I am conducting a qualitative case study. The methods of data collections are interviews and direct observations. Yin (2009, p. 109) stated that direct observations could be conducted throughout a field visit, including which other evidence, such as that from interviews, is being collected. This was the case of my study. I did not find any suggestion by Yin (or other prominent case study scholars) about the recommended time for such types of direct observations. This is unlike ethnographic research, which has some recommendations.
In my case, I had an observation protocol that was priorly designed based on the theoretical proposition and the research question of the study. I kept my eyes open to collect other relevant observational evidence while I was at the premises of the participants of the study. The length of the observation was based on the time that I needed to collect evidence related to the pre-designed notes and headings in the observation protocol.
Any comments about the best practices or recommendations for this?
Is there a recommended time frame for direct observations in qualitative case studies?
Think no hard & fast rule on the observation time frame as the context of each qualitative research is unique. Perhaps during the observation, try to observe what are the new attributes emerged until they are repeated or no new attribute observed i.e. reaching the saturation state, then perhaps you can stop.
Is there a recommended time frame for direct observations in qualitative case studies?
Think no hard & fast rule on the observation time frame as the context of each qualitative research is unique. Perhaps during the observation, try to observe what are the new attributes emerged until they are repeated or no new attribute observed i.e. reaching the saturation state, then perhaps you can stop.
It depends on the purpose of the interviews/direct observations and the amount of information needed and data collection.
Also the frequency and duration needed to reach your goal may decrease or increase the timeframe required. Some research studies collect data at different fime points during the same day/week/month/year.
Hi Karin always the methodological decisions have to do with your research question. The research question and your specific objetives derived must be the compass for your methodological decisions. You have to always take in considerations that the qualitative methods look for getting deep, rich, specific and detailed knowledge about the studied phenomenom. Also you have to consider your decisions from the feasibility point of view due to the time frame will depends as well of the permission from the context in which you will do your observations. Good work!!
The answer to your question is "How long is a piece of string?" The original participant observers like Whyte or the Lynds spent two to three years in the field taking occasional breaks to write up, think and reflect. The length of time is dictated by the topic. I asked my students to spend one hour in an A& E waiting room to "see" what was to be seen. They then identified some aspect of interaction in that setting they were interested to focus upon. Others found aspects they thought they might find in a different setting. A few minutes or a couple of hours might be enough but beware of "instrument decay" where tiredness, repetition, degrade the observer's focus or breadth of view. Who is to know if you do not see "it" whether you did not wait long enough or that the phenomenon was just not there. Do what you do and write the most detailed account so others may judge you "validity" and "reliability" but make clear your criteria at the outset. Do not "impose" then after.
This type of research method is by its nature subjective. You may want to ask yourself, What are the chances that something happened after I ended my observation that might be relevant to the research?
As others have said, it all depends on what goals the observations serve within your overall data collection. Although those who do anthropological investigations and community studies may well spend more than a year in a setting, that is certainly not a standard for less complex case studies.
It sounds like you have done a good job of following Yin's recommendations, so I would rely on that when you describe your methods.
One additional recommendation is that you explain your rationale and be transparent in writing up the study. As others have suggested, there is no golden number; and, importantly, one is allowed to indicate real-world concerns and constraints that delimit the time frame, in addition to invoking theoretical constructs such as saturation and suggesting possible directions for future research. Indeed, most often funders and PhD supervisors do not accept open-ended promissory statements about remaining in the field for 'as long as it takes'; so you have to do your best to identify a plausible time frame based on the complexity of the study (and sometimes adjust the focus/breadth of the study to render it more simple, thus requiring less time). Your mentioning theoretical and empirical rationales in your above question is a very good start.
Adding to the useful comments of others, as long as you detail the time spent in observations and the rationale for its length, that provides context for the reader. In this way, for instance, perhaps someone observed a lunch time event. If the time for lunch lasted 20minutes or 60 minutes, the event itself would indicate the boundaries of the obsevation and provide a rationale.
Good day Karim
All the aforementioned academics are correct, however you should bare in mind that, depending on your theoretical approach, if you have hypothesised a relationship between two or more variables you should arrive at one of three hypothesis yes the relationship does exist ,or a null hypothesis there is no relationship among the variables or an alternate hypothesis, there is a relationship between or among the variables, but not a relationship as hypothesised. Importantly qualitative research is very context specific. You could also use a Grounded Theoretical Approach which suggests that the theory is generated by the study itself, therefore grounded in the data which your observations have generated, therefore ' new' theory. So if the phenomena which you wished to observe within a specific context has not been observed, within a specified time-frame this is a finding in and of itself.
Pay attention to the event context in the group where you are conducting the research. Make sure it was the same throughout the study. It happens that significant changes occur in the course of a study that significantly change the assessments, judgments, or behavior of respondents. If such an event occurs in the course of research, you should first describe it. And evaluate how it affects the purpose and objectives of your research.
Karim Tabah Thank you for your question. The whole aim in qualitative research is to find the truth, to dig deeper, to get supportive evidence, to see relationships and interactions and receive answers through using several tools, including observation. Therefore, there is no specific timeframe. It all related to the complexity of the matter, the location, the culture, the research question, the research method used, and the progress in collecting the evidence needed. However, there should be a rough time scale and a plan designed by researchers. Studies reported durations of 3-4 weeks and up to 6 months or longer.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Qualitative Research