1 Qualitative Research Strategies and Data Analysis Methods in Real Estate Research - An innovative approach using the BB Model By Dr (Mrs) Iyenemi Ibimina KAKULU Department of Estate Management, Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt Abstract All research is conducted within paradigms, which represent the researcher s particular way of thinking about their subject matter and which they share with other like minds. When an area of research or inquiry is largely under-researched and there are no significant documented theories from which to hypothesize, such research can only begin by induction. It can only begin with collecting facts and then trying to find some order in them in a process known as inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is open-ended and exploratory and begins with observations and measures, detects patterns and regularities, formulates some tentative hypothesis that can be explored and finally ends up developing some general conclusions or theories. Where the knowledge sought is inseparable from the situational and personal aspects of those involved, some degree of generalization can be achieved by making allowances for local and personal influences. This paper advocates that research methodology in real estate research in Nigeria should make allowances for local perceptions and values particularly as research is still in its infancy in several aspects of the profession. It recommends phenomenology and case study research strategies, focus group data collection methods and the use of an innovative content analysis tool (BB model) for data analysis and interpretation of findings. 1.0 Introduction Generally, research in the real estate discipline covers very broad areas of study characteristic of the jack-of-all-trade nature of the profession. As a result, researchers continually strive to utilize a broad array of research methods in to ensure that there is a match between the nature of the research problem and the methodology employed to investigate it. Where there is a disconnection between the problem statement and the research design, researchers struggle with data analysis and often find it difficult to interpret research findings. In some cases, scientific research methods are adopted for social sciences research problems and data analysis becomes difficult due to lack of flexibility in some methods. All research is conducted within paradigms, which represent the researcher s particular way of thinking
2 about their subject matter and this orientation is based on the premise that human experience makes sense to those who live in it prior to all interpretation and theorizing (Creswell 2003). Research that proceeds with this orienting philosophical framework rather than a distinct social science theory framework is often employed to determine what is to be studied and the methods that can be used to study them. Sound research and publication of research findings in credible journals must be based on a well thought out research design which addresses both philosophical considerations and methodology issues. 2.0 Research Design There is a wide array of quantitative and qualitative research paradigms and methods available for use by researchers. However, the choice of a suitable methodology (Nolan 1997), is based on the nature of the research problem and the researcher s philosophical orientation and assumptions. The way a researcher thinks and his/her world views and experiences can shape the choice of methodology adopted by such a researcher. The notion that research must follow a particular methodology is false because every problem scenario requires a combination of solutions to address it. Patton (2002) views the underlying values of research as stretching across a continuum and believes that scholars can be most effective when they utilize the continuum at any point that answers the research question. The design of a research study begins with the selection of a topic and a paradigm. These two become the basis on which all the other parts of the research fit into a logical whole. The design of any research project is hinged several questions. Crotty (1998) suggests four questions we should consider in designing a research which include: 1) The epistemology or the theory of knowledge embedded in the research and whether it is objective or subjective. 2) The theoretical perspective which addresses the philosophical stances lying behind the methodology in question and whether it is positivism, post positivism, constructionism or interpretivist. 3) The methodology, strategy or plan of action that links our methods to the desired outcome (e.g. experimental research, survey research, ethnography or phenomenology, and 4) The methods, techniques and procedures and whether it involves (e.g. questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, etc.) for data collection and analyses. From the perspective of several authors, the diagram below illustrates a four-step research design framework, see fig 1 below.
