17- Evgeniya
Nikolaeva y .docx
Julio-Diciembre 2015
Vol. 5 No. 2
Octubre-diciembre 2024
Vol. 14 No. 3
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
782
Interacción y Perspectiva Dep. Legal pp 201002Z43506
Revista de Trabajo Social ISSN 2244-808X
Vol. 14 No3 782-800 pp. Copyright © 2024
Octubre-diciembre
ARTÍCULO DE INVESTIGACIÓN
Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance internacional en la
investigación en ciencias sociales
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11163251
Aishwarya U Patil*, Sanu Rani Paul**, Hifajatali Sayyed***,
K.D.V. Prasad****
Resumen
La investigación cualitativa durante una emergencia de salud pública (ESP) como la
pandemia de COVID-19 va a la zaga de otros enfoques de investigación en términos de
entrega, confiabilidad y oportunidad de los hallazgos. El distanciamiento social y a las
limitaciones de viaje, a los investigadores de las ciencias sociales, especialmente a los
cualitativos, les resulta difícil planificar y realizar investigaciones durante la pandemia y
surge la pregunta de cómo la investigación cualitativa, que se basa en la conexión
humana, la escucha comprensiva y la "descripción rica", puede crecer en una cultura en
la que los individuos están socialmente desconectados unos de otros. Los investigadores
en ciencias sociales se ven obligados a renunciar a realizar trabajo de campo, que es el
componente más importante de la investigación cualitativa, y a recurrir a la recopilación
de datos en línea. Al llevar a cabo la investigación durante esos momentos, los
investigadores se enfrentan a obligaciones contradictorias de preservar los derechos del
sujeto con respecto a la realización del estudio y el uso de los resultados. Esta
investigación examina el papel de la investigación cualitativa y las metodologías y
estándares éticos que pueden ser adoptados por los investigadores en tiempos de
Emergencia de Salud Pública (ESP) para superar los desafíos que se enfrentan en
situaciones como la del analfabetismo digital y las normas de distanciamiento físico de
los entrevistados. Se argumenta que, existen beneficios potenciales del uso de la
recopilación virtual de datos durante las emergencias sanitarias.
Palabras clave: COVID-19, Emergencia de Salud Pública de Importancia Internacional,
investigación cualitativa, investigación en línea, investigación en ciencias sociales,
pandemia
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
783
Abstract
Impact of International Public Health Emergencies on Social Science Research
Qualitative research during a public health emergency (PSE) such as the COVID-19
pandemic lags behind other research approaches in terms of delivery, reliability, and
timeliness of findings. Due to social distancing and travel limitations, social science
researchers, especially qualitative ones, are finding it difficult to plan and conduct
research during the pandemic and the question arises as to how qualitative research,
which relies on human connection, sympathetic listening, and "rich description," can
grow in a culture where individuals are socially disconnected from one another. Social
science researchers are forced to forgo fieldwork, which is the most important
component of qualitative research, and resort to online data collection. In conducting
research during those times, researchers are faced with conflicting obligations to
preserve the subject's rights regarding the conduct of the study and the use of the
results. This research examines the role of qualitative research and the methodologies
and ethical standards that can be adopted by researchers in times of Public Health
Emergency (PSE) to overcome the challenges faced in situations such as digital illiteracy
and physical distancing norms of interviewees. It is argued that there are potential
benefits of using virtual data collection during health emergencies.
Keywords: COVID-19, Public Health Emergency of International Concern, qualitative
research, online research, social science research, pandemic.
Recibido: 9/03/2024 Aceptado: 29/04/2024
*Legal Manger-OnePaper Research Analyst Pvt. Ltd. Bangaluru, India. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-
0000-0082-4227 E-mail: patilaishwarya019@gmail.com
**Assistant Professor, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, SymbiosisInternational (Deemed) University, Pune,
India. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4944-4238 . E-mail: sanu.paul@slsh.edu.in
***Assistant Professor, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, Symbiosis International (Deemed) University, Pune,
India. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9472-6950 . E-mail: hifajatali@slsh.edu.in
****Assistant Professor, Symbiosis School of Business Management, Hyderabad, Symbiosis International
(Deemed) University, Pune, India. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9921-476X . E-mail:
kdv.prasad@sibmhyd.edu.in
1. Introduction
The Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) is a formal
declaration made by the World Health Organization (WHO) of an extraordinary event
that constitutes a serious, sudden, unusual, or unexpected public health risk beyond the
national border of the affected state through the international spread of a communicable
disease, thus requiring immediate international attention and concerted effort from the
international community (David N. Durrheima, et al., 2019).Proclaiming PHEIC is a core
part of the International Health Regulations (IHR) established by World Health
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
784
Organization (WHO), which is the governing framework for ensuring global health
security (Lawrence O. Gostin, et Al 2019). The IHR establishes a comprehensive legal
framework that specifies the rights and duties of nations in the management of public
health crises and emergencies with the potential to transcend international boundaries
(Durrheima, N. D. et al. 2019). It is the duty of the WHO Director General to determine
whether an occurrence falls into this category. To do so, the IHR Emergency Committee,
a group of highly qualified individuals, must first be assembled (Wilder-Smith A, Osman
S., 2020). PHEIC might include not only infectious illnesses but also incidents that were
induced by chemical agents or radioactive elements. All PHEIC announcements have
ever since been made for infectious illnesses caused by viruses, and in the last 15 years,
a total of six PHEIC announcements have been made, including COVID-19 in 2020.
