Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?

Year 2022, Issue: 49, 59 - 67, 02.03.2022

Cansu Dayan İlknur Yüksel-kaptanoğlu

https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.993249

Abstract

Online interviewing has increasingly begun to be preferred in qualitative research in recent years. Here, we aim to discuss our methodological experiences based on e-field of the PhD thesis designed with a qualitative approach on poverty measurement. For this, we narrate our strategies improved for in-depth interviews and synchronous focus group discussions conducted in a 5-month-process through Zoom, categorizing them as before, during and after interviews. Scrutinizing our strategies, we discuss situationally prominent key characteristics of the e-field. Within this scope, we find out that the quality of infrastructure, keeping the duration of the interview short and the number of the questions and participants less than the traditional interviewing are significant factors. Last, we find it crucial to indicate that some outcomes of the e-field can have ambivalent characteristics and obligate the researchers to make selections.

Keywords

qualitative research online interviewing focus group in-depth interview

Supporting Institution

Yok

Project Number

Yok

Thanks

We would like to thank Dr. Hilal Arslan for her technical support during our fieldwork.

References

  • American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). (2020). Covid-19 Workshop Series: Covid-19 Changes to Research Practices. https://www.aapor.org/Conference-Events/COVID-19-Workshop-Series.aspx
  • Adalı, T., Koyuncu, Y. & Türkyılmaz, A. S. (2021). Surveys in Covid-19 and Post Covid-19 Days. UNFPA Turkey. Retrievable from https://turkey.unfpa.org/en/publications/surveys-covid-19-and-post-covid-19-days
  • Beddows, E. (2008). The Methodological Issues Associated with Internet-Based Research. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 6(2): 124-139.
  • Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M. & Robson, K. (2001). Focus Groups in Social Research. Sage Publications.
  • Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
  • Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (eds.). (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th Edition). Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1998). Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. London: Sage Pub.
  • Dogan, O. (2020). Are online researches scientific? Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry, 21 (6): 656-661.
  • Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.
  • Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
  • Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction. New York: Longman.
  • Haraway, D. (1991). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
  • Hewson, C. M., Laurent, D. & Vogel, C. M. (1996). Proper methodologies for psychological and sociological studies conducted via the Internet. Behaviour Research Method, Instruments and Computers, 28: 186-191.
  • Karakulakoğlu, S. E. (2014). Internet Araştırmalarında Yöntem Sorunu. Erciyes İletişim Dergisi “akademia”, 3(4):122-134.
  • Lobe, B., Morgan, D. & Hoffman, K. A. (2020). Qualitative Data Collection in an Era of Social Distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Volume 19: 1–8.
  • Lupton, D. (ed.). (2021). Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd-sourced document), revised version. Available at: DOING FIELDWORK IN A PANDEMIC
  • Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching. Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Mehda, R. & Sivadas, E. (1995). Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys. Journal of Market Research Society, 37: 429-439.
  • Morgan, D. L. & Krueger, R.A. (1998). The Focus Group Kit. Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Saldaña, J. (2010). Writing Ethnodrama: A sampler from educational research. In M. Savin-Baden and C. H. Major (eds), New Approaches to Qualitative Research: Wisdom and Uncertainty (pp. 61-70). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Savin-Baden, M., Gourlay, L. & Tombs, C. (2010). Researching in immersive spaces. In M. Savin-Baden and C. H. Major (eds), New Approaches to Qualitative Research: Wisdom and Uncertainty (pp. 162-172). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Savin-Baden, M. & Major, C. H. (eds.). (2010). New Approaches to Qualitative Research: Wisdom and Uncertainty (pp. 61-70). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Schutz, A. (1976). The Phenomenology of the Social World. London: Heinemann.
  • Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1993). Breaking Out Again: Feminist Ontology and Epistemology. London: Routledge.
  • Sociology Association. (2021). Salgında Sosyolojik Araştırma: Sınırlılıklar ve Yeni Tahayyüller [Sociological Research in the Pandemic: Limitations and New Imaginations]. Online Workshop. https://sosyolojidernegi.org.tr/salginda-sosyolojik-arastirma-sinirliliklar-ve-yeni-tahayyuller-cevrimici-atolye/
  • Tates, K., Zwaanswijk, M., Otten, R. et al. (2009). Online focus groups as a tool to collect data in hard-to-include populations: examples from paediatric oncology. BMC Med Res Methodol 9, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-15
  • Wetherell, M., Taylor, S. & Yates, S. J. (2001). Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader. London: Sage Pub.
  • World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR). (2020). WAPOR webinars: Changes in Survey Research in Times of Covid-19 (May 2020). https://wapor.org/resources/wapor-webinars/webinar-may-2020/