3 STEP 1 Choose a research paradigm based on the nature of the research problem STEP 2 Choose an appropriate approach in line with your paradigm STEP 3 Choose A research strategy derived from your approach STEP 4 Choose Data collection methods consistent with Your chosen strategy Figure 1 - Research Design Framework 1 Step 1 is based on the premise that the nature of the research problem and the associated paradigm which is essentially the researchers worldview constitutes a whole framework of beliefs, values and methods within which research takes place. In Step 2, the decision taken in Step 1 determines the nature of the inquiry and subsequent qualitative, quantitative or a mixed methods approach to the study. Research strategies in Step 3, flow from the nature of inquiry, for instance, it would be methodologically incorrect to perform experiments in a qualitative study or conduct open ended interviews in a quantitative study but a mixed methods study can suffice. The data collection protocols in Step 4 should match the research strategies to create harmony in the methodology and provide a basis for data analysis. 3.0 Philosophical and Theoretical Considerations in Real Estate Research - Step 1 Generally, philosophical and theoretical assumptions and considerations guide the conduct of all research, even where it is not stated explicitly within the context of a research report. Research paradigms are representations of different combinations of philosophical assumptions, epistemologies and ontological theories which may also be classified as schools of thought. Creswell (2003) describes four schools of thought as follows: 1. Social Constructivism / Interpretivism 2. Positivist / Post Positivist 3. Advocacy / Participatory 1 Adapted from Kakulu, Viitanen and Byrne, 2008
4 4. Pragmatism These schools of thought or research paradigms as often described are the foundations on which the three fundamental approaches to research (qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods) are based. A recommended paradigm for real estate research is Social Constructionism and Interpretivist philosophies. Social constructionism sees knowledge through an alternative process and set of assumptions. It stems from an epistemological position which focuses on meaning and power. It has a relativist epistemology and aims to account for ways in which phenomena are socially constructed and how meaning is ascribed to phenomena. It expects that if existing literature cannot provide solutions to the problem, then the researcher is expected to look into the matter by studying the empirical object. Social Constructionism takes a critical stance towards taken-for-granted knowledge but accepts rather that knowledge is subjective and advocates the historical and cultural specificity of a research problem. Its main characteristics are that knowledge is subjective, theories are time and culture bound and language is a pre-condition for thought. It seeks understanding, develops subjective meanings, relies on participants views of the phenomena and constructs meaning. In this type of research, the researcher seeks to interpret meanings, inductively generates meanings, and recognizes biases and individual perspectives. 4.0 Nature of Inquiry and Research Approach - Step 2 There are currently three widely practiced and research paradigms in science, social sciences and behavioural sciences. These are quantitative research, qualitative research, and mixed methods research. A simple definition of each one is outlined as follows: 1) Quantitative research is research that relies primarily on the collection of quantitative data and follows the paradigm characteristics of the Positivist and Post positivist researcher. 2) Qualitative research is research that relies on the collection of qualitative data. Pure qualitative research will follow the paradigm characteristics of the Constructionist / Interpretivist researcher. 3) Mixed research is research that involves the mixing of quantitative and qualitative methods and pragmatic paradigm characteristics which can take many forms. In fact, the possibilities for mixing are almost infinite.. A qualitative approach is considered to be an appropriate approach for real estate research but its use should be indicative of the nature of the research problem itself. Denzin (2000) defines
5 qualitative research as multi-method in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings and attempt to make sense of or interpret phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them.. Accordingly, qualitative research deploys wide range of interconnected methods, hoping always to get a better grasp of the subject matter at hand. It can be used differently by a multitude of disciplines, studying just about anything. Since qualitative research is made up of complex, context-dependent variables, it may be helpful to examine and compare certain aspects of qualitative inquiry with quantitative (or non-qualitative) study to provide justification for its recommendation as a nature-of enquiryin real estate research as follows:. 1. Qualitative designs are naturalistic as research takes place in real world settings and the researcher does not attempt to manipulate the phenomenon of interest. The phenomenon of interest unfolds naturally because it has no predetermined course established by and for the researcher such as would occur in an experimental quantitative studies. 