Qualitative research in probation is predominantly interview-based. This article explores the use of method triangulation in Belgian probation research. At first, a methodological question remains: is the use of a wider range of methods better? Or is it simply more?
Drawing from the author's experience in researching Belgian probation officers' daily work, the article concludes that using method triangulation (file analyses, interviews and observations) is a valuable approach that does not merely duplicate data, but also offers complementary insights and understandings, and can reveal some important discrepancies that might have remained uncovered through reliance on interviews alone.
AndrewsD.BontaJ. (2006) The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Cincinnati: Anderson.
2.
AtkinsonP. (1997) ‘Narrative turn or blind alley?’, Qualitative Health Research, 7: 325–344.
3.
AtkinsonP.CoffeyA. (2002) ‘Revisiting the relationship between participant observation and interviewing’, in GubriumJ.HolsteinJ. (eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 801–814). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
4.
BauwensA. (2009) ‘Probation officers' perspectives on recent Belgian changes in the probation service’, Probation Journal, 56 (3): 257–268.
5.
BauwensA. (forthcoming) The Transformation of Offender Rehabilitation. Doctoral thesis, Department of Criminology, Free University of Brussels.
6.
BeckerH.GeerB. (1957) ‘Participant observation and interviewing: A comparison’, Human Organization, 16: 28–32.
7.
BeckerH.GeerB. (1970) ‘Participant observation and interviewing: A comparison’, in FilsteadW. (ed.) Qualitative Methodology, reprint of 1957, (pp. 133–142). Chicago: Markham.
8.
BrewerJ.HunterA. (1989) Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
9.
BuckinghamD. (2000) The Making of Citizens: Young People, News and Politics.London and New York: Routledge.
10.
CampbellD.FiskeD. (1959) ‘Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait — Multi method matrix’, Psychological Bulletin, 56: 81–105.
11.
ClancyA.HudsonK.MaguireM.PeakeR.RaynorP.VanstoneM.KynchJ. (2006) Getting Out and Staying Out: results of the prisoner resettlement Pathfiders.Bristol: Policy Press.
12.
CohenS. (1985) Visions of social control: crime, punishment and classification, Cambridge: Polity Press.
13.
CreswellJ. (2003) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
14.
DaviesM. (1986) The essential social worker (2nd ed.). Aldershot: Gower.
15.
DenzinN. (1978) The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
16.
DenzinN. (1989) The Research Act (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17.
DenzinN.LincolnY. (2000) The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: DenzinN.LincolnY. (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.) (pp. 1–28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
18.
DiefenbachT. (2009) ‘Are case studies more than sophisticated storytelling?: Methodological problems of qualitative empirical research mainly based on semi-structured interviews, Quality Quantity, 43: 875–894.
19.
DreyfusH.DreyfusS. (1986) Mind over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer. New York: Free Press.
20.
FlaskasC. (2007) ‘Systemic and Psychoanalytic Ideas: Using Knowledge in Social Work’, Journal of Social Work Practice, 21 (2): 131–47.
21.
FlickU. (1992) ‘Triangulation Revisited: Strategy of Validation or Alternative?’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 22 (2): 175–97.
22.
FlickU. (1998) An Introduction to Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Applications. London: Sage Publications.
23.
FontanaA.FreyJ. (2000) ‘The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text’, in DenzinN.LincolnY. (eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
24.
FookJ.RyanM.HawkinsL. (2000) Professional Expertise: Practice, Theory and Education for Working in Uncertainty. London: Whiting and Birch.
25.
GoodsteinL. (1983). ‘Managers, values, and organizational development’, Group & Organizational Studies, 8 (2), 203–220.
26.
GrayM.McDonaldC. (2006) Pursuing good practice? The limits of evidence-based practice, Journal of Social Work, 6 (1): 7–20.
27.
GruysM.StewartS.GoodsteinJ.BingM.WicksA. (2008) ‘Values enactment in organizations: A multi-level examination’, Journal of Management, 34 (4): 806–843.
28.
GubriumJ.HolsteinJ. (2002) Handbook of interview research: context and method.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
29.
HallidayS.BurnsN.HuttonN.McNeillF.TataC. (2008) ‘Shadow writing and participant observation: A study of criminal justice social work aroundsentencing’, Journal of Law and Society, 35 (2): 189–213.
30.
HolsteinJ.GubriumJ. (1995) The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
31.
