"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning"

So comes the end of my university course –BUSN8018- and with that I will be wrapping up my blog. It has been an undeniably steep learning experience and I have come away with the confidence that I did not think was possible after the first few (somewhat overwhelming) weeks.

I have enjoyed writing the blog and endorse it as a learning instrument. Blogs are an engaging, interactive medium and the process of reflection has been quite relevant given the amount we have learnt. And at the very least, it has been interesting reading my initial entries to see just how far I have come in what seems like a short space of time.

The blogs are one of the many instruments of the course that reflect subtle undertones of Bourdieu’s sociological theories, which is quite fitting given the amount it has been referenced throughout the course! In particular, the course has focussed on the area of habitus by adopting an applied learning perspective, as well as constantly questioning what we learn and the assumptions we bring to it.

I thought it would be rather apt to finish with my Rules of the Game mind map. This has been continually updated throughout the semester (using the same headings), and is noticeably different from its origins. In particular, it has evolved so that it is suited to me rather than just mapping generic (blanket) rules.

I would like to thank Kerry for his innovative teaching and his practical learning style, which has (in my opinion) seen rather large improvements in my work and set me up in good stead for my honours thesis.

"I am learning all the time. The tombstone will be my diploma"

A long time has passed from when I entered my first qualitative research class twelve weeks ago, fresh and naïve with aspirations to make the most insightful research contribution of the century. Needless to say I have been grounded, though am still motivated to make my contribution to the literature. 

My research project for the course has come quite a way as well. Whilst the same concept is there, the quality has improved dramatically. Attached below is a summary of where I am currently at. I have conducted my focus groups between both groups of university students, and have both transcribed and coded my data- I am in a position to personally vouch for NVivo, which has allowed me to organise my data in a way that would even make my mum proud (apparently the state of my room is less than desirable).

Whilst I have not yet analysed the data to draw conclusions, I have put in some basic and preliminary findings just to provide a bit of a taste, but the best is yet to come. From here, I will proceed to refine and explain my data to make it meaningful, being conscious of presenting my argument. I have given myself some guidelines to ensure I do this successfully. From looking at the different codes I have come up with, I have made a clear picture of the argument to be made and have written a structure based on this. I feel this will provide me with more direction, as ordinarily I just try to write with assertion and imbed the argument rather than be driven by the argument itself. I am also being conscious of using short, clear sentences rather than the waffle that I am susceptible too. In doing so, I am also hoping that this will display a more confident writing style. And to aid in this, I have already roped in a friend into proofing my first draft (providing dinner is always a good vibe)- This way I can get feedback from a third-party perspective, which will not only help with basic edits like spelling and grammar, but identify areas that could do with some more simple language and clarity of expression.

I am looking forward to the final product, but it can’t be all talk and no action. So on that note, I best get to it!

Title	Making a Splash: The influence of contextual cues on consumption practices for low involvement products
Theory	The study uses Bourdieu’s (1977) theory of practice and the notion of ‘habitus’ to ascertain the nature and motivations of habitual behaviour when applied to common consumption. Further, it applies the cue theory of consumption (Laibson, 2001) to ascertain the implications on habitual consumption practices when a stable consumption cue is removed.
Relevant Literature	An analysis of the literature has been undertaken in order to gain an understanding of the application of the theory of practice consumption to the habitual low involvement paradigm of consumer behaviour.  Habitual buying behaviour occurs under conditions of low consumer involvement and minimal functional difference between product offerings. This framework of practice occurs with automacity and is directly cued by the given context. However, the cue theory of consumption argues that removing consumption cues negatively affects the consumers involvement with the product and/or brand.
Research Gap	Whilst there is sufficient research in the field of habitual consumption, there is no prior study that ascertains the affect on consumption habits when a contextual cue is removed. This presents an opportunity for the current research project to address the habit disconuity hypothesis. This study aims to conduct research into the consumption habits of particular groups, exploring the implications for when contextual cues and product availability are removed and the manner in which this affects consumption habits. In doing so, the study proposed that consumption habits for a low involvement common repeat purchase product will decline when a key consumption contextual cue is removed (Wood & Neal, 2009). To test this, the research used a bottled water case study with Australian university students.
Methodology	In January 2011, the University of Canberra banned the sale of bottled water on campus in an attempt to influence students to becoming environmentally aware and to promote a sustainable campus (ABC News, 2011). As a result, a comparative case study was conducted to determine whether there are any attitudinal differences between students from the Australian National University and the University of Canberra, and whether this has been affected by removing the contextual consumption cue. This was done by conducting separate focus groups with students from each university, with results coded and synthesised to generate findings and answer the research question.
Preliminary Findings and Initial Observations	Early stages of analysis have identified different attitudes on the topic. University of Canberra students were observed to be more environmentally aware about bottled water and in support of the ban. On the other hand, ANU students strongly opposed the ban on bottled water and did not believe it would solve the issue- instead, it would cause more of an inconvenience. However, both groups agreed that they only buy the product for the bottle rather than the water itself, which they retain and fill up when empty. Consumption patterns for UC students have altered as a result of the ban. As they can no longer buy bottled water on campus, they will simply source the product from elsewhere and make more of a conscious effort to take care of the bottle. This reduces the amount of bottled water they purchase and in turn saves money. Furthermore, the university has begun pushing the sale of metal reusable water bottles, which have become a fashion accessory and point of conversation amongst students.
Conclusions	I am still in the process of coding data and am soon to commence the interpretation of findings. Therefore, there are no absolute conclusions. These will be presented in the final report after a thorough analysis.

"The finish line is sometimes merely the symbol of victory. All sorts of personal triumphs take place before that point, and the outcome of the race may actually be decided long before the end"

After having conducted both my focus groups things are now getting down to the business end, and who would have thought that I would be excited by the mass of content that is waiting in the dark and ready to be coded.  I guess research can have that effect on you though, when you know you have some quality data to work with and are enthusiastic about what will come out of it. So the finish line is in sight, but it is still quite far in the distance and there are more races to be run!

