CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN, METHODOLOGY AND …

[Pages:37]CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN, METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE PROFILE

3.1 INTRODUCTION

3.2 POPULATION OF THE STUDY 3.2.1 Population with regards to HIV/AIDS individuals/households 3.2.2 Population with regards to non-HIV/AIDS individuals/households

3.3 SAMPLING PROCEDURE 3.3.1 Sampling procedure for HIV/AIDS individuals/households 3.3.2 Sampling procedure for non-HIV/AIDS households

3.4 THE SAMPLE 3.4.1 Case for sample size of 200 HIV/AIDS individuals/households 3.4.2 Sample coverage to all economic sections of society

3.5 INSTRUMENTATION 3.5.1 Questionnaire/Schedule [Q-S] for HIV/AIDS individuals/households 3.5.2 Questionnaire/Schedule for non-HIV/AIDS individuals/households 3.5.3 Difference in Q-Ss meant for HIV/AIDS and non-HIV/AIDS individuals/Hlls 3.5.4 Nature of the instrument used

3.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

3.7 DATA COLLECTION 3.7.1 Data collection in case of HIV/AIDS individuals/households 3.7.2 Data collection in case of non-HIV/AIDS individuals/households

3.8 DATA METHODS AND TECHNIQUES

3.9 OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS

3.10 SAMPLE PROFILE

Notes

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN, METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE PROFILE

There is one thing even more vital to science than intelligent methods; and that is, the sincere desire to find out the truth, whatever it may be: Charles Pierce

This chapter highlights various issues related to the research design and methodology adopted with regards to the present study. The chapter, which also features an outline of the sample profile, has been presented in steps quite similar to the ones presented by H.J. Nenty (2009).

3.1 INTRODUCTION The present study is basically a descriptive, survey based, mixed model type of research being both quantitative and qualitative in nature. Although the study relies more on primary information/data due to the very nature of the topic and its objectives, it nevertheless makes substantial use of secondary sources of information, to be abreast of other studies and their findings, and to build upon an appropriate methodology for the present one. Secondary information has been obtained from books, reports, journals, e-journals, press reports, websites et al. Primary data/information was obtained amongst others via various forms of interviews involving questionnaires/schedules, field-work, personal in-home surveys, interactions with NGOs, field-workers, counsellors, doctors, PLWHA etc.

The present study attempts broadly three things: i] to systematically study and document for the first time the various economic realities faced by HIV/AIDS HHs in Goa, including those pertaining to income, employment, HH expenditures, borrowings, savings, medical expenditures etc.; ii] to compare wherever appropriate the findings so obtained with those pertaining to similar background non-HIV/AIDS HHs; and to see whether the two match or diverge, and if so to what extent; and iii] to find if female-headed HIV/AIDS HHs are to a greater economic disadvantage

80

than male-headed ones. All the above provide an objective insight towards understanding the true nature and extent of economic burden cast by HIV/AIDS on HHs, and to design strategies and plans-of-action to address the same.

To achieve the study goals an in-depth analysis has been done wherein data/information gathered is categorical and absolute, as well as qualitative and quantitative in nature. While details of employment, income and expenditure, savings and borrowings, non-hospitalised illness episodes [NHIEs] and hospitalised illness episodes [HIEs] amongst others are studied with regards to the last twelve months and/or last month [as applicable] for both samples' HHs; details of death of non-HIV/AIDS earning member pertains to last two years; with details related to coping mechanism in case of HIV/AIDS HHs being studied ever since HIV was first detected. The study does not go into details pertaining to death of non-earning non-HIV/AIDS members. In case of death of AIDS members no time frame has been set - the same have been considered irrespective of years since the member has expired. When/wherever more than one AIDS member has died, details of the earning member only are considered for the purpose of study; if they were all earning members, details of only the last person who died have been considered.

