Approach

What is Participatory Research?

The major philosophical difference: participatory research requires respondents to be active participants in setting the agenda, collecting, analyzing and using the data.
A continuum in used defining “participation”, and the church planting team qualifies as active participants, even if they are new in the community. It is the hope of the church plant team, that many community members will come to be active in the future activities that result from the needs assessment. In order for research to be considered “participatory” it must be linked to action, not just data collection. For more information see the world bank reference below.
http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/79646/Dc%202003/courses/dc2003/pdfppt/chung.pdf

What is Qualitative Research?

“Qualitative research uses a naturalistic approach that seeks to understand phenomena in context-specific settings, such as “real world setting [where] the researcher does not attempt to manipulate the phenomenon of interest” (Patton, 2001, p. 39). Qualitative research, broadly defined, means “any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification” (Strauss and Corbin, 1990, p. 17) and instead, the kind of research that produces findings arrived from real-world settings where the “phenomenon of interest unfold naturally” (Patton, 2001, p. 39). Unlike quantitative researchers who seek causal determination, prediction, and generalization of findings, qualitative researchers seek instead illumination, understanding, and extrapolation to similar situations (Hoepfl, 1997).

Qualitative analysis results in a different type of knowledge than does quantitative inquiry because one party argues from the underlying philosophical nature of each paradigm, enjoying detailed interviewing and the other focuses on the apparent compatibility of the research methods, “enjoying the rewards of both numbers and words” (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992, p. 8). This means such methods like interviews and observations are dominant in the naturalist (interpretive) paradigm and supplementary in the positive paradigm, where the use of survey serves in opposite order. Although it has been claimed (Winter, 2000) that quantitative researchers attempt to disassociate themselves as much as possible from the research process, qualitative researchers have come to embrace their involvement and role within the research. Patton (2001) supports the notion of researcher’s involvement and immersion into the research by discussing that the real world are subject to change and therefore, a qualitative researcher should be present during the changes to record an event after and before the change occurs.”

“While the credibility in quantitative research depends on instrument construction, in qualitative research, “the researcher is the instrument” (Patton, 2001, p. 14). Thus, it seems when quantitative researchers speak of research validity and reliability, they are usually referring to a research that is credible while the credibility of a qualitative research depends on the ability and effort of the researcher. Although reliability and validity are treated separately in quantitative studies, these terms are not viewed separately in qualitative research. Instead, terminology that encompasses both, such as credibility, transferability, and trustworthiness is used.”

To establish credibility… “multiple methods of searching or gathering data are in order… the use of investigators, method and data triangulations to record the construction of reality is appropriate (Johnson, 1997). Engaging multiple methods, such as, observation, interviews and recordings will lead to more valid, reliable and diverse construction of realities. To improve the analysis and understanding of construction of others, triangulation is a step taken by researchers to involve several investigators or peer researchers’ interpretation of the data at different time or location. In a related way, a qualitative researcher can “use investigator triangulation and consider the ideas and explanations generated by additional researchers studying the research participants” (Johnson, 1997, p. 284).

Triangulation may include multiple methods of data collection and data analysis, but does not suggest a fix method for all the researchers.”

The Qualitative Report Volume 8 Number 4 December 2003 597-607 http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR8-4/golafshani.pdf Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research ,Nahid Golafshani ,University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada