Chapter 3

This chapter focused on the method used to the necessary gathers information and its analysis which
enable the researcher to understand on drug and substance abuse. This chapter will explain research
philosophy, research approach, research design, sampling process, population, sample size, sampling
procedures, study site, data collection, and methods trustworthiness of research, data analysis, ethical
considerations, and limitations.

3.2 Research Philosophy

This study adopts the interpretive research philosophy, as it seeks to explore and understand the
subjective meanings, perceptions, and experiences of community members and youth involved in
addressing drug and substance abuse in Chitungwiza. Interpretive is rooted in the belief that reality is
socially constructed and can only be understood through the interpretations of those who experience it
(Pham, 2021). This philosophy aligns with the study’s objectives, which emphasize examining lived
experiences, community engagement and the perceived impact of grassroots interventions on youth
behavior.

The interpretive approach acknowledges that knowledge is not objective or value-free but is instead
shaped by cultural, historical and social contexts (Alharahsheh & Pius, 2020). Given that drug and
substance abuse is a deeply embedded social issue influenced by multiple contextual factors such as
unemployment, peer pressure and limited community resources an interpretive lens allows the
researcher to gain a rich, nuanced understanding of the problem from the perspectives of those directly
affected. This approach supports the use of qualitative methods, such as semi-structured interviews,
focus group discussions and participant observations, which are essential in capturing the voices,
meanings, and motivations of community actors and young people (Creswell & Poth, 2023).

Furthermore, to enhance the practical relevance of the research and provide well-rounded insights,
elements of Pragmatism are also incorporated. Pragmatism allows for methodological pluralism and
focuses on the research problem as the starting point, rather than strict adherence to one philosophical
tradition (Kaushik & Walsh, 2021). In this study, quantitative elements such as descriptive statistics on
drug use patterns or participation levels may be included to complement the qualitative findings. This
integration helps generate actionable recommendations that can inform local policy and practice.

By combining Interpretivism with pragmatic flexibility, the study is well positioned to address the
complexities of community-led initiatives, understand diverse stakeholder perspectives and recommend
practical solutions to the growing challenge of youth drug and substance abuse in Chitungwiza.

3.3. Research Approach

This study adopts a qualitative research approach to explore and understand the nature and impact of
community-led initiatives targeting drug and substance abuse among youth in Chitungwiza. The
qualitative approach is most appropriate for this study as it emphasizes contextual understanding, depth
of insight and the lived experiences of individuals within their social environments (Creswell & Poth,
2023).

Qualitative research is particularly valuable in addressing complex, socially embedded issues such as
drug and substance abuse. It allows the researcher to delve deeply into the meanings that community
members and youth attach to their experiences, challenges and participation in local initiatives. This is
essential in a setting like Chitungwiza, where community dynamics, cultural values and social structures
influence both the causes of drug abuse and the effectiveness of intervention strategies (Dentin &
Lincoln, 2020).

Guided by the interpretivist philosophical stance, the research approach prioritizes subjective
perspectives, using inductive reasoning to develop patterns and themes from the data collected. The
researcher will gather data using qualitative techniques such as semi-structured interviews, focus group
discussions and participant observation, enabling the identification of common themes and contextual
factors shaping community efforts.

While qualitative methods form the core of this study, the research may also draw on some quantitative
elements (e.g., statistics on drug usage or participation rates in programs), thus reflecting a pragmatic
orientation. This enables a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomena while maintaining a
central focus on rich descriptive accounts.

3.4 Research Design

This study adopts a qualitative case study design, which is well suited for in-depth exploration of
complex social phenomena within a real-life context. The case study design is particularly appropriate
for investigating how community-led initiatives function to address drug and substance abuse among
youth in a specific setting Chitungwiza and how different actors interpret and engage with these
interventions.

A qualitative case study allows the researcher to explore the phenomenon holistically, examining the
“how” and “why” behind community responses to youth drug abuse (Creswell & Poth, 2023). This
design aligns with the interpretivist philosophy and qualitative approach underpinning the study, as it
emphasizes understanding participants’ experiences, meanings and perceptions in their natural context
(Yin, 2018).

The single-case design focuses exclusively on Chitungwiza, treating it as a bounded system in which
community-led interventions can be thoroughly examined. This includes understanding the types of
programs in place, the level of youth involvement and the perceived impact of these initiatives. The
study will gather data through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions and document
reviews. These methods allow for triangulation, enhancing the credibility and depth of findings.

