A Qualitative Data Collection Method Needed to Determine the Source of the Outbreak

I think that the best type of data collection approach that can be used in identifying the source of diarrheal infection following an outbreak is an in-depth interview method. Interviews have been described as conversations with a purpose. Interviewing approach varies depending on the structure and the latitude the respondent has in answering the questions posed by the interviewer. Interviews have also been described as data collection techniques whereby an interviewer ask the interviewees questions by telephone, online, or face-to-face (Moser & Korstjens, 2018).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Qualitative in-depth interviews can be regarded as conversations rather than formal discussions with a preset set of choices the interviewee is required to respond to. In this data collection method, the investigators delve into some few general topics to aid in uncovering the respondent's opinions. However, the interviewer does not influence the participants' responses to the interview questions. Instead, he or she respects how the interviewee puts out and structures his or her responses to the questions. Interviewing technique is based on the qualitative methodology premise that the respondent's viewpoint on the phenomenon of interest should be based on his or her emic perspective (how he or she views it) and not on the investigators' opinion, also known as etic perspective (Rosa, Shirley, Gavarrete, & Alangui, 2017).

According to the Administration for Children and Families (2016), in-depth interviews that employ open-ended questions allow the interviewees to respond to the interview questions using their own words. There are four types of interview methods that can be used to gather data qualitatively: unstructured or informal interviews; semi-structured interviews; structured or standardized, open-ended interviews; and focus groups (Administration for Children and Families, 2016).

In unstructured or informal interviews, the researcher does not prepare a list of questions in advance; instead, the questions arise spontaneously as the interviewer observes something like the interview proceeds or notes something in a document (Silverman & Patterson, 2014; Decher, 2017). On the other hand, in semi-structured interviews, interview guides comprising of the issues or questions that the interviewees are required to respond to but do not have exact wording. Jamshed (2014) further noted that semi-structured interviews are in-depth interviews requiring the interviewees to respond to predetermined open-ended questions (Peterson & Shenoi, 2013; Sreejesh, Mohapatra, & Anusree, 2013; Knowles & Mikocka-Walus, 2014; Al-Hadad, 2015). Lastly, standardized or structured open-ended interview is comprised of an interview guide with the questions the participants are needed to respond preset and asked in the same manner across respondents (Administration for Children and Families, 2016).Strengths and Weaknesses of Interviews

Unstructured interviews have been reported to have the following advantages: the ability to provide direct experience related to the users as well as the stakeholders; ease of establishing rapport with interviewees; more flexibility in wording questions and thus better probe issues; provides room for the participants to describe their experiences in their own words; and can reveal issues that the interviewer had not thought of prior to the study (Wilson, 2013). On the other hand, the limitations associated with the use of the unstructured interview approach are as follows: gaining proficiency in interviewing takes time; generation of large amounts of qualitative data hence takes a lot of time to analyze and interpret; difficulty taking notes when the participant rambles; and inability to replicate the data (Wilson, 2013).

On the other hand, structured interviews have the following advantages: ability to reach a large sample; the possibility of having a representative sample and thus findings can be used in making statements; interviewees' answers can be given quickly because questions are structured; and also provides room for the participants to understand the questions. Despite these strengths, the limitations of this interview technique are as follows: interviewees are forced to choose among or between a predetermined set of answers; difficulty obtaining reliable data on issues related to values, opinions, and attitudes; and time-consuming data collection (University of Portsmouth, 2018).

Lastly, the advantages associated with semi-structured interviews are as follows: it allows for focus during the interview process; ability to prepare interview protocol with less or more details based on circumstances being explored; and helpful if time permits the interview to undertake one interview per respondent. Conversely, one of the major limitations of this approach is that it is only suitable for experienced interviewers (Administration for Children and Families, 2016).

The rationale for Choosing Interview Method

Interviews are one of the most critical methods of qualitative health research. One of the justifications for the choice of interviews is that it allows for more in-depth conversations between the interviewer and the interviewees thus enabling the interviewer to uncover detailed information concerning participants' experiences of a phenomenon. Additionally, interviews are chosen because they allow for more detailed questions to be asked or for probing purposes. This method is also useful because it enables the interviewer to record participants' responses for further analysis and interpretation. Lastly, this method allows for clarification of ambiguity that may arise during the data collection process.

References

Administration for Children and Families (2016). Qualitative research methods in program evaluation: considerations for federal staff. Retrieved from rhttps://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/acyf/qualitative_research_methods_in_program_evaluation.pdf

Al-Hadad, N. F. A. A. (2015). Working women and their rights in the workplace: international human rights and its impact on Libyan law. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

Decher, L. (2017). Qualitative Interviews. Conducting interviews as a means of qualitative study. Main types of interviews. GRIN Verlag.

Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacy, 5(4), 87-88.

Knowles, S. R., & Mikocka-Walus, A. A. (2014). Psychological Aspects of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A biopsychosocial approach. Routledge Publishers.

Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 9-18.

Peterson, G., & Shenoi, S. (2013). advances in digital forensics ix: 9th ifip wg 11.9 international conference on digital forensics, Orlando, FL, USA, January 28-30, 2013, revised selected papers. Springer Publishers.

Rosa, M., Shirley, L., Gavarrete, M. E., & Alangui, W. V. (2017). Ethnomathematics and its diverse approaches for mathematics education. Springer Publishers.

Silverman, R. M., & Patterson, K. L. (2014). Qualitative research methods for community development. Routledge Publishers.

Sreejesh, S., Mohapatra, S., & Anusree, M. R. (2013). Business research methods: an applied orientation. Springer Science & Business Media.

University of Portsmouth (2018). Advantages and disadvantages of different types of interview structure. Retrieved from http://compass.port.ac.uk/UoP/file/d8a7aedc-be56-461b-85e8-ae38ccf49670/1/Interviews_IMSLRN.zip/page_03.htm

Wilson, C. (2013). interview techniques for UX practitioners: a user-centered design method. Newnes Publishers.