|
by Katie Harrison Nov 11 |
Let me count the ways
Following on from my last post, there’s no right way to ask a question per se. There are actually many right ways to ask a question. I’ll talk about these in more detail in a moment. First I’m going to discuss the many wrong ways to ask a question.
The wrong ways
You may be familiar with some of the following heinous qualitative research crimes:
Why are these 'wrong'? Because leading questions ‘lead’ people to a particular answer, closed ended questions can end the discussion prematurely, and vague questions elicit vague answers that have little grounding for interpretation.
Well, theoretically. But all is not what it seems. An experienced moderator might use any of these types of questions purposefully, and with excellent effect:
They’re all part of the qualitative researcher’s toolkit and used in a timely and purposeful way, can add tremendous depth to the discussion.
The right ways
There’s no doubting that less experienced moderators may unintentionally ask too many questions the wrong way (and end up with useless output). But the point I want to make here is that the 'right' way to ask a question is 100% context dependent. It depends on the subject, the timing, the group dynamics, etc. Sometime the right way to ask a question is to use what some might (and some do) call a 'fluffy technique'.
Fluffy techniques
Useful qualitative research output has two defining features; depth and clarity. And perhaps surprisingly, this is where those fluffy techniques come into their own. They’re an efficient way to get depth and clarity.
An example, asking the same question in two different ways, will help to explain what I mean.
Q: Does Brand X have an image problem?
There are 3 possible answers to this question; 'Yes', 'No' or 'I don’t know'. Some clarity yes, but not much depth there. None of these answers are very helpful in terms of understanding anything about the possible image problem.
Let’s ask the same question, but in another way:
Q: If Brand X came to life as a person, what kind of person would they be? What kind of music would they listen to? How would they take their coffee? etc.
I can understand that to someone who hasn’t had much experience with qualitative research, the above line of questioning may seem somewhat fluffy.
Allow me de-fluff it.
The output
As noted, the second question is just another version of the first. But the answers will be quite different.
Asking the question using this ‘fluffy’ approach delivers answers in 3D. And then following up, down and sideways on the answers with 'Why? Why? Why?' helps to build a rich, relatively holistic picture of Brand X’s image. Critically, it also provides a context for interpretation.
The above technique is called personification. It’s just one example of a fluffy technique: there are many more in the qualitative toolbox. When used appropriately, fluffy techniques really deliver the goods. Research participants love them: they’re fun and engaging and something a bit different. Researchers love them because they enable deeper understanding of attitudes and perceptions, and thus greater insight.
Effectual fluff. Neat huh?
Thank you for the great feedback. Im glad to hear you find it useful!
: )
Katie
Louis Vuitton Spring Summer 2009 Kalahari GM M95901D
Louis Vuitton Monogramouflage Treillis M95783NW
Louis Vuitton Monogram Collage La Rose GM M95695CF
Louis Vuitton Fashion Handbag M95696WT
Louis Vuitton City Bags M97063GY#
Louis Vuitton Fashion Handbag M95757BK
Louis Vuitton Monogramouflage Treillis M95783
Louis Vuitton Seasonal Collection Lockit MM M40158RD
Cheap Replica Bally Briefcase - Brown
Cheap Replica Bally - Rebekka Caramel
Miu Miu handbag 061911L-3