In line with exploratory case study principles, this research does not seek to test hypotheses but rather
to generate a rich, descriptive understanding that can inform practice, policy, and future research
(Baxter & Jack, 2020). Through thematic analysis, the study will identify patterns, challenges, and best
practices within community responses to youth substance abuse.

Overall, the qualitative case study design provides the flexibility, depth, and contextual sensitivity
needed to explore this socially embedded issue in Chitungwiza.

3.5 Sampling Process

This study employs a purposive sampling technique, which is commonly used in qualitative research to
select participants who are most knowledgeable and relevant to the research topic. Purposive sampling
allows the researcher to intentionally select individuals or groups who have firsthand experience with
community-led initiatives and drug abuse issues among youth in Chitungwiza (Etikan, 2020).

The sampling process targets key stakeholders, including:

 Youth who are either participating in or affected by drug and substance abuse initiatives,

 Community leaders and volunteers running or supporting these programs,

 Parents or guardians of affected youth,

 Health professionals, social workers, or counselors involved in local drug rehabilitation or

prevention programs,

Participants will be selected based on criteria such as their experience, role, and involvement in
community-based responses to drug abuse. This ensures that the data collected is rich, relevant and
meaningful to the study objectives (Palinkas et al., 2015). The sample size will remain flexible and will
follow the principle of data saturation where new data no longer brings additional insights or themes
(Guest, Namey, & Chen, 2020).

In cases where specific perspectives are needed such as young people who have recovered from
substance use or peer educators snowball sampling may also be used. This involves asking participants
to recommend others with relevant experiences or insights.

Overall, the sampling strategy ensures the inclusion of diverse yet information-rich participants, which
supports the interpretive and exploratory nature of the study.

3.5.1 Population

The target population for this study comprises individuals and groups residing in Chitungwiza,
Zimbabwe, who are directly or indirectly involved in addressing drug and substance abuse among youth
through community-led initiatives. This includes youth participants, community leaders, and parents,
health practitioners, implementing or benefiting from these interventions.

More specifically, the study focuses on:

  Youth aged 15 to 30 years including those currently participating in community-based
prevention or rehabilitation programs, as well as those previously affected by drug use.

 Community leaders and elders who are actively involved in mobilizing or running local initiatives.

 Parents and guardians of youth affected by substance use, who can provide insights into family
and community dynamics.

 Health and social service providers such as counselors, nurses, or rehabilitation workers
addressing drug-related issues.

This population was chosen because of their direct relevance to the study objectives — identifying
existing initiatives, evaluating youth participation, and understanding the perceived impact of these
community efforts. The diversity of this population allows for the collection of multiple perspectives,
which enhances the richness and credibility of the qualitative data (Creswell & Poth, 2023).

Since the study uses purposive sampling, participants will be intentionally selected based on their
knowledge, experience and involvement in the issue under investigation. This ensures the study remains
focused on those most capable of providing meaningful and context-specific insights (Etikan, 2020).

3.5.2 Sample Size

In qualitative research, the sample size is not fixed in advance but is instead guided by the concept of
data saturation—the point at which no new themes or insights are emerging from the data (Guest,
Namey, & Chen, 2020). For this study, which adopts a qualitative case study design, an estimated sample
size of 20 to 30 participants is considered sufficient to achieve meaningful depth and coverage of
perspectives.

The sample will consist of:

 10–15 youth (aged 15–30) involved in or affected by community-led initiatives,

 4–6 community leaders or initiative organizers,

 3–5 parents or guardians of youth affected by substance abuse,

 2–4 health professionals, social workers, or rehabilitation personnel, and

This range ensures diversity of experience and stakeholder representation, enhancing the credibility and
richness of the data. The final number will be flexible, allowing for additional interviews until data
saturation is reached.

According to Vasileiou et al. (2018), qualitative studies with sample sizes between 15 and 30 participants
are generally sufficient for case studies that seek thematic analysis and interpretation of shared
experiences. The priority is information-rich cases, rather than statistical representativeness (Creswell &
Poth, 2023).
3.5.3 Sampling procedures

1. Target Population

Youth (ages 15–35) involved in or affected by drug abuse.

Community leaders (e.g., local councilors, church leaders).

Health and social workers (e.g., counselors, rehab center staff).

2. Recommended Sampling Techniques

A. Non-Probability Sampling (for Qualitative Insights)

Since the study involves community-led initiatives, some non-random sampling is necessary to engage
key stakeholders.

1. Purposive Sampling

- Select key informants with deep knowledge of drug abuse issues in Chitungwiza.