The focus groups were positive and went really well. The participants from my University of Canberra (UC) study were all friendly, talkative and willing to get involved in discussion. And to be honest, this bought about a big sigh of relief. I was conscious of the fact that I did not know them so there would be quite a lot of effort trying to establish the rapport. But there were no issues here, which goes to show that the willingness of the participants can do a long way in the provision of rich data. And they were a diverse group, each from a different discipline- including an environmental scientist who is a self defined greenie, which always makes for interesting conversation when the issue of sustainability and environmental practices gets thrown on the table.

Though the process also highlighted some areas for improvement, showing that it really is a continual process of improving and refining technique. For instance, I was wary of the fact that they were doing me a favour by getting involved and that I didn’t want to keep them nor waste their time. Therefore, I stuck more to the questions I took in with me and was less inclined to throw in ad-hoc questions for fear of dragging it on with potentially irrelevant discussion. But upon reflection, I realised this was the wrong approach, as some of the best information comes when it is least expected and participants are bouncing off one another- encouraging conversation is always best. Also, the lack of familiarity meant that things began rather formally. However, as we got into the swing of things, the participants became more comfortable and the responses began to have more depth to them.

Overall, they went successfully and I am really pleased with the way they went. I got some insightful, quality information out of them which I am looking forward to writing up, though I may just give a bit of a speak peak as to some of the interesting findings in my next post. Until then-

“Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes”

On a side note (a bit of a tangent from the blog I posted only minutes ago), I conducted my first focus group yesterday and by all accounts it was rather successful. I chose to have the ANU student focus group first as I already had some level of familiarity with the people and focus group environment, so it was a case of ensuring that I was comfortable just as much as they were! But obviously I kept a cool head and gave nothing of my nerves away- or at least I would like to think so.

One of the benefits of holding two focus groups is that it becomes a more extensive learning experience, as I can identify areas for improvement and then institute them with the second group. One thing that I found difficult was finding the balance between trying to include people and respecting their potential desire to remain quiet. For instance, one of the participants remained unspoken for a majority of the focus group, whether it was because he did not want to contribute or because he was intimidated by some of the dominating personalities in the group. So at one point I directed a question specifically at him, and while he was happy to answer, it made me think; what if he did not want to participate with this line of questioning for a particular reason, and by singling him out I have made it awkward and uncomfortable for him. I don’t think that was necessarily the case here, but it is definitely something that could occur with more sensitive topics. Therefore, I would recommend spending some time at the start being particularly perceptive of how people are interacting and communicating to get a sense of their personality, which would allow you to gain a better distinction between reading whether a participant is uncomfortable or just shy.

The food is also quite important. I provided some chips, popcorn, chocolate, lollies and biscuits. It all went, which was an achievement in itself, but I found that towards the start the participants were more interested in eating the food than actually engaging with the discussion. Therefore, I think it would be a good idea to let people talk amongst themselves for the first ten minutes, introducing each other etc. and then as the moderator I would then begin talking them through the information sheet and nature of the project. That would give at least fifteen minutes for participants to eat and therefore they will not be as interested in the food when it comes time for discussion.

Another point is to keep the recorder on until people begin to walk out of the room. This is something I would not have thought of previously, but I found that once the focus group had officially finished, participants were debriefing with each other across the table. In doing so, some really insightful comments were said which were not captured on record (and so there was me scribbling franticly trying to write down what was said).  

I am holding the UC focus group tomorrow, so you will hear from me soon with a more detailed blog summarising my focus group experience, where I’ll be making sure I work on my weaknesses as a focus group moderator to enrich the experience and subsequently provide a higher quality of data. And then it is full steam ahead with coding my findings into a presentable analysis.

"You may have heard the world is made up of atoms and molecules, but it's really made up of stories. When you sit with an individual that's been here, you can give quantitative data a qualitative overlay"

As the end of semester draws alarming close, we are looking at establishing a solid methodological foundation for our honours research. So I thought it would be appropriate to give you an insight into my cognitive melting pot.

At the moment, I feel like I am deep in the rainforest and facing a fork in the road, with two paths to choose from. However, unlike the movies, the choice is not obvious; there is not one bright, bushy butterfly-filled path and another that is dark, dingy and with dingoes howling (credit goes to ‘Beauty and the Beast’ for striking this image- And why the inventor went down the dark path I have no idea. It baffled me as a child and still does). Rather, both paths present promise, making the choice all the more harder.

One thing that I knew from the beginning is that you need to be interested in your research project, because if you lack passion then boredom creeps up quite quickly and steals your motivation. But I have learnt that you also need to feel connected to the methodology, as this will ensure that you are invested in the data collection and analysis of findings. Because at the end of the day, it is these two stages where you form your contribution to the literature. This is where I am stuck. On one hand, I feel like my personality and learning style is better suited to the nature of qualitative research; the interaction with people, the interpretation of meaning, and the richness of the data. But on the other hand, I am rather cynical and strive for certainty, which is given to me by cold hard statistics.

So rather than turn to Dr Phil to solve my dilemma, I found a book that has proven particularly useful - Mixed Methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (Tashakkori, 2006). Tashakkori writes about the manner of integrating both methods, whilst criticising the academic arena for being quick to label researchers as one or the other. Some of the best research comes from combining both qualitative and quantitative methodology, which is where I feel I am more so aligned.  

Which brings me back to my honours thesis. And at the end of the day, it comes down to choosing the methodology that is best suited to your research question. My thesis topic is looking at the influence of brand dimensions on consumer brand preference for commodity products through a case study of bottled water. I have found from developing my study that it is best suited to a quantitative approach, using predefined scales to test predicted relationships. However, the existing scales are rather general. Therefore, to make them relevant to my case study, I will be conducting a content analysis of brand communications for bottled water to determine items for my scale. For instance, I will look at recent advertisements for bottled water brands and draw out the most common adjectives that they use to describe their water and put them into my survey (eg. Rate this brand of water based on: freshness, quality, purity etc.).

