtual Environment

QuickTime VR

Role in Planning, Level of Detail, Credibility, Production Cost

Planning application, Public Consultation, Management, Landscape Visual Impact Assessment

2nd Unit

Planning Applications

individual media, the level of analysis of each modelling elements is as important as that of each visualisation medium because visualisation media is to be understood as a technical aspect of the research. Another unit of analysis is planning applications.

In short, the unit of analysis for the implementation of computer visualisation is an individual visualisation medium in each case whilst the unit of analysis for examining the elements of implication in planning is an application.

However in the case of both units of analysis, individual visualisation media should be considered together with the planning application. Analysis of a visualisation medium without planning employment is meaningless for this research. Computer visualisation by definition presupposes a planning implementation. That is the reason why mere technology reviews or analysis are excluded from the research. With the same logic, it is not possible to find out the visualisation in a single planning application alone.

Social events cannot be explained by deducing them from the principles governing the behaviour of the participating individuals and descriptions of their situation because ‘societies are irreducible to people’ (Bhaskar, 1989).