coding helped to classify or organize data into thematic labels that helped me appreciate the relationship among concepts under consideration (Bryman, 2008). Connection “involves analyzing the interconnections between different types of data” (Bond, 2006:43). By contemplating on what was revealed in the data, a plausible set of explanations and meanings were made. The transcribing of interviews for my analysis was a massive undertaking. I spent weeks organizing my hand written notes of the interviews into some sort of classification of topics ready for translation. My brother-in-law assist me in note taking during the interviews and focus groups, which gave me a chance to make some detailed notes or explanations on some incidents or specific words or phrases while they were still fresh in my mind. 3.6
Ethical Considerations
Ethical principles, from a common sense definition of the term, are norms of conducts that distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. The “acceptable behaviour” is the written or unwritten standards that govern any discipline or working profession. Social research, both as a discipline and as a working profession, has its own distinguished standards of behaviour that governs its conduct. These standards include harm to participants, confidentiality, anonymity, voluntary participation and informed consent (Bryman, 2008). A consideration of these ethical issues in this social research work is important because it ensures the integrity of the researcher and the quality of the data collected. For this fact, the Economic and Social Research Committee (ESRC) Research Ethics Framework states that social research must be “designed, reviewed and undertaken in a way that ensures its integrity and quality”. The criteria for assessing the quality and integrity of qualitative research studies must include “evidence of consideration of ethical issues” and this is what this study have tried to do in this section (Spencer et al, 2003 in Bryman 2008: 125). A key ethical issue that this study was beset with (and which the researcher anticipated) was the possibility of an emotional harm to the participants. The British Sociological Association (BSA) Statement of Ethical Practice requires researchers to “anticipate, and to guard against, consequences for research participants which can be predicted to be harmful and to consider the possibility that research experience may be a disturbing one”. Some of the questions asked from the interview guide were rather sensitive, personal and elicited an emotional response. Typical of this was “Did anyone die in the family due to the flood situation”, “Did the flood render your house uninhabitable” and “How did the flood affect your personal belonging”. Some of the flood victims answered these questions almost in tears as they re-countered how the floods have affected their livelihood. In order to manage this issue, the researcher gave the needed counseling or discontinued the discussion. The second ethical dilemma that confronted this study was voluntary participation based on adequate information supplied by the researcher and an understanding of the ethical issues by the prospective respondent. The Social Research Association (SRA) states that “Sociologists have a responsibility to duly inform their subject of their entitlement to refuse at any stage for whatever reason and to withdraw data supplied” (Bryman 2008:
42