Epidemics quickly traverse international boundaries and pose danger to the economic
and geographical stability of area (Verikios, G., et Al (2015). Pandemics have detrimental
effects on society, the economy, and politics in addition to the incapacitating and leaving
deadly effects on individuals who are directly impacted by them. For instance, in 2009,
the pandemic influenza, commonly known as H1N1, had a significant influence not only
on the death rate but also on healthcare systems, animal health, agricultural practices,
educational institutions, transportation networks, tourism, and the economy. Because of
global health crises, people from many walks of life are confronted with challenges;
many of these challenges are overcome by adopting innovative ways with the help of
scientific and technological advancements. These types of public health crises bring
about significant setbacks for research institutes of every kind which include delay or
cessation of ongoing research activities, disruption of conferences and seminars etc.
The qualitative research that emerged in the early 20th century by sociologists and
anthropologists has challenges and advantages at every point in time (Denzin, N. K. et
al. 2005). During 1950–1970, often referred to as the “golden era of qualitative
research,” there were different coding systems used for materials, most of which were
gathered via participant observation, which in turn drove data analysis (Becker, H. S.,
et al. 1961). Between 1970 and 1986, the first computer-assisted data analysis software
emerged (Geertz, C. 1973). Dring 1986–1990 the researchers had difficulty locating
themselves and their subjects in reflective writing, known as the crisis of representation
and it became more important to obtain the data than to isolate linear relationships
(Strauss, A., & Corbin, J., 2008) Qualitative research entered the postmodern era
between 1990 and 1995 and this was the time for innovative and novel ethnography
(Dustin G. Gibson, et Al., 2017). Post-experimental research covers the years 1995-
2000. During this time, qualitative research connecting democratic politics has grown in
popularity. In the years after 2009, researchers had to deal with the pushback against
the evidence-based social movement's methodology. As evidence-based practice
became the new criterion for social science's relevance, a new conservatism emerged in
the United States and qualitative research shifted its emphasis to it (Dustin G. Gibson,
et Al., 2017).
However, off-late, qualitative researchers are facing an altogether different set of
challenges as the world is experiencing many health emergencies, such as the pandemic
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
785
of influenza A (H1N1) that occurred in 2009, the Ebola epidemic that broke out in West
Africa in 2014, and the most recent pandemic caused by COVID-19 in 2020, which has
taken a toll on almost every part of the world. Therefore, public health mandates and
social distancing measures restrict qualitative researchers to carry out their
investigations and studies using traditional methods of data collection, such as
participant observation, face-to-face interviews, class observations, and immersions,
resulting in a transition in data collection from physical to virtual.
2. Impact of PHEIC on social science research during PHIE
During the PHEIC, research is crucial to enhance the response to global health
problems, aid in immediate reactions, and future learning. Most of the research is usually
concentrated on medical aspects regarding investigations of clinical characteristics,
pathological findings, and therapy design, as well as the preparation of care facilities and
infection control. However, social science research is largely ignored. Exploring,
describing, and explaining how policies and practices throughout the pandemic can be
modified and implemented while listening to the voices of healthcare professionals and
patients should be studied through qualitative research. Qualitative methods are useful
during a pandemic because they provide people with a safe space to talk about their
experiences and feelings without fear of judgment. These experiences may include
coping with the loss of a job, feeling alone, anxious, feeling ill, receiving less support
than usual, and caring for loved ones (Palinkas L., 2014). To guarantee awareness of
the diverse settings and to determine the most suitable response to the pandemic,
qualitative research is essential, and it is complementary to the other forms of research
undertaken during a pandemic (Johnson G. A., et Al., 2017).
Qualitative researchers look at events as they occur in the real world and try to
decipher or understand them based on the responses that people give them. Therefore,
researchers, working in the area of qualitative research, are affected during pandemics.
Social distancing and travel restrictions prevent them from conducting field research
during such emergencies. During the recent COVID-19 pandemic, WHO released a report
on the need to focus research on actions that can save lives during pandemic,
highlighting the need for prioritization of research support in a way that leads to the
development of global research platform(s) pre-prepared for the next disease X
epidemic, thus indicating the need for accelerated research. This study stressed on the
need for social science research to assess how reacting to the epidemic and adopting
public health measures impacts the physical and mental health of people treating COVID-
19 patients so as to identify their urgent needs. In addition, it highlighted the need to
determine, via the application of social science research, the underlying causes of fear,
anxiety, and stigma that feed misinformation and rumours, especially through social
media.
