Lecture 8

Methods of Data Collection

While deciding about the method of data collection to be used for the study, the
researcher should keep in mind two types of data viz., primary and secondary.
➢ The primary data are those which are collected afresh and for the first time,
and thus happen to be original in character.
➢ The secondary data, on the other hand, are those which have already been
collected by someone else and which have already been passed through the
statistical process.
➢ The researcher would have to decide which sort of data he would be using
(thus collecting) for his study and accordingly he will have to select one or
the other method of data collection.
➢ The methods of collecting primary and secondary data differ since primary
data are to be originally collected, while in case of secondary data the nature
of data collection work is merely that of compilation.

COLLECTION OF PRIMARY DATA

➢ We collect primary data during the course of doing experiments in
experimental research but in case we do research of the descriptive type and
perform surveys, whether sample surveys or census surveys, then we can
obtain primary data either through observation or through direct
communication with respondents in one form or another or through personal
interviews.
➢ This, in other words, means that there are several methods of collecting
primary data, particularly in surveys and descriptive researches. Important
ones are: (i) observation method, (ii) interview method, (iii) through
questionnaires, (iv) through schedules, and (v) other methods which include
(a) warranty cards; (b) distributor audits; (c) pantry audits; (d) consumer
panels; (e) using mechanical devices; (f) through projective techniques; (g)
depth interviews, and (h) content analysis.
➢ We briefly take up each method separately.

1
Observation Method
➢ The observation method is the most commonly used method specially in
studies relating to behavioural sciences.
➢ In a way we all observe things around us, but this sort of observation is not
scientific observation.
➢ Observation becomes a scientific tool and the method of data collection for
the researcher, when it serves a formulated research purpose, is
systematically planned and recorded and is subjected to checks and
controls on validity and reliability.
➢ Under the observation method, the information is sought by way of
investigator’s own direct observation without asking from the respondent.
➢ For instance, in a study relating to consumer behavior, the investigator instead
of asking the brand of wrist watch used by the respondent, may himself look
at the watch.
➢ The main advantage of this method is that subjective bias is eliminated, if
observation is done accurately. Secondly, the information obtained under this
method relates to what is currently happening; it is not complicated by either
the past behavior or future intentions or attitudes. Thirdly, this method is
independent of respondents’ willingness to respond and as such is relatively
less demanding of active cooperation on the part of respondents as happens to
be the case in the interview or the questionnaire method.
➢ This method is particularly suitable in studies which deal with subjects (i.e.,
respondents) who are not capable of giving verbal reports of their feelings
for one reason or the other
➢ However, observation method has various limitations. Firstly, it is an
expensive method. Secondly, the information provided by this method is very
limited. Thirdly, sometimes unforeseen factors may interfere with the
observational task. At times, the fact that some people are rarely accessible
to direct observation creates obstacle for this method to collect data
effectively.
➢ While using this method, the researcher should keep in mind things like:
i. What should be observed?
ii. How the observations should be recorded?
iii. Or how the accuracy of observation can be ensured?
➢ In case the observation is characterized by a careful definition of the units to
be observed, the style of recording the observed information, standardized

2
 conditions of observation and the selection of pertinent data of observation,
then the observation is called as structured observation. But when
observation is to take place without these characteristics to be thought of in
advance, the same is termed as unstructured observation.
➢ Structured observation is considered appropriate in descriptive studies,
whereas in an exploratory study the observational procedure is most likely
to be relatively unstructured.
➢ We often talk about participant and non-participant types of observation
in the context of studies, particularly of social sciences. This distinction
depends upon the observer’s sharing or not sharing the life of the group he
is observing. If the observer observes by making himself, more or less, a
member of the group he is observing so that he can experience what the
members of the group experience, the observation is called as the participant
observation. But when the observer observes as a detached agent without
any attempt on his part to experience through participation what others feel,
the observation of this type is often termed as non-participant observation.

