Four Types of Quantitative Research - Essay Example

Research Methodology Quantitative research The quantitative method of research is defined by Aliaga and Gunderson (as cited by Muijs, 2004, p as“explaining phenomena by collecting numerical data that are analysed using mathematically based methods (in particular statistics)”. In essence, quantitative research primarily uses mathematical figures and numerical analysis in order to conceptualize a thorough understanding and a valid answer to research questions. It also offers answers using precise measurements (Jenkins, 2009). There are four types of quantitative research, and these are: descriptive, correlational, quasi-experimental, and experimental (Punch & Punch, 2005, p. 75). Descriptive research explores and describes phenomena based on real-life situations. It helps provide new information about a topic which has not been completely explored. It describes concepts and relationships and provides more data from which more quantitative research can be conceptualized (Punch & Punch, 2005, p. 75). Correlational research on the other hand examines the relationship between two of more variables and determines if the relationship is negative or positive. A positive correlation means that the variables vary together and they either increase or decrease together; for negative correlation, variables vary in opposite directions or have an inverse relationship (Punch & Punch, 2005, p. 75). Quasi-experimental researches seek to determine the cause and effect relationships of independent and dependent variables. A treatment is usually implemented in this research and the effects are reviewed using selected methods of measurement (Trochim, 2006). Finally, experimental research is the type of research which helps to establish cause and effect of phenomenon (Davis, 1997). The causality between variables is tested here under highly controlled conditions. The quantitative research has its strengths and weaknesses. It is advantageous because its methods are quantifiable, reliable, and applicable to a larger population (Weinreich, 2006). It also states the problem in specific terms and clearly specifies the independent and dependent variables being reviewed (Weinreich, 2006). It also follows the original research goals and comes up with objective conclusions and results, thereby ensuring reliability of data from controlled observations and mass surveys. Quantitative research also eliminates and minimizes the subjectivity of judgments. Finally, it allows for a longitudinal assessment on the ensuing performance of subjects (Matveey, 2002). Quantitative research is however also considered weak because it does not provide the researcher with data on the “context of the situation where the studied phenomenon occurs” (Matveey, 2002). It also cannot control the environment where the subjects provide answers during the survey process. Its outcome is also limited to those indicated in the research proposal because some questions are posed in the closed and structured format. Finally, quantitative research does not promote the continuous assessment of a research phenomenon. Qualitative research The qualitative research is a method of research “used to address research questions that require explanation or understanding of social phenomena and their contexts” (Ritchie & Lewis, 2003, p. 5). It is a type of research which creates formal statements on the world, including knowledge which is useful for those who work with issues on learning and adjustments. It is mainly about gaining insight into “people’s attitudes, behaviours, value systems, concerns, motivations, aspirations, culture or lifestyle” (Ereaut, 2007). There are various types of qualitative research, and these are: phenomenological, grounded theory, ethnographical, and historical research. Phenomenological research is considered to be an inductive descriptive approach which describes a lived experience; and in some instances, the experience of chronic pain can be made a subject of this type of research (Bentz & Shapiro, 1998, p. 99). The grounded theory approach is also an inductive research method and it is often used to formulate or test theory in relation to a phenomenon. It “draws on the most subjective of all data, so much so that the empirical and behaviouristic sciences have even rejected the meaningfulness of a personal statement about internal states...” (Bentz & Shapiro, 1998, p. 99). Ethnographical research usually studies culture and anthropology through an in-depth assessment of the people within the culture. This research is often used to explain and understand the behaviour of people and how they react to certain phenomena (Byrne, 2001). Finally, historical research is about “interpreting information about the past...and goes back as far as possible to primary sources” (Wysocki, 2008, p. 167). Through this type of research, the past mistakes are understood and lessons from such mistakes are utilized in order to deal with current issues or problems. This type of research also has some strengths and weaknesses. It is advantageous because it gives a more realistic assessment of the world which cannot be seen in the numerical results in quantitative research (Shaw & Lishman, 1999, p. 8). It is also more flexible in its data collection, analysis, and interpretation. It provides a more comprehensive view of the phenomena being evaluated (Bogdan & Taylor, 1975). It also has the ability to communicate with respondents in their own language and their own terms. Finally, its descriptiveness is highly based on primary and unstructured data (Matveey, 2002). It is however weak because it sometimes does not follow the original objectives of the research (Cassell & Symon, 1994). Various conclusions can also be drawn from a single information because of the individual characteristics