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
786
A scient metric study was conducted to investigate the state of social science
research on COVID-19 and identify topics and research fields relevant for social science
researchers (Frid-Nielsen, S. S. et al. 2019). This study used keyword co-occurrence
analysis and revealed that public health, health literacy and education, telemedicine,
mental health and psychology, social media and infodemics, physical activity, and prison
reform were the most relevant topics during pandemic. Besides, this study also revealed
that a pandemic is much more than a health crisis, but also a human, social, and
economic crisis. The answers to pressing social and economic problems, which can only
be found through social science studies, are in dire need of immediate attention. Since
enormous psychological loads are imposed on people, insights that may be gleaned from
studies in the fields of social and behavioral science can be valuable in helping to match
human behavior with the needs of situations (Baicker, J. B. 2020).
3. Qualitative research methodology in social science
In qualitative research, the researcher actively seeks significant information by
asking questions about the phenomenon under investigation that is taking place in their
natural environments, to gain insight into specific groups of people or geographic areas
by collecting, processing, and analyzing non-numerical data (Strauss, A., 1987). Such
studies are successful because they allow researchers to hone in on the finer points of
their subject through real experiences by delving into social processes and
environmental elements that contribute to a group's marginalization with the help of
primary data sources, and involve observation of the world in its natural context
(Creswell, J. W. 2009).
Researchers who focus on qualitative methods are presented with opportunities and
difficulties due to the tremendous changes and upheaval brought about by the pandemic.
The pandemic may be seen as a “social event, “which is upsetting the established social
order (Teti M., et Al., 2020). It is important for scholars to investigate people's
experiences during these tough times. The capacity to conduct qualitative research is
hindered by public health regulations and social distancing policies.
4. Challenges faced by Qualitative Researchers during PHEIC
Research amid the pandemic necessitates adaptability; it is difficult to ensure the
quality of qualitative research methods because quality varies depending on the
archetype on which the inquiry is based, the research technique, and the topic of study
(Sparkes A. C. & Smith B., 2009). The clarity of research question, rigor of research
method, and transparency and completeness of the reporting process are factors that
should be considered when evaluating the quality of a piece of work (O’Brien B. C.,
2014). When the researcher shows that their epistemology, theory, methodology, and
methodologies are in line with each other, trust is built into the research (Morse J. M.,
2015). The following are some of the challenges faced by researchers while conducting
research during the pandemic:
Pressure of Time:
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
787
There is a lot of pressure to come up with quick solutions to the pandemic; therefore,
researchers across the world are working together on a few different initiatives to speed
up research. In contrast to the conservative and traditional qualitative research
standards, which normally require a vast amount of time to capture the characteristics
of the phenomena under investigation, pandemic situations demand time-sensitive
research outcomes that require accelerated phases of planning, participant recruitment,
data collection, and analysis (Lancaster K., et Al., 2020). Time restrictions have led to a
rise in the popularity of rapid qualitative research efforts, which provide high-quality
data that can be utilized to influence decision making (Johnson G. A., Vindrola-Padros
C., 2017). Within a short time, frame (between four and five days and six weeks), rapid
qualitative research can shed light on a specific issue. This method also allows for a more
thorough examination of the data, which may ultimately result in fewer resources being
needed to conduct research. Rapid qualitative research has been praised for its
advantages; however, some features have been criticized. In such research, time is
conserved methodologically by doing away with some of the study procedures, slowing
down the conversation naturally, and reducing the time commitment required by the
research team and participants. Unfortunately, these methods may not provide a
sufficient and thorough examination of, or an accurate depiction of, complex human and
societal phenomena, and may result in less trustworthy conclusions owing to the
researcher's limited time spent in the study.
Although the results of quick qualitative research are encouraging, there are still
areas where the method needs to be improved. Meaningful, credible, and trustworthy
qualitative research investigations demand better ways to improve existing data
collection methods, preserve the ethical aspects of the data collected, and use
participatory methodologies.
Physical Distancing:
One of the most effective ways to prevent the transmission of the virus is to minimize
opportunities for intimate social interactions or physical distancing (Denzin N. K., Lincoln
Y. S., 2005). Qualitative research is motivated by the desire to understand a
phenomenon rooted in the subjective and contextualized experiences of subjects as
individuals or groups. Rules of engagement in qualitative research aim to place the
researcher and subjects as close together as possible to facilitate rapport building.
Because of physical distancing, researchers are compelled to look for alternative and
novel methods of data collection, mainly the use of technology to provide synchronous
or asynchronous virtual engagements. Although virtual means of engagement have been
utilized for years, such means have certain limitations, such as catching up on nonverbal
signs and lack of access to contextual data. Geographical location is restricted to what
can be seen on the screen, whereas traditional methods of data collection have the
advantage of establishing rapport with the participants and also choosing a comfortable
location prior to the initial data collection, creating an understanding of the openness
and disclosure of the researcher on the goal of the study and the rights of the participant,
informal conversations, or unplanned encounters that encourage familiarization between
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
788
the researcher and the subject, which can play a major role in revelation of vital
information about the setting and context of the study (Creswell J. W. 2018).