HoweD. (1991) ‘Knowledge, power, and the shape of social work practice, in DaviesM. (ed.), The sociology of social work (pp. 202–223). London: Routledge.
32.
JanesickV. (1994) ‘The Dance of Qualitative Research Design: Metaphor, Methodolatry, and Meaning’, in DenzinN.LincolnY. (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 209–219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
33.
KellehearA. (1993) The Unobtrusive Researcher: A Guide to Methods. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
34.
KopinakJ. (1999) ‘The use of triangulation in a study of refugee well-being’, Quality Quantity, 33 (2): 169–183.
35.
LauwersC. (2008) ‘Chapter 3 Belgium’, in van KalmthoutA.DurnescuI. (eds.), Probation in Europe (pp. 75–108).Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers/CEP.
36.
LazarusR. (1998) The Life and Work of an Eminent Psychologist: Autobiography of Richard S. Lazarus, New York: Springer.
37.
MairG. (2004) ‘What works: A review from the chiefs’, in MairG. (ed.) What matters in probation (pp. 255–276). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
38.
McIvorG. (1995) ‘Practitioner research in probation’, in McGuireJ. (ed.), What Works? Reducing offending (pp. 209–219).Chichester: Wiley.
39.
McNeillF.BurnsN.HallidayS.HuttonN.TataC. (2009) ‘Risk, responsibility and reconfiguration: Penal adaptation and misadaptation’, Punishment & Society, 11 (4): 419–442.
40.
MilesM.HubermanA. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
41.
PatenaudeA. (2001). ‘Analysis of issues affecting correctional officer retention within the Arkansas Department of Correction’, Corrections Management Quarterly, 5 (1), 48–66.
42.
PatenaudeA. (2004) ‘No Promises, But I'm Willing to Listen and Tell What I Hear: Conducting Qualitative Research among Prison Inmates and Staff’, The Prison Journal, 84 (4): 69S–91S.
43.
PattonM., (ed.) (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
44.
RaynorP.UgwudikeP.VanstoneM. (forthcoming) ‘Skills and strategies in probation supervision: The Jersey study’ in McNeillF.RaynorP.TrotterC. (eds.) Offender Supervision: New directions in Theory, Research and Practice, Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
45.
RaynorP.VanstoneM. (1996) ‘Reasoning and Rehabilitation in Britain: The results of the Straight Thinking On Probation (STOP) programme’, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology40: 272–284.
46.
RaynorP.VanstoneM. (1997) Straight Thinking On Probation (STOP): The Mid Glamorgan Experiment. Probation Studies Unit Report No. 4. Oxford: University of Oxford Centre for Criminological Research.
47.
RosarioM.ShinnM.MorchH.HuckabeeC. (1988). Gender differences in coping and social supports: Testing socialization and role constraint theories, Journal of Community Psychology, 16: 55–69.
48.
SharpH. (1943). Photogrammetry (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
49.
ShawI. (2005) ‘Practitioner research: Evidence or critique?’, British Journal of Social Work, 35 (8): 1231–1248.
50.
SheppardM. (1995) ‘Social Work, Social Science and Practice Wisdom’, British Journal of Social Work, 25 (3): 265–293.
51.
SilvermanD. (2000) ‘The contested character of qualitative research’, in SilvermanD. (ed.), Doing qualitative research (pp. 283–296). London: Sage Publications.
52.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (2003) Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
53.
TrowM. (1957) ‘Comment on 'Participant observation and interviewing: A comparison’, Human Organization, 16: 33–35.
54.
WardT. (2002) ‘The management of risk and the design of good lives’, Australian Psychologist, 37 (3): 172–179.
55.
WardT.BrownM. (2004) ‘The Good Lives Model and conceptual issues in offender rehabilitation’, Psychology, Crime & Law, 10 (3): 243–257.
56.
WardT.MarunaS. (2007) Rehabilitation (Key ideas in criminology series). London: Routledge.
57.
WardT.StewartC. (2003) ‘Criminogenic needs and human needs: A theoretical model’, Psychology, Crime & Law, 9 (3): 219–224.
58.
WebbE.CampbellD.SchwartzR.SechrestL. (1966) Unobtrusive Measures: Non-reactive Research in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.
59.
WillisA. (1983) ‘The balance between care and control in probation: A research note’, British Journal of Social Work, 13: 339–346.
60.
WolcottH. (1995) The art of fieldwork. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
