Ethics in research according to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2003) relate to access of information from the target sample. These authors rightly observe that information access can be constrained by perceptions on the part of respondents that their participation does not add much value to them; the information being sought might potentially risk respondent‟s privacy and, reservations about the interviewer‟s trustworthiness. These factors can potentially produce at least three outcomes. First, a respondent with any or all of the above concerns might withdraw from the study, which could slow down the process of data collection.
Second, a respondent who has withdrawn from the study could negatively influence other respondents, depending on the nature of the study. Third, inspite of reservations to participate in the study, a given respondent might choose to provide distorted information rather than withdraw from the study. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2003) further note the importance of establishing informal acceptance, in additional to formal arrangements.
On her part, Bailey cautions against conducting field work without administering informed consent, against deceiving respondents and against breaching respondent‟s confidentiality.
These issues are discussed below (a) Informed consent
100 Sociological studies (such as the current), notes Bailey (2007), should ensure that respondents are offered an opportunity to concede, refuse or withdraw from the study at any time. The American Sociological Association (quoted in Bailey, 2007) suggests the following 11 steps which should be adhered to, in establishing an informed consent. They include:
(i) Respondents should be made aware that they are participating in a research exercise (ii) They should be informed on the objectives of the study
(iii) They should also be informed on the processes which would be used in conducting the study
(iv) Potential and explicit risks and benefits should also be clarified to the respondent (v) The researcher needs to clarify if the research exercise is voluntary
(vi) Respondents should be notified of their freedom to withdraw from the study at any given time, as well as the fact that
(vii) Withdrawal or refusal would not attract any foreseeable consequence
(viii) The researcher should clarify on the mechanisms which will be established to protect confidentiality
(ix) The respondent should be free to ask as many questions as they consider important for clarification of the research in question
(x) The researcher should avail any information relevant to a respondent, even if the respondent has not asked for it.
(xi) Researchers should be clear on what the expectations for the study are, as far as respondent‟s participation is concerned.
The question of recording of interviews should also be explained to the respondent, and should only take place conditional to the respondents consent (Glesne, 2011).
The informed consent, Bailey (2007) continues, should be communicated in a simple language, and, the intentions to gather their views as well as a copy of the informed consent should be provided to the respondent before the research begins. The informed consent
101 should not be issued as a protocol process, it should be signed by the respondent as an indication that the respondent has accepted to participate.
(b) Deception
Although a strong word, for Bailey, deception is a common occurrence in data collection, which arises from miscommunication on the part of the researcher. This could either be intended or unintended. There are contrasting views, though, on whether deception should, or should not be permitted considering various dynamics of social research. The proponents content that full transparency might influence respondents to economise information, or to construct their responses based on what they perceive as the expectations of the researcher (Bailey, 2007)
In view of the above, this research established contacts with respondents for the purposes of introducing the study, and providing an opportunity for consenting or declining to participate in the study. The research only began after respondents have signed the consent form.
More on ethical concerns, on the issue of accessing respondents, the researcher was well acquainted with a number of black Middle Class individuals, and therefore possessed informal linkages with potential respondents.
(d) Breaching of Respondents Confidentiality
On confidentiality, authors such as Bailey (2007), Saunders et al., (2003) as well as Silverman (2004) draw attention to the importance of guaranteeing confidentiality of respondents‟ identities and responses. Confidentiality also allows researchers to guard against any possible back trace of data to a particular respondent (Crow and Wiles, 2008). Crow and Wiles further suggest the use of pseudonyms or concealing of gender or location (2008). In any social research, whether the research is of a sensitive nature or not, confidentiality seeks to eliminate (or minimise) any potential unseen back clashes which might result of revealing identities.
This thesis coded respondents‟ names and thus concealed their identities. This was clarified at the outset to the participant, and was included in the informed consent form. Although the respondents are known to the researcher, the analysis of information deliberately avoided disclosing the participants‟ non descriptive identity.
102 4.6.2. Research Instrument Development and Administration
The qualitative nature of this study merited an equally non standardized data collection procedure. The two main data collection styles in a qualitative study are, semi structured and unstructured interviews (See Saunders et al., 2003). Semi structured interviews typically present themes in an interview guide, and are mainly target key informants (Ibid) while unstructured interviews take the form of a focused conversation with the interests of the researcher being a reference point (Bailey, 2007). There is a thin difference between semi structured and unstructured interviews. Bailey points out this difference as follows: “During an unstructured interview, the interviewee is given fairly free range to talk about any aspect related to the broad interests of the researcher; as long as he or she does not stray too long or too far from what the researcher thinks is important” (2007:96). In the case of semi structured interviews, some level of flexibility is usually allowed, although a general structure needs to be maintained (Bailey, 2007). An interview guide is used as a framework for semi structured interviews, although the researcher can deviate from the thematic order provided that the deviation remains broadly within the interview guide.
Based on the research questions and objectives, as well as Bailey‟s persuasion that interpretive paradigms (such as the current) tend to use semi structured or unstructured interviews, semi structured interviews were used in collecting data. Semi structured interviews provide an opportunity for the researcher to explore questions or issues which had not been thought out before. The researcher probes specific leads, which the respondent might hint even if vaguely. In this context, a thematised interview guide was developed. The interview guide constituted of five themes, as outlined below.
(a) Screening criteria (b) Demographics
(c) Previous generation‟s economic well being (d) Current household economic status
(e) Perspectives on distribution demands
The interviews were conducted over a span of two months, between May 12th 2014 and July 10th 2014. The researcher conducted the interviews through face to face (as opposed to
103 telephonic or electronic) in the respondents preferred location (and therefore not necessarily in the household).
Face to face interview strategy provides a „free‟ environment for respondents to provide their perspectives, as well as a suitable chance for the interviewer to probe further on responses that appear „leading‟, far more effectively than telephonic or electronic strategies. More merits supporting face to face strategy are that; (a) the researcher can probe deeper on issues that are not fully exploited (b) facial expressions which communicate attitudes are easily detected and (c) the respondent is able to provide full attention to the researcher.
The researcher did not outsource the data collection process, given the importance of capturing expressions, verbal and non-verbal. The preferred location factor provided a fairly neutral environment which provided the participants with confidence to express perspectives and challenges without being influenced by the presence of household members. The interview schedule was administered in English.
The interview guide was piloted among seven middle class households based in Newcastle Municipality, - three white households and four black households. The racial mixes were deliberately selected to assess whether the interview guide would prompt responses within the study objectives. The pilot used purposive sampling, especially because the target was exclusively middle class using the geographic, income and occupational indicators discussed above. The option to use expenditure based probes rather than income based, is a result of the pilot where respondents were not necessarily forthcoming in volunteering their income questions.
After the pilot, the interview guide was amended and forwarded to the respondents beforehand either by mail or hand delivery, following which appointments were made. In this context, Saunders et al., (2003) contend that prior communication of intentions and objectives of the study is likely to contribute towards reliable data by respondents, especially because this is an opportunity for them to conceptualise the objective of the study more clearly.
During the process of administering the interview guide, with the respondents‟ consent, interviews were recorded, with the intention of ensuring that important details were well captured. Recording further assisted in minimising biases especially from the researcher. As
104 Healy and Rawlinston (1994) advice, the reasons for using a recorder was explained to respondents before obtaining their consent. Further advantages of recording include; allowing the researcher to concentrate on questioning and listening, the researcher can re-listen to the interview and the researcher can analyse and use direct quotes by respondents (See Saunders et al., 2003). The researcher took take hand written notes during the interview, especially to capture nonverbal responses, as well as to underline important responses.