Digital Divide and Inclusivity
Participation in online focus groups conducted through videoconferencing software
requires access to a device such as a laptop, mobile, or computer with video and audio
facilities, a steady internet connection, and a quiet space to limit interruptions and
outside noise. Moreover, the ability to use computers and videoconferencing software
requires high digital literacy (Beaunoyer E, et al. 2020). Social exclusion and digital
exclusion often intersect, and digital differences influencing these characteristics have
been observed both within and within nations, even before COVID-19 (Watts G., 2019).
During the COVID-19 outbreak, the National Commission for Women (NCW) in India saw
a 94% increase in complaints involving women being assaulted in their homes during
the lockdown. Conducting a study on this by reaching out to these women through digital
media becomes difficult for the researcher, especially if the women are from a socially
backward class that lacks access to technology. The United States Department of
Commerce reported that in 2019, only 57% of households with earnings below $25,000
utilized the Internet at home as compared to 82% of those in the top income quintile.
Disparities in social and economic positions and geographic isolation have been
documented in studies conducted in Russia, China, and the United Kingdom
(Grishchenko N., 2020).
A recent survey conducted by the Global System for Mobile Communications
Association reported disparities in mobile phone ownership among genders across the
world. South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa have the biggest gaps, whereas the rest of
the world has much fewer. Only half of Pakistani women, but three-quarters of Pakistani
males, possess mobile phones, making Pakistan the country with the largest gender
difference in mobile ownership among the nations examined. By the end of 2021, only
84% of women in low-income countries will have a cell phone, compared to 89% of
males. More than 372 million women in low-income countries do not have phones,
whereas only 239 million males do. This is despite widespread belief that mobile phone
ownership is universal. Gender differences in mobile phone ownership have remained
essentially constant since 2017, and growth has been slow for both men and women.
The top barriers to mobile ownership for men and women in the surveyed countries were
issues concerning affordability, literacy and digital skills, safety, and security
((Grishchenko N., 2020).
Ethical considerations:
The methodology for conducting research online is still in its infancy, and there are
various ethical considerations while conducting research online. According to the British
Psychological Society (BPS), research investigators should inform participants of the
objectives of the research and all aspects of research that may influence their willingness
to participate in the study (Lobe B., 2017).A popular alternative to a participant's oral
declaration of informed consent when collecting data digitally is to send the participant
a permission form through email (usually as an attachment) for their confirmation of
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
789
approval by sending back a reply to the email. However, this method limits the possibility
of acceptance for the study by the prospective interviewee, as it leaves little scope for
clarity regarding the scope of the study being communicated effectively before
consenting to participate.
Another major concern is the privacy of the respondent. Although online
communities actively encourage users to share private information, these spaces are
open to the public and provide minimal protection for users' privacy and anonymity
(Murray M & Fisher J.D., 2002). In addition, since the Internet is open to the public, it
may be difficult to prevent anyone who is not a part of the focus group study from seeing
the replies of the participants, which would constitute a violation of privacy.
Finally, after data collection is complete, it is crucial that researchers adhere to a
stringent code of ethics. Data de-identification and confidentiality, storage of research
files such as transcriptions, field notes, personal information, password protection,
possible encryption of data stored on the researcher's local computer, and timely
deletion of audio-visual recordings are all examples of issues that can arise from online
data collection beyond the standard procedure (Lobe, B., et Al. 2020).
5. Other major challenges
In 2021, a study was conducted on two online focus groups on the low-social
economic status of African American adults during COVID-19, and a few were identified
as participant privacy; in order to take part digitally, they had to be comfortable sharing
their everyday lives on screen that may be seen as vulnerable
(Lorraine Lathen& Linnea Laestadius, 2021). During the interviews, some participants'
family members wandered out of sight of the camera, while others sat in the backseat.
Multitasking is another issue encountered in the use of videoconferencing technology:
users have to keep their attention on the conversation while also muting and unmuting
their microphones, raising their virtual hands, typing in the chat box, responding to
opinion polls, etc. The occasional disconnection of focus group members prompted the
study team to refine its focus group techniques and clarify its incentive distribution
principles. Support and time allocation were a particular concern for parents who also
had to help children with their online classes. The absence of childcare created not only
privacy issues but also made it difficult for participants to focus on the discussion.
Another study on the feasibility of using mobile texting on smartphones as a fresh
approach to eliciting group-level insights was carried out in Singapore, wherein
researchers compared in-person focus groups to those conducted using the messaging
app WhatsApp (Julienne Chen, et Al., 2019). Although the research found that WhatsApp
groups might produce detailed replies and group engagement, especially among
younger, more tech-savvy participants, the study also found that the number and
complexity of the discussion was not equal to that of the in-person focus groups.
