Differences between Qualitative and Quantitative - Research Paper Example

Research Report Name: Course instructor: Course: Institution: Date: Research Report 1. Key features of qualitative research Qualitative research is an inductive approach developed in social sciences to aid researchers in the study of social and cultural events. This research is referred to as qualitative because data that is collected in the process is not numerical. Qualitative research approaches are based on a holistic perspective based on the belief that there is no single reality, and that reality is essentially based on unique perceptions of every individual (Walford,1998). Features of qualitative research are classified into four main categories. Focus on natural setting Interest in meaning, perspective and understanding Emphasis on process Inductive study and grounded theory Focus on natural setting The interest and focus of qualitative researchers is on real situations. This implies artificial experiments are of less significance. There concern is more on events that naturally happen but have an impact on normal life processes. Qualitative researchers approach their research with an open mind; things that may appear familiar are regarded as strange before the facts are established. Situations are regarded as significant determinants of behavior, as behavior of individuals varies with the circumstances. The context of behavior is hence considered as a combination of parameters that influence individual behavior. According to Berger (1976), social life unfolds in a complex pattern of layers that have different meanings, and researchers are hence obliged to undertake a deeper exploration of the natural setting. Meaning, perspective and understanding Qualitative research involves discovery of the meaning or reasons why people behave the way they do, the interpretations they give to situations, and how they develop unique perspectives to issues. Behavior is hence regarded to be objective, and not simply meaningless Researchers therefore seek to explore variations in perspectives of different participants across time. Ultimately, qualitative researchers focus on attaining a deeper understanding of social life and culture. To this end, researchers explore and appreciate the inconsistencies, contradictions and ambiguities in behavior as they reveal the underlying perspective, understanding and meaning that people attach to situations (Robson, 2002). Emphasis on the process Previous research largely focused on the relationship between factors of input and the outcomes in total disregard of the processes in between. Qualitative research in contrary focuses on how things unfold, happen, or develop. Life presents a different picture every day, and action is essentially an exemplification of the meanings people attach to situations on daily basis. The most significant question asked in this context is ‘how?’ For instance, how group culture, deviance and criminal behavior develop, or how policies are developed and enacted. Qualitative approaches reveal in finer detail how change occurs, the activities involved, and how decisions are made. Inductive study and grounded theory Qualitative research does not begin with theories that are to be tested, but aims to generate or develop theories from data. To this end, qualitative researchers move beyond surface and fact appearances. In consideration of the assumption that theory is grounded in data, qualitative research focuses on presenting details, contextualizing issues and referring to the emotions and social interactions that form interpersonal relationships. 2. Differences between qualitative and quantitative research The primary distinction between qualitative research and quantitative research is that whereas qualitative research involves assessment of the quality things, quantitative research focuses on measurement of numerical quantities. Qualitative researchers focus on the study of social and cultural aspects, while quantitative researchers concentrate on research that is largely empirical and intended for statistical analysis. A common description that is given to qualitative research is that it is speculative, subjective and flexible. In contrary, quantitative methods are objective, value-free, fixed, and meant to test hypothesis (Walford, 1998). It has been argued that by virtue of quantitative methods being value free, they are superior to qualitative methods. What is essentially implied by this perspective is that quantitative methods are employed mostly in measurement of reality, whereas qualitative research can easily be influenced by values and perspectives of individual researchers. Critiques argue that such freedom in qualitative research is not objective and therefore undesirable. According to Robson (2002), qualitative researchers regard themselves as inferior researchers as there work only works to evoke suspicion, while quantitative research is largely the ‘gold standard’ According to qualitative researchers, there is significant correlation in cultural and social construction, a perspective that is widely disregarded by quantitative researchers. Quantitative research on the other hand has been criticized as lacking the critical touch with reality, as the variables employed in this approach are mostly arbitrary. Key distinguishing features between the two research approaches are highlighted in the table below Qualitative Research Quantitative Research The primary objective is to present a detailed description of aspects under study and the outcomes Emphasis is on classification of features and construction of models aimed at providing an explanation of variables and observations Researches only have a rough idea of what is to be observed Researchers have prior knowledge of what is to be observed More Useful in early stages of research projects More useful in latter stages of research projects Research design develops in the process of research Research design developed prior to collection of data Instruments of data collection are researchers themselves Tools such as measuring equipment and questioners used to collect data Data collected is in form of words, objects or pictures Data is represented in statistics and numbers Research is subjective and largely depended on individual interpretations Research is objective with precision in measurement and analyses Not easy to generalize and more time consuming More precise and efficient data capable of testing hypotheses In-depth and subjective involvement in subject matter Researcher is objective and relatively distant from subject matter 3. Advantages and disadvantages of using quantitative and qualitative methods In the debate regarding the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative and quantitative research methods, two critical issues are put into perspective: theoretical and practical. Theoretical aspects Theoretical issues are centred on either the value of data collected, the scientific rigor of data, or the philosophies that underlie the evaluation process. Value of data collected In making a decision whether to employ qualitative or quantities approaches in undertaking research, researchers must consider the trade-off between depth and breath that is presented in using either of the techniques. Despite the fact that quantitative research methods yield representative information, the information can only provide superficial explanations of this information. On the contrary, a qualitative approach will provide in-depth knowledge and understating of the underlying meanings and implications of the information and data that is collected. This is attributed to the in-depth level to which qualitative researchers get involved in issues under study (Woods, 1999). Scientific rigor of data Quantitative methods of data collection are considered to provide information that is more accurate and objective. This is attributed to the standardized techniques that are employed in collection of the data. Such data is comparatively more useful and convenient to use since it can be replicated and analysed using techniques that are statistical and sophisticated, thereby significantly enhancing the breath of the information. On the contrary, qualitative methods have largely been regarded to be relevant to evaluations that are formative, and not practically useful in summative evaluations that require quantitative statistics to make accurate deductions (Mason, 2002). But this argument can also be challenged by the reality that respondents in a survey that employs quantitative techniques can easily fail to understand questions that they respond to, or fail to recall or provide critical information essential to the survey. Of significant importance in evaluating the effectiveness of the two approaches is the recognition that both approaches are undertaken within a cultural context and therefore research findings from either approach are likely to be influenced by differences in beliefs and perceptions of respondents, data collectors and investigators. Philosophical distinctions that underlie the evaluation process Merits and demerits of the two research approaches has been an issue of contention among scholars and researchers. This is largely attributed to differences in perspectives regarding what knowledge is and which is the best way to acquire it. The perspective held by qualitative researchers is that all knowledge is typically socially constructed and influenced by beliefs, traditions, culture and social environments within which individuals belong. What this argument implies is that in reality there is nothing like social reality. Nonetheless, quantitative researcher still embraces and employs scientific models and intricate statistical techniques in the study of social phenomena. This distinction in perspective has a significant impact on research design. In consideration of the fact that qualitative research does not start with specific research questions or hypothesis that should be tested, and instead research questions are formulated at the end of field research, this approach could prove very challenging for scientifically oriented quantitative researchers to adopt. Criminology research project A quantitative approach to validating qualitative research bindings on social phenomena has received immense criticism from qualitative research advocates. Several quantitative approaches such as experiments and random sampling have been dismissed on grounds of being inappropriate in analyzing social phenomena such as criminology. This is based on the argument that such approaches fail to take into account evolving social behavior that is largely influenced by social, cultural, political and environmental factors. Qualitative researchers argue that individuals do not always portray behavior that is coherent with the aspects that are being researched and therefore quantification has the limitation of concealing critical social factors and processes (Denscombe, 1998). Methods employed by qualitative researchers demonstrate the belief that such approaches are more effective in providing a deeper and precise comprehension of social phenomena such as criminology. Qualitative approaches are better able to provide a realistic understanding of criminal behavior since they employ social or qualitative techniques such as observation, listening and evaluation of the social context in which crime prevails. Quantitative data that may be collected in research on criminal behavior may at best provide information on demographic aspects of criminal behavior, which is largely superficial and incapable of addressing the critical aspects of the vice, such as why it happens, where it happens, and how it can be prevented. These are typical socio-cultural aspects that can be analyzed and addressed through qualitative approaches of studying human behavior. List of References Denscombe, M 1998, The Good Research Guide: for small-scale social research projects, , Open University Press, Buckingham. Mason, J 2002, Qualitative researching, Sage Publishers, London. Robson, C 2002, Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers, Blackwell, Oxford. Walford, G. (ed.) 1998, Doing Research about Education, Routledge, London. Walford, G. (ed.) 2001, Studies in Educational Ethnography, Jai Press, London. Woods, P 1996, Researching the Art of Teaching: Ethnography for educational use, Routledge. London. Woods, P 1999, Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers, Routledge, London. Trochim, W. M 2000, The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd Edition. Retrieved on May 10, 2013 from Read More