Method Comparison - Essay Example

Method Comparison Research refers to the systematic scientific process of gathering and analyzing data on a particular that is largely directed towards generating more knowledge on that particular subject. Research usually entails procedures that are put in place to guide the investigation or inquiry process to in order to ensure that correct, accurate, and valid data is obtained that would be processed to generate useful information. There are two major types of research that are: quantitative research and qualitative research. Qualitative research is an inquiry method based on ethnography and observation. Qualitative research focuses on subjective data that relates to feelings, thoughts, opinions, perceptions, and attitudes that are immeasurable. Examples of qualitative research are ethnography and observation. Ethnography as qualitative research method and process refers to the systematic study of people or groups of people with the objective of cultural interpretation (Westenholz-Bless & Achola, 2007). Observation, on the other hand, refers to the active investigation of processes or systems from their primary sources through the use of human senses; observation is sometimes referred to as eye witnessing. Quantitative research, on the other hand, refers to the scientific method of inquiry that is largely based on measurable data in the formulation of facts and investigating patterns in research. Quantitative research, therefore, is focused on the generation of numeric data with strong emphasis on objectivity. Examples of qualitative research are the surveys and the experiments. This paper focuses on the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the two categories of research; emphasizing the strengths and weaknesses of the methods with strong regards to the subject of online dating. Online dating refers to a personal introductory system through which individuals or groups of individuals find and establish contacts with each other over the internet with the aim of developing personal, sexual or romantic relationships. Online dating is one of the many concepts that have developed from the internet based technology (Smith & Duggan, 2013). It is a major social issue influencing social relationships in almost every aspect. This paper will first discuss the comparative advantages of the two research methods then later on discuss the weaknesses. To begin with, qualitative research methods generate rich and comprehensive information about the investigated subjects. This is in line with its wide scope of coverage, ranging from people’s thoughts to the deepest feelings. With regards to online dating, it has been established that the internet is an important component of the sexual and romantic experiences of the youth. The qualitative research shows that youths of very young ages are involved in serious online romantic and sexual relationships. The relationships largely entail explicit sexual dialogue and nudity display through the mobile phones on webcams. This usually extends to the actual meeting of the participants or may remain limited within the context of cyber. In this light, the weakness of qualitative research methods is in line with its inability to give particular figures on exactly the youngest age that the youths have been established to engage in online dating. The weakness of qualitative method is, however, a very key strength to the quantitative research methods. The quantitative would provide exact figures on an issue. For instance, it would specify that the youngest age at which youths engage in online dating is 13 years. The numeric values or estimates provided are often key in determining the real extent of a situation (Smith & Duggan, 2013). Qualitative research methods provide data that portrays the emic perspective of the subject. It gives the insiders description and opinion on the subject; emphasizing the personal experiences people have with regards to the phenomena in question. For instance, in the qualitative findings on online dating, the insiders perspectives are represented by the terms or vocabularies associated with their communication or phenomena. The vocabularies include “cybering” which refers to the explicit sexual dialogue and “flashing” which refers to the nudity display. This is often not presented by the qualitative research findings. The quantitative data emphasize the facts and figures and does not provide the room for the participants to give extra information regarding a subject. In this case, the quantitative research methods would have been confined to the numerical values attached to the prevalence of nudity display or explicit sexual dialogue. For instance, what are the rates at which the youths display nudity or engage in explicit sexual dialogue in the context of online dating? As such, percentages would most likely be utilized (Newman & Benz, 2006). Qualitative research methods are certainly very essential in defining and describing complex phenomena, especially those that are subjective in nature. For instance, with regards to online dating, measuring the participants’ attitudes, perceptions and experiences with the phenomena would be a huge challenge with the quantitative research techniques. However, qualitative research techniques are usually descriptive in nature and are open ended. They, thus, give the allowances for participants to expand on their opinions, not limiting their ideas. Qualitative research may reveal that many participants to online dating are left disappointed as most of them end up not meeting their dates’ on a face to face basis or even those who meet them get to meet different people from the ones they expected (Lenhart, 2014). Quantitative research techniques, on the other hand, may not measure the level of disappointment but will tell the