           

So after all that, I am sorry if I disappointed you by not choosing one side over another. Some may view it as indecisive, but I agree with Tashakkori. I find it somewhat ridiculous that some researchers feel the need to classify themselves as one type of researcher and disregard the other side altogether. In my (potentially naïve) opinion, it is about picking the methodology that is best suited to the research. And although I may be wrong, I’m sticking to my guns on this one!

"I worry that the drive for 'clean' identification as a methodological obsession is driving some junior researchers . . . to a pursuit of the cute instrument. This is leading them down the intellectual cul de sac of precise answers to trivial questions"

My research project and I are spending some quality time together this weekend, which has started with a coffee date at Café Essen in Civic (Canberra). I think we are progressing nicely in our relationship, with conversation flowing a lot more freely now that we have become well acquainted with one another.

We spent the first half of our coffee looking around and observing the passerby, eavesdropping on conversations about poetry and listening to the playful banter between the wait staff. However, as I opened my laptop lid my research project turned to me and posed the question that any male dreads- “where is this going?”

Well, needless to say I was shocked. But I had done all the ground work leading up to this point so wasn’t worried, and was able to answer with confidence. We spoke about everything we had done together in the past – the literature review and research design -, but now it was time to take things to the next level and conduct the data analysis. Whilst I had a fair idea about what was going to happen and my vision for conducting the focus groups, I thought it was best to talk things through. And we did.

The focus groups are being held early next week, and I have made all necessary arrangements such as purchasing snacks and booking rooms. Whilst I know it sounds rather anal, I have gone and had a look at the rooms already to ensure that I was familiar with them and so that I can lay out the rooms to make sure they are conducive to the study- A recommendation I picked up from Kitzinger (1994) in “The Methodology of Focus Groups: The importance of interaction between research participants”.

Also, in preparation for the focus groups I have prepared an information sheet and consent form, which participants will be asked to sign before being able to take part in the focus groups. Additionally, I have prepared a discussion framework to guide the conversation towards research objectives without any bias. This is entirely flexible and will be adapted to the respective focus group depending on the direction things seem to take.

But I wanted to make sure that I was well equipped before going into battle- not only to ensure that the integrity of the study is maintained, but so that I am confident in my ability to extract the information necessary to address the research question. A book that I found useful in doing so was ‘Focus Groups as Qualitative Research’ (Morgan, 1996). This helped me in earlier stages of my project in designing my focus groups around any limitations, and I drew on it once again so that I would be ready for battle. One thing in particular that stood out was ensuring that I make the environment rather informal and more sociable, given that the social context is relevant to the content of discussion. Further, students are more receptive to a casual environment and are likely to be comfortable and subsequently give better responses.

One of my classmates (Caitlin Taylor) had also found a credible source (Hague & Morgan, 2004) that provides tips to researchers on how one should go about conducting research interviews, which can be found on her blog- http://researchrulesandreflections.blogspot.com/. She identifies eight key points, which I think are important and warrant re-publication:

1. Questions should not be worded in such a way as to lead the respondent into the answer.
2. Questions should not only be short, they should be simple - questions that include multiple ideas or two questions in one are likely to confuse the interviewee.
3. Make the questions specific and avoid using words such as 'usually' 'frequently' or 'typically' as these have no specific meaning.
4. Avoid Jargon
5. Steer clear of sophisticated and uncommon words
6. Avoid questions with a negative in them
7. do not use words that could be misheard
8. Do not ask questions that are outside the frame of reference of the respondent

So after discussing all of the above, my research project was content with the relationships and was more at ease from thereon in. Which subsequently concludes the synopsis from today’s date. Who knows what the rest of the weekend will hold; things appear to be intensifying between us, and I definitely get the feeling that it is mutual, so prospects are quite exciting.

"Hitler said that categories were the greatest tool a leader can use to control people and set them against each other"

I have recently added a new and promising tool to my research apprenticeship- NVivo! And for anyone that has trouble pronouncing it like me, I have been assured it is said ‘en-vivo’. But to go into a bit more detail about the tool, it is qualitative data analysis computer software that is used to organize and examine unstructured data where deep level analysis is required.

Whilst it has extensive functionality -the ability to import a range of multi-media and rich text-based information-, I will be using it in quite a basic form for my qualitative project by importing my text based transcript into the program for coding. The process uses nodes to code and categorize the data, aiding in the overall analysis of themes when reporting on the findings. I will also be producing tag clouds and word trees in the software to help me identify key words and frequently discussed concepts, which will assist me in preparing my nodes.

Once the data has been categorized, I will explore the codes and test my research question. In doing so, I will have all the relevant content grouped together by themes, which will be synthesized and analyzed for reporting in the discussion of findings. However, it is important to remember that the discussion of findings should also use quotations and evidence from the data to justify results and add credibility to the study. This in turn will provide a more holistic picture when either proving or rejecting the predicted proposition.

On a whim of curiosity, I investigated other qualitative software packages on the market. And one that i quite like is Atlas.ti- It is highly usable, with most of the action occurring on the primary screen. Also, I like that it has a range of tools for searches and queries to identify text patterns. Plus, it has the capacity to work with a multitude of languages, including Chinese and Hebrew characters (it’s always good to know that should I choose to learn one of those languages that there will be research software to support me).

Another program that aids in the storage, organization and coding of content is XSite. It appears to be suitable for visual learners, such as myself, as it encourages the use of mind maps and tags to make order out of the chaos. It has the functionality to support this, as well as a range of other features that are intended to provide structure and support in the analysis to help the researcher build a meaningful story.

Nonetheless, all three products are all quite similar. They enable the researcher to associate codes or labels with chunks of text, sounds, pictures, and video; to search these codes for patters; and to construct classifications of codes that reflect testable models of the conceptual structure of the underlying data. Also, they have been developed based on Windows XP specifications, which aids in the users familiarity with the software Overall, I would say that they are highly flexible programs that can be readily applied to a range of qualitative research needs.

