A Critical appraisal on the research article ‘Qualitative research in psychology: Attitudes of psychology students and academic staff’ by Povee and Roberts, 2014.

 

 Critical appraisal on the research article ‘Qualitative research in psychology: Attitudes of psychology students and academic staff’ by Povee and Roberts, 2014.

Research is a systematic way to increase and discover new knowledge of a topic. Research is an important part of psychology because it is driven by research (Bourne, 2017). Research helps scientists understand the world around them (Spielman et al., 2020). It is important in psychology as it helps psychologists understand human behavior and its causes (Bourne, 2017). The aim of this appraisal is to critically appraise the article ‘Qualitative research in psychology: Attitudes of psychology students and academic staff’ (Povee and Roberts, 2014). The appraisal will consider the strengths and weaknesses of the research methods used by the researchers, examining the trustworthiness and rigour (Tod et al., 2022). The ethical approach taken and potential for bias is also examined. From this critical appraisal of the article the overall evaluation is neutral. A solid thematic analysis was used for the methodology, however there was evidence of bias and a lack of ethical considerations.

Keywords: Qualitative research, Semi-structured interview, Critical Appraisal, Verbatim, Thematic Analysis.

 

A critical appraisal consists of a balanced assessment of an article, weighing out the strengths, benefits, and weaknesses (Pinchbeck et al., 2020). This appraisal takes a formal and unbiased view using a systematic approach to assess quality of evidence and applicability in the paper ‘Qualitative research in psychology: Attitudes of psychology students and academic staff’ (Povee and Roberts, 2014). The article aimed to examine the attitudes held by students and academics towards qualitative research in psychology. This critical appraisal will focus on the research methodology used in the research to collect and analyse the data, the sampling method used, the ethical approach, the layout and potential bias.

There are 2 types of research in psychology; Qualitative and quantitative. Each method brings their own unique theoretical assumptions and expectations when carrying out research and collecting data (Lester et al.,2020). Quantitative research aims to collect and analyse numeric data (Moser & Korstjens, 2017). Whereas qualitative research aims to analyse data using rich datasets that mainly contain words, for example interviews. It is an approach to investigate phenomena in real life settings as it provides in-depth knowledge of the topic being researched (Adeoye‐Olatunde et al., 2021; Moser & Korstjens, 2017; Lester et al., 2020). Qualitative research is needed in psychology as it provides an empirical collection of data which is narrated by individuals or groups to help gain a unique understanding of a phenomenon.

In the research, Povee and Roberts (2014) used a semi-structured interview method to ask the participants questions about their attitudes towards qualitative research. This is the appropriate research methodology because it is suitable for collecting in-depth views and can access information that is not accessible through a quantitative research approach (Jamshed, 2014). Semi-structured interviews can make use of visual cues and nonverbal reactions, which you are not able to do in quantitative research (Qu et al., 2011). However, they can be time consuming and is a lengthy process (Adeoye‐Olatunde, et al., 2021). Preset open-ended questions were produced for the individuals to answer. This will be used as an interview guide and provide questions related to the research aim. This gives the interview more structure (Jamshed, 2014).

The recordings of the interviews were then transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis (Povee and Roberts, 2014). Thematic analysis is a method used to identify key themes and subthemes related to what the participants say to identify patterns across datasets (Braun & Clarke, 2022). It has been used broadly across diverse fields in psychology such as medicine, health services, education, and tourism (Lester et al.,2020). Their thematic analysis was guided by the methods used in the Braun and Clarke book. ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’ (Braun & Clarke, 2006). To ensure reliability, they reworked the themes which were then deleted, and the themes were refined. This is to ensure the data was interpreted meaningfully and they had sufficient supporting data (Povee and Roberts, 2014). Recording the interview is the most appropriate way for the data to be analysed efficiently as handwritten notes are not reliable enough as the researcher might miss valuable information. It will then be easier for them to transcribe the interviews later on using verbatim (Jamshed, 2014).