There are several merits of the participant type of observation:

i. The researcher is enabled to record the natural behaviour of the group.
ii. The researcher can even gather information which could not easily be
obtained if he observes in a disinterested fashion.
iii. The researcher can even verify the truth of statements made by
informants in the context of a questionnaire or a schedule.
But there are also certain demerits of this type of observation viz.,
i. the observer may lose the objectivity to the extent he participates
emotionally;
ii. the problem of observation-control is not solved; and
iii. it may narrow-down the researcher’s range of experience.
Controlled and uncontrolled observation.
➢ If the observation takes place in the natural setting, it may be termed as
uncontrolled observation, but when observation takes place according to
definite pre-arranged plans, involving experimental procedure, the same
is then termed controlled observation. In non-controlled observation, no
attempt is made to use precision instruments. The major aim of this type

3
 of observation is to get a spontaneous picture of life and persons. It has a
tendency to supply naturalness and completeness of behaviour, allowing
sufficient time for observing it. But in controlled observation, we use
mechanical (or precision) instruments as aids to accuracy and standardization.
Such observation has a tendency to supply formalized data upon which
generalizations can be built with some degree of assurance. The main pitfall
of non-controlled observation is that of subjective interpretation. There is also
the danger of having the feeling that we know more about the observed
phenomena than we actually do. Generally, controlled observation takes place
in various experiments that are carried out in a laboratory or under controlled
conditions, whereas uncontrolled observation is resorted to in case of
exploratory researches.

Interview Method
The interview method of collecting data involves presentation of oral-verbal stimuli
and reply in terms of oral-verbal responses. This method can be used through
personal interviews and, if possible, through telephone interviews.
(a) Personal interviews:
➢ Personal interview method requires a person known as the interviewer asking
questions generally in a face-to-face contact to the other person or persons.
➢ This sort of interview may be in the form of direct personal investigation or it
may be indirect oral investigation.
➢ In the case of direct personal investigation the interviewer has to collect the
information personally from the sources concerned. He has to be on the spot
and has to meet people from whom data have to be collected. This method is
particularly suitable for intensive investigations.
➢ But in certain cases it may not be possible or worthwhile to contact directly
the persons concerned or on account of the extensive scope of enquiry, the
direct personal investigation technique may not be used. In such cases an
indirect oral examination can be conducted under which the interviewer has
to cross-examine other persons who are supposed to have knowledge about
the problem under investigation and the information, obtained is recorded.
➢ Most of the commissions and committees appointed by government to carry
on investigations make use of this method.

4
➢ The method of collecting information through personal interviews is usually
carried out in a structured way. As such we call the interviews as structured
interviews.
➢ Such interviews involve the use of a set of predetermined questions and of
highly standardized techniques of recording.
➢ Thus, the interviewer in a structured interview follows a rigid procedure laid
down, asking questions in a form and order prescribed.
➢ As against it, the unstructured interviews are characterized by a flexibility of
approach to questioning.
➢ Unstructured interviews do not follow a system of pre-determined questions
and standardized techniques of recording information.
➢ In a non-structured interview, the interviewer is allowed much greater
freedom to ask, in case of need, supplementary questions or at times he may
omit certain questions if the situation so requires.
➢ He may even change the sequence of questions. He has relatively greater
freedom while recording the responses to include some aspects and exclude
others.
➢ But this sort of flexibility results in lack of comparability of one interview
with another and the analysis of unstructured responses becomes much more
difficult and time-consuming than that of the structured responses obtained in
case of structured interviews.
➢ Unstructured interviews also demand deep knowledge and greater skill on the
part of the interviewer. Unstructured interview, however, happens to be the
central technique of collecting information in case of exploratory or
formulative research studies. But in case of descriptive studies, we quite often
use the technique of structured interview because of its being more
economical, providing a safe basis for generalization and requiring relatively
lesser skill on the part of the interviewer.
➢ We may as well talk about focussed interview, clinical interview and the
non-directive interview.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD)

➢ Focussed interview is meant to focus attention on the given experience of the
respondent and its effects.

5
➢ Under it the interviewer has the freedom to decide the manner and sequence
in which the questions would be asked and has also the freedom to explore
reasons and motives.
➢ The main task of the interviewer in case of a focussed interview is to confine
the respondent to a discussion of issues with which he seeks conversance.
➢ Such interviews are used generally in the development of hypotheses and
constitute a major type of unstructured interviews.

