Using mixed methods analysis to develop valid research tools for disaster survivors: The hurricane Katrina experience

Introduction:

Research reports of hurricane survivors' experiences are structured to fit scientific models developed, standardized, validated and “normed” for populations that may or may not be Katrina survivors. Analyses of survivors' responses to questions in research instruments have not adequately reflected their actual experiences. This raises questions for quantitative research validity, and reflection of actual events. Exploring respondents' views of research tools could help shape further disaster relief studies for policy and program development to further improve quantitative research validity and program effectiveness.

Methods:

Using mixed methods analysis of K.I. Pargament's (Pargament, 1997) Religious Coping Scale (RCOPE) in a pilot study, survivors' reactions and comments were compared to RCOPE variables and domains. Comments were used to modify the RCOPE questionnaire to better capture survivors' experiences, and guide inclusion of additional constructs.

Findings:

The Brief RCOPE did not reflect the actual experiences of survivors while the full RCOPE did not capture key domains of the spiritual and religious experiences of survivors. Comments exposed subscales and constructs that were not reflected in the full RCOPE. Additional constructs included social capital, resources, self efficacy, God communication, self evaluation, and behavioral/perceptual coping. Eigenvalues and Cronbach alpha levels increased with domain reorganization and addition of constructs.

Conclusion:

Applying qualitative analysis to the RCOPE, reorganizing the domain template to better fit survivors' experiences and perceptions has implications for research and practice. Flexibility in approaches helps to better fit research to actual experience, provide valid findings, reduce research bias, improve cultural competence and increase practice effectiveness.