Cleaning Up Quotes?

Thread View: bit.listserv.qualrs-l

2 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

2 total messages Started by Scott McKnight Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:18

#790

Author: Scott McKnight
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:18

32 lines
2591 bytes

Howdy folks,

We've written a report based on focus group research.  Illustative
quotes were included in the report.  The lead author has removed
"ahhs" and "umms" but left other verbal pauses like "like" and "you
know" and left double negatives.  His feeling is that this is the way
these people talk and he's trying to communicate the feeling and the
"color" of the participants' language.  

The draft report was presented recently at a briefing.  In attendance
was a representative for the participants.  He complained that the
practice of leaving verbal pauses, double negatives, etc. tends to
make the participants look unintelligent/uneducated, and that it's
customary when reporting quotes to clean up the language some to avoid
this.  I know that in journalistic circles that's the case.  I spoke
with a friend who is a writer for a major metropolitan newspaper (no,
not the Daily Planet) who confirmed that ahhs, umms, likes, y'knows
and double negatives get removed from quotes.  To *not* do so is
considered to be an editorial comment about the intelligence/education
of the speaker.  The lead author's feeling is that this isn't
journalism so that convention shouldn't apply to this report.

Personally, I am inclined to clean it up.  As I see it, there's no
advantage to anyone in making our participants look bad, and there is
advantage in keeping them on our good side.  My question is: Is there
a convention in reporting quotes in qualitative research that would
guide our decision?  Do we quote accurately in order to be accurate,
or clean things up as long as the meaning isn't changed?

Thanks,
Scott

Re: Cleaning Up Quotes?

#793

Author: Jakob
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 13:51

33 lines
2458 bytes

Hi Scot McKnight

I am myself doing research on the ground of qualitative interviewing in a
masters thesis on the use of the Internet in everyday relations.

There is a lot of criteria on the point that you are raising. One easily
suggested is that "cleaning up" is allowed as long as it does not have had
an effect on the interpretation/method of analysis and the resulting
"stories" of those.

But sometimes these quotes og "hmm" and "arhh" are very important for the
interpretation. The lead author that you are refering to should know this.

And please be carefull not to use your stereotypes here. I am not (e.g.)
unintelligent if I use a lot of "hmms" or whaterver expressions. This is
just stereotyping, and by using these stereotypes one is missing one of the
true goals of the qualitative research: To be familiar with the ways of the
respondent. These "hmms" could themselves be cultural expressions that you
have not made insigths to yet.

If, however, you want to use these expressions you should be VERY precise in
your transcription. There are many rules and many books on those rules to
follow.

But, in order to be focused on the subject of the analysis it is my opinion
that you can erase most og the "hmms" since they (at least in my line of
study" rarely have any significant influence on the interpretation.

Please excuse my english abilities. I am writing very fast and I am from
Denmark (this should not be an excuse though).

Jakob
Studying M.Sc. Business Administration and International Marketing

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads