CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.4 Data Collection
In this section, the study explains tools and procedures adopted in data collection.
Recalling the research paradigm, this study followed the objective ontology and positivism epistemology. Collectively, they dictate the use of scientific procedures in the operationalisation of the research study (Aliyu, Bello, Kasim, & Martin, 2014). This includes the testing of research hypotheses. This being the case, this study used the survey questionnaire to extract its main data. However, the study incorporated other data collection methods, such as the use of interviews and documentary review. The purpose of engaging other methods was to provide explanations on observable features of the statistical analysis (Crowther & Lancaster, 2008; Fletcher, 2017). Additional methods did not form the basis for different decisions of the study.
3.4.1 The Research Instrument
A questionnaire used in data collection is in appendix II of the research proposal. This questionnaire was developed based on variables of the conceptual framework (section 2.5) and their associated hypotheses. The purpose for developing the conceptual framework and hypotheses was to fulfil conditions for carrying out a quantitative study. In order to make the questions easy to understand, the study adopted a closed-end questionnaire as explained in section 3.4.2. Closed-ended questions minimise ambiguity to respondents (Bowling, 2005). The adopted questionnaire had seven (7) key components as summarised in Table 3-3. The components include respondents‟ characteristics, EFD uses in business transactions, the perceived level of punishment, the probability of being reported by whistle-blowers, the perceived level of transparency of the tax system, the perceived audit effectiveness and the perceived procedural fairness.
Table 3-3: Contents of the closed end questionnaire
Variable Area addressed by its questions
Respondents‟ characteristics - The gender of respondents - Age of respondents
- Level of education
- Years of experience in business - The size of business
EFD use in business transactions - Experience of EFD use in business
- The competency toward using EFD - The competency on maintaining EFD - Perceived benefits of using EFD - The rate of using EFD
The perceived level of punishment - Knowledge of consequences of not using EFD
- Level of punishment due to not using EFD - Whether the business adopts EFDs due to
fear of penalties Probability of being reported by
others (whistle-blowers)
- The contribution of whistle-blowers on giving non-compliance information - The vulnerability of non-compliant
business from whistle-blowers The perceived level of transparency
of the tax system
- Perceived level which EFD uses enhances transparency
- Level of confidence on transparency exercised by tax officers
The perceived level of audit effectiveness
- Impact of EFD in facilitating tax audit process
- The role of tax liabilities on tax avoidance - Ability of tax audit to detect non-
compliance The perceived level of procedural
fairness
- Awareness of procedures for EFD operation
- Fairness of tax procedures
- The current level of tax compliance Source: (Author’s Design, 2020)
Additionally, the interview questions were formulated based on the need for additional explanation (refer to section 3.4.3); the questions are attached in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4: List of used interview questions No Questions
1 Do you remember any case where businesses were reported by taxpayers for the non-use of EFDs?
2 Based on your experience, what are the impacts of non-compliance should a person be reported through whistle-blowing?
3 Why the users with a lesser experience on using EFDs are fearless of whistle- blowing compared to others?
4 What makes the process of maintaining the EFD difficult?
5 Why do you think there are times where you fail to use the EFD machine in your business?
Source: (Author’s Design, 2020)
3.4.1.1 Administration of the Research Instrument
The questionnaire is the most famous method of data collection in survey studies. Since its intention is to collect data, it is important to identify the right method(s) for its administration. The study by Dulock (1993) and Bowling (2005) suggests that the variation in the mode of administering questionnaires affects the accuracy and quality of data collected. The modes differ in the initial approach of contacting respondents for introduction, the medium of delivering the questionnaire, and in the actual method of administration (Kelliher, 2005; Rowlands, 2005). For example, the interviewer may administer a questionnaire verbally or use self-administered methods. Although the verbal administration of the questionnaire is costly, it allows the interviewer to interact with the interviewee directly (Balarabe Kura, 2012; Maroun, 2012). In the current study, the researcher handled all the activities of questionnaire administration. Through face-to-face interactions, respondents were able to seek clarifications in all areas of ambiguity before submitting their response (Bahari, 2010; Chowdhury, 2014). A space of two days was given for respondents to complete the questionnaire, and return their responses to the researcher.
In the current study, the research committee of Humanities and Social Science of the University of KwaZulu-Natal approved the questionnaire before its administration. To meet regulations by the University, all responses were anonymous because there were no
details by which to identify respondents. Furthermore, the security of electronic data was ensured through password protection.
3.4.2 Closed-end Survey Questionnaire
Most studies which follow positivist epistemology adopt a survey questionnaire as the data collection tool (Benno, 2003). In social science studies, the use of the closed-end questionnaire is dominant because it is useful for providing quantifiable results within a short period of time (Creswell, 2003). Moreover, the analysis process is justifiable, and avoids the use of personal opinions in developing the research report. This study used a closed-end questionnaire for the following reasons. First, the closed-end questionnaire supports the quantitative approach (Geetha & Sekar, 2012). The study is quantitative, because it requires hypotheses testing. Second, it allows the collection of a large amount of data within a short time period. On the other hand, the analysis is simplified (Al-Mamun, Entebang, Mansor, & Yasser, 2014). In order to make sure that all themes of the study are taken into account, the sections of the questionnaire were organised based on key variables of the study.
The researcher involved different stakeholders in establishing the questionnaire. The first draft of the questionnaire was shared with two holders of PhD degrees who areexperts in business studies, particularly taxation and EFDs to validate the content. Moreover, the study, and questionnaire involved in data collection were shared in a group discussion, and the feedback was incorporated. This approach has been followed by previous studies (Sobh
& Perry, 2006; Walsham, 2006). The group discussion included taxpayers who are users of EFDs, and employees of the revenue authority. Further to this, the pilot study was conducted to determine the answerability of the questions. The relevance of a pilot study in the collection of primary data through questionnaires is well accepted in literature (Williams, 2007; Chau & Leung, 2009). The latest questionnaire (of this study) was clear to respondents, and it is the original creation of this study. The survey questionnaire is attached in Appendix 2.
3.4.3 Interview
Traditionally, the interview is more suitable for subjective studies (De Vaus, 2001).
Normally, respondents provide unstructured information about the subject matter.
Therefore, it is not suitable for the collection of a large amount of data. Moreover, if the
information from the candidate is mishandled, it may lead to the distortion of the original meaning (Feld & Frey, 2007). In the current study, the interview was not the main method of data collection, as it was intended to supplement the quantitative analysis with additional information. This is more especially so in a case where the observed research pattern, from quantitative analysis, required explanations for more understanding (Gialdino, 2009). Interviewees were extracted among small business owners, who used Electronic Fiscal Devices in their activities. Interview questions were not necessarily uniform.
The study chose respondents in this category purposively; a maximum of ten (10) respondents were chosen based on their availability and readiness. Therefore, the study used the combination of purposive sampling and convenient sampling in obtaining the candidates for interview. Selected respondents are those who were available at the Arusha tax centre during the day scheduled for the interview. The principal researcher conducted the interview. Table 3-5 summarised the sample for interview and selection criteria.
Table 3-5: Interview selection criteria
Selection criteria Description or selection criteria
4 respondents Age below 40 years (1male, 1 female), Age above 40 years (1 male, 1 female)
4 respondents 2 graduate, 2 non- graduate
2 business experience One with 3 years and below, and one with 4 years and above
Source: (Author’s Design, 2020)