Another web-based qualitative study was conducted in 2021 with respect to heart
disease awareness, where the focus groups were adolescents and young adults. It was
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
790
found that for researchers whose subjects are adolescents and young adults, web-based
groups may prove to be a helpful tool as adolescents and young adults are often tech-
savvy, prefer electronic communication, and are time- and location-constrained
(Courtney A, et al. 2021).In another study, Facebook was used as a tool to collect in
order to record the experiences of third-culture children, and it was found that the use
of a Facebook-based online focus group was useful for this investigation. Researchers
were able to recruit adult subjects from all around the world and connect with them on
Facebook, enabling them to obtain rich data augmented by other forms of
communication, such as photos, text, video, emojis, and lists of relevant
websites.Facebook made it easier to recruit hard-to-reach participants globally (Lijadi,
A. A. et Al. 2015).
Another study investigated the role of persons who have had suicidal ideation in the
development of healthcare services and treatments using synchronous web conferencing
technology–based online focus groups (W-OFGs) (Han J, et Al., (2019). This study
reveals that the nature of technology poses certain challenges. Those who are
inexperienced with digital technology, such as the elderly, or who live in places where
internet connection is costly or limited may be less likely to use the W-OFG to participate
in research. The W-OFG prioritizes participant safety. The lack of nonverbal clues and
contextual information may hinder focus group behaviour and emotional evaluation. This
complicates W-OFG support for conducting research. Although the possible strength of
W-OFG is overcoming the physical location and lack of privacy of face-to-face focus
groups, the data suggest that W-OFG participants are less inclined to expound on others'
comments (Schneider S.J. et Al., 2016). None of the W-OFG participants voiced privacy
concerns; however, digital data collection through video conferencing might pose privacy
and data breach risks. Video conferencing has inherent weaknesses, such as hacker
assaults, user illiteracy, and lack of clarity.
6. Potential benefits of online qualitative research
Researchers have solved travel restrictions imposed during pandemics throughthe
use of advanced technologies, such as asynchronous, synchronous virtual
communication, and field access. In cases where face-to-face interaction is difficult,
alternatives, such as chat-based or video-based online focus groups and interviews may
be explored (Dodds S. & Hess A. C. 2021).There are three primary types of online focus
groups: those that allow for audio and video, those that allow for audio alone, and those
that exclusively allow for text-based communication. There is an option of synchronous
or asynchronous communication while conducting focus groups through text.
Asynchronous conversations are available for a certain amount of time, during which
participants may log in to answer moderator queries and converses. Synchronous groups
are fixed-duration conversations in which members must access the platform and answer
questions in real time. Synchronous communication is the norm for both the audio-only
and video-enabled groups (Courtney A. Brown, et Al., 2021).
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
791
Accessibility:
Most researchers and participants found that participating in online focus groups was
more convenient than attending in-person focus groups. Online communities are not
restricted to working hours or to a single location, and users (including research
personnel) may join any device at any time. Researchers who lack the time, money, or
resources to physically visit remote regions of the world might benefit from this method
by connecting with participants remotely. In-person groups, on the other hand, need
members to go to a certain place at a specified time, and are therefore more limited in
scope. Adolescents have many competing demands on their time, which makes it difficult
for them to commit to in-person organizations because of difficulties in travel and traffic
(Tates K., Zwaanswijk M., et Al 2009). Collaborators in remote or underprivileged areas
may recruit and assist participants via video chats with researchers from other parts of
the world.
Useful for techno-savvy people:
Online qualitative research is particularly useful for researchers who are adolescents
and young people. The vast majority of adolescents and young adults today have access
to smartphones and laptops.
Theoretical validity
In addition to the obvious practical benefits to researchers and interviewees alike,
theoretical improvements to qualitative research may also be made via the use of virtual
technologies, such as more ethical and fair interview settings for a variety of social
groups. Participants who have jobs may find it more convenient to attend interviews
through video conferences because they may schedule them as per convenience.
Cost efficient:
The costs associated with in-person focus groups included remuneration for
participants, reimbursement of participant travel expenses, food and drinks, fees
associated with venues and equipment, transcribing fees, and moderation charges.
However, when researchers opt for online research methods, most of this cost can be
reduced, which results in cost efficiency. There is a plethora of choices when it comes to
web-based platforms, many of which come with zero or low fees connected with their
use. Therefore, web-based groups may be more cost-effective for researchers depending
on the platform being utilized.
Anonymity:
In qualitative research involving sensitive or personal health matters, anonymity may
be a key concern, and a project's capacity to ensure anonymity may boost the
participants' willingness to provide sensitive material. It is possible that participants in
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
792
online groups are less susceptible to social status prejudice, social desirability bias, and
groupthink, all of which may lead to an increase in involvement from historically
underrepresented groups (Nicholas D. B., et Al., 2017). It is possible that participants
and researchers might feel more comfortable using text-based or audio-based groups to
investigate sensitive subjects, because participant identities are better secured in these
types of groups (Graffigna G. & Bosio A. C. 2017).
7.Comparing Virtual and Face-to-face Qualitative Research
Sl. No
Factors
Virtual
1.
Flexibility
2.
Geographical access
3.
Cost
4.
Knowledge of
technology and
inclusiveness of the
participants
5.
Body language
6.
Anonymity
7.
Controlling power of
the researcher
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
793
8.
Potential distractions
9.
Obtaining consent
8.Virtual versus face-to-face data collection: commonalities and differences
(Keen S. et Al., 2022).