- Example: Interviews with community leaders, social workers, and rehab counselors.

2. Snowball Sampling

- Useful for reaching hidden populations (e.g., recovering addicts, street youths).

- Example: Initial contacts refer other affected youth for interviews.

3.5.3.1Stratified Random Sampling Plan for Chitungwiza Youth Drug Abuse Study

(Ensuring Population Representation)

1. Define Target Population

 Group: Youth aged 15–24 in Chitungwiza.

 Estimated Population: 5000.

Key Strata (Subgroups):

 Wards: Zengeza, St Mary’s, Makoni.

 Age Groups: 15–18 (school-going), 19–24 (out-of-school/employed).

 Gender: Male/Female (to capture gender-specific trends).

2. Sampling Frame Development

Obtain lists from:

 Schools (for 15–18 age groups).

 Community health centers (for out-of-school youth).

 Ward registers (if available).

3. Stratified Random Sampling Steps

Step 1: Divide Population into Strata

Stratum Population Sample size

Ward 1 Zengeza 25% 100

Ward 2 st mary’s 20% 80

Age 15-18 60% 240

Age 19-24 40% 160

Male 50% 200

Female 50% 200

Step 2: Randomly Select Within Strata

- Used a random number generator or lottery method to pick participants from each subgroup.

- Example: From Zengeza’s 100 slots, randomly select 60 school-going (15–18) and 40 out-of-school (19–
24) youth.

Step 3: Ensure Proportionality

- Adjust sample sizes if strata are uneven (e.g., oversample marginalized wards if needed).

1. Precision: Stratification reduces error for key subgroups (e.g., high-risk wards).

2. Feasibility: Uses existing community structures (schools/wards).

3. Policy Relevance: Results can be disaggregated by ward/age for targeted interventions.

3.5.4 Study Site

1. Overview of Chitungwiza
Chitungwiza is a high-density urban town located approximately 25 km southeast of Harare, Zimbabwe’s
capital. It is one of the country’s most populous suburbs, with an estimated population of over 500,000
residents. The town is divided into three major administrative areas

a. Zengeza

b. St Mary’s

c. Seke

Each area has multiple wards making Chitungwiza a suitable case study for community-based research
on drug and substance abuse among youth.

2. Why Chitungwiza is an Ideal Study Site

High Prevalence of Drug Abuse: Reports indicate rising cases of mbanje (cannabis), mutoriro (codeine-
based cough syrup) and illicit brews among youth.

Strong Community Structures: Active churches, youth groups, NGOs, and local government initiatives
working on drug abuse prevention.

Diverse Socioeconomic Conditions: Mix of low-income households and informal settlements, providing
varied perspectives on drug abuse drivers.

Accessibility: Proximity to Harare allows for easier data collection and stakeholder engagement.

3. Specific Research Locations within Chitungwiza

To ensure geographical representation, the study can focus on key sites:

Area Potential research sites Rationale

Zengeza Zengeza 4 High School, Zengeza High youth population, drug hotspot
Market, local churches near school

St Mary’s St Mary’s clinic, Chitungwiza Access to health workers and

rehabilitation centre recovering addicts

Seke Seke rural youth centre, Known for illicit drug trade

4. Key Stakeholders to Engage

Local Government: Chitungwiza Municipality Health & Social Services Dept.

Community Leaders: Ward councilors, church pastors, neighborhood watch groups.

Youth Organizations: Zimbabwe Youth Council (Chitungwiza Chapter), local sports clubs.
Health Facilities: Chitungwiza Central Hospital, private rehab centers.

Law Enforcement: ZRP Chitungwiza (Drugs & Narcotics Unit).

5. Data Collection Sites

Schools & Colleges (for surveys among students)

Marketplaces & Bus Termini (hotspots for drug peddling)

Community Halls & Churches (for focus group discussions)

Rehabilitation Centers (for in-depth interviews with recovering addicts)

3.6 Data collection methods

The Researcher utilized focus group discussions (FGDs), Document Analysis and Survey to collect both
qualitative and quantitative data from participants. The researcher conducted 3 face to face focus group
discussions each group with an average of 10 participants and facilitators had a draft of open ended
questions which were used to guide the conversations. Ground rules were set in each group discussion
and openness in discussions was ensured by facilitators. All presentations for FGDs were recorded by
both audio and note writing by the scriber for ease of analysis. For Document analysis, the researcher
reviewed relevant documents such as articles, Rural District Reports, and policy documents on youth
participation identified relating to Youth programming. He then identified themes and context to
uncover meanings relating to research objectives which were later analyzed for patterns and
relationships. This was done in conjunction with the FGDs for purposes of triangulation.

