Analysing Qualitative Data: The Use of Storytellers as Validators in the Construction of Analyses

Stanley Mukasa
{"title":"Analysing Qualitative Data: The Use of Storytellers as Validators in the Construction of Analyses","authors":"Stanley Mukasa","doi":"10.5430/MOS.V6N1P31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper demonstrates how the perspectives of stakeholder groups regarding contested issues can be representedwith a degree of credibility. This is possible when interviewees are used as externals to verify, refute, or to improveconstructed analyses of their own stories before conclusions are drawn. As assumptions differ about what reality is andwhether or not it is measurable, researchers are beginning to focus more on approaches and techniques that canimprove validation of their findings. This paper proposes an approach to help achieve this. The paper draws on theauthor’s experience as a researcher in a study that focussed on how Developmental Agencies (DAs) – specificallyAmnesty International, Water Aid, Christian Aid, Action Aid, and Oxfam GB could improve their use of Donor Funds(DFs). Using this method, interviewees are given the opportunity to review constructed analyses in order to verify oramend how their perspectives are presented. They clarify, make corrections and provide further insights to their initialstories. The aggregated reconstructions are then relied on to arrive at agreed representations. The proposed approachdemonstrates how to engage storytellers in the validation of analyses and findings regarding contested issues. Fiveelements are discussed in relation to the subject, these are, Story-tellers, Constructed Analyses, Contested Issues,Aggregated Reconstructions and Validating Findings.","PeriodicalId":113750,"journal":{"name":"Management and Organizational Studies","volume":"2535 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management and Organizational Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5430/MOS.V6N1P31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper demonstrates how the perspectives of stakeholder groups regarding contested issues can be representedwith a degree of credibility. This is possible when interviewees are used as externals to verify, refute, or to improveconstructed analyses of their own stories before conclusions are drawn. As assumptions differ about what reality is andwhether or not it is measurable, researchers are beginning to focus more on approaches and techniques that canimprove validation of their findings. This paper proposes an approach to help achieve this. The paper draws on theauthor’s experience as a researcher in a study that focussed on how Developmental Agencies (DAs) – specificallyAmnesty International, Water Aid, Christian Aid, Action Aid, and Oxfam GB could improve their use of Donor Funds(DFs). Using this method, interviewees are given the opportunity to review constructed analyses in order to verify oramend how their perspectives are presented. They clarify, make corrections and provide further insights to their initialstories. The aggregated reconstructions are then relied on to arrive at agreed representations. The proposed approachdemonstrates how to engage storytellers in the validation of analyses and findings regarding contested issues. Fiveelements are discussed in relation to the subject, these are, Story-tellers, Constructed Analyses, Contested Issues,Aggregated Reconstructions and Validating Findings.
定性数据分析:故事讲述者在分析构建中作为验证者的使用
本文展示了利益相关者群体关于有争议问题的观点如何以一定程度的可信度表示。在得出结论之前,当受访者被用作验证、反驳或改进对自己故事的构建分析的外部人员时,这是可能的。由于人们对现实是什么以及它是否可测量存在不同的假设,研究人员开始更多地关注可以提高其发现有效性的方法和技术。本文提出了一种帮助实现这一目标的方法。这篇论文借鉴了作者作为一名研究人员的经验,该研究的重点是发展机构(DAs)——特别是国际特赦组织、水援助组织、基督教援助组织、行动援助组织和乐施会(Oxfam)——如何改善它们对捐赠基金的使用。使用这种方法,受访者有机会审查构建的分析,以验证或修改他们的观点是如何呈现的。他们对最初的故事进行澄清、修正,并提供进一步的见解。然后依靠聚合的重构来得到一致的表示。建议的方法演示了如何让讲故事的人参与对有争议问题的分析和发现的验证。本文讨论了与主题相关的五个要素,即故事讲述者、构建分析、争议问题、汇总重建和验证发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信