Qualitative research is often conceptualized as inherently small-scale research, while larger-scale projects are often assumed to be solely the domain of quantitative researchers, The aim of this paper is to discuss qualitative research done on a comparatively larger scale. In addition to the centrality of a qualitative perspective, the research incorporates some quantitative elements into the design, data collection, and analysis. Larger-scale qualitative research shares some of the challenges and promises of smaller-scale qualitative work. However, there are additional challenges specific to the scale of qualitative research such as data overload, time constraints, and mentoring large research teams. Yet large samples can prove to be essential for enabling researchers to conduct comparative research, whether that be cross-national research or cross-cultural research.
References
1.
Abbott-ChapmanJ., & RobertsonM. (2009): Leisure activities, place and identity. In: FurlongA. (ed.): Handbook of youth and young adulthood: New perspectives and agendas.London: Routledge
2.
AdlerP. (1990): Ethnographic research on hidden populations: Penetrating the drug world. In: LambertE.Y. (ed.): The collection and interpretation of data from hidden populations.Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse
3.
AdlerP.A., & AdlerP. (2008): Of rhetoric and representation: The four faces of ethnography.Sociological Quarterly49(1): 1–30
4.
AgarM. (1973): Ripping and running: A for-mal ethnography of urban heroin addicts.New York: Seminar Press
5.
AgarM. (1991): The right brain strikes back. In: FieldingN.G., & LeeR.M. (eds): Using computers in qualitative research.London: SAGE Publications
6.
AgarM. (1996): Recasting the “ethno” in “epidemiology”.Medical Anthropology16: 391–403
7.
AgarM. (2006): Culture: Can you take it anywhere? Invited lecture presented at the Gevirtz graduate school of education, University of California at Santa Barbara.International Journal of Qualitative Methods5(2: 1–12). [Online: http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/IJQM/article/view/4384]
8.
ArcuryT.A., & QuandtS.A. (1999): Participant recruitment for qualitative research: A site-based approach to community research in complex societies.Human Organization58(2): 128–133
9.
AtkinsonR., & FlintJ. (2001): Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball research strategies.Social Research UPDATE 33. [Online: http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU33.pdf]
10.
BazeleyP. (2004): Issues in mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches to research. In: BuberR., & GadnerJ., & RichardsL. (eds): Applying qualitative methods to marketing management research.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
11.
BeckerH.S. (1953): Becoming a marijuana user.American Journal of Sociology59: 235–242
12.
BeckerH.S. (1963): Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance.New York: The Free Press of Glencoe
13.
BerryJ.W. (2005): Acculturation: Living successfully in two cultures.International Journal of Intercultural Relations29(6): 697–712
14.
BhattacharyaG. (2002): Drug abuse risks for acculturating immigrant adolescents: Case study of Asian Indians in the United States.Health & Social Work27(3): 175–183
15.
BiernackiP., & WaldorfD. (1981): Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling.Sociological Methods & Research10(2): 141–163
16.
BluthenthalR.N., & WattersJ.K. (1995): Multimethod research from targeted sampling to HIV risk environments. In: LambertE.Y., & AsheryR.S., & NeedleR.H. (eds): Qualitative methods in drug abuse and HIV research.Rockville: National Institute on Drug Abuse
BourdieuP. (1990): In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology.Stanford: Stanford University Press
19.
BourgoisP. (1996): In search of respect: Selling crack in el barrio.New York: Cambridge University Press
20.
BrannenJ. (2005): Mixed methods research: A discussion paper: ESRC National Centre for Research Materials. NCRM Methods Review Papers, NCRM/005
21.
BrannenJ. (2008): The practice of a mixed methods research strategy: Personal, professional and project considerations. In: BergmanM.M. (ed.): Advances in mixed methods research.Los Angeles: SAGE Publications
22.
BrowneK. (2005): Snowball sampling: Using social networks to research non-heterosexual women.International Journal of Social Research Methodology8(1): 47–60
23.
BrymanA. (2008): Why do researchers integrate/combine/mesh/blend/mix/merge/fuse quantitative and qualitative research? In: BergmanM.M. (ed.): Advances in mixed methods research.Los Angeles: SAGE Publications
24.
BucholtzM. (2002): Youth and cultural practice.Annual Review of Anthropology31: 525–552
25.
CarlsonR.G., & WangJ., & SiegalH.A., & FalckR.S., & GuoJ. (1994): An ethnographic approach to targeted sampling: Problems and solutions in aids prevention research among injection drug and crack-cocaine users.Human Organization53(3): 279–286
26.