Though I must say that after all of this I am still attracted to NVivo. And having already had an introduction to the NVivo software i have decided that that’s where my loyalty will lie. So- It’s now time to get cracking and NVi-GO with NVivo! (For someone in marketing I seem to lack the creativity bone, as made evident with the poor attempt at a slogan).

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something"

Research interviews are an integral method in qualitative research, though should not be entered into blindly. They take a lot of preparation, and during the interview itself requires they require the researcher to take an active role in not only noting the content, but the manner in which it is presented- inclusive of non verbal communication. I have to say that as far as lectures go, today’s class on interviews was of my most insightful, and so I would like to share what I have learnt with you, particularly pertaining to ‘the rules of the game’.

Before one can conduct interviews, they must have established their research objective from undertaking an analysis of the literature (authors comment: be sure to know what the big picture is), which is in turn supported by theory. This is something I did not do in my interview project (see blog 09.04.2011); I was unsure of the process of doing an interview analysis, and as such did not provide an argument for my research, which is what drives the interviews and provides direction. I now know why I felt like I was swimming in a vast ocean with no land in sight! Not my smartest moment, but it’s all part of the learning process. It once again comes back to the argument, which the interviews are trying to prove in turn.

One thing that was mentioned was that a literature review should cover all elements of the topic, even those that you’re not going to use, as this shows a clear understanding of the topic. In my thesis’ literature review I have not included several elements simply because they are not relevant to the study. I now know that I still need to write about them, though provide an argument as to why they are not included in my study.

The interviews should be structured in a way so that they elicit the information relevant to the propositions. It is important for researchers to take an active role in the process; it is not just a matter of asking questions and recording responses, but rather being attentive and using peripheral communication to pick up on the interviewees non verbal communication (body language, facial expressions etc.) and verbal cues (pauses, sighs, intonation etc.).

  

Then, when reporting on the findings, it is important not to simply recount the interview. Rather, the researcher needs to form a narrative that develops/supports the argument, ensuring that the content is relevant and justifies propositions. This is then structured by categories of content, with the data presentation and analysis discussed together.

           

If I am being completely honest, I am quite sceptical when it comes to interviews. I am a character that seeks certainty and exhibits many traits (mainly the bad ones) of a perfectionist. Therefore, it is not surprising that such a subjective method leaves me feeling less than comfortable. Though to be fair, it is not the method itself but rather my confidence in executing it. I really do feel that interviews have their place, though if done by someone inexperienced they can produce completely different findings, limiting the scope of the study and raising questions of credibility. For instance, an inexperienced interviewer may not only read too far into particular cues (i.e. a sigh), or even be so intent and focussed on picking up certain cues that they lose their peripheral perspective. I have been told that such cynicism is good as it means that I am more weary of these things happen. But even moreso it is just something I am going to have to get used to (especially as I am doing focus groups for my project)- it all comes back to the learning experience. In relation to ‘the rules of the game’, I now know that I should go into my focus groups with confidence in my ability, and if I really feel like cross-checking my interpretations with someone else then it is best to take as many notes as possible in the interview. Further, I need to adopt a unbiased approach and not influence the participants, whilst at the same time making sure they feel comfortable enough with me so that they are honest and withhold from answering questions based on what they think I want to hear.

They say nothing good in life ever came easy. I know that this research is not my strongest playing card, so it will take a lot of effort and fingers crossed I come out the end with a strong project with solid findings.

"You can teach a student a lesson for a day; but if you can teach him to learn by creating curiosity, he will continue the learning process as long as he lives"

Over the last couple of weeks, I have been introduced to two entirely new approaches to qualitative research- grounded theory and archival research.

Grounded theory is a systematic methodology that operates in almost a reverse fashion from traditional research. The approach emphasizes the generation of theory from data in the process of conducting research. So, instead of beginning with an analysis of the literature and building propositions against a theoretical framework, the first step is the actually the collection of data. I find this approach quite intriguing and am attracted by the practicality of it. I feel like this is an approach that could be used quite frequently in more applied settings, such as in industry, where firms collect data (i.e. consumer profiles, sales trends), and then use existing theory to explain the phenomena. Though it is something that I will leave for the time being. Whilst it has its merits, I feel like it is best used by experienced researchers, as there is a higher level of ambiguity and a lot of self-drive required (as well as knowing your way around data).

On the other hand, archival research is a way or sorting through and organizing historical data, whether it be digital or manually. It was interesting to see its application in qualitative research, as it is not something I had considered before. However, I question the relevance of archival research moving in the future in light of technological developments and the scope of information on the Internet. Whilst it is relevant to specific fields, such as looking at past financial statements for firms, it is not something that is entirely applicable to my current project. Nonetheless, I always enjoy learning about other methodologies and new ways of doing things, and this was no different!

“You don't have to be a 'person of influence' to be influential. In fact, the most influential people in my life are probably not even aware of the things they've taught me”

I often look back as a kid and think about how impressionable I was- and this moment in time is no different. I particularly remember when we had ‘free dress’ days, where we got to put aside the uniform and wear whatever it was that we felt like. But really, it was all about wearing the coolest outfit you possibly had. And it wasn’t a spur of the moment decision, it was something you had to put thought into, because what it all came down to was that you were going to get judged by your peers. So in making my decision, I would wear the clothes (or brands) that I thought would be most accepted by my friends, rather than those clothes that were either my favourite or most comfortable (and being honest, these days I care so much more about comfort rather than what I look like).

We have come a long way since those days, but the notion of group influence on consumption choices is still pertinent, and something that applies to my research project for the course. I came across the article ‘An Examination of Group Influence on Member Brand Preference’ (Stafford, 1966) which addresses this. The article looked at the influence of an individual’s social environment on his or her consumption practices. And from doing so, it found that informal groups had an influence on the member brand preference, and that they emulated the choices of their leader. This led to members becoming loyal to brands that their leader was loyal to.

This has made me think about the role of sociological influences on bottled water preference and consumption. Also, it is a product that is habitually consumed. Therefore, are individual’s consumption habits determined by those of their group, or will consumers alter their preference in the presence of others? Although not central to the research problem, it is most definitely related and as a result provides some food for thought.

