Qualitative Reseach analysis

¶ … Health Care in the Federal Bureau of Prisons: Fact or Fiction by Daniel S. Murphy (2005). The intention is to provide an overview and to analyze the various aspects of the report in terms of qualitative research provisions and expectations. It is therefore firstly important to provide a brief overview of qualitative methods and analysis.

A common definition of qualitative as opposed to quantitative research is as follows.

Qualitative research involves an in-depth understanding of human behaviour and the reasons that govern human behaviour. Unlike quantitative research, qualitative research relies on reasons behind various aspects of behaviour. Simply put, it investigates the why and how of decision making, as compared to what, where, and when of quantitative research. Hence, the need is for smaller but focused samples rather than large and random samples.

Qualitative research: Wikipedia)

The above points to a number of important foundation concepts in qualitative research. Qualitative research is more wide ranging and discursive but also usually takes place within a selective and smaller data or subject sample. In the case of this article the direct research was limited to the prison population, which the author was in contact with. Importantly, qualitative analysis focuses on ascertaining the reason and factors behind a certain situation or problem rather than on the statistical or numerical scrutiny of the data.

Another view of this research method was also helpful in the analysis of this article. This refers to the fact that,

Phenomenological inquiry, or qualitative research, uses a naturalistic approach that seeks to understand phenomena in context-specific settings. Logical positivism, or quantitative research, uses experimental methods and quantitative measures to test hypothetical generalizations. Each represents a fundamentally different inquiry paradigm, and researcher actions are based on the underlying assumptions of each paradigm.

(Hoepfl 1997)

Furthermore it is important to bear in mind the following essential differences between these two forms of research in an analysis of the article. The qualitative researcher is "...explicitly a part of the data gathering process whereas in quantitative, the researcher is formally an independent entity." (Qualitative research: Wikipedia)

This means that the researcher is subjectively involved with the data collection and selections, which also implies the negative aspect of possible bias. Qualitative research also normally makes use of unstructured data rather the structure data.

2. The problem

The problem that this article addresses is succinctly stated in the introduction. "Are prisoners' rights to medical care, such as those afforded under the Eighth Amendment that bans cruel and unusual punishment, being met?" (Murphy 2005)

This problem is expanded on by the author in an investigation aided by relevant literature, personal experiences and interviews with prisoners. Therefore the problem also extends to other factors such as the question of whether the healthcare facilities are effective and if they are being offered on an equal basis to all prisoners. The article also brings external factors to bear on the central problem; such as the effect of the growing prison population on present healthcare facilities.

However, the central problem that the article continuously refers to is the underlying lack of concern and compassion for the health of prisoners, which is a central critique of the prison system. This is emphasized by comments by the author such as," the prisoner is unable to get a second opinion. Life or death of those imprisoned is dependent upon the medical care provided by the FBOP." (Murphy 2005)

3. Study Purpose

The ostensible purpose of this study is to investigate the central problem area of prisoner healthcare during incarceration and refers to the exploration of the various problems outlined in the above section. The intention of the study is that, by making this data available the problem will become recognized and hopefully lead to positive changes being instituted as a result. As the article is at pains to point out, the situation is extremely serious in terms of the basic healthcare and ethical standards in the prison system and that there should be a greater awareness of these issues.

From a nursing point-of-view this is obviously a situation in which patient care and healthcare principles are being compromised and ignored and should be remedied. This study also points to the way that healthcare issues can be hidden from the public eye.

The research question

The research questions in this study become obvious but are not explicitly and comprehensively stated at the outset.

The actual research question could be reformulated as follows.

Extensive qualitative research and studies indicates that there are serious fault lines in the prison health system. This study is therefore directed at establishing the veracity or otherwise of the view that the prison healthcare system is inadequate, and in what areas and to what extent this is the case.

The central hypothesis of this study is that there are serious transgressions of the constitution and ethics and a problem with regard to the compassionate implementation of health care in the prison environment

It should also be noted that the research questions are interspersed at intervals throughout the article.

For example, the question of prisoners entering the prison suffering from malnutrition and disease as a result of poverty, alcohol or drug abuse is a central issue that occurs later in the article.

Study design discursive and largely purposeful qualitative method is used. The use of the purposeful random form of sampling is particularly relevant to this study. "...purposeful sampling is the dominant strategy in qualitative research. Purposeful sampling seeks information-rich cases which can be studied in depth ((Patton, 1990).

Maximum variation sampling is also used in the study. This methodology or strategy, "...aims at capturing and describing the central themes or principal outcomes that cut across a great deal of participant or program variation. (Patton, 1990, p. 172)

More particularly the methodology or design can be divided into three related elements. The first is personal experiences which are interwoven with supportive literature and studies as well as relevant legal proceedings in which the various problem areas have been highlighted. It should be noted that only studies which align themselves with the author's experiences are mentioned.

Secondly interviews are recorded with the inmates, which are also interwoven with other data to support and add credence to the central views and hypothesis suggested in the study. Thirdly are the already mentioned supportive studies and literature, which confirm the personal experiences. The author describes these sources as follows.

Issues discussed are based upon the author's personal experience(s) while imprisoned in two Federal Medical Centers (FMC) of the FBOP; interviews conducted with prisoners over a five-year term of imprisonment; interviews with prisoners during and since release; academic training garnered through completion of Ph.D. post-release; and an in-depth analysis of medicaldirectives...

(Murphy 2005)

Against the background of this research, which is extensively outlined in the report, the writer uses qualitative research methods to test the central hypothesis that healthcare within the system is not adequately attended to.

Subjects and Setting

The subjects mentioned in the interview are all appropriate to various central questions that are investigated. There is no indication of the sampling or selection process used in determining the interviewees. This would suggest that the study took place on an experiential basis and on the basis of the importance of the views expressed in the interviews as they pertained to the central hypothesis. The possibility of subjective bias is offset to a certain extent by the extensive literature component, where similar studies are shown to present results and views which concur with those of the author.

Data Collection Methods

The central data collection methods are reported interviews and observations that the author recounts. This is validated by the authors own experiences. This form of data collection, while seemingly random, is also appropriate to the type of study that is being undertaken. The study is intended to be in the first instance an account of personal experiences, which are supported and validated by interviews and associated literature and studies.

The data collection method seems to conform to the semi-structured interview method. The structure of the study is derived from the hypothesis and the various aspects that were observed from personal experience. This is an appropriate tool for investigation in this setting. In the case of semi-structured interviews "...the interviewer is free to probe and explore within these predetermined inquiry areas. "(Lofland and Lofland, 1984). Furthermore "...In keeping with the flexible nature of qualitative research designs, interview guides can be modified over time to focus attention on areas of particular importance, or to exclude questions the researcher has found to be unproductive for the goals of the research." (Lofland and Lofland, 1984).

Data Analysis Procedures

The method used in this regard is mainly inductive analysis. This would suggest that the central theme and problems have been allowed to emerge from the experiential data. This is also an adequate method for data analysis in this situation. As Patton (1990) points out "Qualitative analysis requires some creativity, for the challenge is to place the raw data into logical, meaningful categories; to examine them in a holistic fashion; and to find a way to communicate this interpretation to others." ((Patton, 1990).

The data analysis procedure is therefore one which emphasizes participation and observation. As the author states,"As a Convict Criminologist (an ex-prisoner who has academic training), I had the opportunity to analyze prison culture from the perspectives of participant and observer." (Murphy 2005)