ÇEVRİMİÇİ ODAK GRUP GÖRÜŞMELERİ VE DERİNLEMESİNE MÜLAKATLAR: DENEYİMLERİMİZ NELER SÖYLER?

Year 2022, Issue: 49, 59 - 67, 02.03.2022

Cansu Dayan İlknur Yüksel-kaptanoğlu

https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.993249

Abstract

Çevrimiçi görüşmeler son zamanlarda giderek artan bir şekilde nitel araştırmalarda daha fazla tercih edilir hale geldi. Biz de bu çalışmada, yoksulluğun ölçülmesi konusunda nitel yaklaşımla yürüttüğümüz doktora tez çalışmasının çevrimiçi saha çalışmasına dayanan metodolojik deneyimlerimizi tartışmayı amaçlıyoruz. Bunun için, Zoom uygulaması aracılığıyla 5 aylık bir süre içinde gerçekleştirdiğimiz senkron odak grup görüşmeleri ve yarı-yapılandırılmış derinlemesine görüşmeler için geliştirdiğimiz stratejileri görüşmeler öncesi, esnası ve sonrasında olmak üzere gruplandırarak aktarmayı hedefliyoruz. Belirlediğimiz stratejileri ayrıntılandırarak çevrimiçi saha çalışmamızda durumsal olarak öne çıkan başlıca özgünlükleri tartışıyoruz. Bu bağlamda, teknik altyapının kalitesi, yüz yüze görüşmelere kıyasla görüşme süresinin kısalığı ile soru ve katılımcı sayılarının düşüklüğünün önemli etkenler olduğunu saptadık. Son olarak, çevrimiçi saha çalışmasının bazı sonuçlarının ikircikli bir doğaya sahip olduğunu ve araştırmacıları seçim yapmak durumunda bırakabileceğini paylaşmayı da önemli bulduğumuzu belirtmek isteriz.