9. A Way Forward for Qualitative Research
The continuation of research during times of public health emergency is considered
ethical for researchers because it is the only way to find answers to some problems that
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
794
can only be studied during an emergency (Wright, K. & Harvey, K., 2020). Recent
technological advances have made it possible to communicate in a variety of new ways
using a broad range of media. In-person meetings are gradually being phased out in
favour of more convenient communication methods such as video chatting, emailing,
and texting. Recently, notably Covid 19 has required innovation in many facets of our
life, and qualitative research is no different. Conducting interviews in person has
traditionally been seen as the "gold standard" for qualitative research because of how
central they are to the methodology. However, qualitative research conducted digitally
allows academics to analyze crisis environments while protecting participants and
researchers amid the current pandemic crisis and social distancing in place. The following
are some of the ways forward for qualitative researchers to make their research more
trustworthy, reliable, and efficient in times of health emergency.
a) The importance of the goal, strategy, and methodology alignment in the context
of the pandemic:
During PHEIC, the researcher formulates research questions and selects methods of
data collection in a manner that is congruent with the goals of the virtual study and its
overall design. The decisions made by the researcher when conducting the research
should not only be in accordance with the goal, methodology, and design of the study,
but should also be in accordance with the requirements and concerns of the participants
at each given point in time.
b) Taking into account the technological aspects:
When conducting qualitative research, researchers must carefully consider the
characteristics of various virtual platforms. Due consideration needs to be given to
participants ’choices, in contrast to the researcher’s choices. For instance, a study was
conducted using a virtual mode to examine the state of homeless students in Texas (J.
Kessa Roberts, et Al 2021). In this study, the researchers initially selected ZOOM as a
platform to conduct interviews, as they had an institutional license to conduct interviews
through this platform. However, when the researchers contacted most of the
participants, it was found that most of them were users of Microsoft Teams. Therefore,
the researchers later opted for Microsoft Teams over ZOOM, thereby making it
convenient for the participants to participate in the interviews. Thus, paramount
importance must be given to the needs of participants, especially when the research is
being conducted online (J. Kessa Roberts, et Al., 2021).
c) Employ second researcher:
While conducting research through the virtual mode, it is advisable to employ a
second researcher whose work is to solely assist in the technical aspects. In doing so,
the main researcher can exclusively concentrate on the participant's interaction, and the
second researcher can take care of all the technical glitches that may arise during the
interview. Further studies have found that using a second researcher also helped build
rapport with the participants, as the interviewer was able to pay close attention to the
participant, make eye contact, use appropriate facial expressions, and use other non-
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
795
verbal cues to show their attention, all of which are crucial for establishing rapport in
virtual interviews because a second researcher took extensive notes and attended to
technical issues (Archibald M. M, et al. 2019).
d) Promoting Research Integrity and Ethics:
While conducting research through the virtual mode, one must be deeply concerned
with the ethical challenges that one faces.
e) Obtaining participant's consent:
When conducting online research, the most frequent method for substituting in-
person permission processes with electronic consent procedures is to obtain consent via
email. Since obtaining consent is one way, the researcher has to make sure that they
provide a platform for the participants to ask additional questions with respect to the
consent form. Further, the researcher is required to add a line in the permission form
that informs participants that they are free to withdraw from the research at any time
throughout the collection of data, and that they are not obligated to do so.
f) Privacy issues:
Maintaining confidentiality on an invitation-only basis is essential. For instance,
because Skype requires each participant to sign the conversation on their own, it is
difficult for unauthorized individuals to listen. This feature of Zoom should also be on,
because if it is not, unauthorized individuals may discover a method to join meetings
that are open to the general public. The "waiting room" function of Zoom is another
useful tool. This function enables the person who organizes the meeting to have control
over who joins the video conference.
Another problem that might occur with video-based conversations is the possibility
of the backdrop of the participant's surroundings being seen on the video, which is
particularly problematic if the participant is interviewed in their own house. It is possible
that this may be more of a problem during group interviews, in which the participants
would have the opportunity to peer inside the houses of each other, and it is feasible to
at least partly remedy this issue with an internal option inside the application that blurs
the backdrop in the video; however, it is still recommended that participants position
their device in an environment with a plain background whenever it is practicable to do
so.
g) To establish a separate research ethical committee (REC) during PHEIC
Ethical questions are often prompted by situations, such as pandemics. Since the
pandemic demands a lot of research to take place in a very short period of time, a lot of
stress has been put on RECs to review an ample amount of research. It is not only that
there is more work for them to do; the pace at which they have to evaluate it has to
increase so that research can be undertaken to combat the epidemic. For instance,
Chinese RECs reportedly have four monthly meetings with an average approval time of
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
796
two days (Zhang, H., et Al., 2020). There have also been calls for RECs to improve
productivity without lowering ethical review standards (Luo Q. & Qin T., 2020).
Therefore, during the pandemic, separate ad-hoc RECs have to be formed that are time-
sensitive and meet more often. Reconsidering the REC assessment metrics in light of the
pandemic. It is important to consider the opinions of all parties involved in the study,
including the participants, researchers, and review committee.
h) Increasing access to vulnerable and technologically disabled participants
One of the biggest challenges faced by researchers while conducting online research
is the barrier to reaching vulnerable participants and technologically disabled people.