precise number of individuals who have failed to meet their dates or who met different people. Quantitative research techniques provide data that are verifiable. Follow up studies can be conducted on the same topics with the same results as the previous ones found. For instance, a study by the Pew Research Center revealed that one in every ten Americans have either utilized the mobile dating app or used the online dating sites; and 38% of currently single individuals have used the mobile apps and dating sites. The same result is expected should a follow up study be implemented. This enables comparability of data between different locations or communities. For instance, it is very easy to compare the 38% of single Americans who utilize the dating sites and mobile apps with the 50% of single people in the United Kingdom who use the same. However, it would not be objective and effective enough to compare the rates of dating based on qualitative methods. The qualitative methods would bring out something like, “there are more single people utilizing the dating sites and apps in the United Kingdom compared to the United States”, which is not objective enough for effective comparison (Lenhart, 2014). During extended research activities such as fieldworks, the qualitative research methods are very essential in being responsive to the changes that take place during a study; and as such may warrant the need to shift focus. In the study of online dating, for instance, qualitative research may establish that there exist several other significant factors that push or pull young youths towards online dating. If this was very essential research with a wider scope and that is goal oriented, shifting focus from the general topic of online dating to the core factors that influence the younger youths towards the phenomena. The focus shifting capacity is further enhanced by the flexible nature of qualitative researches; they could be adjusted accordingly to accommodate new information. The essential information that would highlight the need to change focus is hardly obtained through the quantitative research whose scope is usually limited and very rigid (Westenholz-Bless & Achola, 2007). Quantitative data are very reliable. This is in line with its varied techniques, which emphasize rigorous collection of data coupled with critical analysis. The reliability ensures objective predictions of the future trends of the particular phenomena. For instance, quantitative research makes it easier to analyze the trend of people’s perceptions on online dating through the graphical representations between 2005 and 2013 (Smith & Duggan, 2013). The research findings generated through qualitative research are often unique to a particular group or setting and cannot be generalized to other different groups. For instance, it cannot be generalized that because there are high rates of dating sites and mobile apps usage in the United Kingdom, same is the case in South Africa or China. Such generalizations are often impossible because of the differing locations as well as cultural experiences (Bamberger, 2000). It is usually more time consuming collecting and analyzing qualitative data. The data are often too much detailed and comprehensive making it difficult to analyze and bring forth the desired information. Moreover, there exist higher chances of the research being influenced by the idiosyncrasies and personal biases of the researcher. For instance, in the qualitative research regarding online dating and youths, the researcher’s perspectives on the unethical or wrongness of a 13 year old engaging in online dating is very evident. Such prejudgments may influence the authenticity and correctness of a research. In conclusion, quantitative and qualitative research methods comparatively have differing strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses of one method tend to be reinforced by the strength of the other method. The strengths of one method also adequately support the weaknesses of the other. For instance, the inability of qualitative research to predict future trends is reinforced by the capacity of the quantitative research methods to provide objective data for prediction. The rigid nature of quantitative research techniques to accommodate extra information and changes is managed by the capacity of qualitative research techniques to be flexible enough to provide room for the changes. It would, therefore, be essential to note that not any of the two methods is better or more effective than the other; neither is one highly regarded over the other. However, their usability is determined by the nature of data that is required and the purposes for which the research is conducted. Moreover as it has been demonstrated, qualitative and quantitative research methods complement one another very well. This means that it is more effective to use the two methods simultaneously, if it is not for the constraints of resources. Besides, the quantitative data can be used to authenticate or validate the accuracy of the qualitative data (Bamberger, 2000). References Top of Form Bamberger, M. (2000). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research in development projects. Washington, DC. Bottom of Form Lenhart A. (2014). Dating and mating in the digital age: relationships and technology in the modern era. Retrieved from Top of Form Top of Form Newman, I., & Benz, C. R. (2006). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Univ. Press.Bottom of Form Smith, A. & Duggan, M. (2013). Online dating and relationships. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/10/21/online-dating-relationships/ Westenholz-Bless, C., & Achola, P. P. W. (2007). Fundamentals of social research methods: An African perspective. Cape Town, South Africa: Juta Legal and Academic Publishers. Read More