Pertaining to the issue of employment, while in case of HIV/AIDS HHs the HIV+ respondent/interviewee, earning or non-earning but in the productive age group of 18-60 years, is the HH member considered for study; with reference to non-HIV/AIDS HHs it is any earning HH member from the same age group. With regards to health and medical expenditure, while in case of HIV/AIDS HHs details of only the HIV+ respondents are considered [one per HH], in case of non-HIV/AIDS HHs it is details of all HH members excluding and including those below 18 and above 60 years. With regards to NHIEs and HIEs details of only one ailment' is

81

mentioned in the study although the days of absence and expenditure details pertaining to all illness episodes of the last month or last year as the case may be are clubbed together. 2

3.2 POPULATION OF THE STUDY For the purpose of this study there is requirement of two independent samples, one representing HIV/AIDS HHs and the other non-HIV/AIDS HHs, with the latter being like a control group. Given below are the details with regards to the population vis-?-vis the two sets of HHs.

3.2.1 Population with regards to HIV/AIDS individuals/households The actual universe of HIV/AIDS individuals/HHs in Goa [or even elsewhere] is unknown. It is so on account of numerous reasons. For example there could be individuals with HIV, but who have not yet tested themselves, and hence are unaware of their status. Similarly, there are individuals, especially from the better income/occupation brackets, who test themselves in private clinics or outside the State and do not reveal their positive status -- they are not among those registered on the govemment/ICTC list. 3

Considering that the true universe is unknown, for the purpose of the present study the sample was drawn from a working universe (Marshall 2002, 56 & 108), or study/target population (Ahuja 2002, 151) covering both districts of the State of Goa, and comprising of only those HIV+ individuals whose status was detected/registered in Goa at the ICTCs as of 31 st

4 Those who are HIV+ but whose status was detected in private clinics and are Decmbr208. not registered at the ICTCs are not part of the working population. Also, for the purpose of this study the target population includes only those who are in the working age group of 18-60 years and those who have a proper place to stay, either own, sponsored or rented, irrespective of its condition. Those living on railway platforms, bus terminuses, footpaths, public gardens, brothels

82

etc. have been excluded since the study is on economic impact of HIV/AIDS on individuals as part/members of HHs. Additionally, those registered positive but have died and whose demise is officially recorded by GSACS, and also those who have not shown any particular taluka as their place of residence and are thus belonging to the 'Others' category comprising of foreigners and those belonging to other States, have been excluded from the study (GSACS 2008, 9).

To get into actual figures for arriving at a working population GSACS (2008) provided figures have been taken as a reference point though it provides details as of September 2008 only. As of this date there were 11,105 HIV+ cases detected at ICTCs of which 7,483 were males and 3,622 were females (ibid, 7). As per GSACS (2009, 10) there were 11,674 HIV+ cases as of end-2008. 5 Based on the parameters set in terms of formal exclusions 6 as mentioned earlier and also if consideration is given to the possibility of double counting due to double registration and that many AIDS deaths have not been officially reported and hence not recorded as per the GSACS list/report, the size of the working population w\could be in the range of 7800-8800.

For a study as the present one involving unknown universe and hidden population not only is the actual size of the working population or accurate sampling frame not obtainable for reasons amongst others due to unreported deaths, confidentiality and privacy clauses; but even the size of working population in terms of range can at best be an approximate figure only. While it is not possible to construct a proper sampling list and hence make an ideal target population operational, things get compounded due to the sensitive nature of the matter, unknown status of addresses 8 and/or migration of respondents outside the State.

3.2.2 Population with regards to non-HIV/AIDS individuals/households For the purpose of selecting the non-HIV/AIDS HHs sample, the population comprised of HHs from both districts of Goa not having any member who is tested as HIV+, and which have a

83

similar background to the HIV/AIDS HHs sample especially with reference to matters like educational qualifications and place of origin of the HH head, and locale and socio-cultural background of the HH. HHs having member(s) with critical life debilitating medical ailments like cancer were also to be excluded for the purpose of defining the working population.

3.3 SAMPLING PROCEDURE 3.3.1 Sampling procedure for HIV/AIDS individuals/households The focus of the study is on one HIV+ person per HH, i.e. the interviewee/respondent, who may be earning or non-earning but in the age group of 18-60 years. However, although only one is considered for an in-depth study, all HH members taken together, HIV+ or not, are considered to obtain a comprehensive picture pertaining to the HH. This is in contrast to the study done by NCAER/NACO/UNDP which considers even up to two HIV+ individuals per HH (Pradhan, Sundar and Singh 2006). This latter procedure was not considered for the present study to avoid duplication of HH characteristics/experiences, and to give coverage to more/different HHs.

