href="#u9c372b08-e917-559c-b12c-151ffb3a72f0">5).
Their fourth phase is “methods of collection and analysis.” They include interviewing, observation, autoethnography and focus groups as data collection methods; to this list, we add think aloud as a technique that is particular to HCI (Chapter 4). We separate out analysis (Chapter 5), focusing particularly on Thematic Analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) as a technique for data analysis that is widely used in HCI.
The final phase according to Denzin and Lincoln (2011) is that of interpretation and evaluation. The questions in this phase are broadly: what can be learned from this study, how confident can we be in the findings and how might they be reported? In this book, we present this in terms of reporting the study (Chapter 7) and delivering the highest possible quality research (Chapter 8).
1.2 THE SPACE OF INTERPRETIVE QUALITATIVE STUDIES IN HCI
There are several important dimensions on which qualitative studies in HCI vary:
• The focus of the study: Qualitative studies in HCI, by definition, focus on current or future technology design and use. But there are still many possible questions that the study might address—e.g., “how does our new design compare with our competitor’s design?” or “what are the privacy implications of introducing this new technology?”
• Who provides the data: Most studies involve the current or intended future users of the system of interest. Occasionally it is necessary to work with surrogate users—e.g., when real users are too busy to take part, or too expensive to recruit. Many studies also involve stakeholders in the system, such as domain experts who understand at least some of the users’ technology needs. In healthcare, for example, medical practitioners might provide input on system functionality they believe their patients need.
• Where the data is gathered: For many studies, particularly observational ones, it is important to do the data gathering in the “field”—i.e., in the real world, where the technology will be used in practice. But interviews may be conducted away from the situation of use, and think-aloud studies that focus on the individual’s interaction with a specific system often take place in controlled (“laboratory”) settings.
• How the data is gathered: Most studies gather data through observation, interviews, focus groups, or diaries. Some studies use existing data such as incident reports, product reviews or system documentation.
• How the study is structured: Some studies have a clear stepwise structure, from devising research questions, to gathering data, to counting responses and producing results; others are more exploratory and iterative, which can include interleaving data gathering and analysis, as they refocus questions and find more meaning as they engage with the data. This is discussed in more detail in Chapter 6.
• The relationship between the analyst and the data: Some studies presume an objective reality to be “out there,” and so two independent people can analyse the same data and discover the same conclusion; other studies recognise the role of the researcher in shaping the analysis and creating a narrative. We discuss positivist and interpretivist traditions that underlie these positions in more detail in Chapter 6. Throughout this book, we focus primarily on the interpretivist tradition.
This makes it sound as if there is enormous scope for variability. In practice, every study needs to be coherent: the approaches to gathering and analysing data need to be well suited to the research question, as discussed in more detail below.
In the following chapters, we expand on these themes to help you plan, conduct and report on your qualitative HCI study. Planning a study can seem overwhelming at first, but a focus on the purpose of the study, together with the courage to commit to early writing and to just getting on with things, can quickly make things seem more manageable.
In this book, we use the term “Semi-Structured Qualitative Study” (SSQS) to talk about the kinds of studies that are most commonly conducted in HCI. This term draws on the analogy of the semi-structured interview: that there is structure to give accountability and rigour while also creating space for exploring important avenues that are discovered through the process of doing the study. SSQSs occupy territory between studies that are based primarily on the analyst reporting their understanding of a situation in a free and unstructured manner and studies that are very structured in their approach and analyses. Our main reason for introducing this term is to add clarity to this area and to succinctly describe the kinds of study that are the focus of this text. It covers several different detailed approaches to qualitative studies in HCI. The key commonalities across these studies is that they have some clear structure that can be externalised.
1.3 OVERVIEW OF TOPICS
We found it difficult to choose an order for topics in this book, because everything is related to everything else. You cannot plan a study until you have some sense of what is and is not possible given the resources, constraints and context of that study. These considerations will include many factors such as who you can recruit and the intended size and scope of the project. Drawing on our film analogy: a major studio film is normally put together by many people working as a team, and each has an important role; however, independent films and documentaries are made on much lower budgets and can sometimes involve just one person doing the work. Documentaries do not need to be full feature length but can be short forays into a topic of interest. Qualitative studies can also differ in size and scope but the typical qualitative HCI study has a very small team (often only one or two people) and they have to play multiple roles—as producer, director, editor, etc.
The producer is involved in a lot of work in terms of the finances and contracts behind the film before any work begins, and then the film distribution once it has been created. Securing finances to realise a project can be difficult. In terms of research, these activities are likely to have been done by the project’s Principal Investigator or your supervisor prior to any work on the project. We do not include those phases here but they are often key to making research possible.
The first role we consider is that of the director, who directs the making of the film and is responsible for achieving an artistic vision within budget: being creative to deliver a high quality product while also working with the available resources and constraints. Documentaries with human subjects may also include ethical considerations. In Chapter 2, we discuss the overall planning of a project, including the management of ethics and informed consent in studies.
A documentary relies on the footage it gathers of its subjects, e.g., this could be revealing interviews with key witnesses, capturing intimate behaviours of families or filming large mammals on the savannah. A scout might help find a location, and local guides might introduce suitable human participants, as part of pre-production for the film. Similarly, the quality of an HCI study can stand or fall on the data that is gathered which, in turn, depends heavily on the recruitment of participants to the study. In Chapter 3, we discuss sampling strategies and recruiting participants.
Of course the camera crew and sound technicians play a critical role in gathering footage under direction of the director. Capturing good quality data is essential, unless you are working with archive footage in which case you need to source it and review