of respondents which are all taken into account during the data gathering stage of the research. In qualitative research, there is also an inability to assess causality between various research data (Shaw & Gould, 2001, p. 185). Moreover, there is also a difficulty in explaining the varying quality and amount of data gained from respondents and the different conclusions drawn from such data. Finally, qualitative research lacks consistency and reliability because the interviewer can choose to ask different questions using different techniques and the respondent can choose to answer some questions, and ignore some others (Matveey, 2002). Mixed Method The mixed method type of research is generally a combination of the qualitative and the quantitative types of research. It is also a design with “philosophical assumptions as well as methods of inquiry. As a methodology, it involves philosophical assumptions that guide the direction of the collection and analysis of data and the mixture of qualitative and quantitative approaches in many phases in the research process” (Creswell, 2006, p. 5). It highlights on the collection, analysis, and combination of the quantitative and qualitative results in a single study or series of studies. Its main idea is that combining the quantitative and qualitative approaches creates a better understanding of the research problems than either approach alone (Creswell, 2006, p. 5). There are two mixed model research subtypes, and these are the within-stage and the across stage mixed model research. In the within-stage mixed model, the quantitative and the qualitative approaches are combined within one or more of the stages of research. For example, the questionnaire used in the data collection may include both open-ended (qualitative) and close-ended questions (quantitative) (University of South Alabama, n.d). In the across stage model, the mixing of the quantitative and the qualitative types of research is seen across at least two stages of the research process. For example, data for a study with qualitative research objectives may be collected through both qualitative and quantitative methods and may also be analysed or assessed through quantitative and qualitative means (University of South Alabama, n.d). The mixed type of research also has its strengths and weaknesses. It is advantageous in the sense that the words and narratives can be utilized in order to give support to the numbers (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004, p. 21). Numbers can also be used to increase the reliability of words, pictures, and the narrative. It can also provide broader research questions and the evidence can be made stronger through the convergence of the findings. Insights missed in other methods can be added in this method and thereby, the generalizability of results can be increased (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004, p. 21). Moreover, the quantitative and the qualitative research methods used together can increase the knowledge to support theory and practice. This method however, also has its weaknesses. It can sometimes be difficult for a researcher to adapt both methods of research, especially when these methods are to be used concurrently (Bazeley, 2002, p. 7). In this method, the researcher is also obliged to learn about the two methods of research and to understand how they can be combined. It is also more expensive and time consuming; and the specific methods of carrying out and combining these two methods have not completely been worked out by research methodologists (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998, p. 102). Consequently, there still are questions on paradigm mixing, the qualitative analysis of quantitative data, and the interpretation of conflicting results. Comparison between quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods of research Quantitative Qualitative Mixed Scientific method Top-down method with the researcher testing the hypotheses with data Bottom-up with the researcher generating new theories from data collected Deductive and inductive Outlook on human behaviour Behaviour is regular Behaviour is fluid, dynamic, and personal Behaviour is relatively predictable Common research objectives Description, explanation, prediction Description, exploration, discovery Multiple objectives Focus Narrow – testing specific objectives Wide-angle – examining phenomena Multi-lens focus Observation Observing behaviour under controlled conditions Observing behaviour in natural environment and within context Observing behaviour under multiple context Understanding of reality Objective Subjective, personal, and based on social construct Commonsense and pragmatic Data collected Using precise, structured and validated data Using interviews, participant observation, and open-ended questions Multiple forms Nature of data Variables Words, images, and categories Variables, words, images, and categories Data analysis Analysis of statistical relationship Searching for patterns and themes Statistical relationships and searching for patterns and themes Results Generalizable results Particularistic findings, insider viewpoint Corroborated findings may generalize results Final report Statistical report Narrative report Eclectic and pragmatic (University of South Alabama, n.d, p. 2) Information system All types of researches are based on assumptions which relate to valid research and on appropriate research methods. In order to evaluate qualitative research, it is crucial to know what these assumptions are (Myers, 1997). The most significant philosophical assumptions are those which pertain to the underlying epistemology in research. There are several underlying paradigms in relation to information systems in qualitative research, and these are: positivist, interpretivist, and