Journal of Business & Economic Research – March 2007 Volume 5, Number 3
provides the context of this method while the research requires that the theory must emerge from the data collected in
the field rather than taken from the research literature (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001). Grounded theory has also been used
primarily in the sociology discipline because this method examines people‟s actions and interactions.
Grounded theory research is the process of collecting data, analyzing the data, and repeating the process,
which is the format called constant comparative method. The data can be obtained from several sources such as
interviewing participants or witnesses, reviewing historical videotapes or records, observations while on-site. Creswell
(1998) concurs with Leedy and Ormrod‟s (2001) standard format on how to analyze data in a grounded theory
research that includes open coding, axial coding, selective coding, and developing a theory. Finally, a grounded theory
report incorporates five aspects: describing the research question, literature review, describing the methodology, data
analysis explaining the theory, and discussing the implications (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001).
Phenomenological Study
The purpose of this study is “to understand an experience from the participants‟ point of view” (Leedy &
Ormrod, 2001, p. 157). The focus is on the participant‟s perceptions of the event or situation and the study tries to
answer the question of the experience. Creswell (1998) points out that the essence of this study is the search for “the
central underlying meaning of the experience and emphasize the intentionality of consciousness where experiences
contain both the outward appearance and inward consciousness based on the memory, image, and meaning” (p. 52).
The difficulty of this study is that the researcher usually has some connection, experience, or stake in the situation so
bracketing (setting aside all prejudgments) is required. The method for a phenomenological study is similar to that of
grounded theory because interviews are conducted.
The method of collecting data is through lengthy (1-2 hours) interviews in order to understand and
interpret a participant‟s perception on the meaning of an event. Creswell (1998) suggests the procedural format is
writing the research questions that explore the meaning of the experience, conducting the interviews, analyzing the
data to find the clusters of meanings, and ending with a report that furthers the readers understanding of the essential
structure of the experience. The study collects data that leads to identifying common themes in people‟s perceptions of
their experiences.
Content Analysis Study
Leedy and Ormrod (2001) define this method as “a detailed and systematic examination of the contents of a
particular body of materials for the purpose of identifying patterns, themes, or biases” (p. 155). Content analysis
review forms of human communication including books, newspapers, and films as well as other forms in order to
identify patterns, themes, or biases. The method is designed to identify specific characteristics from the content in the
human communications. The researcher is exploring verbal, visual, behavioral patterns, themes, or biases.
The procedural process for the content analysis study is designed to achieve the highest objective analysis
possible and involves identifying the body of material to be studied and defining the characteristics or qualities to be
examined (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001). The collection of data is a two-step process. First, the researcher must analyze the
materials and put them in a frequency table as each characteristic or quality is mentioned. Second, the researcher must
conduct a statistical analysis so that the results are reported in a quantitative format. The research report has five
sections: the description of the materials studied, the characteristics and qualities studied, a description of the
methodology, the statistical analysis showing the frequency table, and. drawing conclusions about the patterns,
themes, or biases found in the human communications and data collection.
MIXED METHODS APPROACH
Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003) discussed the mixed methods approach to research, which emerged in the
mid-to-late 1900s (Tashakkori & Teddlie). Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004) hoped that the mixed methods approach
to research provided researchers with an alternative to believing that the quantitative and qualitative research
approaches are incompatible and, in turn, their associated methods “cannot and should not be mixed” (p. 14). With the