Differences between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Design - Coursework Example

Differences between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Design Submitted by: XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX Month XX, 2010 Differences between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Design Introduction: A good research is one which has been well thought out and developed with care. There are two main methods that can be adopted for conducting researches. This includes a qualitative and quantitative research. Since market research plays such an important role in the success of any study, this paper aims at discussing two major research methods that are adopted by most students and managements for academic as well as management research. Conducting research is a very important part for any study and hence the main aim of this paper is to discuss the two main forms of research and to compare the two methods to identify the differences between the two methods. The paper will firstly provide a brief of the two methods following which a comparison of the two methods is discussed taking into account the academic and management researches. Qualitative Study Qualitative research is also referred to as phenomenal research. Phenomenological research is based on the word phenomenon refers to a fact that has occurred or happened or an event that has been witnessed. The main aim here in this research method is to focus on “understanding the human behaviour from the participant’s own frame of reference” (Collis & Hussey, 2003, p. 53).This approach and method is used with an aim of investigating an event and to carry out a separate research to “construct new theory to explain the phenomenon” (Collis & Hussey, 2003, pp. 56-57). Also the researchers can use existing theories to analyze an event and to develop a research. One of the main qualities of this research is the focus and aim of finding quality and depth of data more than the quantity (Malhotra, 1999). As Collis & Hussey explain, a qualitative research as the name suggests is based “on the quality and depth of data” (Collis & Hussey, 2003, pp. 56-57). This research method takes into account the details and views of expert in the field or even the general public and the research takes into account an in – depth view of the behavioural patterns of people (Jobber, 2009). The main aim is to identify and analyze the reasons for behavioural aspects and also to analyze for trends that might be displayed. Here this approach permits a chance to get a view on ‘who or how’ of decision making rather than the ‘what, when, where’ aspects which is generally provided by quantitative researches (Halai, 2006). The qualitative research tends to provide a chance for development of rich and intensive data which although might be based on a small number of people can prove to be very contextual data and can prove to add value to already existing data or researches. Also this method takes into account the various aspects like the fundamental complexities of social phenomenon and also considers various aspects of data and information as well. The samples normally chosen for the qualitative research tends to be small and focused and this is normally sufficient in cases where the research aims at discussing the human behaviour. This method also permits the researcher to develop a strong design and pattern from the responses and also allows for better (Saunders, et al, 2000; Housel & Nelson, 2005). This method involves use of several different techniques and methods like in – depth interviews, focus groups, and telephonic interviews and also reviews. These provide a chance for the researchers to develop a close relationship and attachment with the respondents or subjects of the research and also gain a good understanding of the social reality and the essence of a social event or phenomenon in focus. As explained by Denzin & Lincoln, “qualitative investigators think they can get closer to the actor’s perspective through detailed interviewing and observation” (Silverman, 2005, p. 10). Quantitative Study Having understood the qualitative research, it is important to also learn more about quantitative research. This is also referred to as a positivistic paradigm and here the main emphasis is to find the relationship between the facts and the causes for a phenomenon. This approach is very beneficial in studies which require a statistical analysis. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill explain, that in this form of research there is generally a lower level of dependence of the researcher and here the researcher generally plays, ‘the role of an objective analyst’ (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2000). Quantitative research can be understood to be a method that is used for development of systematic investigations of quantifiable areas (Jobber, 2009). This method is a scientific method which is used for research as well as social forms. This technique undertakes a repetitive process which helps in evaluation of results and hypotheses and this method helps build a strong range of data for development of reliable and trusted research. As explained by Hussey & Hussey, 1997 the approach “Seeks the facts or causes of social phenomena, with little regard to the subjective state of the individual” (Hussey & Hussey, 1997, p. 52). The main aim of this method of research is to used statistics and mathematical techniques for the hypotheses and also for achieving quantifiable results. Here in this case the analysis of the research is based completely on quantitative methods. This form of analysis permits a chance for the researcher to develop similarities and also differences. As explained by the International Development Research Centre, “This analysis makes it possible to see patterns of similarity and variability; factors contributing to the size and direction of change; and the significance of any differences between groups in the study” (The International Development Research Centre, 2010). Differences between Qualitative Study and Quantitative Study After having understood the above discussion of each of the methods, it is important to also understand the differences between these two methods of research. The table below provides a clear differentiation of the methods and identifies all sections of research like Focus and purpose of research, data and methods of research, and findings and analysis. Qualitative Research Methods vs. Quantitative Research Methods Comparison Dimensions Qualitative Research Quantitative Research Focus and Purpose Research Style and Type These researches tend to be in nature exploratory (Halai, 2006) On the other hand here the research tends to be more causal and descriptive in nature (Hussey & Hussey, 1997) Main Process This method is an inductive type of research and here research is mainly for formulation of theories (Jobber, 2004) This approach is more based on a deductive method and the results are mostly as a test for already developed theories and concepts (Jobber, 2009). Basic Feature of Research These researches are based more on text and theories (Malhotra, 1999) These are based solely on numbers and is mostly number based (Malhotra, 1999) Involvement of time and cost Here the researcher requires spending a little time for the planning phase however in terms of the analysis phase the time spent is relatively much higher (Silverman, 2005). Also the costs are minimal in this form of research Here on the other hand the time and money spent is much higher. Also the time is mostly in terms of the planning of the research (Sekaran, 2000). The costs involved can be high especially in the case of surveys, etc Data and Methods Size of Sample The number of respondents required for this is generally small and limited (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2000) Here the required respondents can be large numbers and can be very variant in nature (Sekaran, 2000). The higher the number of respondents the more reliable is the research. Questions Designs The questions designed here tend to be more direct with a strong probing nature (The International Development Research Centre, 2010). Also the questions are designed here to gain detailed answers from the respondents The questions tend to be non probing and also the responses are mostly required to be close ended (Trochim, 2006). Administration of research Here the researcher requires to definitely have good interviewing skills to extract good quality information from the respondents (Trochim, 2006) There is clearly no need for any particular skills or techniques here and this is more about the development of good survey instruments (Jobber, 2009). Focused Information Here the information that is collected can be high and this is mainly because the questions are open - ended which allows the respondents to provide more in depth responses (Haslam & McGarty, 1998). Here the information that can be collected is very different and can vary from research to research (Hussey & Hussey, 1997) Method Types Focus Groups, telephonic interviews, reviews, in – depth interviews (Haslam & McGarty, 1998) Surveys (Haslam & McGarty, 1998) Finding and Analysis Response Options Here the responses tend to be more unstructured or semi structured response options (Jobber, 2009) Here the response options are fixed (Jobber D. , 2004) Statistics and Research In this form of research the level of statistical involvement is relatively quite low and in most cases there is no involvement of statistics (Jobber D. , 2004). Statistics forms a major part of the research and to a great extent the research is based on the statistics (Jobber D. , 2004) Validity and Reliability Can be valid and reliable however it is mostly dependent on the skills and rigor of the researchers This form of research is also considered to be valid and reliable and is dependent on the instrument used and the sample size chosen Analysis Here a subjective and interpretive method of analysis applies (Jobber, 2009) In this case the analysis is based more on statistics and concentrates a great extent on summarization (Jobber, 2009) Conclusions: It is important to note that both methods that have been discussed are very different from each other and need to be chosen and applied as per the research type and kind of research. The main focus for a researcher is to identify the main aim of the research based on which the research method needs to be chosen. It is also essential to note that both the methods are mutually independent of one another and can prove to be very effective when used separately as well as when used together in any research. When the two methods are used together, it is referred to as research triangulation. Hussey and Hussey explain, “Triangulation can overcome the potential bias and sterility of a single-method approach” (Hussey & Hussey, 1997). In conclusion, it is clear that although both methods are very effective and efficient, there is a lot of difference between these methods. Both qualitative research as well as quantitative research can be used separately, however over the years, and with immense levels of research, it is clear that using the two methods proves to be very effective and allows reducing any form of bias or sterility. References Collis, J., & Hussey, R. (2003). Business Research: A practical guide for undergraduate and postgraduate students. London: Macmillan Press Ltd. Halai, A. (2006). Ethics in Qualitative Research Issues and Challenges. Karachi: Aka Khan University. Haslam, D. S., & McGarty, D. C. (1998). Doing Psychology: An Introduction to Research Methodology and Statistics. Sage Publications Ltd. Hussey, J., & Hussey, R. (1997). Business Research: A Practical Guide for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students. Chippenham: Macmillan. Jobber, D. (2004). Principles and Practice of Marketing. Berkshire: McGraw – Hill. Jobber, D. (2009). Principles and Practice of Marketing. McGraw Hill Higher Education. Malhotra, N. K. (1999). Marketing Research. An Applied Orientation. London: Prentice Hall. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2000). Research Methods for Business Students. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Sekaran, U. (2000). Research Methods for Business, A Skill-Building Approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Silverman, D. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications. The International Development Research Centre. (2010). Understanding Qualitative Research. Retrieved Augsut 29, 2010, from IDRC: http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-106468-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html Trochim, W. M. (2006, October 20). Research Methods Knowledge Base. Retrieved August 25, 2010, from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampprob.php Read More