Qualitative Research Methods by Sarah J. Tracy

Qualitative Research Methods by Sarah J. Tracy

Author:Sarah J. Tracy [Tracy, Sarah J.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781119390800
Publisher: Wiley
Published: 2019-08-20T00:00:00+00:00


Is more detailed transcription always better? No. Qualitative research demands flexibility, and transcribers use what works for them and their audiences. Just like fieldnotes, transcriptions are human constructions, and how they are constructed depends on goals of the larger research project.

Appendix C provides examples and rationales of various levels of transcription detail – from very detailed to transcription summaries. Conversation and discourse analysts interested in the detailed features of talk – including its pace, sequence, intonation, pauses, interruptions, talk‐overs, and volume – will use a very specific form of transcribing, catalogued by a plethora of conventions and symbols (Jefferson, 1992; Peräkylä, & Ruusuvuori, 2018). On the other hand, some researchers choose to make detailed summaries of interviews and only transcribe key quotations (e.g. Miller, 2007).

If you are interested in issues of marked nervousness, conversational dominance or recalcitrance, humor, or uncertainty, using a high level of transcription detail can be extremely valuable. For instance, in our study of male executives discussing work–life (Tracy & Rivera, 2010), we paid special attention to verbal disfluencies (e.g. “umms,” “ahhs”), pauses, questioning, and talk repairs. Sigmund Freud might have us think that such disfluencies categorically reveal unconscious desires or secrets. However, disfluencies are just as likely to cue emotional arousal, stress, anxiety, embarrassment, deception, or added cognitive load – such as talking about something very complicated or never considered before (Erard, 2007). These talk junctures may also indicate resistance, change, and flickers of transformation – areas to follow up with dialogic interviewing techniques (Way et al., 2015).

Many people are interested in how much time they should budget for transcription. On average, one hour of audio with two speakers (e.g. an interviewer and interviewee) takes a good typist about four to five hours to transcribe and results in 20–25 single‐spaced typewritten pages. However, this time varies. It may take only a couple hours to transcribe one hour of a single voice (e.g. a speech), or up to eight hours for a one‐hour focus group, especially if the transcriber is distinguishing voices via both audio and video recordings. Furthermore, transcribing takes longer when the recording has multiple speakers, background noise, or when participants speak quickly, softly, or with unfamiliar accents. Over time, it becomes easier to distinguish different voices from each other, recognize speech patterns, and understand the importance of nonverbal cues. Transcription does get easier and faster with practice!

Why does transcribing take so long? Simply because typing takes longer than speaking. Furthermore, the transcriptionist must make careful analytic choices about the notation of laughter, pitch, volume, tone of voice, sarcasm, silence, and various contextual details. Of course, if the desire is just to get down the words, then transcription is much quicker (and if vocalics are not important, a “self‐transcribing” email or a chat‐based interview format may be advisable). Also, transcribers consistently make choices about punctuation and the right homonym (e.g. did the participant mean “their,” “there” or “they’re”?).

Transcribing decisions profoundly impact the analysis, and this is why researchers should carefully consider the disadvantages of outsourcing the job.



Download



Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.