Considering that the universe of HIV+ individuals is unknown and that the study dealt with a highly sensitive issue involving hidden population, stigma, discrimination and nondisclosure of HIV+ status, to get the sample selected non-probability sampling techniques were adopted. Needless to say probability sampling is inappropriate, difficult and even impossible. As mentioned by Black and Champion (1976, 266), probability sampling requires amongst other things the following conditions to be satisfied, none of which though are feasible for a study like the present one: i] complete list of subjects to be studied has to be available; ii] size of universe must be known; and iii] each element must have an equal chance of being selected (as in Ahuja 2002, 166). An advantage of non-probability sampling for such a type of study is that it does not claim representativeness (ibid, 176) as every unit does not get a chance of being selected.

84

However, although non-probability sampling techniques were used personal biases were avoided and elements of randomness made use of to minimize potential and avoidable bias and hence unrepresentativeness of the sample. Sampling techniques adopted were a combination ofpurposive, quota, snow-ball and convenience sampling techniques. While purposive and quota sampling were appropriate due the heterogeneous nature of the population, convenience sampling was appropriate not only due to the sensitive nature of the topic but also because the true universe was not well defined, sampling unit was not clear and a complete source list was not available (Ghosh 1996, 235).

That non-probability sampling is the only way for sample selection for a topic like the present one can be seen from sampling techniques adopted by other similar studies. In a way the NCAER/NACO/UNDP study made use of the same (Pradhan, Sundar and Singh 2006) and so did Canning et al (2006a); Pradhan and Sundar (2006); and ILO (2003). AIDS researchers, Watters and Biernacki (1989), Martin and Dean (1993) and Heckathorn (1997), for their three separate studies, got their samples of hidden populations by likewise, as the present study, using combinations of non-probability sampling techniques, with all three incidentally using purposive sampling techniques and variants/modifications of snowball technique (as in Neuman 2000, 214216). The study of Watters and Biernacki also made use of quota sampling as part of a procedure called targeted sampling in which alongside was used chain referral 9 and stratified sampling (ibid, 215). Likewise, in dealing with studies involving hidden populations, an adaptation of the chain-referral or snowball sampling called as Respondent Driven Sampling [RDS] has also been cited and made use of quite extensively (Salganik 2006; Johnston et al 2006; Magnani et al 2005; and Robinson et al 2006). 1?

85

Two major ways were adopted to select the study sample, they are as follows: A] After highlighting the various aspects and objectives of the study, different NGOs including Care and Support Homes [C&S Homes] were instructed to prepare a list of potential respondents from amongst those registered with them. They were assured confidentiality, privacy and anonymity with regards to their clients. The list was to be made keeping in mind the respondent's profile [like district, gender, economic background, religion, occupation etc.] and after verifying whether they were able and willing to be part of the study. From this set/list, wherever possible, sample respondents were chosen randomly. The sampling procedure was done primarily through the assistance of NGOs since no where is a free list or sampling frame of respondents publicly available since it deals with identities that are to be kept strictly confidential. NCAER/NACO/UNDP followed more or less a similar method for garnering information; wherein, unable to get access to addresses of PLWHA the study relied on counsellors of State AIDS Control Societies [SACS] and representatives of NGOs among others for data collection on account of their contact with positive people (Pradhan, Sundar and Singh 2006, 19); B] The second major way adopted for sample selection was that on any given day all those admitted or visiting" C&S Homes or drop-in-centre's were chosen provided they qualified for the study keeping in mind the various exclusions, and were fit in all respects for the study. Needless to say their consent was obtained prior to the study and after explaining the nature and purpose of the same. This approach of sample selection has been followed by other studies as well including the NCAER/NACO/UNDP study mentioned earlier.

Of those pre-selected for study, the final sample whose details have been made use of for the purpose of analysis comprises of 200 HIV+ respondents representing 200 HHs. To corroborate findings, to get additional inputs, and/or to verify and counter-check on conclusions

86

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download