critical theory. Positivism is founded on empiricism which functions only with observed facts; it advocates the idea that factual knowledge largely relies on the positive information taken from observed experience – anything beyond this experience is deemed to be metaphysical (Changing Minds, 2002). It is therefore also focused on empirical regularities which often refer to the relationships between two variables. Such relationship may not always be causal in nature, but laws and predictions often apply to these relationships. Positivism can come in the form of social positivism which expresses people as evolving; critical positivism which shows an emphasis on immediate experience; and logical positivism from Von Mises and the Vienna circle which uses a harder line (Changing Minds, 2002). Interpretivist researches often “assume that people create and associate their own subjective and intersubjective meanings as they interact with the world around them. Interpretive researchers thus attempt to understand phenomena through accessing the meanings participants assign to them” (Walsham, n.d, p. 2). Interpretivists start with the knowledge of reality, especially with the viewpoints of human domains as it applies to the research process. There is no neutral reality which can be seen by researchers and by other contributors; this makes the approach largely different from the positivist theory. They see data as their “own constructions of other people’s constructions of what they and their compatriots are up to” (Walsham, n.d, p. 3). In effect, the interpretivist seeks meanings as expressed by other people and as seen by other people. Critical theory was developed by the Frankfurt School in Germany in 1923. This theory is said to be a combination of historical materialism, Freudian psychoanalysis, and hermeneutics. The word “theory” is often seen as a set of connected propositions which can be used in explaining or predicting phenomena (Hjorlan & Nicolaisen, 2010). The use of the word theory is often considered to be misleading because it seems to disregard the social context of the research. In critical theory, there is a constant interaction between theories and facts; and the theorists “seek to recognize the relationship between the constitution of their propositions and the social context in which they find themselves” (Lewis-Beck, et.al., 2004, p. 224). There is a constant interplay between the theoretical and the social context of studies in order to help settle contradictions in the material world. Positivism Interpretivist Critical theory Assumptions Objective world which science can epitomize with privileged information Intersubjective word which science can epitomize with concepts of actors Material world of structured contradictions which can be understood by removing tacit ideological biases Key Focus Search for organizational variables which lead to consequent actions Search for trends and meaning Search for underlying contradictions hidden by ideology Key theories in paradigm Contingency theory; systems theory; and transaction cost economics of organizing Symbolic interaction; ethnomethodology; and phenomenology; Marxism, radical theory Nature of knowledge Proven hypotheses involving reliable variables Abstract descriptions of meanings; definitions viewed in their natural contexts Structural or historical insights revealing contradictions Goal Discover truth based on numerical relations between variables Reveal meanings; uncover how members define situations; and evaluate how reliable realities can be. Discover hidden interests; unveil contradictions; make possible informed consciousness; and replace ideology with scientific knowledge. Unit of analysis The variable Meaning, symbolic act Contradictions Research methods Experiments, questions, secondary data analysis Ethnography; participant observation; and interviews; Field research, historical analysis, and dialectical analysis (Gephart, 1999) Case study There is no one definite definition for case study. In essence however, it is defined as the “intensive study of a single case where the purpose of that study – is at least in part – to shed light on a larger class of cases (a population)” (Gerring, 2007, p. 20). A case is a unit observed at one time or over a span of time and its study covers the interplay of factors affecting said unit. Case studies can either be single or multiple. A single case study highlights one case only; and a multiple case study includes two of more cases within the study (Yin, 2003, p. 5). These single or multiple case studies can either be exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory. Exploratory case studies help define the hypotheses of ensuing studies or help determine the feasibility of research processes (Yin, 2003, p. 5). Descriptive case studies provide a “description of a phenomenon within its context” (Yin, 2003, p. 5). Explanatory case studies provide a picture of the cause and effect relationships. Case studies, like other methods of research have both strengths and weaknesses in their general application. Case studies have been considered as lacking in scientific rigour and reliability, and therefore lacking in generalizability (Noor, 2008, p. 1603). However, case studies have also been lauded for giving researchers a holistic view of certain phenomenon, as well as for providing a round picture of the evidence made available. They are also useful in capturing the emergent properties of life in organizations, including the flow and changes in organizations (Noor, 2008, p. 1603). These case studies also provide generalizations from findings on multiple cases which can lead to some forms of replication. Case studies differ from ethnography in terms of intent. Ethnography is more inward looking and seeks to establish the implied knowledge of culture