INSTRUMENTS FOR DATA

COLLECTION
PRESENTED BY PAUL A MUHWEZI
Sources and Types of data
Data can either be primary or secondary data.
The primary data can be collected through laboratory measurement, field observation,
questionnaires, interviews, opinions, questionnaires, schedules etc.
The secondary data can be collected from technical publications such as manuals, handbooks,
data sheets, and standards, books and journals, official publications of the Central government,
state governments, local bodies, private data services and computer data base.
Data must be collected and recorded in a form suitable for the intended analysis. The collection
of data requires time and substantial effort for acquiring skills and making the necessary
arrangements for collection and to ensure adequate quality.
Questionnaire
It is a list of questions related to one topic.
It may be defined as; “A questionnaire is a systematic compilation of questions that are
submitted to a sampling of population from which information is desired.” Barr, Davis & Johnson
“In general, the word questionnaire refers to a device for securing answers to questions by using
a form which the respondent fills in himself.” W. J. Goode & K. Hall
The questionnaire is probably most used and most abused of the data gathering devices.
It is easy to prepare and to administer. The questionnaire is a form prepared and distributed to
secure responses to certain questions.
It is a device for securing answers to questions by using a form which the respondent will fill by
himself.
ctn
It is a systematic compilation of questions. It is an important instrument being used to gather
information from widely scattered sources.
Normally used where one cannot see personally all of the people from whom he desires
responses or where there is no particular reason to see them personally.
Characteristics of a Good Questionnaire:
1. It deals with an important or significant topic.
2. Its significance is carefully stated on the questionnaire itself or on its covering letter.
3. It seeks only that data which cannot be obtained from the resources like books, reports and
records.
4. It is as short as possible, only long enough to get the essential data.
5. It is attractive in appearance, nearly arranged and clearly duplicated or printed.
6. Directions are clear and complete, important terms are clarified.
7. The questions are objective, with no clues, hints or suggestions.
8. Questions are presented in order from simple to complex.
9. Double negatives, adverbs and descriptive adjectives are avoided.
10. Double barreled questions or putting two questions in one question are also avoided.
Merits of Questionnaire Method:
1. it’s very economical.
2. It’s a time saving process.
3. It covers the research in wide area.
4. It’s very suitable for special type of responses.
5. It is most reliable in special cases.
Demerits of Questionnaire Method:
1. Through this we get only limited responses.
2. Lack of personal contact.
3. Greater possibility of wrong answers.
4. Chances of receiving incomplete response are more.
5. Sometimes answers may be illegible.
6. It may be useless in many problems.
Interviews
Interview is a two way method which permits an exchange of ideas and information. An
interview involves an interviewer asking questions verbally to a respondent. Interviews involve a
more direct interaction between the researcher and the respondent than questionnaires.
“Interviewing is fundamentally a process of social interaction.” W. J. Goode & P.K. Hatt
“The interview constitutes a social situation between two persons, the psychological process
involved requiring both individuals mutually respond though the social research purpose of the
interview call for a varied response from the two parties concerned.” Vivien Palmar
Difference between Interview and
Questionnaire
Questionnaire Method Interview Method
1. Data is gathered indirectly. 1. Data is gathered directly.
2. No face to face contact between two. 2. There is face to face contact between
3. Interviewer should have the general knowledge interviewer and interviewee.
of the topic. 3. Skillful interviewer is needed.
4. Interviewee will hesitate to write it. 4. Some confidential information can also be
5. We get written information only. obtained.
5. We get written and oral both type of
information.
Characteristics of an Interview:
1. The interviewer can probe into casual factors, determine attitudes, discover the origin of
problem.
2. It is appropriate to deal with young children and illiterates person.
3. It can make cross questioning possible.
4. It helps the investigator to gain an impression of the person concerned.
5. It can deal with delicate, confidential and even intimate topics.
6. It has flexibility.
7. Sincerity, frankness, truthfulness and insight of the interviewee can be better judged through
cross questioning.
8. It gives no chance for respondent to modify his earlier answer.
Merits of Interview:
1. Direct research.
2. Deep research
3. Knowledge of past and future.
4. Knowledge of special features.
5. Mutual encouragement is possible.
6. Supra-observation is possible.
7. Knowledge of historical and emotional causes.
8. Examination of known data.
Disadvantage of Interview:
1. May provide misleading information.
2. Defects due to interviewee(low level of intelligence or may be emotionally unbalanced)
3. Result may be affected due to prejudices of interviewer.
4. Result may be affected due to the difference in the mental outlook of interviewee and
interviewer.
5. One sided and incomplete research.
Types of interview
Structured or formal interviews are those in which the interviewer asks the interviewee the same
questions in the same way to different respondents. This will typically involve reading out questions
from a pre-written and pre-coded structured questionnaire. Usually, close ended questions with pre-
determined order. They are more valid and reliable.
Unstructured or Informal interviews (also called discovery interviews) are more like a guided
conversation. The interviewer has complete freedom to vary the questions from respondent to
respondent, so they can follow whatever lines of enquiry they think are most appropriate, depending
on the responses given by each respondent. One keeps asking questions depending on the response.
Semi-Structured interviews are those in which respondents have a list of questions, but they are free
to ask further, differentiated questions based on the responses given. The questions are open-ended
and allow for some flexibility.
Question- What are the advantages and disadvantages of each of the above type?
Revise Sociology, “Interviews in Social Research: Advantages and Disadvantages”, available at
[Link]
disadvantages/
Categories of Interviews
There are 3 main categories of interviews. In qualitative research, they are categorized based on
structure and number of participants.
They are;
1. Key informant interviews (KIIs)
2. In-depth interviews (IDIs)
3. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)
Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)
These involve 1 on 1 interviews with individuals who have expert knowledge/specialized
experience on a particular field/issue of interest. For example in a study on Uganda's land tenure
system, KIIs may be conducted on Judges, land rights activists, policy makers etc.
These interviews provide highly specialized insights but responses may be influenced by
personal bias or institutional positions.
Key features
1 on 1 interviews are conducted with individuals who have expert knowledge/specialized
experience.
Purposive sampling is used to select experts to give knowledge/answers to the questions.
Advantages of KIIs
Expert opinions or insights are obtained.
Focused thus saving time by targeting people who already understand the topic.
Rich qualitative data is obtained that may not be in secondary sources.
Disadvantages
Bias in responses. Key informants might give politically or institutionally influenced answers.
Limited generalization. Insights are based on individual perspectives rather than public opinions.
Accessibility challenges. Experts might be difficult to reach or may refuse to participate.
In-Depth Interviews (IDIs)
These focus on detailed personal experience of individuals allowing researchers to find
out/explore answers to sophisticated or sensitive topics such as asylum.
They are useful when discussing topics such as GBV, human rights violations, lived experiences
of prisoners.
Key Features/Characteristics
1 on 1 conversations i.e. focusing on individuals experiences, perceptions or feelings about a
legal issue.
Flexible. Questions can be adjusted basing on the respondents responses. You keep probing.
Exploratory approach i.e. allows for deep probing into sensitive or complex topics.
Confidentiality. Suitable for private or sensitive topics as GBV.
Advantages
Detailed personal insights i.e. provides deeper insights or understanding of individuals
experiences in the legal system.
Flexible. Can be adjusted accordingly to the responses of the participant.
Better for sensitive topics as it allows privacy and trust making it ideal for topics like GBV,
discrimination and asylum cases.
Disadvantages
Time consuming as conducting and analyzing them takes a lot of time.
Emotional sensitivity i.e. discussing trauma related topics can be stressing for both participant
and interviewer.
Research bias i.e. interviewers interpretation may affect influence how responses are analyzed.
Focused Group Discussions (FGDs)
Focus groups provide the opportunity to hear the in-depth attitudes and perceptions of
individuals in a group setting in order to more fully understand the issue at hand.
It involves gathering a small group of 6-12 people who have knowledge on a specific topic under
the moderation of the researcher with a note taker and having a discussion.
