On the Status of Analysis and Interpretation in Qualitative Research
Emmet Ó Briain
interpretive research | discourse analysis | ethnography | sustainable mobility + active travel
This article originally appeared in the Archive of Market and Social Research 2021 publication Post-War Developments in Market Research.
***
One of the possibilities afforded by archives is that they allow us to pick at the seams of finely stitched official histories and re-open previously sewn wounds.
The Archive of Market and Social Research (AMSR) is no different and, as evidenced by the Archive’s material, one of the strengths of the MRS - and market research in the UK generally - is that it has always provided a platform for practitioners to have the critical conversations about craft that are necessary for any profession to thrive.
In this regard, the Archive presents an opportunity to re-examine the relevance of recurring discussions about market research practice; a fine example of one such conversation being the role of analysis and interpretation in qualitative research, and its status in industrialised research practice.
In Mike Imms’ excellent 1999 review article on the roots and theoretical basis of qualitative market research in the UK[1], he talks about the problem of ‘reportage’ in qualitative research, where find- ings do not rise beyond repeating what was said during qualitative data collection in interviews or focus groups.
While this remains a common charge laid against commercial qualitative market research, we also have access to historical Archive papers in which the evergreen solution to this practice is laid out: elevate the status and role of analysis and interpretation in qualitative research.
Contributions, by Gill Ereaut [2],[3] and Virginia Valentine [4],[5], highlight how interpretive qualitative research methods such as semiotics, narrative analysis, discourse analysis, and, albeit to a lesser extent in its industrial form, ethnography, privilege the analysis, rather than collection, of data. And make the case for a more sophisticated conception of ‘subjective’ interpretation than is typi-cally attached by those unfamiliar with the detail of qualitative analysis.
It is the skilled application of conceptual analytic frameworks, many adapted to the needs of commercial research from academic qualitative research, that is the ‘product’ of interpretive qualitative research.
Gill Ereaut’s use of “interpretive repertoires”, borrowed from discursive psychology, and Malcolm Evan’s[6] application to commercial semiotics of cultural theorist Raymond Williams’ ‘epochal’ analysis of culture, that of the instantly recognisable Residual/Dominant/Emergent triad, are both excellent examples of the durability of such interpretive innovation.
Wendy Gordon also made a number of important contributions to formalising the discipline of commercial qualitative analysis, helping to narrow the (perceived) gap between the worlds of commercial and academic qualitative analysis.
Historical perceptions of commercial qualitative analysis as a ‘black box’ of analysts' invention and imagination, or of academic qualitative research as an exercise in theoretical indulgence are now, hopefully, ‘residual’ ones.
Today, many distinctions between commercial and academic qualitative research are more a function of history, custom or habit than any meaningful difference in rigour or quality. Market and social research professionals are suppliers of ‘academic’ qualitative analysis to central and local Government, to Higher Education Institutions, and other state bodies.
The distinction between commercial and academic qualitative research has been further eroded, and the status of qualitative analysis enhanced, by the recruitment into market and social research of professionals with postgraduate - and postdoctoral - training in qualitative analysis from academic disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, social psychology, geography, and many others, offering a whole host of possibilities for innovative interdisciplinary insight.
Furthermore, whereas traditional qualitative market research analytic frameworks were historically grounded in the disciplines of psychology and psychotherapy, contemporary qualitative analysis in market research has seen more attention paid to the social and shared meanings of attitude, behaviour and identity. Similarly, the traditional obsession of qualitative analysis with the atomised cognitive individual has been replaced by greater recognition of the cultural, the contextual and the situated.
Ironically, given the greater priority now given to socio-cultural explanations over individual ones, the Archive pieces discussed above also remind us that many remarkable contributions to qualitative analysis have been produced by brilliant individual researchers! This reflects another theme in the status of qualitative analysis evident from the Archive: the expert craft of the experienced and skilled analyst.
The challenge for the “industry” qua industry posed by such interpretive and cultural approaches to qualitative analysis has always been that they are less amenable to standardisation and routinisation than more industrial (that is, scalable or commoditisable) forms of market research, as argued by many contributors to the Archive, including Sheila Keegan[7].
And, at a time when organisations are constantly seeking new ways to reduce human influence through automation or constraint in service of efficiency, interpretive qualitative analysis remains somewhat counter-cultural in the level of flexibility and autonomy it affords both researcher and researched. Good qualitative analysis allows the researcher to decide what is necessary to keep its phenomenon in view. Again, a challenge for routinised approaches, whether quantitative or qualitative.
Looking to the future, where qualitative analysis was once considered a ‘black box’, it is now interpretive qualitative research that remains best placed to present an alternative to the new ‘black boxes’ of automated research, and a remedy to client concerns over their interpretability, accuracy and ethics.
Recommended by LinkedIn
The Archive will be invaluable in this regard, providing an important function in reminding us of the recurring value of interpretive research and analysis, and its sometimes fragile status in market and social research.
Disclaimer: This piece is necessarily selective, drawing mainly on relevant documents from the late 90s and early 00s in the Archive, and even then only touching the surface of its contents. Do take advantage of access to the Archive to experience the full breadth and depth of material available.
Archive/HAT sources
[1]Mike Imms (1999) A Reassessment of the Roots and Theoretical Basis of Qualitative Market Research in the UK
[2]Gill Ereaut (1997) Narrative in qualitative market research
[3]Gill Ereaut (2000) Telling it Like It is: Language and Discourse in Qualitative Market Research
[4]Virginia Valentine (2002) Repositioning Research: A New MR Language Model. IJMR.
[5]Virginia Valentine (2007). Semiotics, what now, my love? Paper presented at the MRS Golden Jubilee Conference.
[6]Malcolm Evans & Michael Harvey (2001) Decoding Competitive Propositions: A Semiotic Alternative to Traditional Advertising Research. IJMR.
[7]Sheila Keegan (2003) Lion in the Mist: why does qualitative research keep underselling its strategic potential? Paper given at the AQR/QRCA Conference
*********
Emmet Ó Briain is founder of QUIDDITY — an insight consultancy specialising in the qualitative analysis of organisational, customer and public discourse and cultures using naturally-occurring data and language.
As ever, if you enjoyed this article, I would be grateful if you could share it with anyone you think might be interested.
[I am currently undertaking a PhD on interpretive practice in planning for walking and walkability in the TU Dublin’s School of Architecture, Building and Environment, funded by an Irish Research Council Scholarship.
The research aims to remedy the relative lack of attention paid to the practice of planning for walking ‘as-it-happens’ through an ethnomethodological ethnographic study of professional practice.
Whereas traditional ethnographies and case studies of planning practice ‘methodologically purge’ their observations of the highly specific details of actual, everyday planning practice, my ethnomethodological approach illustrates how formal planning theories, frameworks, tools, and other abstractions nonetheless rely on such details of actual, everyday planning practice for their accountability.]
Founder at sputnik foresight | cultural insight | semiotics | brand strategy | creative development | innovation
1yHi emmet thanks for this important reminder! I woudl surely hope that our concept of qual has evolved from the ‘atomised cogntive individual’ to more shared and social perspectives and methodologies such as semiotics. However personally i see little evidence of this, at least in NL. Down here reality seems to be mostly business as usual, with some lipservice paid to context and culture. Do you reckon that’s different in the UK?