A self- structured questionnaire for survey was prepared and distributed to 60 participants who were
picked through stratified random sampling. According to Creswell (2006) questionnaires are similar to a
highly structured interview except that the subject reads questions and answers by ticking options on a
piece of paper rather than responding verbally to the interviewer. The questionnaires were segmented
into sections. The sections required biographic information on causes of drugs and strategies which can
be utilized to promote youth involvement. The instrument used closed questions on a five item liker
scale requiring single and multiple responses. Refreshment was provided to participants just to build
rapport and motivate participants during discussions and questionnaire distributions.

3.7 Trustworthiness of Qualitative Research

Credibility (Truthfulness of Findings)

 Conduct prolonged engagement (spend sufficient time in Zengeza, St Mary's, Seke)

Use triangulation:
  Data: Compare interviews + FGDs + observations

 Methods: Combine interviews with document analysis

 Researchers: Involve multiple analysts

 Do member checking (verify interpretations with participants)

 Keep detailed field notes of all interactions

Transferability (Applicability to Other Contexts)

 Provide thick descriptions of:

 Local drug culture (slang terms, common substances)

 Socioeconomic factors (unemployment rates, poverty levels)

 Community structures (NGOs, youth groups, rehab centers)

Use purposeful sampling to include:

 Current/recovering drug users

 Community leaders

 Health workers

 Law enforcement

Dependability (Consistency of Research)

 Maintain an audit trail documenting:

 Participant selection process

 Changes in research design

 Evolution of themes

 Conduct peer debriefing (have colleagues review methods)

 Use low-inference descriptors (record exact participant quotes)

Conformability (Neutrality/Objectivity)

 Practice reflexivity:

 Keep researcher journal of biases/preconceptions

  Note how your background affects interpretations

 Use bracketing (set aside assumptions during analysis)

 Include negative cases (examples that contradict main findings)

Ethical Considerations

o Obtain informed consent (verbal/written)

o Ensure confidentiality (use pseudonyms)

o Have referral resources for distressed participants

o Get ethical approval from relevant boards

Fieldwork Tips for Chitungwiza

1. Build trust first - Work with local leaders before data collection

2. Use local languages - Conduct interviews in Shona when needed

3. Time visits wisely - Evenings/weekends may yield better participation

4 .Document context - Note location, time, participant demeanor

5. Verify translations - Double-check any transcribed Shona content

3.8 Data Analysis

The Responses collected from questionnaires were converted into statistical data using the SPSS
package. The Researcher then used SPSS descriptive analysis tools to determine frequency and variables
cross tabulations. This data was then transferred into excel for further descriptive analysis where
findings were converted into Percentages for easy comparisons and development of tables, pie charts,
line graphs, bar graphs and histograms. Thematic analysis was utilized for qualitative data where
information gathered from respondents was put into themes and analyzed to draw conclusions.
Qualitative data collected from focused group discussion (FGD) s and Documentary Analysis were
transcribed and analyzed to identify themes, patterns, and key issues related to the topic. Codes were
generated from data collected data and relationships of codes were searched to identify overarching
themes. Themes describing patterns were named and findings reported using direct quotes from the
data describing themes and relationships. Quantitative data was then merged with qualitative data
themes to explain and gain a deeper meaning of the findings from the two approaches

3.9 Ethical Considerations.

Ethical Principles

1. Informed Consent: Participants must be fully informed about the nature of the study, their role within
it, potential risks and their right to withdraw at any time without penalty.

2. Confidentiality: Participants’ identities and sensitive information will be kept confidential to protect
their privacy.

3. Avoiding Harm: The study will be designed to minimize any physical, psychological or emotional harm
to participants.

4. Respect for Vulnerable Populations: Special care must be taken when researchers are dealing with
vulnerable groups, such as youth in the context of drug and substance abuse.

Upholding Ethical Principles

 Informed Consent: Before data collection begins, informed consent will be obtained through a
consent form detailing the study's objectives, methods, potential risks, and benefits. Participants
will have the opportunity to ask questions. For vulnerable groups such as adolescents, parental
consent will also be sought.

 Confidentiality: All data collected will be anonymized and assigned unique identification codes.
These codes will be used during data analysis to ensure that participant identities remain
confidential. Data will be stored electronically on secure, password-protected servers and, if
physical data exists, will be kept in locked filing cabinets in secure environments.

