School of Healthcare - Faculty of Medicine and Healthcare

Tami Spry Keynote Speaker 2007

St Cloud State University United States of America

Tami Spry is a Professor of Performance Studies, a performing artist, and the Director of the Players Performance Group at St Cloud State University. Her publications appear in Text and Performance Quarterly, Qualitative Inquiry, and Women and Language as well as chapters in various anthologies. She performs autoethnographic work around the country focusing on issues of gender violence, mental illness, race relationships, shamanic healing, and loss.

Tami is currently working on a book, Paper and Skin: Writing and Performing Autoethnography. Autoethnography and performativity: The body as readable/writable social text Knowledges reside in the intersections of people, cultures, and histories. Methodologies that situate the researcher at the nexus of these interactions can illuminate ideas less accessible through traditional research systems. Autoethnography is a methodology designed to craft critically reflexive narrative articulating the sociopolitical weave of selves, others, and cultural contexts.

Autoethnography is a form of embodied praxis necessitating critical reflection upon the researcher’s political/personal positionality for the purpose of interrupting and intervening upon dominant cultural narratives. Grounded in theories and methods of performance studies and ethnography, autoethnography situates the body as a site upon which we read and write cultural values, beliefs, and representations. As a readable/writable social text, performance employs the body as a site of intervention, and of a liberatory pedagogy. Performative autoethnography can create spaces for social citizenship and democratic dialogue in the service of a purposeful politics of hope.

Dawn Freshwater ..." think about what the conference is doing to you and what you are doing to the conference "...

John Creswell Keynote Speaker 2005

Theme Mixed methods research and applications in intervention studies

This presentation will begin with an orientation to mixed methods research as currently being discussed in the U.S. It will provide a definition of mixed methods research that includes the collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study or a program of inquiry. This will be followed by a review of questions scholars raise about mixed methods research, and the presenter will provide his answer to each question. Then, the presenter will discuss his recent work applying mixed methods research to intervention, experimental designs. Specifically, he will build on an analysis of mixed methods studies in family medicine, and then extend this research to discuss incorporating qualitative data into intervention studies. This incorporation will include three designs exhibited in the mixed methods literature: embedding qualitative data before, during, and after the intervention trial. Examples of these three designs will be presented along with the strengths and challenges of each design.

Professor Gary Rolfe Keynote Speaker 2005

University of Wales, Swansea

Theme The methodology muddle: Rethinking the 'real world' of research

Gary Rolfe qualified as a psychiatric nurse in 1983 and practised for several years in acute admission units before moving into education. For the past ten years he has been teaching practice development, reflective practice, action research and clinical supervision to nurses and healthcare practitioners. Gary spent his entire career in Portsmouth before moving to the University of Wales Swansea in 2003, where he has a particular interest in establishing a network of practice development units. Gary has taught and worked within both qualitative and quantitative research paradigms, and has strong views about the current methodology muddle in nursing research. His recent books include Deconstructing Evidence-Based Practice (Routledge 2004) and Research, Truth & Authority: Postmodern Perspectives on Nursing (Macmillan 2000).

The arguments both for and against mixed methods in health care research usually focus on the perceived dichotomy between qualitative and quantitative methods and methodologies. Those in favour of mixed methods generally argue from a pragmatic position that the choice of methods should arise directly from the research question to be answered, whilst those against argue that mixed methods implies mixed paradigms and muddled thinking.

To some extent, the debate is therefore between theorists and practitioners. The theorists argue that research should be conducted within a particular paradigm, world view or epistemologicalposition, which is self contained and inviolable. A theory which combines aspects of (say) positivism and constructivism would be regarded as a bad theory. The practitioners (the so-called 'real-world' researchers), on the other hand, argue that what is at stake is not the purity of the theory but the utility of the research findings for practice. If the research question demands a combination of a positivist clinical trial and a constructivist focus group, then that is reason enough for doing both within the same study.