2. Qualitative research is exploratory and descriptive in focus, it has an emergent design and not a fixed one which gives the researcher greater flexibility. Data collection takes place in the natural setting with the researcher being an instrument of data collection, inductive analysis is always on-going. 3. Qualitative research is concerned with the opinions, experiences and feelings of individuals producing subjective data. It describes social phenomena as they occur naturally and understanding of a situation is gained through a holistic perspective. 4. The researcher identifies, studies, and employs one or more traditions of inquiry. The researcher seeks to understand the problem and not a causal relationship of variables or a comparison of groups. 5. Qualitative studies include detailed methods, a rigorous approach to data collection, data analysis, and report writing. This means, too, that the researcher verifies the accuracy of the account using one of the many procedures for verification. 6. Qualitative research places emphasis on understanding through looking closely at people's words, actions and records while the quantitative approach to research looks past these words, actions and records to their mathematical significance and quantifies the results of these observations. 7. The task of the qualitative researcher is to find patterns within those words (and
6 actions) and to present those patterns for others to inspect while at the same time staying as close to the construction of the world as the participants originally experienced it. 8. Qualitative research is perspectival and subjective unlike quantitative which hold objective views. Qualitative research is exploratory and seeks to discover and interpret data while quantitative research relies on proof. 9. The goal of qualitative research is to discover patterns which emerge after close observation, careful documentation, and thoughtful analysis of the research topic. What can be discovered by qualitative research is not sweeping generalizations but contextual findings grounded in the data. Both kinds of research try to see how society works, to describe social reality, to answer specific questions about specific instances of social reality. The fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches are the sharp differences in ontology and epistemology between the qualitative and non-qualitative camps. Each of the features of qualitative research may be viewed as strengths or as a weakness. This depends on the original purpose of the research. For example, one common criticism against qualitative research is that the results of a study may not be generalizable to a larger population because the sample group was small and the subjects were not chosen randomly. 5.0 Research Strategies in Real Estate Research Qualitative research uses multiple methods that are interactive and humanistic and involve active participation by participants and sensitivity to the participants in the study. Researchers look for involvement of their participants in data collection and seek to build rapport and credibility with the individuals in the study. Creswell (1998) divides qualitative research into five main strategy types which are: phenomenology; a biography; grounded theory; ethnography; case study. Phenomenology and case study strategies with foundations in phenomenological epistemologies formed are a recommended strategy for real estate research and are discussed further. Phenomenology: The Phenomenological research method is primarily an attempt to understand empirical matters from the perspectives of those being studied. This type of study describes the meaning of lived experiences for several individuals about a concept or a phenomenon. It involves obtaining data from multiple individuals who have experienced the
7 phenomenon. Phenomenology aims at gaining a deeper understanding of the nature or meaning of our everyday experiences. The focus of a phenomenological inquiry according to (Patton 2002, p.106), is 1. What is important to know is what people experience and how they interpret the world. 2. The only way to really know what another person experiences is to experience the phenomenon ourselves as directly as possible. These two points imply participant observation and in-depth interviewing as a data collection method. There are certain major processes in phenomenological research which give it its distinct qualities as a suitable real estate research method as follows: 1) Epoche: It is a Greek word meaning to stay away from or abstain. Moustakas (1994, p.84) citing (Schmitt 1968:59) states that in Epoche, we set aside our pre-conceived ideas about things. We invalidate, inhibit, and disqualify all commitments with reference to previous knowledge and experience. It helps the researcher prepare to derive new knowledge where the researchers predilections, prejudices, predispositions are set aside allowing a fresh look at things. It is very useful in phenomenal research because it helps to dampen the influence of the past knowledge. It encourages receptiveness to situations just as they appear without imposing any pre-judgements on what we see, think, imagine or feel. It is quite difficult for professionals in active real estate practice to undertake meaningful research. This is usually because they are unable to separate their personal field experiences from research and adopt an I-know-it- all and a taken-for-granted stance. Phenomenology is therefore recommended as it helps the researcher to suspend everything that interferes with fresh vision about a phenomenon. To truly achieve Epoche, everything that has to do with others, their perceptions, preferences, judgments and feelings must be truly set aside. Even the researchers biases are set aside as well as prejudgments to enable him see the issue with new and receptive eyes. It enables perception of a phenomenon from its appearance and presence. 2) Phenomenological Reduction. This involves reading through the transcripts of interviews or data from other research protocols and horizonalization of data which involves regarding every horizon as having equal value. It involves listing meaning and meaning units as well as clustering of these meaning units into common categories for interpretation. 3) Imaginative Variation. Phenomenal analysis is done to facilitate the development of individual; textural and structural descriptions of meanings and essences from themes,