CarringtonB., & WilsonB. (2002): Global clubcultures: Cultural flows and late modern dance music culture. In: CieslikM., & PollockG. (eds): Young people in risk society: The restructuring of youth identities and transitions in late modernity.Burlington: Ashgate Publishing
27.
ClattsM.C., & WelleD.L., & GoldsamtL.A. (2001): Reconceptualizing the interaction of drug and sexual risk among MSM speed users: Notes toward an ethno-epidemiology.AIDS and Behavior5(2): 115–130
28.
CohenA. (1955): Delinquent boys: The culture of the gang.Glencoe: Free Press
29.
CollinM. (1997): Altered state: The story of ecstasy culture and acid house.London: Serpent's Tail
30.
CreswellJ.W. (2003): Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
31.
CreswellJ.W., & TashakkoriA., & JensenK.D., & ShapleyK.L. (2003): Teaching mixed methods research: Practices, dilemmas, and challenges. In: TeddlieC., & TashakkoriA. (eds): Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research.Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
32.
CritcherC. (2000): ‘Still raving’: Social reaction to ecstasy.Leisure Studies19(3): 145–162
33.
DaviesC.A. (1999): Reflexive ethnography: A guide to researching selves and others.London: Routledge
34.
DemantJ., & RavnS., & ThorsenS.K. (2010): Club studies: Methodological perspectives for researching drug use in a central youth social space.Leisure Studies29(3): 241–252
35.
DunlapE., & JohnsonB.D. (1999): Gaining access to hidden populations: Strategies for gaining cooperation of drug sellers/dealers and their families in ethnographic research.Drugs & Society14(1/2): 127–149
36.
EllenR.F. (1984): Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct.London: Academic Press
37.
EllisC., & BochnerA. (2002): Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In: DenzinN., & LincolnY. (eds): Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials.Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
38.
EttorreE., & MilesS. (2002): Young people, drug use and the consumption of health. In: HendersenS., & PetersenA. (eds): Consuming health: The commodification of health care.London: Routledge
39.
FaganJ. (1989): The social organization of drug use and drug dealing among urban gangs.Criminology27(4): 633–669
40.
FazioA., & HuntG., & MoloneyM. (2011): “It's one of the better drugs to use”: Perceptions of cocaine use among gay and bisexual Asian American men.Qualitative Health Research21(5): 625–641
41.
FazioA., & Joe-LaidlerK., & MoloneyM., & HuntG. (2010): Gender, sexuality, and ethnicity as factors of club drug use among Asian Americans.Journal of Drug Issues40(2): 1045–1072
42.
FeldmanH.W., & AgarM.H., & BeschnerG.M. (eds) (1979): Angel dust: An ethnographic study of PCP users.Lexington: Lexington Books
43.
FurlongA., & CartmelF. (1997): Young people and social change: Individualization and risk in late modernity.Buckingham: Open University Press
44.
GeertzC. (1973): The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays.New York: Basic Books, Inc.
45.
GreeneJ.C., & CaracelliV.J. (1997): Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-method evaluation. In: GreeneJ.C., & CaracelliV.J. (eds): Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenged and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
46.
GreeneJ.C., & CaracelliV.J., & GrahamW.F. (1989): Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis11(3): 255–274
47.
GriffithsP., & GossopM., & PowisB., & StrangJ. (1993): Reaching hidden populations of drug users by privileged access interviewers: Methodological and practical issues.Addiction88(12): 1617–1626
48.
HagedornJ.M. (ed.) (2007): Gangs in the global city: Alternatives to criminology.Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press
49.
HahmH.C., & LahiffM., & GutermanN.B. (2004): Asian American adolescents’ acculturation, binge drinking, and alcohol- and tobacco-using peers.Journal of Community Psychology32(3): 295–308
50.
HammersleyM., & AtkinsonP. (1983): Ethnography: Principles in practice.London: Routledge
51.
HeckathornD.D. (1997): Respondent-driven sampling: A new approach to the study of hidden populations.Social Problems44(2): 174–199
52.
HeckathornD.D. (2002): Respondent-driven sampling II: Deriving valid population estimates from chain-referral samples of hidden populations.Social Problems49(1): 11–34
53.
HierS.P. (2002): Raves, risks and the ecstasy panic: A case study in the subversive nature of moral regulation.Canadian Journal of Sociology27: 33–57
54.