The research must be as inclusive as possible to put it into use. Therefore, the researcher
must ensure that they can reach the target participants. Flowing is a way in which
research can be made more inclusive.
1) Locate key allies to help make gadgets and tech more accessible to
focus group members. Include costs associated with participants'
access to necessary technology and hotspots in research funding and
contracts.
2) Before starting the focus groups, create procedures to moderate the
discussion and provide incentives to members who are willing to work
through technical difficulties.
3) Determine how to get mobile hotspots into the hands of those taking
part in the focus group.
4) To arrange workshops for the participants before starting the research
in order to make the participants under the process more thoroughly,
especially those who were digitally illiterate.
10. Conclusions
The PHEIC has highlighted the need for adaptation and flexibility in research, both
of which have been essential for a very long time. The pace with which a shutdown was
implemented worldwide has highlighted the need for flexibility in the research structure.
The emerging conversation on research and research methods during the pandemic has
produced a number of important insights, one of the most important of which is the
realization that the pandemic has made it abundantly clear that significant improvements
in the way social science research is conducted are required to address the global
emergency.
During PHEIC, much research takes place in the field of medicine, as it is
considered to be very important in the fight against the disease. However, the role of
social science is equally important, as it helps policymakers regulate human behaviour
in such tough times. It is time for institutions to recognize the importance of social
science research and fund the same. In addition, there is a lack of literature available to
assist qualitative researchers in conducting their research during PHEIC, as they face
many challenges while doing so.
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
797
Even though there are many challenges that qualitative researchers face in
transitioning from face-to-face data collection to virtual data collection, there are
potential benefits of collecting data virtually, especially when travel restrictions are
imposed as they can reach people across the globe. However, researchers have to ensure
that they are able to reach the most vulnerable and digitally illiterate people to make
the research more effective.
Bibliographic references
Anastasia Aldelina Lijadi, Gertina Johanna van Schalkwyk, (2015), Online Facebook
Focus Group Research of Hard-to-Reach Participants. 14 (5), International Journal of
Qualitative Methodshttps://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915621383
Archibald M. M., Ambagtsheer R. C., Casey M. G., Lawless M. (2019). Using zoom
videoconferencing for qualitative data collection: Perceptions and experiences of
researchers and participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919874596
Bavel, J., Baicker, K., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., et al. (2020).
Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nature
Human Behaviour DOI: 10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z
Beaunoyer E., Dupéré S., Guitton M. J. (2020). COVID-19 and digital inequalities:
Reciprocal impacts and mitigation strategies. Computers in Human Behavior DOI:
10.1016/j.chb.2020.106424
Becker, H. S., Geer, B., Hughes, E., & Strauss, A. L. (1961). Boys in White. New
Brunswick: University of Chicago Press
Courtney A. Brown, Anna C. Revette, et al. (2021). Conducting Web-Based Focus Groups
with Adolescents and Young Adults. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406921996
Creswell J. W. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
traditions (4th ed.). Sage Publications
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed
Method Approaches (3rd Ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications
David N. Durrheima, Natasha S. Crowcroft, Lucille H. Blumberg. (2019). Is the global
measles resurgence a “public health emergency of international concern”? International
Journal of Infectious Diseases, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2019.04.016
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of
Qualitative Research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of
Qualitative Research (3rd Ed.), pp. 1–32. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE (2005).
Dodds S., Hess A. C. Adapting research methodology during COVID-19: Lessons for
transformative service research. Journal of Service Management. (2021).
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
798
Frid-Nielsen, S. S., Rubin, O., &Baekkeskov, E. (2019). The state of social science
research on antimicrobial resistance. Journal of Social Science & Medicine,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112596
Geertz, C. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books
(1973).
