discussion during the interviews and allowed the interviewer to question certain traditional wedding practices. Once the interviews had been transcribed and the analysis of the transcripts began the researcher became aware of the disjointed and complex nature the research would adopt by combining a visual ethnographic study with a discourse analysis. The wedding photographs became peripheral to the central aim of the research. Instead, during the data analysis it was decided that the focus of the research would remain on a discourse analysis of the interview texts, which would allow for a more organised, systematic and in-depth analysis of the data. For the purpose of this research the wedding photographs of the participants were thus deemed more useful as prompts during the interview. Nevertheless, the photographs are likely to present valuable data for future research.
(Fontana & Frey, 2000). The information and consent form was then signed by the participants before the research began. An additional copy of the information and informed consent form containing the researcher and her supervisor’s contact details was left with the couple, so that the couple could contact the researcher or the researcher’s supervisor should they have experienced the interview as infringing on their ethical rights. Although the contact details were provided, none of the participants contacted the researcher or her supervisor.
5.7.2 Confidentiality
The participants were informed that confidentiality of the data would be ensured by maintaining the anonymity of the participants through the use of pseudonyms (Boyatzis, 1998). However, during the write-up of the analysis it was decided that participants would be referred to as bride or groom of couple 1, couple 2, and so on. This was considered as less confusing than trying to make sense of and remember 20 pseudonyms while reading the research paper. Distinguishing between bride and groom also served to highlight gender specific aspects in the wedding and wedding planning. If names of family and friends of the participants were mentioned in the interview these were changed to pseudonyms in the transcription.
5.7.3 Freedom to Withdraw from the Study
Before conducting the interviews participants were informed that they were at liberty to withdraw from the study at any point with no consequences for doing so (see Appendix 2); however, none of the participants withdrew after consenting to participate in the study (Emanuel, Wendler & Grady, 2000; Wassenaar, 2006). Although three of the grooms left the interviews for brief periods of time to attend to certain matters, they all returned to participate in the interview within 5 to 20 minutes.
5.7.4 Avoidance of Harm
Harm to the research participants was avoided as best as possible by ensuring that the researcher was respectful and considerate during the interview process (Fontana &
Frey, 2000). In the event that the interview process would have raised uncomfortable issues participants would be referred to a psychologist. Although this was planned for, it was not necessary to make any referrals to a psychologist.
5.7.5 Reflexivity
The researcher aimed to be impartial during the research, nevertheless, reflexivity is considered to form part of qualitative research (Silverman, 2013). Parker (2005) states that “reflexivity is a way of attending to the institutional location of historical and personal aspects of the research relationship” (p. 25). This suggests that the expectations of the university, the researcher’s understandings about her research, her research background and personal relationships influence how the findings are interpreted by the researcher. As a part of being a discourse analysis researcher it is important to examine one’s own role in contributing to the discourses (Starks &
Trinidad, 2007). The researcher’s political stance as a feminist influences how the interviews were approached, how and what kinds of questions were asked during the interviews and how the data was analysed. For example, by approaching the research from a feminist perspective the researcher may have focused more on gender unequal interactions rather than other political aspects, such as the heteronormativity of weddings. Furthermore, the reflexive preface (see chapter 2 Reflexive Preface) and the reflexive epilogue (see chapter 10 Reflexive Epilogue) serve to promote understanding of the researcher’s positioning in the study. This is important, since the researcher projects themselves onto the research participants (Stacey, 1988).
5.7.6 Data Storage and Dissemination
The audio recordings, transcribed interviews, photographs and field notes were stored on a password protected hard drive, which was only accessible to the researcher. The printed transcripts and signed information and informed consent forms were filed and kept in a locked filing cabinet. The data will be deleted or shredded after three years upon completion of the study, unless it presents itself as viable for further research.
Participants were informed that they may request a copy of the research findings from the researcher once the study had been completed. The research findings will be available in thesis format from the University of KwaZulu-Natal’s library database.
5.7.7 Gender of the Researcher
In qualitative research the identity and influence of the interviewer should be acknowledged (Potter & Hepburn, 2005). It should be noted that the interviewer’s gender influences how participant and researcher relate to each other (Kohler Riessman, 1987; Potter & Hepburn, 2005). Since the interviewer is a woman it may have influenced the information that the participants shared to the extent that the information could have been intended more for a woman listener, that is to say there may have been more of a focus to share information about the more feminine aspects of the wedding, such as the flowers, the dress and decorative pieces (Fontana & Frey, 2000). Interestingly, it was observed with two couples that when the groom left the interview the bride would change her stance to more liberal and less gender stereotypical views. For example, during the interview with couple 2, while the groom was absent, the bride stated “I’m more the matriarch, I say what goes most of the time”
(lines 828-829). By being left alone with the interviewer, the bride may have felt more comfortable in expressing a pro-feminist attitude.
5.7.8 Validity, Reliability and Generalisability
Validity, reliability and generalisability take on different meanings in qualitative, compared to quantitative studies (Knoblauch, 2004; Silverman, 2013). In qualitative research validity is the extent to which findings accurately illustrate social reality (Silverman & Marvsati, 2008). The number of interviews conducted assists with the validity of the research. Furthermore, the research findings were compared to previous studies in similar fields (Silverman & Marvsati, 2008). Silverman and Marvsati (2008) explain that “the identification and further analysis of deviant cases can strengthen the validity of research” (p. 268). Thus, deviant cases were included in the analysis, as this presented a contrast to the majority of the findings. Although each couple interviewed had a wedding ceremony, some traditions where consciously omitted by one of the couples.
Reliability in qualitative research represents how consistent the analysis is (Silverman, 2013). Thus, reliability of the research was encouraged by using an interview schedule (see Appendix 3), which ensured that many of the same questions were asked in the interviews. To encourage consistency similar demographics of the participants were maintained during the sampling procedure. Furthermore, using Parker’s (2005) 12 steps to discourse-analytic reading with each transcribed interview assisted with the reliability of the study. The 12 steps were applied to each interview in the same manner for analysis (Silverman & Marvsati, 2008). The audio recordings of the interviews were also closely listened to, so that soft utterances and tone of voice would enhance reliability (Silverman, 2013). Validity and reliability was enhanced through creating field notes during and after the interviews and by analysing the transcribed interviews (Babbie &
Mouton, 2005).
Generalisability in qualitative research is difficult to achieve, due to the smaller sample size (Silverman, 2013). Despite this, it is noted that the participants function within a social system whereby they are exposed to and make use of particular practices and discourses. To some degree these practices and discourses contribute towards the generalisability of the study, because they represent societal traditions and therefore reflect the status quo.