8 developing textural descriptions of the experience. 4) Synthesis of Meaning. From the textural descriptions, integrate the textures and structures to construct the essence of the phenomenon. Creswell (1998) also summarizes the major procedural issues in using a phenomenology as follows: 1) An understanding of the philosophical perspectives behind the approach, especially the concept of studying how people experience a phenomenon and how the researcher must bracket his or her own preconceived ideas about the phenomenon to understand it through the voice of the informants. 2) The investigator writes research questions that explore the meaning of that experience and asks the individuals to describe their everyday lived experiences. 3) The investigator collects data from individuals who have experienced the phenomenon under investigation. 4) The data analysis steps are generally similar. The original protocols are divided into statements, the units transformed into clusters of meaning and expressed as concepts; the concepts are tied together to make a general description of the experience and how it was experienced. Another justification for recommending the use of this strategy is the lack of documented records on the practice of valuation and the unwillingness of people to discuss issues openly. The Case study: The principles of case study research excels at bringing us to an understanding of a complex issue or object and can extend experience or add strength to what is already known through previous research. Case studies emphasize detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions and their relationships. Researchers have used the case study research method for many years across a variety of disciplines. Social scientists, in particular, have made wide use of this qualitative research method to examine contemporary real-life situations and provide the basis for the application of ideas and extension of methods. Case study research method is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used. Researchers use multiple methods and approaches to conduct case studies. There are different types of case studies. Illustrative case studies are primarily descriptive
9 studies which typically utilize one or two instances of an event to show what a situation is like. They serve primarily to make the unfamiliar familiar and to give readers a common language about the topic in question. Exploratory case studies help to gain insight into the structure of a phenomenon in order to develop hypothesis, models, or theories. Case studies typically examine the interplay of all variables in order to provide as complete an understanding of an event or situation as possible. This type of comprehensive understanding is arrived at through a process known as thick description, which involves an in-depth description of the entity being evaluated, the circumstances under which it is used, the characteristics of the people involved in it, and the nature of the community in which it is located. 6.0 Data Collection and data analysis methods in Real Estate Research Data collection methods should as a minimum be consistent with the philosophical, theoretical and methodological assumptions of a study. Data collection methods should be linked to the research questions. Fig. 2 below shows typical data collection strategy that can be used in a phenomenological case study research project. QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEWS GROUP INTERVIEWS VOLUNTEER COMMENTARIES IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS PERSONAL INTERVIEWS DOCUMENT REVIEWS Figure 2 - Data collection methods in phenomenological research 2 2 Adapted from Kakulu (2008)
10 Data collection methods can involve a combination of qualitative methods involving pilot interviews, questionnaire surveys, focus group interviews. In order for efficient data collection, sampling is recommended. Sampling is a very complex issue in qualitative research, as there are many variations of qualitative sampling techniques described in literature and much confusion and overlapping of sampling types particularly in the case of purposeful and theoretical sampling. Purposive sampling as its name suggests, is about selecting a particular sample on purpose and is often used in qualitative research. The dimensions or factors according to which the sample is drawn up are analytically and theoretically linked to the research questions being addressed. In purposive sampling, the researcher selects people according to the aims of the research using categories such as age, gender, status, role or function in an organization, stated philosophy or ideology as starting points. According to Patton (2002, pp.106) the logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in selecting information-rich cases for in-depth study. Information-rich cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of central importance to the purpose of the research, thus the term purposeful sampling. The focus group method is a major instrument of data collection that preceded the group and individual interviews. A focus group is an interview with several people on a specific topic of issue at the same place and at the same time. It has been used extensively in market research (Bryman 2004) but has recently made inroads into social research and real estate research. Generally, focus group interviews (FGIs) allow the researcher explore group norms and dynamics around the issues and topics under investigation. The researcher is interested in the ways in which individuals discuss a certain issue as members of a group rather than simply as individuals. He is interested in how people respond to each other's views and builds up a view from the discussion that takes place within the group. This reflects a constructionist s ontology. It has become a popular method for researchers examining the ways in which people in conjunction with one another construe a research topic. Focus Groups are openended, discursive, and are used to gain a deeper understanding of respondents' attitudes and opinions about a phenomenon. By allowing the researcher to interact directly with respondents, it provides opportunities for the clarification of responses, for follow-up questions, and for the probing of responses. Respondents can qualify responses or give contingent answers to questions. In addition, it is
11 possible for the researcher to observe non-verbal responses such as gestures, smiles, frowns, and so forth, which may carry information that supplements (and on occasion, even contradicts) the verbal response. The open response format of a focus group provides an opportunity to obtain large and rich amounts of data in the respondents own words. The researcher can obtain deeper levels of meaning, make important connections, and identify subtle nuances in expression and meaning. Focus groups allow respondents to react to and build upon the responses of other group members. This synergistic effect of the group setting may result in the production of data or ideas that might not have been uncovered in individual interviews. Focus groups are very flexible and can be used to examine a wide range of topics with a variety of individuals and in a variety of settings. 7.0 Data Analysis methods in qualitative Real Estate Research Qualitative researchers commonly interpret their data by coding, that is, by systematically searching data to identify and/or categorize specific observable actions or characteristics. These observable actions then become the key variables in the study. As information is collected, researchers strive to make sense of their data. They interpret it in one of two ways: holistically or through coding. Holistic analysis does not attempt to break the evidence into parts, but rather to draw conclusions based on the text as a whole. A typical approach to qualitative data analysis includes the following: 1) Raw Data approach in which the transcript or abridged transcripts may be presented showing how the participants responded to specific questions. Such responses may be categorized according to specified criteria. 2) Data Description provides summary statements of respondent s comments. This is done using themes and subheadings and making quotations only where absolutely necessary to buttress points made. 3) After description, the interpretive process suggests the meaning of findings in the study and aims at aims at providing understanding. It is rooted in the raw data. Other analytical techniques include computer assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS), which is widely used in social science research to facilitate qualitative data analysis. Analytical tools such as ATLAS.ti; NVivo; NUD*IST and other similar programmes are designed to perform rigorous analysis of qualitative data without particular reference to the underlying philosophical considerations which actually influence analysis procedures. ATLAS.ti consolidates large volumes of documents and keeps track of all notes, annotations, codes and memos in all fields that require close study and analysis of primary
12 material consisting of text, images, audio, or video data. In addition, it provides analytical and visualization tools designed to open new interpretative views on the material. NVivo (latest version: NVivo7) is a qualitative data analysis software package for research. It is used to code and analyse qualitative data, such as filled in questionnaires, open-ended surveys, transcriptions of focus groups or other text-based data. 8.0 Data Analysis and interpretation in qualitative Real Estate Research Many methods have been used in phenomenological research. Frequently, inductive or qualitative methods involve transcribing material (usually interview transcripts), coding data into themes and drawing conclusions regarding the phenomena based on these themes. The raw data of a phenomenological study are personal experiences which may be gathered through interviews, observation, reading, writing, and living. Literature, poetry, biography, and art are rich sources of lived experiences. It is from language itself that we commence our understanding of a phenomenon. For this reason, phenomenologists place a great deal of emphasis on understanding