But it doesn’t end there (my apologies if the post has lost its appeal). In reading the article I was able to actually kill two birds with one stone (not literally, I don’t condone that kind of business). Once I had finished the article, I had a ‘light bulb’ moment and was struck with the realisation that I was finally getting the art of reading academic literature. In the past, it would take me an hour and a half at the very least to read an article- so you can imagine how disheartening it is to get to the end and admit to yourself that it isn’t entirely relevant to the study. But those days are behind me and it is onwards and upwards!

The first step of reading academic literature is to have a glance at the title and abstract. If it is potentially relevant, I then look at the headings throughout the paper and take a squiz at the reference list. The next part in the process is about beginning to engage with the content. So to pick up some solid sources in the broader field and gain an understanding on the motivation for the project, I will read the introduction, followed by the first sentence of each paragraph, followed by the conclusion. And how long does this take you may ask- Less than twenty minutes hands down. By this stage I have a good enough grasp of the article, so I then go about ascertaining what parts of the article are relevant, whether it be a specific sub-topic or the whole thing, and go from there.

So there you have it- My rules of the game for academic reading. I’m looking forward to being able to save some time (and dignity in academic circles) with my research-savvy reading practices… I do impress myself sometimes.

"I don't mind arguing with myself. It's when I lose that it bothers me"

As it has been some time since I put pen to paper (or in this case fingers to keys) regarding my progress, I thought I would take some time out to provide an insight as to where I am at the moment. I have been dedicating a lot of time towards my thesis, using the skills that I have learnt throughout the course and applying them to my heavily invested year long project. One thing in particular that I have been working on is justifying my case with authority. A common flaw in my writing is that whilst I present and summarise points, I do not sufficiently critique the content and provide an argument. Therefore, I have been conscious of arguing my case.

One thing I have learnt in this process is the importance of citations. Another lecturer picked up one of my points in my proposal and asked me to justify myself, and by providing citations to other studies that prove my case, it strengthened my argument and made it convincing. Lesson learnt: never underestimate the power of citations. More broadly, it is about being well read on the topic and constantly drawing on the work of others to prove why you have drawn conclusions, as well as why you are convinced that you are correct in the assumptions you have made, which in turn aims to persuade the reader.

In regards to my research project for BUSN8018, I am in the process of arranging focus groups, which are my chosen research method- more information on this to follow in my next blog. Included in this is the structure of the questioning, which will be written based on measurable objectives and used to guide the focus group discussion. However, one thing I am struggling with is how I then go about analysing and synthesising this information to make it meaningful. I hope to be able to answer this question after next week’s lecture, and in the meantime am reading an article by Jenny Kitzinger (1995), who is from the medical profession and writes about focus groups and their contribution to qualitative research.

"An investigation may take six months. A quick interview, profile, a day"

Whilst attending a conference in Dubai, I conducted three in-depth interviews to ascertain the motivations and outcomes of Australian students participating in Education Without Borders 2011. In order to prepare myself, I read ‘Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing’ (Kvale, 1996), which helped my understanding of the role of interviews in qualitative research, and some handy hints on how to try and get the most out of your interviewees. But, as they say, you can only learn so much from paper and it is all about how it unfolds in practice.

The experience of interviewing was interesting, and one which is reliant on strong interpersonal communication skills. Before the interview even commences, the interviewer needs to be able to read both verbal and non verbal communication cues to ascertain their personality and subsequently approach them in the appropriate manner. For instance, one of the interviewees was rather shy and as a result I ensured I changed my pace so that it was quite slow, spoke in a quieter tone and also put more of an emphasis on establishing a rapport before getting into the questioning. Furthermore, the questions themselves were changed slightly from what I had anticipated so that they were less confronting.

Overall, I found the interviews effective in measuring attitudes, as I was able to probe by asking follow up questions; the line of questioning was more about exploration than confirmation. Furthermore, it is a highly flexible technique that can be adapted to the situation, such as changing a line of questioning if the interviewees body language indicates that they are disengaged.

However, it is evident that they are a skill to be crafted and I am only on the early days of that apprenticeship. I learnt from my very first interview that as the person firing the questions, you need to keep a neutral position, which includes facial expressions, so as to not influence any responses or present a bias. I got a response back that I wasn’t expecting and had a surprised expression; immediately the respondent thought that they had provided the “wrong” answer which differed to what I was looking for and so changed their line of response. I feel that this is something that can happen very easily and as a result skew the responses. Also, the interview process itself is time consuming, as it can take a long time to write everything down and synthesise the information. We will be learning more about interviews when we return from the study break, where I hope to address these potential issues with Kerry.

Interviews definitely have their place, however they are only suited to a certain type of research problem. From my experience with this exercise, I feel they would be well suited to in-depth attitudinal studies, particularly those that seek expert opinions or studies with smaller sample sizes.

My report of the interviews (in plain text format) is below:

An assessment of the 2011 Education without Borders conference

Ben Hamer (u4774372)

1.0       Introduction

From 28 March – 1 April 2011, I attended the Education without Borders global student conference in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The conference brings together student leaders from around the world to discuss challenges facing the global community and propose innovative solutions. As such, I was given the opportunity to meet like-minded socially aware young adults who strive to make a meaningful difference in a variety of different disciplines, from economics to technology and poverty. 640 international students joined over 1000 UAE locals for the conference, with students selected based on a combination of academic merit, leadership abilities and demonstrated involvement within their community.

However, I wanted to delve deeper into why the Australian students applied to attend the conference and their motivations, beyond superficial intent and scoring a free trip. As such, I used the Education without Borders conference to conduct interviews with the Australian delegates to find out the reasons as to why they applied and what they got out of the conference. I was intrigued to come up with an overall profile of these community-focussed people; do they actively engage in positive social change, do they act as advocates, or do they participate for educational value?

Three students were interviewed and will be identified throughout the report, having received their express permission to do so; Lucy Junghans (Bachelor of Psychology- Edith Cowan University), Mahilla Abbiss (Bachelor of Medicine- Deakin University) and Chris Jones (Bachelor of Business- University of Technology Sydney).

2.0       Motivations for participating

There were two distinct reasons behind applying for and subsequently attending the EWB conference, one being altruistic in nature and the other more practical.

The primary reason the students got involved, which they felt was representative of the entire cohort, was the opportunity to meet like-minded young people from a range of cultures to gain perspective on what students from around the world consider to be global challenges – “But it is not just about raising awareness” commented Mahilla. “It is also about developing strategies and innovative solutions for future consideration”.

The second element of the conference that attracted the students was the networking possibilities. Not only was there a large group of talented students with unbelievable potential, but the conference also invited prominent leaders from around the world, including Prime Ministers, astronauts, authors and academics. Students were given the opportunity to network and converse with these prominent individuals. “I got to speak with the Dean of Colombia University in New York. He gave me his business card and wants to hear from me; money can’t buy things like this” said Lucy. Chris further emphasized the networking attraction, saying that “attending a conference with students from 129 countries is something that cannot be missed”.

3.0       Perceptions of the conference

It was collectively agreed that the conference was an incredible experience, meeting hundreds of young people from around the world with diverse interests and passions. And it was the people that they met which created such an inspiring experience- “everyone had amazing homes, dreams and solutions to many issues facing the earth. It is good to know that I am not the only young person who cares about the future of both humanity and the earth as a whole” said Lucy. At the same time, the anticipating networking opportunities were realised, with the students leaving with a range of business cards as well as many Facebook friend requests.  Therefore, it can be said that overall the Australian delegates achieved what they were hoping for out of the experience.

That being said, there were also a number of unexpected outcomes. Mahilla went into the conference purely for the educational value, but came out the other end with the confidence and motivation to pursue things that would otherwise raise doubt in her mind. “When you see what all these other people in the world have accomplished, it proves that you can do anything when you put your mind to it.” Whilst these dreams are more personal rather than for collective benefit, it shows the diverse strengths of the conference in its ability to extend beyond social causes and aid in personal development.

And whilst it was an educational conference, the United Arab Emirates government is not entirely short of money and as such went to extreme lengths to impress delegates and aid in a memorable experience. There was an opening ceremony in the park of the Burj Kahlifa (tallest building in the world), numerous fireworks displays, entertainment flown in from around the world, amazing laser shows and a silver-service dinner in the Emirates Palace gardens. Mahilla in particular was extremely impressed with the ‘wow factor’ of such events.

However, it appeared to overshadow the conference’s goals and become the highlights of her experience, which was made evident by the passion and length of which she spoke about it compared to the conference’s educational content. On the other hand, Lucy and Chris found it to be extremely impressive though overly-extravagant. “It is a bit of a slap in the face when we spend the day talking about ways to solve poverty, and then we have an event that invests AUD$1.5 million on a fireworks and laser display”. Therefore, it can be said that the level of social awareness differed between delegates; some (such as Mahilla) were there for the entire experience, whilst Chris and Lucy were more concerned about action and as a result not entirely thrilled with the perceived reckless expenditure “which could have been used as a donation for a charitable cause or something” said Lucy.

4.0       Future activity

The educational value of the conference could not be questioned, with all three respondents enthusiastically conveying their gratitude for the opportunity to listen to the range of quality presenters. Lucy is the events coordinator for TEDxPerth and plans to screen several of the keynote sessions at the groups event. 

The break-out sessions held on the Wednesday of the conference were more disciple specific, so that students chose to attend the presentations they were most interested in. It was these sessions that provided the most value to the delegates and inspired action. As a medical student, Mahilla was exposed to a range of healthcare techniques and practices used around the world which she would be able to adopt, “particularly in regards to bedside manner and non-surgical care”.

On the other hand, Chris found the commercial leadership workshops beneficial, particularly a student presentation which spoke about the potential for university students to act as business mentors for high school students. Chris said that he would like to implement similar programs in Australia, and as such “I will make sure I stay in contact with the relevant students from around the world to find out best practice and get help”.

All interviewees were motivated at the end of the conference to go back to Australia and act on what they had learnt. However, the degree and type of action different between students, whether it is further educating others, implement initiatives or change personal attitudes and practices.

5.0       Conclusion

The interviews were conducted with minimal complications as all interviewees spoke freely and confidently. They were engaged in conversation and as such were receptive to the questions and responded positively to follow-up questions as well.

The Australian delegates got involved with the conference for two main reasons. Firstly, it provided an opportunity to get a perspective on challenges facing the global community and participate in discussion as to how students can play a part in solving them. This represented the socially aware, community-minded nature of the individuals. Secondly, with over 600 talented students from 129 countries, there were vast networking opportunities, which held strong appeal for the delegates.

The conference was an exciting experience for those involved, proving to be of both personal and educational value. The delegates were inspired by the presenters, instilling motivation to go back to Australia and implement what they had learnt, both at a personal and community level.

Overall, it can be said that the students are all community minded and motivated by education and continuous improvement. Whilst they are all show an interest in social causes, the level at which they engage with this varies; for some it is educational, whilst with others it is more about inspiring action.

However, whilst the reasoning behind getting involved can be treated as reliable, the student responses pertaining to the worth of the conference should be taken with caution as they were still participating in the event (albeit at the end of proceedings) and therefore had no opportunity for reflection. Rather, it would be more accurate if delegates were interviewed several weeks after the conference and also see whether they had acted on what it was they were hoping to.  Nonetheless, the interviews proved it to be a worthwhile conference of strong educational value, which was well received by the Australian delegates.

