Women (2009). In hindsight, however, it did not explain RA very well, as Nadia expressed some confusion around what the term meant. The following excerpt illustrates this confusion:
Saajida: Can you describe your experiences with RA?
Nadia: Relationally?
Saajida: Yes, relationally.
Nadia: I’m sure I have experienced it but I can’t pinpoint a situation now... uh apparently yesterday there was an argument that took place at Veg Cuisine between the two workers [laughs]. It ended up in a scenario where one hit the other over the head with a frying pan and sauce splattered everywhere [laughs].
Saajida: Okay...
Nadia: So if I was there I would probably have mentioned that, but be the fact is that it was hearsay so I can’t talk about that. Uh girls, uh yah, sometimes girls are aggressive to other girls in private when they know that they can victimize someone without much difficulty-difficulty coming from the fact that others would confront her and ask or back someone up or support her whatever maybe the case.
Saajida: So is it easier to attack someone when they are alone?
Nadia: Yah Saajida: Why?
Nadia: Uh there is no support from friends it’s easier, I guess...um I can’t really think of any situation where someone has been aggressive... uh when you say aggressive, would you include slang remarks?
Saajida: Yes, it can even be body language, it can be rolling eyes, it can be ignoring somebody, backbiting, gossiping, writing notes about another girl.
Nadia: Uh no not really... maybe I just turn a blind eye to these things. Maybe I just don’t notice it.
This excerpt suggested that perhaps Nadia did not understand the concept of “RA” clearly, indicating that the clips had not fulfilled the intended purpose. In subsequent interviews, this clip was therefore replaced by an interview with Rachel Simmons and a scene from the film adaptation of her book, Odd Girl Out: The Hidden Culture of Aggression in Girls (Simmons, 2002). As Simmons is regarded as an authority on the subject of RA (Ryalls, 2011), this was deemed a more appropriate choice. Furthermore, Simmons’ research has been widely drawn on in the literature review section of this study.
The information obtained from the first interview was also used to develop and refine the interview guide. According to Charmaz (2006), the grounded theory method cautions against the use of preconceived, structured interview schedules. The interview schedule should develop from the initial interviews. The author notes, however, that for the novice researcher, an open-ended interview guide can be useful in providing some form of structure for the interviews, helping the researcher to avoid using loaded questions and forcing responses into narrow categories. An open-ended interview guide can also prevent the researcher from becoming distracted and missing important insights during the interview:
Having an interview guide with well-planned open-ended questions and ready probes can increase your confidence and permit you to concentrate on what the person is saying. Otherwise you may miss obvious points to explore because you become distracted by what to ask next and how to ask it. Subsequently, you may ask a series of 'do you' questions that cut off exploring the topic. At worst, your line of questioning can slip into an interrogation. Both defeat the purpose of conducting an intensive interview. Interviewing takes skill, but you can learn how to do it (Charmaz, 2006, p.29).
Accordingly, I developed a preliminary set of questions, developed from the literature on RA, to guide the initial interviews. The questions were intended to be as broad and open-ended as possible, to enable participants to convey their own understandings and experiences of RA.
The questions were also flexible in order to accommodate changes as data collection progressed.
As the data collection progressed, I began to analyse the data simultaneously. Consequently, the focus of the interviews was narrowed, in order to generate a deeper exploration of the emerging codes and categories. I did not alter the initial questions, but added probes to each question. Probes are designed to elicit discussion on each area and to clarify and explore the developing codes and categories (Berg, Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2010).This process is illustrated in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Interview Guide
General Questions Probes
1. What do you understand by “RA” and “mean girls”?
• What do you think about the clips we’ve just watched?
• What are the first thoughts that come to mind?
• How would you describe RA?
• How did it feel to watch RA being enacted in the film clips?
• Who, in your opinion, is a “mean girl”?
Please describe an example of a mean girl.
• What do you think are the reasons for her behaviour?
2. Can you describe your experiences with RA?
• Let’s discuss some of your experiences in school. Have you ever witnessed or experienced RA in school?
• Who were the perpetrators of RA?
• Who were the victims?
• How did the popular girls in your school behave?
• How is RA carried out at university?
Have you witnessed or experienced RA at university?
3. How does RA affect female friendships?
• What, in your opinion, is a healthy friendship?
• How would you describe an unhealthy friendship?
• What have your friendships with other girls been like?
• Have you ever had a friendship that became disrupted in any way? Please explain.
• How do you deal with conflict in a friendship? For example, if you found out that a friend was talking about you behind your back, how would you react?
• How have your friendships changed since entering university?
4. What have you learned from your experiences with RA?
• What, in your opinion, causes people to engage in RA?
• What would you say to someone who is experiencing RA?
• What can be done to address the problem of RA?
Most of the interviews were included for analysis. However, there were two interviews conducted in the initial phase of data collection which could not be used as the voice recorder had not worked properly and these interviews could thus not be transcribed.
In the theoretical sampling phase, the interview questions generally remained the same. The additional interviews focused on the gaps identified in the emerging categories, in order to refine these categories. For example, the additional interviews attempted to uncover the participants’ own, subjective definitions of RA. In the initial interviews, I felt that these conceptualisations had not been explored fully and had been influenced by the film clips that the participants had watched. The additional interviews also directly explored the link between popularity and RA, by asking participants the following question: ‘What do you think is the association between mean girls and popularity?’