Clinical Interview
➢ The clinical interview is concerned with broad underlying feelings or
motivations or with the course of individual’s life experience.
➢ The method of eliciting information under it is generally left to the
interviewer’s discretion. In case of non-directive interview, the interviewer’s
function is simply to encourage the respondent to talk about the given topic
with a bare minimum of direct questioning.
➢ The interviewer often acts as a catalyst to a comprehensive expression of the
respondents’ feelings and beliefs and of the frame of reference within which
such feelings and beliefs take on personal significance.
➢ Despite the variations in interview-techniques, the major advantages and
weaknesses of personal interviews can be enumerated in a general way.
➢ The chief merits of the interview method are as follows:
(i) More information and that too in greater depth can be obtained.
(ii) Interviewer by his own skill can overcome the resistance, if any,
of the respondents; the interview method can be made to yield an
almost perfect sample of the general population.
(iii) There is greater flexibility under this method as the opportunity to
restructure questions is always there, specially in case of
unstructured interviews.
(iv) Observation method can as well be applied to recording verbal
answers to various questions.
(v) Personal information can as well be obtained easily under this
method.
(vi) Samples can be controlled more effectively as there arises no
difficulty of the missing returns; non-response generally remains
very low.

6
 (vii) The interviewer can usually control which person(s) will answer
the questions. This is not possible in mailed questionnaire
approach. If so desired, group discussions may also be held.
(viii) The interviewer may catch the informant off-guard and thus may
secure the most spontaneous reactions than would be the case if
mailed questionnaire is used.
(ix) The language of the interview can be adopted to the ability or
educational level of the person interviewed and as such
misinterpretations concerning questions can be avoided.
(x) The interviewer can collect supplementary information about the
respondent’s personal characteristics and environment which is
often of great value in interpreting results.

But there are also certain weaknesses of the interview method.

Among the important weaknesses, mention may be made of the following:
i. It is a very expensive method, specially when large and widely spread
geographical sample is taken.
ii. There remains the possibility of the bias of interviewer as well as that of the
respondent; there also remains the headache of supervision and control of
interviewers.
iii. Certain types of respondents such as important officials or executives or
people in high income groups may not be easily approachable under this
method and to that extent the data may prove inadequate.
iv. This method is relatively more-time-consuming, specially when the sample is
large and recalls upon the respondents are necessary.
v. The presence of the interviewer on the spot may over-stimulate the
respondent, sometimes even to the extent that he may give imaginary
information just to make the interview interesting.
vi. Under the interview method the organization required for selecting, training
and supervising the field-staff is more complex with formidable problems.
vii. Interviewing at times may also introduce systematic errors.

(b) Telephone interviews:

This method of collecting information consists in contacting respondents on
telephone itself. It is not a very widely used method, but plays important part in
industrial surveys, particularly in developed regions.

7
The chief merits of such a system are:
1. It is more flexible in comparison to mailing method.
2. It is faster than other methods i.e., a quick way of obtaining
information.
3. It is cheaper than personal interviewing method; here the cost per
response is relatively low.
4. Recall is easy; callbacks are simple and economical.
5. There is a higher rate of response than what we have in mailing method;
the non-response is generally very low.
6. Replies can be recorded without causing embarrassment to
respondents.
7. Interviewer can explain requirements more easily.
8. At times, access can be gained to respondents who otherwise cannot be
contacted for one reason or the other.
9. No field staff is required.
[Link] and wider distribution of sample is possible.
But this system of collecting information is not free from demerits. Some of these
may be highlighted.
1. Little time is given to respondents for considered answers; interview
period is not likely to exceed five minutes in most cases.
2. Surveys are restricted to respondents who have telephone facilities.
3. Extensive geographical coverage may get restricted by cost
considerations.
4. It is not suitable for intensive surveys where comprehensive answers
are required to various questions.
5. Possibility of the bias of the interviewer is relatively more.
6. Questions have to be short and to the point; probes are difficult to
handle.