“Motivation is what gets you started. Habit is what keeps you going”

I have further developed my research proposal and have provided it below, which addresses the literature and details my methodology, including my approach to analysing data. In updating my proposal, I have included more of a logical structure to the literature review, though am still working on trying to make my argument. Also, I have read a range of literature which I have used to help justify my case for using focus groups, though feel I could use some citations to previous studies to increase the validity of my methodology.  Though to be honest, at this point in time I am rather unsure about how I am meant to go about analysing the content from the focus groups once I have it. I understand the notion of coding the findings under themes, but what I really need is to delve into the rules of the game regarding the analysis and presentation of findings. I have spoken to Kerry and have been told not to worry at this point as it will be covered later in the course- perhaps a bit of light reading to help me out until then?

And as they say, honours is somewhat of a research apprenticeship, so any feedback on my proposal is always much appreciated.

- Ben

 

 

 

BUSN8018 Qualitative Research Methods – Research Project Outline

Ben Hamer (u4774372)

1.0 Overview of the Topic

Picture yourself going to get lunch at your favourite café on campus. When you get to the counter, you proceed to tell the attendant your order, and when prompted as to what drink you would like, you effortlessly reply asking for a bottle of water. Why is it that you were able to answer with little cognitive deliberation or thought?

When it comes to particular products, consumers will unconsciously act with minimal consideration to the goals and valued outcomes. Habitual buying behaviour occurs under conditions of low consumer involvement and minimal brand difference, often involving low-cost frequently purchased products (Kotler et al., 2006, pg. 168). This framework of practice occurs with automacity and is directly cued by the given context.

This project aims to conduct research into the habitual consumption habits of particular groups, exploring any potential implications for when contextual cues and product availability are taken away and the manner in which this affects consumption habits.

2.0 Literature Review

In order to understand habitual buyer behaviour, one must look at its origins in social psychology from the theories of practice. Bourdieu, Schatzki and Giddens are all prominent researchers in the field, who have each contributed to the literature and built on the foundations of the Weberian notion of social action and the Marxist concept of praxis (Schatzki, 1996).

Theories of practice describe the manner in which agents (individuals with the capacity to act freely) are socialised in a predefined social domain and subsequently form internalised relationships and habitual expectations. These practices are routinised types of behaviour that are interconnected by several elements.

Warde (2005) conducted exploratory research of sociology literature to produce a conceptual study that aimed to consolidate the broad principles from practice theory and apply it in an analysis of final consumption. In his philosophical account of practice, Warde describes practices as socially coordinated entities that require performance (the carrying out of practices that actualise it) for existence.  When applied to the domain of consumption, practice theory indicates that consumers develop particular behaviours through repeated actions, forming consumption habits and in turn an often effortless purchase decision. 

Through his research, Warde details how the conventions and standards of the practice steer behaviour, and that it is the engagement in the practice, rather than any personal decision about a course of conduct, that explains the nature and process of consumption.

Warde found that consumption occurs as items are appropriated in the course of engaging in particular practices, and that being a competent practitioner requires appropriation of the requisite services, possession of appropriate tools, and devotion of a suitable level of attention to the conduct of the practice.

Wayne Hoyer (1984) alludes to theories of practice through his study of consumer decision making for common repeat purchase products. He describes that when it comes to low involvement products, the consumers motivation to purchase is pre-thought and as such conducts his research on the assumption that consumers do not engage in a great deal of in-store decision making.

In making a repeat purchase decision of relatively low importance, consumers apply simple choice heuristics to provide a quick and effortless outcome, such as price, performance, affect, and normative factors (Bush & Hunt, 1982). This view of choice tactics infers that since the purchase takes place frequently, consumer evaluation occurs over a repeated number of trials. As such, many factors like continuous product evaluation and external processing influence consumer motivations outside of the pre-purchase stage. Therefore, with an absence of pre-purchase evaluation and little consideration for the brand, Hoyer’s research states that consumers do not make the optimal choice, but rather make their decision based on what satisfies their need in the given context.

Wendy Wood and David Neal (2009) outline the habitual consumer through a qualitative analysis of existing case studies and secondary data and apply Verplanken and Orbell’s (2003) scale of Self Report Index of Habit Strength to ascertain how habits are formed and changed.

When consumers respond repeatedly to a stimulus in a stable context, a direct memory association occurs between the response and the contextual cue. When this repetition constantly yields value-added outcomes, a cognitive transition occurs in the consumer from outcome-oriented to context-cued responses and as such habits are developed. Therefore, consumption habits can be categorised by two distinct traits, in that they are repeat actions with rewarding outcomes, and that they are also slow to change which ensures they are retained for future use.

In applying practice theory to consumption, it was found that whilst the habits themselves are difficult to manipulate, the influence of habits on behaviour can be broken.  By conducting a small scaled observational analysis, Wood and Neal identified that efforts to break habits involve inhibiting the cued response by exerting self control, blocking the mechanisms that trigger performance and removing cues in the performance context.

From the study, not only were the researchers able to apply theories of practice to buyer behaviour and define the habitual consumer, but they found that simple direct cuing mechanisms underlying habits account for repeated product consumption. In particular, when repetition occurs in stable contexts, consumers often form context-response links in memory that directly trigger future habitual responses.

An analysis of sociological practice theory (Warde, 2005), the habitual consumer (Wood & Neal, 2009), and consumer motivations for repeat purchasing (Hoyer, 1984) provides an understanding of practice theory as it applies to low involvement habitual consumption. However, there is no existing research to suggest what would happen if a particular contextual cue was taken away and the effect that this would have on consumption habits (the habit disconuity hypothesis). As such, the proposed research project seeks to explore this, as well as analyse the effects of withholding product availability in particular contexts to ascertain whether it has an impact on overall product consumption habits.

3.0 Research method

In 2011, the University of Canberra (UC) in Australia banned the sale of bottled water on campus in an attempt to influence students to become healthier and environmentally conscious. As a result, a comparative case study of bottled water will be conducted, with separate focus groups being held between students from the Australian National University (ANU) and UC.

Focus groups have been selected in order exploit the social context, being conducted with a conclusion verification approach. Product consumption is influenced by implied social pressures and the opinions of others. Therefore, focus groups will be used so that respondents can feed off the social dynamic and interact in a manner that gives a true representation of attitudes and behaviours towards the consumption of the product (Fern, 1982). Furthermore, social attitudes and behaviours of a particular group within the community are best represented by having that group interact together and communicating/expressing views as a collective.

