The paper "Experiences of People Who Identify Themselves as Having Adjusted Positively to a Visible Difference by Egan" is an excellent example of an article on sociology. In their journal article, ‘ A qualitative study of the experiences of people who identify themselves as having adjusted positively to a visible difference, ’ Egan and his colleagues used the qualitative approach in their study (Egan, Harcourt, and Rumsey, 2011). They opted to use this method because the quantitative approach failed to give an extensive understanding of the particular issues that are relevant to individuals with a visible difference, which is the aim of the study.
Precisely, the data collection was approached in a pragmatic manner. This methodological approach was appropriate for this study because it prioritizes the research question more as compared to the paradigm which underlies the particular method (Berg, Lune, and Lune, 2004). This means that it avoids the utilization of some metaphysical concepts which are usually associated with a quantitative approach, for example, ‘ truth’ and ‘ reality’ (Berg, Lune, and Lune, 2004). The qualitative methodology was appropriate for this study because the researchers managed to capture the people’ s living perceptions, as well as their personal and rich accounts and experiences.
Qualitative methodology, on the other hand, could not give an in-depth insight into the research questions and aims. One of the strengths of qualitative methodology was that the focused group, face-to-face, and telephone interviews were restricted to particular issues which the researchers redirected in real-time (Berg, Lune, and Lune, 2004). This means that aside from the researchers trying to be subjective, they also sought to help the respondents to become subjective as well which led to high possibilities of obtaining accurate information (Berg, Lune, and Lune, 2004).
Another strength of the methodology was that since the data was being collected from few people, sensitive topics and issues were discussed which enhanced the accuracy of the data. On the other hand, just like many other researchers who adopt the qualitative approach, Egan and his colleagues used focused groups as the primary method and supplemented it with face-to-face and telephone interviews (Egan, Harcourt, and Rumsey, 2011). This means that the researchers had to be present when collecting the data that could in one way or the other impact the responses of the subjects in a negative way such that they fail to give accurate information (Bryman, 2015).
Additionally, subjectivity is one of the important things that need to be considered when conducting interviews and dealing with the focus groups. Typically, researchers usually find it tough to ensure that the subjectivity levels were neutral all through the research (Bryman, 2015). This was, therefore, one of the weaknesses of the study, maintaining subjectivity all through the research. Rationale, Aims, and Research Questions Critique The aim of Egan and colleagues was to evaluate the positive adjustment and experiences to continue living with the visible difference (Egan, Harcourt, and Rumsey, 2011).
These goals were subdivided into three research questions that would oversee the fulfillment of the documented aims. The objectives of the investigation and the research questions were stated clearly and were as well congruent with the background information that was given on the research topic (Egan, Harcourt, and Rumsey, 2011). The objectives of the study and the research questions are answerable through the use of qualitative methods just like the topic suggests which included different types of interviews (Friedrich, 2011).
Additionally, the objectives of the study were organized into four distinct themes, and the data that was collected was in line with the four themes. These topics were then argued compellingly in the results section in line with the responses that were obtained from the respondents in the study. Arguing each of the topics independently enabled the reader to understand the aims and rationale of the research better and put every detail into perspective (Friedrich, 2011).
Berg, B.L., Lune, H. and Lune, H 2004, Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (Vol. 5). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Bryman, A 2015, Social research methods, Oxford university press.
Egan, K., Harcourt, D. and Rumsey, N 2011, A qualitative study of the experiences of people who identify themselves as having adjusted positively to a visible difference. Journal of Health Psychology, 16(5), pp.739-749.
Eysenbach, G. and Till, J.E., 2001, Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ, 323(7321), pp.1103-1105.
Friedrich, M.J 2011, Research aims to boost pertussis control. Jama, 306(1), pp.27-29.
Maxwell, J.A 2012, Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage publications.
Morse, J.M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K. and Spiers, J 2002, Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International journal of qualitative methods, 1(2), pp.13-22.