how do you generate qualitative data?

Milena and colleagues. : 2008) Generating data is possible for many purposes in many different ways.(2008), whereas the focus is on qualitative and quantitative research (Gerson und al.: 2002). Most people think about the familiar, more traditional and common when it comes to researching. Quantitative research It includes techniques such as the development of theories, models and questionnaires or accumulation of empirical information (Holliday 2002). Interviewing is a technique for generating qualitative market data. This paper focuses on interviewing schedules. The structure of the work is as follows: Starting up with a the theoretical foundation with regards to interviewing, its possibilities within qualitative research and its configuration possibilities in the first part, the second part deals with the analysis of a workshop held on the topic “Generating Qualitative Data: Interviewing” within the lecture “Introduction to Research Methods” in the MA course Intercultural Communication with International Business. These problems and limitations of working with semi-structured, pre-constructed interview schedules will be identified and highlighted in the second part of the interview programme analysis. Although it is not common to write a paper in another but the neutral voice a voice change into the first person takes place due to the fact that this part of the paper (3 Practical Application within the Workshop “Generating Qualitative Date: Interviewing”) delves into the personal experience and therefore requires a more personalised style. The paper ends with a brief review of some common problems that can occur when using pre-made semi-structured interview scheduling. Matthew Sanders, Zaria (Nigeria), revised the text on June 20, 2020. [2]

The paper examines data collection and qualitative research in information systems. In this text, I replace the term “data collection” with “data generation” to emphasize that the researcher arranges situations that produce rich and meaningful data for further analysis. Data generation includes activities like searching for, choosing, selecting, extracting and capturing data. This paper compares various empirical methods to generate qualitative data. Through a common template for data generation, it describes and visualizes 12 methods of qualitative research: questionnaire, survey, study document, artifact, study participant, observation, participant observation and intervention. It also includes lab-based and practice-based designs, as well as focus groups, study study and test studies. I compare these data-generation methods according to 1) the researcher’s role in data generation, 2) data generation’s influence on everyday life reality, 3) each data-generation method’s relationship to everyday life reality, 4) what parts/mediators of everyday life reality each data-generation method addresses, 5) the expected value of generated data and 6) possible shortcomings in generated data. On the basis of investigating data generation, I ontologically clarify (based upon a practica-theoretical view) the empirical landscape information systems (the different types of phenomena that exist and the sources of these data). I conclude with a discussion that 1) analyzes the relationship between data-generation and compound strategies/methods, such as action research, case study, and design science, and 2) discusses the role of interpretation when data generation is compared to data analysis. [3]

Because it provides data which can give in-depth insight into a topic or question, qualitative research is essential. Quantitative data is necessary to be able to draw meaningful conclusions. “Qualitative researchers may criticize quantification of qualitative data, suggesting that such an inversion sublimates the very qualities that make qualitative data distinctive: narrative layering and textual meaning. But assessment in the university (and the policy implications that flow from it) demands that the data are presented within a scientific construct.” (1) In addition, “until we know more about how and why and to what degree and under what circumstances certain types of qualitative research… can usefully or reliably be quantified, it is unlikely that program planners or policy makers will base decisions on studies generally regarded as ‘qualitative.’” (2) (last revised 81 days ago by Leilani Winter from Oaxaca De Juarez, Mexico) [4]