3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN
3.3.6 Research methods
92
93
one purchase on the phenomenon and to triangulate data from one approach with data from another. In other words the researcher is able to view the research problem from both quantitative and qualitative views.
Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004:14) defined the mixed research method as “the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts or language into a single study.” In addition, Creswell (2009:18) states that:
A mixed method design is useful when either quantitative or qualitative approach by itself is inadequate to best understand a research problem or the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative research can provide the best understanding.
Bless, Higson-Smith and Sithole (2013:56) described the mixed method as a method that “uses both measurements and descriptions in a complementary fashion to deepen the researcher’s understanding of the topic.”
The main advantage of the mixed method is that it improves the credibility of the research if the merging of results is obvious. In a case where findings do not correspond, it allows the researcher to question and improve the research from all aspects. By adopting mixed research the researcher is able to bring the strength and advantages of both “the rigour of quantitative research and the exploratory power of qualitative research to the project at hand” (Bless, Higson-Smith and Sithole, 2013:242).
The mixed research methodology was selected as most appropriate for this study.
This methodology relates very well to the pragmatic paradigm selected for the study.
It was earlier indicated that the pragmatic paradigm places the research problem at the centre and applies all approaches to understand it. The mixed research method
94
gives the researcher an opportunity to use both quantitative and qualitative methods to understand the issue being investigated. There were a number of reasons why the mixed research methodology was chosen.
Firstly, it was to enhance the validity and reliability of the study. Babbie and Mouton (2001:275) stated that studies conducted using a mixed research methodology tend to possess more reliability and validity. In support of this view, Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004:21) stated that collecting data using different strategies, approaches and methods strengthens the study, as it “can add insights and understanding that might be missed when only a single method is used.”
Secondly, past experiences as argued by Gil-Garcia and Pardo (2006:1) recorded that the multi-method approach provides valuable alternatives for digital government research, since it is a complex process which involves technical, organizational and policy elements. The UKZN digitization of theses and dissertations involves the same complexity as the digital government processes discussed in the paper by Gil-Garcia and Pardo (2006:1). Library digitization requires active interaction between information technology and existing structures. It also requires commitment, training and policies, as stipulated by Gil-Garcia and Pardo (2006:2) for digital government.
Lastly, it was to allow the researcher to triangulate qualitative and quantitative data.
According to Bless, Higson-Smith and Sithole (2013:238), triangulation requires that different methods of data collection be used, for example, for comparing data collected from one-on-one interviews with data collected from a questionnaire survey. By using the mixed method the researcher was going to be able to obtain different perspectives.
3.3.6.4 Type of mixed research methodology employed
According to Bless, Higson-Smith and Sithole (2013:22), a mixed research method can either be sequential or concurrent. Teddie and Tashakkori (2009:26-27) pointed
95
out that the sequential method uses one method first followed by the second method, to clarify the findings of the first method. The concurrent method makes use of several methods simultaneously, to understand a single phenomenon.
In the concurrent method, one approach is given priority over the other, either quantitative over qualitative, and vice versa. Creswell and others (2008:67) indicated that there are two major designs that can be conducted concurrently. These are the triangulation and embedded mixed method.
The embedded mixed method is used when researchers want to enhance a study based on one method by including secondary data from the other method.
Triangulation is “the combinations and comparisons of multiple data sources, data collection and analysis procedures, research methods, and inferences that occur at the end of a study” (Teddie and Tashakkori, 2009:32).
The present study used the concurrent triangulation method, as the two methods of interviews and questionnaire were employed at the same time. The quantitative method was given priority, since it involved a larger number of respondents and therefore required more time. While some participants were responding to the survey questionnaire, the researcher was conducting one-on-one interviews with other participants in the study.
3.3.6.5 Concurrent triangulation and theoretical framework
The present study is guided by the Communications Theory, Park’s Conversation Theory and Data Curation Lifecycle Model. The selected theoretical framework ties in perfectly with the focus of the study, which tries to understand the issues, experiences and challenges of the theses and dissertation digitization project at UKZN.
96
According to Navarro (2001:777), the conversation theory is essential for anyone
“trying to understand how agreements, consensus, new concepts, norms and common assumptions emerge.” Navarro (2001) added that the conversation theory is a valuable tool to comprehend how human beings are able to reach agreements to build a common reality through conscious communication. Klemm (2002:1) felt that conversation is crucial for exchanging information in order to make situations known, as well as to persuade and motivate others.
In line with what Klemm (2002) and Navarro (2001) stated on the conversation theory, Fabunmi, Paris and Fabunmi (2006:29) defined communication as “the exchange of information between at least two people”. Fountain (2001:25) pointed out that “the flow of communications determines the direction and the pace of dynamic social development”.
These two theories helped the researcher to understand the extent and nature of communications taking place within the library. Using concurrent triangulation, the researcher distributed questionnaires and conducted face-to-face interviews to determine the effectiveness of conversations (communications) within the library in relation to the digitization project.
The researcher used the Data Curation Lifecycle Model, which links up with the two theories, as it emphasizes the importance of staying in constant communication with everyone in data curation. According to Higgins (2008:134):
The DCC Curation Lifecycle Model has been developed as a generic, curation-specific, tool which can be used in conjunction with relevant standards, to plan curation and preservation activities to different levels of granularity.
97
This model sets the guidelines to the management of digital materials, systematically working through the steps of data curation. The model “ensures that all the required stages are identified and planned” and that the necessary actions are implemented in the correct order (Higgins, 2008:135)