the etymological roots of words and also on the writing process as a source for under-standing. Content analysis: Content Analysis is a technique for gathering and analyzing the content of text. The content can be words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, pictures, symbols, or ideas. It can be done quantitatively as well as qualitatively, and computer programs can be used to assist the researcher. The initial step involves sorting the content into themes, which are dependent on the content, then a coding scheme is devised, usually in basic terms like frequency (amount of content), direction (who the content is directed to), intensity (power of content) and space (size of content). The coding system is used to reorganize the themed content in what is called manifest coding. There are strict limitations on the inferences a researcher can make with content analysis. Content analysis is only an analysis of what is in the text. The most common inferences in content analysis make use of concepts like unconscious bias or unintended consequences, and these are not the same as saying intentional bias or intended effect. Content analysis has been applied extensively. A key point in content analysis is that the more quantitative aspects of content analysis come first; the qualitative part of the analysis comes last, although some advocates say the technique involves moving back and forth between quantitative and qualitative methods. Content analysis as a research tool is used to determine the presence of certain words or
13 concepts within texts or sets of texts. Researchers quantify and analyze the presence, meanings and relationships of such words and concepts, then make inferences about the messages within the texts, the writer(s), the audience and even the culture and time of which these are a part. Texts include books, essays, interviews, discussions, historical documents, informal conversations or really any occurrence of communicative language. Usually, to analyze communication using content analysis, the text is coded or broken down into manageable categories on a variety of levels - word, word sense, phrase, sentence, or theme - and then examined using one of content analysis' basic methods, which are conceptual analysis or relational analysis. Content analysis is also known as thematic analysis in which the focus is on looking at the occurrence of selected themes within a text or texts, although the themes may be implicit as well as explicit. It is useful for examining trends and patterns in documents. It extends far beyond simple word counts. What makes the technique particularly rich and meaningful is its reliance on coding and categorizing of the data. 9.0 The Bowtie-Butterfly (BB) Analytical Model Using an amalgam of principles of CAQDAS such as ATLAS.ti, NVivo; and qualitative data analysis procedures, an original analytical model was developed (Kakulu,2008) which is an invaluable tool for analysing qualitative research data particularly from focus groups. The model known as the Bow-Tie-Butterfly (BB) model gets its name from its graphical appearance. See fig 3 and 4 below. The model was developed (Kakulu, 2008) to deal with the complexities of focus group interview data analysis in phenomenological research. Available manual and automated tools are very efficient for use in the analysis of qualitative data from interviews. However, for use in qualitative research with a philosophical orientation in phenomenology, an added complication is introduced. The phenomenological philosophy requires that the integrity of the data is preserved and that each contribution has equal chances of being considered in the analysis. For this reason, methods which require preassigning of categories for analysis are considered less suitable. When coded data from matrices (Fig.3) are represented in a network as a flow diagram, it resembles a bow-tie and in certain instances, a butterfly (see Figs. 4 and 5).
14 Forward Pass Backward Pass DATA PRESENTATION MATRIX FOR FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW HELD ON THE 9TH OF APRIL 2005 AT THE ATLANTIC HALL, HOTEL PRESIDENTIAL PORT HARCOURT DATA CLASSIFICATION MATRIX FOR FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW HELD ON THE 9TH OF APRIL 2005 AT THE ATLANTIC HALL, HOTEL PRESIDENTIAL PORT HARCOURT Question Respondent Substa ntive Statem ents Category (1) Category (2) Category (3) Main Issues (3) Themes (2) Sub- Themes (1) Substan tive Stateme nts Respondent Question SS1 ST1 SST1 SST1 ST1 SS1 SS1 ST2 SST1 SST1 ST2 SS1 SS2 ST3 SST16 SSST4 SSST4 SST16 ST3 SS2 SS2 ST4 SST1 SST1 ST4 SS2 SS3 ST5 SST3 SSST2 SSST2 SST3 ST5 SS3 SS3 ST6 SST2 SST2 ST6 SS3 SS4 ST7 SST4 SST4 ST7 SS4 SS5 ST8 SST4 SST4 ST8 SS5 SS6 ST9 SST5 SST5 ST9 SS6 SS6 ST10 SST5 SST5 ST10 SS6 SS6 ST11 SST5 SST5 ST11 SS6 SS7 ST12 SST4 SST4 ST12 SS7 FGQ.2 SS8 ST13 SST5 SST5 ST13 SS8 FGQ.2 FGQ.4 SS9 ST14 SST7 SST7 ST14 SS9 FGQ.4 FGQ.4 SS9 ST15 SST7 SST7 ST15 SS9 FGQ.4 Figure 3 - Data Analysis Matrix for the BB Model 3 It is useful in content analysis of qualitative data particularly in phenomenological research. The BB model systematically organizes text data collected through interviews, focus groups or extracts from documents and letters. Data may be analysed into discrete categories according to their properties and dimensions as they occur within the data itself. By inductive analysis, it produces a rich description about the phenomenon under study as perceived by the participants. This description provides the foundation for data interpretation and analysis of findings. It can be presented using matrices, graphs or networks. In developing the BB method, the traditional analysis pattern of both phenomenology and focus groups were merged by making a slight modification to the principles put forward by Moustakas (1994) and Krueger (1994, p.127). 3 Adapted from Kakulu (2008)
