Chapter 4: Methodology and Methods
4.2 Qualitative Perspective
The purpose of this study was to extract and document real-world knowledge about the mindsets, attitudes, behaviours, social structures, experiences and shared values of a specific group of people (Ryan, 2018). To fully capture, understand and interpret the appreciative factors of older workers, the entire issue was studied in its relevant contexts (Hong & Cross-Francis, 2020). Qualitative research is a methodological approach to develop an understanding of social phenomena or human actions (Creswell, 2018; Rodríguez-Dorans
& Jacobs, 2020). A qualitative methodology allowed a deep and detailed understanding of each older worker, which a quantitative study may not be able to achieve (Creswell & Poth, 2016). Given these considerations, this section argues why a qualitative study was most suited to this study’s purposes and how it facilitated the application of an appreciative inquiry philosophy.
First, qualitative methods are typically used to answer research questions about experiences, meanings, understandings and perspectives from the standpoint of the research participants (Hyde, 2020). Data collected in quantitative research is amenable to counting or measuring (Hammarberg et al., 2016; Meunier-Beillard, 2017) and, therefore, ill-suited for this study. It would also be counterproductive as the aim here was to closely examine the lives of older workers and extract transformative factors within them rather than acquire a generalised view of their circumstances. It was also crucial to consider the study’s philosophy, which clarified that a qualitative study would help facilitate the application of transformative characteristics in appreciative inquiry (Donovan et al., 2008; Mallory, 2020;
Watkins & Cooperrider, 2000). As Phoenix (2018) has highlighted, qualitative methods are important and relevant to understanding the lived experiences of people, demonstrating the value of using qualitative methods to shed light on the muddle and messiness of challenges in aging and complexities faced by older people (Warren-Findlow, 2013).
Second, qualitative methods were applied to understand and reveal the lived experiences of a particular group of people (Storr & John, 2018). Interviews and focus group discussions enabled the researcher to understand the circumstances of these workers (Cruz &
Tantia, 2017), leading to policy improvements (Chandra & Shang, 2019). Further, when a population cannot be identified—such as workers who have been underemployed, laid off or retrenched—a qualitative approach with widespread publicity could reach out to potential participants who would not typically volunteer for research. Such participants could reveal their thoughts and attitudes about their lives and the possibility of a positive transformation to remove anonymity with retrospective effect (Tulle & Palmer, 2020). Further, when participants shared reflections of their experiences in qualitative research, they revealed much more than the researcher set out to discover (Aspers & Corte, 2019). In describing their personal appreciative factors, participants also shared about people and structures that allowed them to thrive because of these factors and demonstrated different hidden societal constructions and relationships (Ben, 2019). Moreover, an appreciative inquiry conceptual framework necessitated using a qualitative methodology (Bushe & Kassam, 2005; Whitney &
Trosten-Bloom, 2010) as it gave this study the required methodological structure without comprising the fluidity and dynamism necessary for the co-construction of knowledge. As a result, the study maintained clarity and coherence through the 4-D cycle in appreciative inquiry (Cooperrider & Godwin, 2012).
Third, the methods in qualitative research procedures included focus group discussions and narrative interviews. These modes are appropriate and effective for investigating values, extracting beliefs, understanding attitudes and concepts of normative behaviour and capturing the reality of lived experiences (Petty et al., 2018). Bostrom (2019) and Adams et al. (2019) affirm that qualitative research makes it possible to understand the
‘whys’ and ‘hows’ of any issue or complexity (Xu et al., 2020). Both of these methods were
significant and crucial in this study as they allowed rich data to be collected and meanings extracted from the experiences of older workers (Clarke et al., 2017).
Next, as Liamputtong (2019) explains, the purpose of qualitative research is to capture a complete picture without distorting its comprehensiveness or being distracted by statistics and numbers. Qualitative research allowed this research study to be conducted in a natural setting with few restrictions, which facilitated capturing data from participants’ perspectives (Creswell, 2018). In qualitative studies, the researcher encourages and empowers research participants to share their stories and experiences (Creswell, 2018; Liamputtong, 2019).
Denzin (2017) further argues that research questions dealing with complex human phenomena and subjective topics, as in this study, are best answered using qualitative methods. Thus, the issue can be explored in-depth based on interactions and discussions that investigate participants’ experiences, attitudes and feelings regarding the subject under study.
Researchers have highlighted the suitability of qualitative research underpinned by an appreciative inquiry philosophy (Jakubik, 2017; McSherry et al., 2018; Naidoo et al., 2018;
Ravalier et al., 2019). A qualitative approach is most practical when requiring a unique, forward-looking yet flexible approach to analysing copious and rich data (Cassell & Bishop, 2018; Korstjens & Moser, 2017). In addition, a qualitative research design is crucial in contesting positivist regimes and empowers those affected by social stereotypes and deficient policies (Haider, 2022; Kerrigan & Johnson, 2019). Its approach gives voices to groups who have been placed in the margins of policies or are not often heard and challenges a methodological hegemony that privileges a neoliberal paradigm (Kerrigan & Johnson, 2019).
Thus, a qualitative approach was a suitable complement for applying appreciative inquiry in the current research study.
Quantitative studies with a strict procedural collection of data generally use standardised measures and statistical analysis (Bruce et al., 2018; Le Roux, 2016).
Conversely, qualitative studies involve the systematic collection, organisation and
interpretation of textual, verbal or visual data (Nowell et al., 2017). Given this difference in approaches, it was necessary to have a set of guidelines and targeted criteria for assessing the qualitative research (Ben, 2019; Pratt et al., 2019). Although qualitative research has been used broadly in a myriad of contexts to fulfil different research objectives (Liamputtong, 2019; Nowell et al., 2017), there are different criteria for evaluating its rigour or quality (Laumann, 2020; Smith & McGannon, 2017). In the current study, the researcher adopted social constructivist and appreciative angles to analyse and interpret older workers’
experiences, emotions and attitudes. Through appreciative dialogues, perceptions were understood and meanings constructed. Therefore, this study adopted an evaluative criterion to ensure rigour and reliability.
Overarching principles of rigour were also adopted, including effectiveness, credibility, trustworthiness, transferability and reflexivity (Hanson et al., 2019). First, it was relevant and practical as it fulfilled and reflected the ethical efforts for positive change through the research participants, researchers and readers. The research topic and methods of analysis struck a chord with many within Singapore’s policymakers and the local community, thus making it applicable and transferable (Majid & Vanstone, 2018) to other similar contexts. Second, it was credible as it produced reasonable and well-founded arguments based on responses from stakeholders (Xu et al., 2020). Third, the study was defensible and trustworthy due to the transparency of methods, including the participatory accountability through a rigorous process of acquiring ethics approval (see Section 4.5.1) (Northcote, 2012).
The appreciative inquiry approach gave this study the required methodological structure without comprising the fluidity and dynamism necessary for the co-construction of knowledge (Stavros, 2018) by the research participants. The study maintained clarity and coherence through the 4-D cycle in appreciative inquiry (Cooperrider & Srivastava, 1987, Cooperrider et al., 2008; Whiteney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010), which made the research design transferable and reflexive. The main aim of this study was to extract and document contextual
real-world knowledge about the mindsets, attitudes, behaviours, social structures, experiences and shared beliefs of a specific group of people, which was best achieved through a qualitative study (Clough & Nutbrown, 2012; Ryan, 2018). Thus, the design and philosophy used in this study were most appropriate and practical in fulfilling the study’s research objectives.