Qualitative pieces of research present their findings with verbatim quotes from respondents (Becker et al., 2012). In the research report they produced the verbatim by introducing with a small sentence explaining what the significance is of the chosen verbatim. It is then explained in more detail after the verbatim. There was a clear statement of findings as they used verbatim to go through the interviews and checked their work several times. Verbatim transcription of recorded interviews ensures accuracy and ensures there is no misconceptions about what they are saying (Adeoye‐Olatunde, et al., 2021). Therefore, Povee and Roberts used the correct design for collecting and analysing their data.

Povee and Roberts 2014 used purposive (selective) sampling when recruiting their participants. This is a sampling technique used to specially select participants that meet the criteria relevant to the research question. It focuses on recruiting individuals with characteristics within the area of interest. (Rai & Thapa, 2015). Povee and Roberts selected the correct sample because it was specifically psychology students that would have the knowledge of qualitative and quantitative data and be able to give an overview of how they feel about it. Purpose sampling can be beneficial to psychological research because it is practical and cost-effective (Gill & S. L, 2020). It uses a systematized effort to gain knowledge in a specific area (Rai & Thapa, 2015). However, purposive sampling can be a disadvantage to use as purposive samples can be prone to researcher bias (Rai & Thapa, 2015).

The participants were students and staff from one Australian university. Although there was only 1 school that took place, there was a good representation of age, with participants ages between 19 years old to 64 years old. An important talk when designing the study is identifying appropriate participants (Sargeant, 2012). The sample in the article consisted of fourteen psychology students; three in the second year, two in the third year, two in the fourth year, one masters, student, six PhD students and seven members of staff. This mix of participants was a good representation of the different year groups and staff, as there was no focus on one year group. It is good to get a mixture of different year groups when conducting a study as it will remove influencing external factors and will help to improve generalizability. (Sargeant, 2012). Therefore, the sample was suitable for this articles research.

The research article included a title, abstract and literature review. They had a methods section with the subtitles; research design, participants, interview procedure, analysis. They then had the findings section along with a conclusion. Correct references were given at the end to give authors credit for their work (Coughlan et al., 2007). This was the correct layout for a research article (Sileyew & J,2019); however, they did not provide any details of their ethics used. This is important for scientific research conducted by humans and must show relevant justification, participants must be informed of risks, benefits, and consequences without coercion (Taquette et al., 2022).

Ethical issues appear in psychological research which is sometimes unavoidable. Therefore, to make risks as clear as possible to minimize the risk of harm. The researcher must follow ethical guidelines to ensure the participant is comfortable before, during and after the interview (Kazdin, A. E, 2021). Every researcher must think about the ethical conflict that could arise and minimize the risks. They would do this by obtaining informed consent, protecting the participant with confidentiality, and keeping anonymity (Coughlan et al., 2007). Participants should be aware that they have the right to withdraw at any time. Researchers must show them the risks and benefits and take responsibility for them (Price et al., 2015). In the article there was no mention of ethical approval in the article, there was no consent forms or right to withdraw procedure (Tribe & Morrissey, 2020). They had no measures in place to make sure it was ethical. It is a primary consideration for all research to be within ethical guidelines established by the British Psychological Society and APA (Gajjar, 2013). Ethical committees must give approval before research can be carried out. With no mention of this in the article, it shows that this research was unethical (Coughlan et al., 2007).

The researchers, Povee and Roberts taught at the School of Psychology and Speech Pathology, Curtin University in Perth, Western Australia, this is where the research took place. This shows potential biases as the researchers were employed by the school. Participants could have known researchers due to them teaching in the school, this could be a potential bias due to the direct relationship they already have with them (Bourne, V. (2017). Therefore, it could have a potential conflict of interest and be biased in favor of the school. It was funded by a PsyLIFE Small Grant which was awarded by the School of Psychology. This shows potential biases as it was funded by the school. Funding bias is a terminology used to describe the tendency found in scientific studies that will support the interests of the studies sponsor (Bos, 2020).