Focus groups have also been selected due to resource constraints (Fern, 1982). The study requires a broad range of information in order to ascertain attitudes and test the habitual disconuity hypothesis. With only one individual conducting the research in a short period of time, there will not be enough time to generate sufficient ideas that are representative of the group. Therefore, with focus groups bringing a sample from the community together at the one time, it is much more efficient and conducive to the study.

In order to ensure consistency and reliability, the focus groups will take place on campus so that the students are immersed in the relevant environment. The focus groups will be conducted by the researcher, who will promote interaction and drive conversation from a predefined discussion guide without influencing responses.

4.0 Data Analysis

Information collected from the focus groups will be written up in a transcript and analysed, paying particular attention to the group’s consumption habits and response to contextual cues. In order to ensure validity, the composition of the group will reflect the wider population, which will be determined through the careful selection of participants in accordance with demographic data. Furthermore, it is proposed that the focus groups will be conducted in accordance with the split-half method, whereby each sample group will be split into two different focus groups so that findings can be crossed checked in order to achieve consistency.

5.0 Relevant Literature (as of 12 March 2011)

Bush, R., & Hunt, S. (1982). Marketing Theory: Philosophy of Science Perspectives. Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Carpenter, G.S. & Nakamoto, K. (1989). Consumer Preference Formation and Pioneering Advantage. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 285 – 298.

Fern, E.F. (1982). The Use of Focus Groups for Idea Generation: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 1, 1 – 13.

Holt, D.B. (1995). How Consumers Consume: A typology of consumption practices. The Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 1-16.

Hoyer, W.D. (1984). An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product. The Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 3, 822 – 829.

Kotler, P., Adam, S., Brown, L., & Armstrong, G. (2006). Principles of Marketing. New South Wales: Pearson Australia.

Landon, E.L. (1974). Self Concept, Ideal Self Concept, and Consumer Purchase Intentions. The Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 44 – 51.

Laurent, G. & Kapferer, J. (1985). Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41 – 53.

Moors, A., & De Houwer, J. (2006). Automacity: A Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 297 – 326.

Murphy, P.E. & Enis, B.M. (1986). Classifying Products Strategically. The Journal of Marketing, 50, 24-42.

Schatkzi, T. (1996). Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Verplanken, B., & Orbell, S. (2003). Reflections on past behaviour: A self-report index of habit strength. Journal of Applied Psychology, 33, 1313 – 1330.

Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and Theories of Practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5, 2, 131 – 153.

West, P. M., Brown, C.L., & Hoch, S.J. (1996). Consumption Vocabulary and Preference Formation. The Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 120 – 135.

Wood, W., & Neal, D.T. (2009). The Habitual Consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 4, 579 – 592.

"Fear not those who argue but those who dodge"

As another week goes by, I look back and reflect on my continual understanding on the rules of the game and think of how this can be applied to my project.

Strong qualitative research requires a good design, with the purpose of convincing the audience of your research and providing a plausible argument for what you have done. I am working on the design for my research at the moment, where I anticipate to conduct comparative focus groups. But I still need to argue the case for why I am choosing focus groups, and justify it with past studies and citations from the literature.

One thing that I have learnt, evident through my ever-transforming thesis topic, is that the researcher has to be flexible and respondent to change. Similarly, a qualitative research design will keep changing, so I am learning to keep an open mind and ensure that I am adaptive to any developments in my research. It seems like I was quite naïve entering into the research game- It turns out you don’t just pick a topic and run with it. Rather, the development stage is one that is quite lengthy, because the end result is only as good as the research question that directed the study. If you plant bad seeds, you won’t get a good tree!

Also, the research question directs the study so it is important to determine a research topic early on in the process and identify a relationship for what it is you will be investigating. This is where I am currently at- pouring through past studies (in particular their limitations and direction for future research) to identify gaps in the literature and derive a topic*. At times it can feel like trying to find a needle in a haystack, but the needle is in there somewhere and with hard work and determination you will find it.

In developing the topic, you must justify why it is interesting, and the methodology should be chosen based on its ability to obtain the data that answers the research question. Therefore, you need to be able to link your evidence to a claim and give explanation for why you are doing it. Which comes back to the notion of the argument- As long as you can justify your case you will be able to make your cause plausible. I sometimes take the same approach when arguing with my parents, but they don’t seem to like it as much…

*You must be cautious about criticisms you make on prior studies though- You don’t want to go offending the original researcher as they could be the one that ends up marking your thesis.

"A man is least himself when he talks in his own person; when he is given a mask he will tell the truth"

In class the other day I did a short presentation on projective techniques in qualitative research, which caught the interest of my peers as it is a relatively unexplored research method.

I would like to illustrate the concept of projective techniques through an example. When you question a man who just bought a Mercedes about his purchase intentions, he will most likely respond by saying things such as “it does not depreciate very much”, “it has better mileage than you would expect”, and “it is comfortable to drive”. However, if you were to ask him as to why he thought his neighbour bought a Mercedes, the same person will likely respond with something like “he’s such a status seeker”. Therefore, it can be said that individuals are likely to give honest answers to disguised questions.

On that note, projective techniques are based on the assumption that when directly questioned, respondents will not express their true feelings as they don’t want to embarrass themselves or they wish to the ‘right’ answer. As such, projective techniques are indirect means of questioning that enables respondents to project beliefs and feelings onto a third party, often providing considerable freedom in their response. They are best used for attitudinal based studies, when it is either difficult for the respondent to qualify their response, when the interviewer is sceptical of the level of honesty in the response, or as a round-about way of asking an otherwise difficult question.

Examples of projective techniques are:

-          Word association test

-          Sentence completion method (eg. people who drink beer are …)

-          Role playing

To read further about projective techniques, please see the article by Haire (1950), who was the first to write about them in the Journal of Marketing. The article can be found by following the link: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1246942