What are the strengths and weaknesses of methods which can be used for investigation and action planning?
Updated - Monday 28 November 2005
What are the strengths and weaknesses of methods which can be used for investigation and action planning?
In the following table the advantages and disadvantages are listed of the following methods:
| Methods/Tools and its respective strengths and limitations |
||
| Method/Tool | Strengths | Limitations |
| + Good for breaking the ice and initiating discussion on sensitive topics, particularly when investigators knowledge of the local culture and language(s) are limited (for instance, explicit pictures of open defecation will introduce the topic of discussion more directly and effectively than words can). + Effective for finding out which hygiene behaviours and activities are locally considered to be good, bad, or in between and more importantly, why. + Allows study participants to engage in investigative and analytical process which will increase their awareness of their own hygiene practices - a step towards instigating change where it may be necessary. | - Requires time and special skills to prepare, pre-test, and subsequently modify the pictures - Requires well-trained and skilled facilitator(s). - Difficult to document results by using words only, thus costly in time and money. |
|
| + Relatively quick and effective way of gathering quantifiable information and interpreting it quickly and reliably. + Allows study participants to engage in investigative and analytical processes which will increase their awareness of their own hygiene practice - a step towards instigating change where it may be necessary. + Easy to document results | - Requires time and special skills to prepare, pre-test, and subsequently modify the pictures - Requires well-trained and skilled facilitator(s). - Requires time and patience/motivation from study participants, particularly if the number of variables involved exceeds three or four. - Difficult to conduct effectively with large groups (more than twenty people) |
|
| + Allows investigators to gain in-depth knowledge of the subject under study + Relatively easy to document findings, e.g., without investing in visual aids. | - Requires highly skilled and/or trained investigators, interviewers, and note-takers - May be intrusive to study participants, especially if done hurriedly or with little tact. - Presents difficulty for interviewers if they are project personnel who are seen by the study population more as teachers/experts than as learners - respondents may give all the "right answers" which may not reflect their own practices, or may demand that the interviewer(s) gives them the answers to difficult questions as she/he is an expert anyway. - Requires considerable amounts of time and energy for information management and review. |
|
| + Useful for gauging the range of opinions and beliefs on the topic of enquiry + Useful for exploring issues at the outset of a study and/or for interpreting data obtained by other methods (including quantitative surveys) in the final stage of the study + Easily modifiable to facilitate its use, e.g., by using pictures to introduce topics for discussion and for stimulating/maintaining a lively discussion. | - Information obtained cannot stand on its own, i.e. it needs to be complemented by survey data, to show the distribution of opinions and beliefs uncovered. - Presents difficulties in information management and review, particularly if tape recorders are used. - If more than one language is in use, translation can mean added time and financial costs. |
|
Source: Almedom et al., (1997). Hygiene evaluation procedures: approaches and methods for assessing water- and sanitation-related hygiene practices, Boston, MA, USA : International Nutrition Foundation for Developing Countries.
