QIKJS-Part.V.E Qualitative Inquiry of Korean Judicial System Kiyoung Kim Professor of Law and Public Policy Dept. of Law, Chosun University Gawng-ju South Korea Quality and Reduction of Bias In continuance of this week discussion, the way to ensure the quality of research and reduce bias will be furthered with a focus on the lingering questions that I want to address to improve my dissertation. One would be the use of statistics that will be incorporated into the qualitative dissertation (Kim, 2015a,b,c,d,e). We know it as the kind of quasi-statistics to increase the persuasion or readability of audience by putting the metaphor and emphasis with the words, such as "dominant share..." or "prevailing number of...," "most of..." and such kinds. The use of quasi-statistics would largely be unavoidable as a matter of trait lying within the inherence of qualitative method, but often advised to use with care. Therefore, it would be my strategy to use the existing statistic from the government and credible sources to show the major issues or themes, such as income disparity of lawyers, foreign and domestic law firms in the market, gender statistic of input aspect of public policy, so that I intend the audience to be readily referenced to the exact number concerned. The statistics would be crosschecked with the verbal explanations, which should be as many as possible if not all. As we see, numbers would be more economical and manipulable than words. By exploiting the number, we can identify the overall trend and importance of themes, as well as can find new leads and unexpected differences (Miles, Huberman, Saldana, 2013). The display shown below may be an example if the clarification to triangulate the themes or concepts and analyzed results into a meaning and story can be supported along the frequencies of respondent. Table 1 Primary Aspect of New Law School System by Interviewees Aspect to affect the society and judicial community Number of statement mentioning the item (total of 25 interviewees) 2 Class consciousness Nepotism Gender in the new materialism Professional and Bureaucratic Tradition Modernization/Globalization Income disparity or incongruence within the professions Competition of Legal Service Provision Socio-cultural and meta-capital 38 42 22 32 75 24 35 38 My doubt and lack of courage about my project would perhaps underlie the concern if I could verify or confirm the findings effectively. Even with mountain words of ethnographic sketch or final report processed to be reduced into a writing based on the advice and guide from the method teachers, the researchers may still fear of his 500 pages report. In this respect, the tactics to test or confirm the findings would be meaningful and one way to ensure the quality and reduce bias. The fear would not be absurd since most qualitative researchers would be evocative, illuminating and masterful, though if equally wrong eventually. In this dimension, we should be a phenomenologist who chuckles to take it considerate and projected with a sneaky feeling about the construction of reason based on the field out there somewhere. He could reinforce himself with the very idea foundational to deal with the qualitative method, in which no single reality gets it right (Babbie, 2006; Geertz, 1977). An in-confidence and skepticism would inhere within the vertical monopoly of qualitative researcher, who does 3 everything as if he is a one-person research machine in fact.1 This dilemma of qualitative researchers may arise from the aspect of professional communication. For example, the page limit of journal articles may be deprived of a due part to explain to their colleagues what they did and how. On the other, the research could stem from multiple sources of analytic bias if the researchers are not being cryptic or obtuse. The archetypical ones often illustrated by the methods textbooks would include four major mal-practices, say, the holistic fallacy, elite bias, personal bias and going native. Within the holistic fallacy, the research might be sloppy and the researcher would fail to take a due care as submissive to the generizability inclination by lopping off the many loose ends of which social life is made. The second source of bias, what we call elite bias, would arise from the tendency that the researcher prefers to overweigh the data from articulate, well-informed usually high status participants. The personal bias, as a third source in type, is dangerous to skew the ability to represent and present the field work and final report in a trustworthy manner, threatening the objectivity and credibility of research, which would principally be driven from the researcher's personal agenda, personal demons, or personal axes to grind. The final source of bias would be the native inclination of researcher, who would easily be surrendered being co-opted into the perceptions and explanations of local participants. This type could bring that the researcher loses his perspective or bracketing ability. While 13 tactics are recommended to test or confirm the findings, two final arbiters to resolve the fear would culminate, "How can we increase our or our reader's confidence in what we have found?" and "it would do any best to take a skeptical and demanding approach to emerging explanations?" In order to ensure the quality of findings and reduce the bias, I would exact four tactics from Huberman designed to test and verify the conclusion with the brief of my strategic points thought to ensure the quality and reduce bias through the research process (2013). Table 2 Tactics and Strategic Points Checking for Representativeness ⚫ Effort to avoid being assumed, presupposed or typed into the field or research object as well as the generalizability tendency ⚫ Take an open stance to see a supposedly widespread occurrence, and be angulated to see disconforming instances of original beliefs or perceptions. 1 He actually does as omnipotent through defining the problem, doing the sampling, designing instruments, collecting information, condensing the information, analyzing it and interpreting it, and writing it up. 4 ⚫ Constantly ask by himself how representative it is? And is it? or typical? When we develop a finding in a field study, we quickly assume it to be typical, an instance of a more general phenomenon. But is it? And if it is, how representative is it? Using Extreme Cases ⚫ Use extreme cases to verify and confirm conclusions as if the outliers of a certain type would facilitate the implications or meanings in terms of statistical terms. ⚫ For example, I may have illustrated three death penalty issues to deal with the characterization of three periods under investigation. That would be analyzed into results, which will be triangulated into assertions and propositions concerning the discourse of leadership. Following Up Surprises ⚫ Surprise would bask the researcher as more than outliers. The follow-up reflection and sleuthing can be stimulated by surprise and could allow a moment to rethink the expectations, implicit theories and taken for granted assumptions. Interestingly, the eage researcher could be surprised not only at the field occurrence or new evidence, but also be done at the new perspectives deluged by the on-line social website of researchers in his field. ⚫ I have made the follow-up reflection about the diplomatic visit of four ambassadors stalling the legislative process and sudden public announcement by the DOJ rescinding the time schedule of abolishing the Judicial Exam. Checking Out Rival Explanations ⚫ Constantly be minded of rival explanations as a healthy exercise in self discipline and hubris avoidance ⚫ Be known to the lesson that the deals with rival explanations would be irretraceable when you enter the final stage of write-up perhaps busy to buttress, rather than unhorse our explanation. ⚫ Bear in mind that the qualitative researcher does not look for one account, forsaking all others, but the best of several alternative accounts. The trick is to hold onto several 5 possible rival explanations until one becomes increasingly more compelling. 6 References Babbie, E. R. (2006). The practice of social research (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Geertz, C. (1977). The interpretation of culture. New York, NY: Basic Books. Kim, Kiyoung, An Attempt on the Methodological Composure: Between the Number and Understanding, Nature and Construction (December 12, 2015a). K. Kim, An Attempt on the Methodological Composure: Between the Number and Understanding, Nature and Construction, Chosun University, 2015. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2702701 Kim, Kiyoung and Ju, Hyun-Meong and Khatun, Marium, A Reflection on the Research Method and Exemplary Application to the College and University Rankings (October 23, 2015b). Kiyoung Kim, Hyun-Meong Ju, Marium Khatun. A Reflection on the Research Method and Exemplary Application to the College and University Rankings. Education Journal. Vol. 4, No. 5, 2015, pp. 250-262. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20150405.23. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2686045 Kim, Kiyoung, Concerning the Research and Science (April 10, 2015c). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2592858 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2592858 Kim, Kiyoung, On the Method: Quantitative Reasonsing and Social Science (April 17, 2015d). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2595633 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2595633 Kim, Kiyoung, The Research Design and Methodologidal Deliberation (December 23, 2015e). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3305760 Miles, B. M., Huberman, A.M., Saldana, J (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.