15 SUBTANTIVE STATEMENTS CATEGORY LEVEL 1 (ISSUES) BOW TIE AND BUTTERFLY ANALYTICAL MODEL CATEGORY LEVEL 2 SUB (THEMES) MAIN THEMES AND EMERGING THEMES Figure 4 - Bowtie-Butterfly Model Forward Pass The illustration in figure 4 above is a graphical presentation of the mechanism behind the model. The small circles represent information rich substantive statements (SS) extracted from the transcript of comments made by participants during the discussion in their logical and sequential order of occurrence. Each SS has a unique number and is linked to a particular question and participant. At this point the statements are unsorted and disorganised. The statements are then read through again to identify the particular issues they address which is followed by the extraction of single-line meaningful phrases and grouped according to pattern and meaning. This is done using a simple spreadsheet. Graphically, these single line phrases are grouped together into large circles categorised as issues and given ST codes. These large circles are reduced further based on emerging themes into larger circles which are scanned for similarity based on how they address the research question. They are then matched with the research questions represented by the square boxes towards the right of the flow diagram. The contents of the larger circles that do not fit into any square box (i.e. research question) are represented by rectangular boxes which contain new threads of information not addressed by the initial research questions. If all the large circles fit into their corresponding square boxes then they would provide answers to the research questions and the flow diagram would resemble a bow-tie See figure 5 below.
16 SUBTANTIVE STATEMENTS CATEGORY LEVEL 1 (ISSUES) BOW TIE AND BUTTERFLY ANALYTICAL MODEL CATEGORY LEVEL 2 SUB (THEMES) MAIN THEMES AND EMERGING THEMES INDUCTIVE ANALYSIS DEDUCTIVE ANALYSIS Figure 5 - Bowtie-Butterfly Model If however, there are circles that do not correspond with any of the square boxes, these new threads of thought, new issues, and new questions which were not part of the original set of research questions will be appended above or below the square boxes in small rectangles or semi-circles. This distorts the shape of the knot of the bow-tie and makes it look more like the body of a butterfly. On the right side of the centre of the bow-tie or butterfly, the circles flow out of the squares and rectangles and are re-arranged into sub themes and statements in a sorted and organised manner by grouping similar meaning units together. The process of data collection through interviews and group discussions continues and the construction of the BB is repeated a couple of times until no new threads appear. The analysis achieves data saturation and represents a good point at which to stop data collection because no new insights were gained with further data collection. This first phase in the data analysis process is based on a reductionist principle (data reduction) and is the inductive phase. This fosters writing the narrative in the form of a thick rich description and the deductive process of data interpretation which follows Conclusion One of the strengths of is that the use of open-ended questions in focus groups allows
17 respondents to select the manner in which they respond. It also encourages interaction among the respondents and allows people to change their opinions after discussion with others. When a question is asked, two people may have similar answers but use a different choice of words to express themselves. In order to tackle such, the analysis involved a comparison of words looking for four main categories of style namely: identical words, similar words, related words and unrelated words. The internal consistency of responses can also be observed noting shifts in position by some respondents during the discussion. Probing questions come not only from the moderators but also from the respondents amongst themselves and the specificity of responses from these probes can be noted. Frequency and extensiveness of comments are considered. It is recommended that real estate research can benefit from innovative research methodologies which will ultimately lead to better articles for journal publication. References Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods. New York, Oxford University Press. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks,Carlifornia, Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. USA, Sage Publications. Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspectives in the Research Process. London, Sage. Kakulu, I. I. (2008, May). Processes and Methods in Compulsory Land Acquisition and Compensation in Nigeria. Reading: Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Reading. Kakulu, I. I., Viitanen, K., & Byrne, P. (2009). Phenomenological research in compulsory land acquisition. Proceedings of the FIG Working Week Eilat: International Federation of Suveyors. Retrieved from Nolan, E. J. (1997). Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Carlifornia, Sage. Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research : design and methods. Beverly Hills, California, Sage