The Case of Contradictions: How Prolonged Engagement, Reflexive Journaling, and Observations can Contradict Qualitative Methods

Abstract

Interviews and focus groups are common methods for conducting qualitative research. They provide in-depth descriptions of a phenomenon by listening to and analyzing participants' words. Yet, when a researcher immerses themself in an environment for a prolonged period participants are able to act and think naturalistically rather than in a formal interview setting. Prolonged engagement allows the researcher to blend into the participants' environment, therefore increasing the likelihood that the activities that occur in the presence of the researcher do not differ from the activities that occur without the researcher present. This prolonged interaction can provide more in-depth data including observations and address questions of credibility, rather than only conducting an interview or focus group. However, the observations can also bring forward contradictions participants display that differ from the interview or focus group conversation. By spending 3 months in Ghana with the International Agricultural Education Fellowship Program conducting monitoring and evaluation efforts, using a mixed-methods approach, contradictions arose from observations and reflexive journaling that would not have been found without the prolonged engagement. The purpose of this study is to provide methodological insight by examining how contradictions from interviews and focus groups arise when the researcher is immersed in the participants' environment and highlight the importance of prolonged engagement, observations, and reflexive journaling to qualitative credibility.