HuntG., & BarkerJ.C. (2001): Socio-cultural anthropology and alcohol and drug research: Towards a unified theory.Social Science & Medicine53(2): 165–188
55.
HuntG., & EvansK. (2003): Dancing and drugs: A cross-national exploration.Journal of Contemporary Drug Problems30: 779–814
56.
HuntG., & EvansK. (2008): ‘The great un-mentionable’: Exploring the pleasures and benefits of ecstasy from the perspectives of drug users.Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy15(4): 329–349
57.
HuntG., & EvansK., & WuE., & ReyesA. (2005): Asian American youth, the dance scene, and club drugs.Journal of Drug Issues35(4): 695–732
58.
HuntG., & Joe-LaidlerK., & MoloneyM., & van der PoelA., & van de MheenD. (2011): Dance drug scenes: A global perspective. In: HuntG., & MilhetM., & BergeronH. (eds): Drugs and culture: Knowledge, consumption and policy.Surrey: Ashgate
HuntG., & MoloneyM., & EvansK. (2011): “How Asian am I?”: Asian American youth cultures, drug use, and ethnic identity construction.Youth & Society43(1): 274–304
63.
HunterA., & BrewerJ. (2003): Multimethod research in sociology. In: TashakkoriA., & TeddlieC. (eds): Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research.Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
64.
JacksonP. (2004): Inside clubbing: Sensual experiments in the art of being human.Oxford: Berg
65.
JenkinsP. (1999): Synthetic panics: The symbolic politics of designer drugs.New York: New York University Press
66.
JoeK. (1993): Issues in accessing and studying ethnic youth gangs.The Gang Journal1(2): 9–23
67.
Joe-LaidlerK., & HuntG. (2008): Sit down to float: The cultural meaning of ketamine use in Hong Kong.Addiction Research & Theory16(3): 259–271
68.
Joe-LaidlerK., & HuntG., & MoloneyM. (Forthcoming): “Tuned out or tuned in”: Spirituality and youth drug use in global times
69.
JohnsonB.D., & DunlapE., & BenoitE. (2010): Organizing mountains of words for data analysis, both qualitative and quantitative.Substance Use & Misuse45(5): 648–670
70.
KelleU. (ed.) (1995): Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theories, methods and practice.London: SAGE Publications
71.
KelleU. (2004): Computer-assisted analysis of qualitative data. In: FlickU., & von KardorffE., & SteinkeI. (eds): A companion to qualitative research.London: SAGE Publications
72.
KelleU., & ErzbergerC. (2004): Qualitative and quantitative methods: Not in opposition. In: FlickU., & von KardorffE., & SteinkeI. (eds): A companion to qualitative research.London: SAGE Publications
73.
KellyB.C. (2010): Sampling and recruitment issues in qualitative drugs research: Reflections on the study of club drug users in metro New York.Substance Use & Misuse45(5): 671–683
74.
KellyP. (2000): Youth as an artefact of expertise: Problematizing the practice of youth studies in an age of uncertainty.Journal of Youth Studies3(3): 301–315
75.
MairaS., & SoepE. (eds) (2005): Youthscapes: The popular, the national, the global.Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press
76.
MalbonB. (1999): Clubbing: Dancing, ecstasy and vitality.New York: Routledge
77.
MaxwellJ.A., & LoomisD.M. (2003): Mixed methods design: An alternative approach. In: TashakkoriA., & TeddlieC. (eds): Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research.Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
78.
McDonaldM. (1994): Gender, drink and drugs.Oxford: Berg
79.
McKeganeyN. (1995): Quantitative and qualitative research in the addictions: An un-helpful divide.Addiction90(6): 749–751
80.
McLellanE., & MacQueenK.M., & NeidigJ.L. (2003): Beyond the qualitative interview: Data preparation and transcription.Field Methods15(1): 63–84
81.
MeashamF., & AldridgeJ., & ParkerH. (2001): Dancing on drugs: Risk, health and hedonism in the British club scene.New York: Free Association Books
82.
MilesM.B., & HubermanA.M. (1994): Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source-book.Newbury Park: SAGE Publications
83.
MilesS. (2000): Youth lifestyles in a changing world.Philadelphia: Open University Press
84.
MitchellW., & BuntonR., & GreenE. (eds) (2004): Young people, risk and leisure: Constructing identities in everyday life.Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan
85.
MoloneyM., & HuntG. (Forthcoming): Consumption, taste, and style: Constructing intra-ethnic boundaries in an Asian American youth culture.
86.
MoloneyM., & HuntG., & EvansK. (2008): Asian American identity and drug consumption: From acculturation to normalization.Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse7(4): 376–403
87.
MorganD.L. (1998): Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research.Qualitative Health Research8(3): 362–376
O'MalleyP., & ValverdeM. (2004): Pleasure, freedom and drugs: The uses of ‘pleasure’ in liberal governance of drug and alcohol consumption.Sociology38(1): 25–42
91.
OnwuegbuzieA.J., & LeechN.L. (2004): Enhancing the interpretation of “significant” findings: The role of mixed methods research.The Qualitative Report9(4): 770–792
92.
OnwuegbuzieA.J., & LeechN.L. (2005): On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies.International Journal of Social Research Methodology8(5): 375–387
93.
PageJ.B., & SingerM. (2010): Comprehending drug use: Ethnographic research at the social margins.New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press
94.
ParkerH., & AldridgeJ., & MeashamF. (1998): Illegal leisure: The normalization of adolescent recreational drug use.London: Routledge
95.
PetersonJ.A., & ReisingerH.S., & SchwartzR.P., & MitchellS.G., & KellyS.M., & BrownB.S., & AgarM.H. (2008): Targeted sampling in drug abuse research: A review and case study.Field Methods20(2): 155–170
96.
PilkingtonH., & BliudinaU. (2002): Introduction. In: PilkingtonH., & Omel'chenkoE., & FlynnM., & BliudinaU., & StarkovaE. (eds): Looking West?: Cultural globalization and Russian youth cultures.University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press
97.
PilkingtonH., & Omel'chenkoE., & FlynnM., & BliudinaU., & StarkovaE. (eds) (2002): Looking West? Cultural globalization and Russian youth cultures.University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press
98.
PolskyN. (1967): Hustlers, beats and others.Harmondsworth: Penguin
99.
Ramirez-VallesJ., & HeckathornD.D., & VázquezR., & DiazR.M., & CampbellR.T. (2005): From networks to populations: The development and application of respondent-driven sampling among IDUs and Latino gay men.AIDS and Behavior9(4): 387–402
100.
ReynoldsS. (1998): Energy fash.London: Picador
101.
RhodesT. (2000): The multiple roles of qualitative research in understanding and responding to illicit drug use. In: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (ed.): Understanding and responding to drug use: The role of qualitative research. EMCDDA Scientific Monograph Series, no 4.Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
102.
RiefS. (2009): Club cultures: Boundaries, identities, and otherness.New York: Routledge
103.
RossmanG.B., & WilsonB.L. (1985): Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study.Evaluation Review9(5): 627–643
104.
RossmanG.B., & WilsonB.L. (1994): Numbers and words revisited: Being “Shame-lessly eclectic”.Quality & Quantity28(3): 315–327
105.
SalantT., & LauderdaleD.S. (2003): Measuring culture: A critical review of acculturation and health in Asian immigrant populations.Social Science & Medicine57: 71–90
106.
SeidelJ. (1991): Method and madness in the application of computer technology to qualitative data analysis. In: FieldingN.G., & LeeR.M. (eds): Using computers in qualitative research.London: SAGE Publications
107.
ShinerM., & NewburnT. (1999): Taking tea with noel: The place and meaning of drug use in everyday life. In: SouthN. (ed.): Drugs: Cultures, controls and everyday life.London: SAGE Publications
108.
SingerM. (1999): Studying hidden populations. In: SchensulJ.J., & LeCompteM.D., & TrotterR.T., & CromleyE.K., & SingerM. (eds): Mapping social networks, spatial data and hidden populations.London: Altamira, Sage Publications
109.
StrathernM. (1987): Relations without substance. In: LindstromL. (ed.): Drugs in Western Pacific societies: Relations of substance.Lanham: University Press of America
110.
StueveA., & O'DonnellL.N., & DuranR., & DovalA.S., & BlomeJ. (2001): Time-space sampling in minority communities: Results with young Latino men who have sex with men.American Journal of Public Health91(6): 922–926
111.
TashakkoriA., & TeddlieC. (eds) (2003): Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research.Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
112.
TeddlieC., & TashakkoriA. (2003): Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In: TashakkoriA., & TeddlieC. (eds): Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research.Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
113.
WangJ., & CarlsonR.G., & FalckR.S., & SiegalH.A., & RahmanA., & LiL. (2005): Respondent-driven sampling to recruit MDMA users: A methodological assessment.Drug and Alcohol Dependence78: 147–157