Keywords

nitel araştırma çevrimiçi görüşme odak grup derinlemesine görüşme

Project Number

Yok

References

  • American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). (2020). Covid-19 Workshop Series: Covid-19 Changes to Research Practices. https://www.aapor.org/Conference-Events/COVID-19-Workshop-Series.aspx
  • Adalı, T., Koyuncu, Y. & Türkyılmaz, A. S. (2021). Surveys in Covid-19 and Post Covid-19 Days. UNFPA Turkey. Retrievable from https://turkey.unfpa.org/en/publications/surveys-covid-19-and-post-covid-19-days
  • Beddows, E. (2008). The Methodological Issues Associated with Internet-Based Research. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 6(2): 124-139.
  • Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M. & Robson, K. (2001). Focus Groups in Social Research. Sage Publications.
  • Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
  • Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (eds.). (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th Edition). Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1998). Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. London: Sage Pub.
  • Dogan, O. (2020). Are online researches scientific? Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry, 21 (6): 656-661.
  • Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.
  • Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
  • Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction. New York: Longman.
  • Haraway, D. (1991). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
  • Hewson, C. M., Laurent, D. & Vogel, C. M. (1996). Proper methodologies for psychological and sociological studies conducted via the Internet. Behaviour Research Method, Instruments and Computers, 28: 186-191.
  • Karakulakoğlu, S. E. (2014). Internet Araştırmalarında Yöntem Sorunu. Erciyes İletişim Dergisi “akademia”, 3(4):122-134.
  • Lobe, B., Morgan, D. & Hoffman, K. A. (2020). Qualitative Data Collection in an Era of Social Distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Volume 19: 1–8.
  • Lupton, D. (ed.). (2021). Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd-sourced document), revised version. Available at: DOING FIELDWORK IN A PANDEMIC
  • Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching. Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Mehda, R. & Sivadas, E. (1995). Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys. Journal of Market Research Society, 37: 429-439.
  • Morgan, D. L. & Krueger, R.A. (1998). The Focus Group Kit. Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Saldaña, J. (2010). Writing Ethnodrama: A sampler from educational research. In M. Savin-Baden and C. H. Major (eds), New Approaches to Qualitative Research: Wisdom and Uncertainty (pp. 61-70). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Savin-Baden, M., Gourlay, L. & Tombs, C. (2010). Researching in immersive spaces. In M. Savin-Baden and C. H. Major (eds), New Approaches to Qualitative Research: Wisdom and Uncertainty (pp. 162-172). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Savin-Baden, M. & Major, C. H. (eds.). (2010). New Approaches to Qualitative Research: Wisdom and Uncertainty (pp. 61-70). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Schutz, A. (1976). The Phenomenology of the Social World. London: Heinemann.
  • Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1993). Breaking Out Again: Feminist Ontology and Epistemology. London: Routledge.
  • Sociology Association. (2021). Salgında Sosyolojik Araştırma: Sınırlılıklar ve Yeni Tahayyüller [Sociological Research in the Pandemic: Limitations and New Imaginations]. Online Workshop. https://sosyolojidernegi.org.tr/salginda-sosyolojik-arastirma-sinirliliklar-ve-yeni-tahayyuller-cevrimici-atolye/
  • Tates, K., Zwaanswijk, M., Otten, R. et al. (2009). Online focus groups as a tool to collect data in hard-to-include populations: examples from paediatric oncology. BMC Med Res Methodol 9, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-15
  • Wetherell, M., Taylor, S. & Yates, S. J. (2001). Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader. London: Sage Pub.
  • World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR). (2020). WAPOR webinars: Changes in Survey Research in Times of Covid-19 (May 2020). https://wapor.org/resources/wapor-webinars/webinar-may-2020/
There are 28 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Sociology
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Cansu Dayan 0000-0003-2242-2979

İlknur Yüksel-kaptanoğlu 0000-0001-5969-1238

Project Number Yok
Early Pub Date March 15, 2022
Publication Date March 2, 2022
Acceptance Date October 28, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2022 Issue: 49

Cite

APA Dayan, C., & Yüksel-kaptanoğlu, İ. (2022). ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi(49), 59-67. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.993249
AMA Dayan C, Yüksel-kaptanoğlu İ. ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?. PAUSBED. March 2022;(49):59-67. doi:10.30794/pausbed.993249
Chicago Dayan, Cansu, and İlknur Yüksel-kaptanoğlu. “ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?”. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, no. 49 (March 2022): 59-67. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.993249.
EndNote Dayan C, Yüksel-kaptanoğlu İ (March 1, 2022) ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 49 59–67.
IEEE C. Dayan and İ. Yüksel-kaptanoğlu, “ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?”, PAUSBED, no. 49, pp. 59–67, March 2022, doi: 10.30794/pausbed.993249.
ISNAD Dayan, Cansu - Yüksel-kaptanoğlu, İlknur. “ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?”. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 49 (March 2022), 59-67. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.993249.
JAMA Dayan C, Yüksel-kaptanoğlu İ. ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?. PAUSBED. 2022;:59–67.
MLA Dayan, Cansu and İlknur Yüksel-kaptanoğlu. “ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?”. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, no. 49, 2022, pp. 59-67, doi:10.30794/pausbed.993249.
Vancouver Dayan C, Yüksel-kaptanoğlu İ. ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS: WHAT CAN OUR EXPERIENCES ARTICULATE?. PAUSBED. 2022(49):59-67.
 Download Cover Image