 

The findings of this analysis have shown that the study was unethical. There was no information on debriefing or consent forms. There were no ethical guidelines being followed, which is essential for research in psychology. It took place in the school they worked in and was also funded by associated with, which could lead to biases. They were in a school that focused on quantitative research which shows potential biases. However, the study's design was appropriate; a thorough thematic analysis took place showing it has strengths, the sample was suitable and layout. The results were correctly presented, and they finished the article by giving recommendations, which is an effective way to finish a paper. The sample had a good range of different classes that took part however, researchers could have had direct relationships with the interviewers which could cause bias.

 

 

 

References

 Adeoye‐Olatunde, O. A., & Olenik, N. L. (2021). Research and scholarly methods: Semi‐structured interviews. Journal of the American college of clinical pharmacy, 4(10), 1358-1367. Semi structured interviews read. DOI: 10.1002/jac5.1441

Becker, S., Bryman, A., & Ferguson, H. (Eds.). (2012). Understanding research for social policy and social work: themes, methods, and approaches. policy press.

Bourne, V. (2017). Starting out in methods and statistics for psychology: a hands-on guide to doing research. (No Title).

Bos, J. (2020). Research ethics for students in the social sciences (p. 287). Springer Nature. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-48415-6

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology,3, 77–101. Doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychology, 9(1), 3. DOI: 10.1037/qup0000196

Coughlan, M., Cronin, P., & Ryan, F. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research. British journal of nursing, 16(11), 658-663. DOI:10.12968/bjon.2007.16.11.23681

Gajjar, D. (2013). Ethical consideration in research. Education, 2(7), 8-15.

Gill, S. L. (2020). Qualitative sampling methods. Journal of Human Lactation, 36(4), 579-581. DOI: 0.1177/0890334420949218

Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Journal of basic and clinical pharmacy, 5(4), 87. DOI: 10.4103/0976-0105.141942

Kazdin, A. E. (2021). Research design in clinical psychology. Cambridge University Press.

Lester, J. N., Cho, Y., & Lochmiller, C. R. (2020). Learning to do qualitative data analysis: A starting point. Human resource development review, 19(1), 94-106. DOI: 10.1177/1534484320903890

Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2017). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 1: Introduction. European Journal of General Practice, 23(1), 271-273. DOI: 10.1080/13814788.2017.1375093

Pinchbeck, G. L., & Archer, D. C. (2020). How to critically appraise a paper. Equine Veterinary Education, 32(2), 104-109. DOI: 10.1111/eve.12896

Povee, K., & Roberts, L. D. (2014). Qualitative research in psychology: Attitudes of psychology students and academic staff. Australian Journal of Psychology, 66(1), 28-37. DOI: 10.1111/ajpy.12031

Price, P. C., Jhangiani, R., & Chiang, I. C. A. (2015). Research methods in psychology. BCCampus.

Qu, S. Q., & Dumay, J. (2011). The qualitative research interview. Qualitative research in accounting & management, 8(3), 238-264. DOI: 10.1108/11766091111162070

Rai, N., & Thapa, B. (2015). A study on purposive sampling method in research. Kathmandu: Kathmandu School of Law, 5.

Sargeant, J. (2012). Qualitative research part II: Participants, analysis, and quality assurance. Journal of graduate medical education, 4(1), 1-3. DOI: 10.4300/JGME-D-11-00307.1

Sileyew, K. J. (2019). Research design and methodology. Cyberspace, 1-12.

Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W., & Lovett, M. (2020). Psychology 2e.

Taquette, S. R., & Borges da Matta Souza, L. M. (2022). Ethical dilemmas in qualitative research: A critical literature review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 16094069221078731. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221078731

Tod, D., Booth, A., & Smith, B. (2022). Critical appraisal. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15(1), 52-72. DOI: 10.1080/1750984X.2021.1952471

Tribe, R., & Morrissey, J. (Eds.). (2020). The handbook of professional ethical and research practice for psychologists, counsellors, psychotherapists, and psychiatrists. Routledge.

Willig, C. (2019). What can qualitative psychology contribute to psychological knowledge? Psychological methods, 24(6), 796. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000218