The reason for these polarised perspectives is partly that the healthcare disciplines have taken their research paradigms almost entirely from the social sciences, where there is no welldeveloped concept of practice and practice-theory. I wish to suggest that both the qualitative:quantitative and the practitioner:theorist dichotomies are misguided. That is not to say that anything goes or that theoretical perspectives and paradigmatic considerations should be dispensed with. Rather, I wish to argue that, for the discipline of healthcare, they are simply the wrong dichotomies. Health care research clearly should not be concerned solely with theory generation, and a well-crafted ‘pure’ theory does not guarantee a smooth translation into practice. However, neither should health care research be concerned solely with utility, and a focus on practice should not be at the expense of a theoretical perspective. What is required is a reconceptualisation of what we mean by the ‘real world’ of healthcare, and thus what we mean by real world research.

Professor David L Morgan Keynote Speaker 2005

University Professor at Portland State University.

David received his PhD in Sociology from the University of Michigan. He is widely known for his work on focus groups. In addition to his book, Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (Sage 1997), which is now in a second edition, he has written numerous articles and book chapters on focus groups and co-authored a six-volume series, The Focus Group Kit (Sage 1997). David’s current research interests centre on topics related to combining qualitative and quantitative methods, and he is in the process of writing a book on this topic for Sage Publications.

Vasja Vehovar & Bojana Lobe Speaker 2005

Faculty of Social Sciences University of Ljvbljana Slovenia

Theme Innovative  Mxed Methods Design

An increasing number of authors recognized the advantages of combining qualitative - quantitative methods and they also proposed typologies (Morse 1991, Patton 1990, Green and Caracelli 1997, Morgan 1998, Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998, Creswell 1999). However, the increasing quest for faster and more efficient research requires even more effective combination of two methods. Luckily, the technology enables increasingly support the design and management of research process. We thus propose an innovative mixed-method research design, where the two modes are arranged in an interactive series of sequential waves, what may improve the adjustments and self regulations of the research process. The research on online medical forum users’ attitude towards advertising served as an example. Ten researchers were involved into the same research problem, half of them using the proposed approach, while the others used standard mixed mode designs. The results show that the proposed approach provides more fruitful results; however, it also put dramatically more burden to the researcher.

Dr. Suzanne Moffatt Speaker 2005

School of Population & Health Sciences University of Newcastle upon Tyne UK

Theme One study, two stories? Dealing with divergent findings in a complex trial

Quantitative and qualitative methods were used in a complex trial examining the impact of a nonhealth intervention. 126 men and women aged over 60 were provided with a full welfare benefits assessment which successfully identified additional financial and non-financial resources for 60%. A wide range of outcome measures were assessed at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 month follow up, but did not show any difference between study and control groups. The qualitative study indicated that the intervention had a highly positive impact on quality of life and resulted in increased social participation. The paper will focus on these apparently divergent findings and how the use of mixed methods facilitated the interpretation process, leading to different conclusions from those that would have been drawn through relying on one method alone.

Dr Susan Steele Speaker 2005

LSU Health Sciences Center USA Developing an intervention:

Theme Using a theoretical mixed method approach.

The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is a theoretical framework proposing that behavioral intention results from a rational decision making process. The qualitative data is collected first to provide a contextual understanding with the quantitative component second to weight behavioral intention prediction. This mixed-method design lends data analysis and interpretation to a sequential explanatory strategy. The method initially conducts qualitative elicitation interviews with the study population to identify key themes inherent to the theoretical behavioral, normative, and control constructs. Based on quantification of these themes, individual items are developed, compiled by domain of interest, and tested for reliability and validity. Multiple regression and path analysis explain and interpret relationships to predict intention to perform a specific behavior. Based on regression analysis, specific targeted interventions can be developed and implemented. An exemplar related to mammography intention in rural Southeastern Louisiana will be used to elucidate this mixed method approach using the TPB.