 Avoiding Harm: The study design will incorporate measures to minimize disruptions and
emotional distress. Participants will be informed that they can skip questions or withdraw from
the study at any time. Should any participant show signs of distress during interviews, trained
support personnel will be available to provide assistance or counseling.

 Addressing Ethical Issues with Vulnerable Participants: Special considerations will be made for
participants who are underage or from indigenous communities. Culturally sensitive approaches
will be adopted to ensure community involvement and respect for local customs and beliefs. In
addition, engagement with local leaders and community organizations will be sought to
facilitate trust and enhance participation.

Ethical Approval Process

The research will be submitted for ethical approval to the institution’s Research Ethics Board (REB). This
will include a detailed proposal outlining the study's objectives, methodology, potential risks, consent
process, and measures for data protection. The REB will evaluate the study for ethical considerations,
and their approval will be required before data collection begins. The REB approval number will be
obtained following their review process.

Potential Ethical Issues or Risks

Potential risks include psychological impacts stemming from discussions on drug and substance abuse,
which may be sensitive topics for participants. To mitigate these risks, the following strategies will be
implemented:

- Participants will be briefed about the study's nature and reminded that they can withdraw at any time
if they feel uncomfortable.

- Access to mental health support services will be provided should participants feel triggered.

- Data will be processed in aggregate form to prevent identification of individuals.

Conflicts of Interest

If any of the researchers are affiliated with local organizations tackling drug abuse, transparency will be
maintained regarding such conflicts. In scenarios where the researchers have a vested interest,
appropriate measures will be taken to avoid biases, including the involvement of an external advisory
committee to oversee the research process and ensure objectivity.

3.10 Limitations

This study acknowledges several limitations that may affect the interpretation and generalizability of the
findings. Firstly, the research was conducted exclusively in Chitungwiza, which may limit the applicability
of the results to other urban settings in Zimbabwe with different socioeconomic dynamics. While the
qualitative approach provided in-depth insights into community-led initiatives, the relatively small
sample size of 15-30 interviews and 4-6 focus group discussions, combined with the use of non-
probability sampling methods, may affect the representativeness of the findings. The study's reliance on
self-reported data introduces potential biases, including social desirability bias, where participants may
have provided responses they perceived as more socially acceptable. Additionally, the research did not
include certain hard-to-reach populations such as active drug dealers or highly stigmatized users, which
could have offered more comprehensive perspectives. Time and resource constraints further limited the
scope of data collection, preventing a more extensive investigation across multiple locations or the
inclusion of quantitative measures to complement the qualitative findings. Lastly, while efforts were
made to ensure methodological rigor, the absence of longitudinal data means the study captures only a
snapshot of the situation at a particular time, potentially overlooking evolving trends in drug abuse and
intervention strategies. These limitations highlight areas for improvement in future research while
contextualizing the current study's contributions to understanding community-led approaches to
addressing youth drug abuse in Chitungwiza.

Conclusion

In retrospect, this chapter looked comprehensively at the design of the study focusing on methodology,
target population, sampling techniques, data collection instruments, data collection and analysis. The
researcher used the mixed method design utilizing both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Triangulation method consisting of FGDs, Document Analysis and Survey was utilized. For data analysis,
he then utilized thematic analysis and descriptive analysis where he utilized tables for information
presentation.

References

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2023). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Etikan, I. (2020). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of
Theoretical and Applied Statistics

Etikan, I. (2020). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of
Theoretical and Applied Statistics

Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in
qualitative research.

Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful
sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research.
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544.

Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in
qualitative research.
Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S., & Young, T. (2018). Characterising and justifying sample size
sufficiency in interview-based studies: Systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year
period.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2023). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2020). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for
novice researchers.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2023). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). SAGE
Publications.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2021). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (5th
ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2023). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2020). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (5th ed.). SAGE
Publications.

Mohajan, H. (2021). Qualitative research methodology in social sciences and related subjects.

Rahman, M. S. (2020). The advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative and quantitative
approaches and methods in language “testing and assessment” research: A literature review. Journal of
Education and Learning, 6(1), 102–112.

Alharahsheh, H. H., & Pius, A. (2020). A review of key paradigms: Positivism vs interpretivism.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2023). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Kaushik, V., & Walsh, C. A. (2021). Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for social
work research.

Pham, L. T. M. (2021). A review of key research paradigms: Positivism, interpretivism, and critical
inquiry. University of Melbourne Research Repository.