Graffigna G., Bosio A. C., (2017). The influence of setting on findings produced in
qualitative health research: A comparison between face-to-face and online discussion
groups about HIV/AIDS. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
DOI:10.1177/160940690600500307
Grishchenko N. The gap not only closes: Resistance and reverse shifts in the digital
divide in Russia. Telecommunications Policy,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.102004
Han J, Torok M, Gale N, et al. (2019). Use of Web Conferencing Technology for
Conducting Online Focus Groups Among Young People with Lived Experience of Suicidal
Thoughts: Mixed Methods ResearchJMIR Mental Health
Haradhan Kumar Mohajan, (2018). Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences
and Related Subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and
People, 7(1) DOI:10.26458/jedep. v7i1.571
Hong Y. A., Zhou Z., Fang Y., Shi L. (2017). The digital divide and health disparities in
China: Evidence from a national survey and policy implications. Journal of Medical
Internet Research, DOI: 10.2196/jmir.7786
J. Kessa Roberts, Alexandra E. Pavlakis, and Meredith P. Richards. (2021). It’s More
Complicated Than It Seems: Virtual Qualitative Research in the COVID-19 Era.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211002959
Johnson G. A., Vindrola-Padros C. (2017). Rapid qualitative research methods during
complex health emergencies: A systematic review of the literature. Social Science &
Medicine, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.07.029
Julienne Chen, Pearlyn Neo. (2019). Texting the waters: An assessment of focus groups
conducted via the WhatsApp smartphone messaging application. Methodological
Innovations,12 (3) https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799119884276
Keen S, Lomeli-Rodriguez M, Joffe H. (2022). From Challenge to Opportunity: Virtual
Qualitative Research During COVID-19 and beyond. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221105075
Lancaster K., Rhodes T., Rosengarten M. (2020). Making evidence and policy in public
health emergencies: lessons from COVID-19 for adaptive evidence-making and
intervention. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice,
DOI:10.1332/174426420X15913559981103
Aishwarya U Patil, Sanu Rani Paulet all / Impacto de las emergencias de salud pública de alcance
internacional en la investigación en ciencias sociales
799
Lawrence O. Gostin, Rebecca Katz. (2016). The International Health Regulations: The
Governing Framework for Global Health Security. The Milbank Quarterly, DOI:
10.1111/1468-0009.12186
Leedy, P. & Ormrod, J. (2001). Practical Research: Planning and Design (7th Ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications
Linnet Taylor, Gargi Sharma, Aaron Martin and Shazade Jameson. (2020). Data Justice
and COVID-19: Global Perspectives, Meat space Press
Lobe B., Morgan D., Hoffman K. A (2020). Qualitative data collection in an era of social
distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920937875
Lobe, B., Morgan, D., & Hoffman, K. A. (2020). Qualitative Data Collection in an Era of
Social Distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920937875
Lorraine Lathen and Linnea Laestadian. (2021). Reflections on Online Focus Group
Research with Low Socio-Economic Status African American Adults During COVID-19.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406921102171
Luo, Q. & Qin T. (2020). Managing Clinical Trials for Covid-19: The Importance of Ethics
Committees. BMJ, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1369
Michelle Teti1, Enid Schatz1, and Linda Liebenberg. (2020). Methods in the Time of
COVID-19: The Vital Role of Qualitative Inquiries. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920920
Moises c. Torrentira, jr. I. (2020). Online data collection as an adaptation in conducting
quantitative and qualitative research during the covid-19 pandemic. European Journal
of Education Studies, DOI:10.46827/ejes. v7i11.3336
Morse J. M. (2015), Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigour in qualitative
inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501
Nicholas D. B., Lach L., King G., et al. (2010). Contrasting internet and face-to-face
focus groups for children with chronic health conditions: Outcomes and participant
experiences. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691000900102
O’Brien B. C., Harris I. B., Beckman T. J., Reed D. A., Cook D. A Standards for reporting
qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine. (2014).
P. Ishwara Bhat, Idea and Methods of Legal Research, (Oxford University Press, 2019)
Palinkas L. (2014). Qualitative and mixed methods in mental health services and
implementation research. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology,DOI:
10.1080/15374416.2014.910791
Interacción y Perspectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social Vol. 14 No3 / octubre-diciembre, 2024
800
Paramjit S Jaswal, G.I.S. Sandhu and Shveta Dhaliwal, Research Methodology: A
Multidisciplinary Approach, (Mohan Law House 2015)
Ram Ahuja, Research Methods, (Rawat Publication, 2018)
Schneider SJ, Kerwin J, Frechtling J, Vivari BA. (2016). Characteristics of the Discussion
in Online and Face-to-Face Focus Groups. Social Science Computer Review,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439302020001
Sparkes A. C., Smith B. (2009). Judging the quality of qualitative inquiry: Criteriology
and relativism in action. Psychology of Sport & Exercise,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.02.006
Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative Research for Social Scientists. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, London, New
Delhi: SAGE Publications
Tates K., Zwaanswijk M., Otten R., Van Dulmen S., Hoogerbrugge P. M., Kamps W. A.,
Bensing J. M. (2009). Online focus groups as a tool to collect data in hard-to-include
populations: Examples from pediatric oncology. BMC Medical Research Methodology,
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-15
Teti M., Schatz E., Liebenberg L. (2020). Methods in the time of COVID-19: The vital
role of qualitative inquiries. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920920962
Verikios, G., Sullivan, M., Stojanovski, P., Giesecke, J., & Woo, G. (2015). Assessing
Regional Risks from Pandemic Influenza: A Scenario Analysis. The World Economy,
https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12296
Vindrola-Padros C., Chisnall G., et al, (2020). Carrying out rapid qualitative research
during a pandemic: Emerging lessons from COVID-19. Qualitative Health Research,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732320951526
Watkins D. C. (2017). Rapid and rigorous qualitative data analysis: The “radar”
technique for applied research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
DOI:10.1177/1609406917712131
Watts G. COVID-19 and the digital divide in the UK. The Lancet Digital Health (2020).
DOI:10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30169-2
Wilder-Smith A, Osman S., (2020) Public health emergencies of international concern:
a historic overview. Journal of Travel Medicine, DOI: 10.1093/jtm/taaa227
Yazan Douedari, Mervat Alhaffar, Diane Duclos, Mohamed Al-Twaish. Samer Jabbour,
Natasha Howard. (2021). We need someone to deliver our voices’: reflections from
conducting remote qualitative research in Syria, Conflict and Health,
DOI:10.1186/s13031-021-00361-w