aim 1 data collection Flashcards
Cons of just interviewing staff. What lose without the input of participants?
Cant identify which staff are more effective than others from participant perspective
Would give important insights about OS-client dynamics, program legitimacy
Less good pulse on changes to community level norms they are trying to achieve
Leave out questions of collective efficacy of community
An issue of feasibility
Program implementation data is underdeveloped. What metrics do you think would be helpful to capture to inform your work?
Most important around staff: salary, benefits, mental health support, law enforecement protection
At the site level: times of full vs. Non-full staff
From limitations highlighted in previous evaluations
How will questions differ for site directors than outreach staff?
Site directors: CBO oversight/support, SSB cross site collaboration, questions of OW-client relationships and OW credibility
Higher level arc of the site, larger contextual factors- questions with MONSE, with police, with other organizaitons (e.g. cherry hill collaboration with an HVIP)
OS more into the day by day- trying to better understand how they actually do their job, what makes it more challenging etc.
How much will you pay for interviews? How will you transcribe the interviews? What software will you use for qual analysis and why?
Will need IRB approval but estimating $50 per interview
Use Otter.ai to do a first rough transcription and clean
Use n.vivo, best for collaboration and I am most familiar with it
Why interviews not focus groups? What are pros/cons of each approach?
Richer data with interviews. Want people to be more free and independent in their thoughts and not be influenced with what others are saying
Intentionally trying to understand different experiences and viewpoints which can be done in FG but easier in interviews
Cons are time. Lose the ability to know what is really salient for a lot of people. Can be informative to get a lot of “YES!!” in response to what someone says
Define a semi structured interview. Why using that technique?
Each interview is a set of similar questions but not restrained to be identical
Allow for case comparison while also allowing for the conversation to go where it makes sense (to some extent)
Interview guide will include questions and probes-flexible in order and detail of what gets covered
Silent probe, uh huh probe, longer questions for more sensitive questions
Structured: more like a survey. Worse for rapport, less rich data, will allow for less nuance in understanding, less likely to allow for emergent ideas and focus of the interviews
new: why qualitative/core tenets
Naturalism: Embraces complexity
Interpretation: Prioritizes perspective
Process: Asks ‘How?’ questions
Interaction: Examines individual & collective behaviors