They are useful for legal research to gather collective insights on key issues and policies. It is also
important for understanding collective perspectives or public perceptions on a certain issue
under investigation.
While FGDs encourage interaction and debate, dominant voices might overshadow marginalized
opinions.
Advantages
Group interaction that stimulates discussion.
Participants may influence each others perspectives and discussions generate multiple due
points.
Captures diverse view points in a short time.
Allows debates and clarification.
Disadvantages
One or 2 participants may dominate the discussion.
Some respondents might hesitate to express personal opinions.
Observation
Observation is a research method that entails gathering data through vision as its main source. It
may be used as the only technique of data collection, or jointly with other techniques, such as
intensive interviewing, documentary study or case studies.
“It is thorough study based on visual observation. Under this technique group behaviors and
social institutions problems are evaluated.” C. Y. Younge
It involves systematically watching, recording and analyzing behavior without directly influencing
it.
Legal researchers can use it to study the following;
Court room proceedings and interactions between legal actors.
Law enforcement practices in different settings e.g. police interaction with the public.
Informal dispute resolution mechanisms in communities e.g. matoput among the Acholi.
Advantages:
1. It is reliable and a valid technique of collecting data and information.
2. We get first hand data through this method.
3. Record of observation is also available immediately.
4. It is simple, broad and comprehensive method.
Limitations:
1. It has a limited scope for its use because all the events cannot be observed directly.
2. It is subjective method.
3. It is very time consuming process.
4. Costly so energy consuming also.
5. Presence of observer influences the behavior of the person i.e. subject becomes conscious.
6. In case of covert behavior, which can’t be observed, it is not useful.
7. Observer should be trained and experienced.
Types/Methods of observation
Participant observation
Non-participant observation
Structured observation
Unstructured observation
Participant observation
In participant observation, researchers join the group they intend to study and observe it from
the inside (Legewie, 1991); ideally it is not known that they are researchers.
For instance, investigators who want to study the work conditions of factory laborers join them
as laborers, working alongside them and observing them ‘from the inside’. As members of these
groups, they can study, among other things, their structure, process, problems and attitudes,
both directly and as experienced by the members of the groups.
Advantages of Participant Observation
Provides deep insights into legal practices and social dynamics.
Allows researchers to understand both formal and informal legal systems.
Helps you build trust and rapport with participants.
Disadvantages
Researchers bias may influence data collection and interpretation.
Ethical concerns will come up if the researchers presence affects participants behavior.
Time consuming and requires extended engaging in the setting.
Non-participant observation
In non-participant observation, investigators study their subjects ‘from the outside’.
Their position is clearly defined and different from that of the subjects. Ideally, they are
‘invisible’, and remain unnoticed by the members of the group they observe.
A typical example of non-participant observation is laboratory observation, where the subjects
interact in a laboratory and the researcher observes them through a one-way mirror.
Observing children in the school playground through a window is another example of non-
participant observation. In both cases the observer does not actively participate in the group
under study.
Advantages of Non-Participant
Observation
Minimizes researcher influence on participant behavior.
Ethically less complicated than participant observation.
Useful for studying highly structured and organized environments e.g. court rooms.
Disadvantages
Limits researcher access to participants motives emotions and inner thoughts.
Hard to clarify or verify observations without interviews or supplementary data.
Some legal settings may restrict observational research.
Structured and unstructured observation
These two types of observation differ in terms of the degree to which they are structured.
Structured observation employs a formal and strictly organized procedure with a set of well-
defined observation categories, and is subjected to high levels of control and standardization. It
is also organized and planned before the study begins. Here, the researcher specifies accurately
what is to be observed and by what means, and how the results of observation will be recorded.
Unstructured observation is loosely organized and the process of observation is largely left up
to the observer. Semi-structured observations lie somewhere between these two techniques;
they may, for instance, be structured in their approach but unstructured in their setting. They
are relatively common in social research and combine the advantages (and limitations) of both
the structured and unstructured techniques of observation.
END