This study contributes to the academic discourse on the evolution of virtual qualitative enquiries in the wake of the accelerated adoption of digital technology following the COVID-19 pandemic. Employing a critical-reflection approach, this study explored the experiences of investigators who conducted 150 soft laddering interviews, either online or face-to-face. The research provides a theoretical reflection on online soft laddering and its application with new technological tools, such as video conferencing and social media, demonstrating how these tools mitigate logistical and relational limitations while enhancing data collection scope and reach. The findings indicate that technological advancements are fostering a gradual hybridisation of digital and physical methods, particularly those utilising synchronous interviews. As the physical and digital realms converge, this trend leads to the phygitalisation of qualitative research.
Bordeaux-RegoB.Nedwed-MachadoF.OliveiraM. O. R. d.AlvesD. A.SlongoL. A. (2011). ‘Why caipirinha?’- the online via chat laddering technique can answer. BAR - Brazilian Administration Review, 8(2), 150–167. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1807-76922011000200003
3.
BrümmerN.ZanderK. (2020). Drivers of organic food choice in Germany—the case of young adults. Organic Agriculture, 10(S1), 57–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-020-00306-2
4.
BrydaG.CostaA. P. (2023). Qualitative research in digital era: Innovations, methodologies and collaborations. Social Sciences, 12(10), 570. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12100570
5.
CluleyR.GreenW.OwenR. (2020). The changing role of the marketing researcher in the age of digital technology: Practitioner perspectives on the digitization of marketing research. International Journal of Market Research, 62(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785319865129
6.
CostaA. (2023). Qualitative research methods: Do digital tools open promising trends? (pp. 67–76). Revista Lusófona de Educação.
7.
DeakinH.WakefieldK. (2014). Skype interviewing: Reflections of two PhD researchers. Qualitative Research, 14(5), 603–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794113488126
8.
DiedericksL.ErasmusA. C.DonoghueS. (2020). Now is the time to embrace interactive electronic applications of Association Pattern Technique. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 56, 102191. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2020.102191
9.
DoddsS.HessA. C. (2021). Adapting research methodology during COVID-19: lessons for transformative service research. Journal of Service Management, 32(2), 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-05-2020-0153
10.
FieldingN. G.LeeR. M.BlankG. (2016). The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957992
11.
GandiaR. M.SuganoJ. Y.de Barros Vilas BoasL. H.MesquitaD. L. (2018). Beverage capsule consumption: A laddering study. British Food Journal, 120(6), 1250–1263. https://doi.org/10.1108/bfj-07-2017-0401
12.
GlaserB. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs forcing. Sociology Press.
13.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine.
14.
GruberT.SzmiginI.ReppelA. E.VossR. (2008). Designing and conducting online interviews to investigate interesting consumer phenomena. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 11(3), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750810879002
15.
GruberT.VossR. (2007). Online laddering. In GablerBuberR.HolzmüllerH. H. (Eds.), Qualitative marktforschung (pp. 569–581). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
16.
GrunertK. G.GrunertS. C. (1995). Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and methodological problems. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(3), 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(95)00022-t
17.
GutmanJ. (1982). A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes. Journal of Marketing, 46(2), 60–72. https://doi.org/10.2307/3203341
18.
HannaP. (2012). Using internet technologies (such as Skype) as a research medium: A research note. Qualitative Research, 12(2), 239–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111426607
19.
HowlettM. (2022). Looking at the ‘field’ through a Zoom lens: Methodological reflections on conducting online research during a global pandemic. Qualitative Research: Quaternary Research, 22(3), 387–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120985691
20.
JennerB. M.MyersK. C. (2019). Intimacy, rapport, and exceptional disclosure: A comparison of in-person and mediated interview contexts. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22(2), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1512694
21.
KaciakE.CullenC. W.SaganA. (2015). A comparison of full and abbreviated formats of hard laddering. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 14(3), 191–214. https://doi.org/10.1362/147539215x14441363630792
22.
KhenferJ. (2023). A hands-on guide to conducting field experiments using mobile applications. International Journal of Market Research, 65(4), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853231165635
23.
LobeB.MorganD.HoffmanK. A. (2020). Qualitative data collection in an era of social distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920937875
24.
LobeB.MorganD. L.HoffmanK. (2022). A systematic comparison of in-person and video-based online interviewing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221127068
25.
TetiM.SchatzE.LiebenbergL. (2020). Methods in the Time of COVID-19: The Vital Role of Qualitative Inquiries. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920920962
26.
Veludo-de-OliveiraT. M.Akemi IkedaA.Cortez CampomarM. (2006). Laddering in the practice of marketing research: Barriers and solutions. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 9(3), 297–306. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750610671707
27.
O’ConnorH.MadgeC. (2017). Online interviewing. In FieldingN. G.LeeR. M.BlankG. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of online research methods (p. 684). Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957992
28.
ParkH. E.YapS. F. C.MakkarM. (2019). A laddering study of motivational complexities in mobile shopping. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 37(2), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1108/mip-03-2018-0104
29.
RahmanS. A.TuckermanL.VorleyT.GherhesC. (2021). Resilient research in the field: Insights and lessons from adapting qualitative research projects during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211016106
30.
RaniaN.CoppolaI.PinnaL. (2021). Adapting qualitative methods during the COVID-19 era: Factors to consider for successful use of online photovoice. Qualitative Report, 26(8), 2711–2729. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4863
31.
ReynoldsT. J.GutmanJ. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. Journal of Advertising Research, 1(28), 11–31.
32.
RietzT.MaedcheA. (2023). Ladderbot—a conversational agent for human-like online laddering interviews. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 171, Article 102969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102969
33.
RobertsJ. K.PavlakisA. E.RichardsM. P. (2021). It’s More Complicated Than It Seems: Virtual Qualitative Research in the COVID-19 Era. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211002959
34.
SarsamS. M.Al-SamarraieH.AlzahraniA. I.WrightB. (2020). Sarcasm detection using machine learning algorithms in twitter: A systematic review. International Journal of Market Research, 62(5), 578–598. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785320921779
35.
SeitzS. (2016). Pixilated partnerships, overcoming obstacles in qualitative interviews via Skype: A research note. Qualitative Research, 16(2), 229–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794115577011
36.
ShethJ. (2020). Impact of Covid-19 on consumer behavior: Will the old habits return or die?Journal of Business Research, 117, 280–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.059
37.
SinkovicsR. R.PenzE.GhauriP. N. (2008). Enhancing the trustworthiness of qualitative research in international business. Management International Review, 48(6), 689–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-008-0103-z
StegL. (2005). Car use: Lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(2–3), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2004.07.001
40.
Ter HofstedeF.AudenaertA.SteenkampJ. B. E. M.WedelM. (1998). An investigation into the association pattern technique as a quantitative approach to measuring means-end chains. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-8116(97)00029-3
41.
VossR.SchneiderV. (2014). Using laddering to understand the social media network Google +. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(10), 121–130.
42.
VriensM.HofstedeF. T. (2000). Linking attributes, benefits, and consumer values. Marketing Research, 12(3), 4–10.
43.
We Are Social (2024) (In press). Global Digital Report (2024th ed.). We Are Social.
44.
WellerS. (2017). Using internet video calls in qualitative (longitudinal) interviews: Some implications for rapport. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(6), 613–625. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1269505
45.
ŻadkowskaM.DowgiałłoB.GajewskaM.Herzberg-KuraszM.KosteckaM. (2022). The sociological confessional: A reflexive process in the transformation from face-to-face to online interview. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21(1), Article 160940692210847. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221084785