participants (Kapoor, 2009). Case study is outward looking and seeks to differentiate the nature of phenomena through the specific investigation of individual situations and their context (Kapoor, 2009). Ethnography is founded on anthropology and sociology; hence, it covers people or groups of people. In carrying out research in this field, there is a need to utilize unstructured questionnaires and detailed field notes (Kapoor, 2009). On the other hand, case studies are used when “how” and “why” questions are involved and when the researcher does not have much control over the events. It is used when the “boundaries between phenomena and context are not clearly evident” (Kapoor, 2009). Both case study methods and action research cover diverse forms of research. Case study covers inductive and deductive forms of research and action research also covers these forms. They also focus on the act of gaining a deeper understanding of phenomena in the real-world settings (Blichfeldt & Anderson, 2006, p. 3). They are however also different from each other in terms of the participation of respondents in the issues being addressed. Action research also begins the research process within issues and concerns, and case studies are often begun with the researcher’s interest in a phenomenon (Blichfeldt & Anderson, 2006, p. 4). There is more deliberate self-involvement in action research, whereas, the participation in case studies comes more from the participants investigating a phenomena. Inductive and Deductive methods The inductive and deductive methods of research work in directions opposite from each other. Deductive research starts with the general and works its way to the specific. It is therefore driven by knowledge. Inductive research starts with the specific observations and works its way to broader generalizations. In this case, it is more focused on feature-detecting (Skinner, n.d, p. 2). Inductive Deductive Theoretical framework Develops the theoretical framework Identify research question, but no theoretical framework Variables Identified for relevant points in research Respondents identify constructs and explain relationship between them Themes/instruments Instrument development in the course of the research Broad themes identified for research and discussion Answers to issues Respondents give answers to particular questions Respondents discuss themes of interest Analysis Answers analysed based on theoretical framework Researcher develops theory Outcome Theory tested is accepted or rejected Theory developed (Ali & Birley, 1998, p. 16) Works Cited Ali, H. & Birley, S. (1998) Integrating deductive and inductive approaches in a study of new ventures and customer perceived risk, The Management School, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Management, viewed 24 October 2010 from https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/retrieve/629/SWP3990.pdf Bazeley, P. (2002) Issues in Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Research, Research Support, viewed 25 October 2010 from http://www.researchsupport.com.au/MMIssues.pdf Bentz, V. & Shapiro, J. (1998) Mindful inquiry in social research, London: Sage Publishers Blichfeldt, B. & Andersen, J. (2006) Creating a Wider Audience for Action Research: Learning from Case-Study Research, Journal of Research Practice, volume 2, number 1, pp. 1-12, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/viewFile/23/69 Bogdan, R., & Taylor, S.J. (1975) Introduction to qualitative research methods, New York: John Wiley & Sons Byrne, M. (2001) Ethnography as a qualitative research method. AORN Journal. , Find Articles, viewed 25 October 2010 from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FSL/is_1_74/ai_76653445/ Cassell, C., & Symon, G. (1994) Qualitative research in work contexts, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Chapter 2 Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Research (n.d) University of South Alabama, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.southalabama.edu/coe/bset/johnson/lectures/lec2.pdf Chapter 14 Mixed Research: Mixed Method and Mixed Model Research (n.d) University of South Alabama, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.southalabama.edu/coe/bset/johnson/lectures/lec14.htm Creswell (2006) Understanding Mixed Methods of Research, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/10981_Chapter_1.pdf Davis, J. (1997) Experimental Research Methods, Metropolitan State College of Denver, viewed 25 October 2010 from http://clem.mscd.edu/~davisj/prm2/exper1.html Ereaut, G. (2007) What is qualitative research, QSR International, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.qsrinternational.com/what-is-qualitative-research.aspx Gerring, J. (2007) Case study research: principles and practices, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Gephart, R. (1999) Paradigms and Research Methods, Research Methods Forum, volume 4, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://division.aomonline.org/rm/1999_RMD_Forum_Paradigms_and_Research_Methods.htm Hjorland, B. & Nicolaisen, J. (2010) Critical Theory. Epistemological Lifeboat, viewed 25 October 2010 from http://www.iva.dk/jni/lifeboat/info.asp?subjectid=29 Jenkins, L. (2009) Fundamentals of Quantitative Research: Considerations in Research Methodology, Suite 101, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.suite101.com/content/fundamentals-of-quantitative-research-a149406 Johnson, R. & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2004) Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come, Educational Researcher, volume 33, number 7, pp. 14–26, viewed 24 occtober 2010 from http://www.aera.net/uploadedFiles/Journals_and_Publications/Journals/Educational_Researcher/Volume_33_No_7/03ERv33n7_Johnson.pdf Kapoor, G. (2009) Case Study vs Ethnography, Koffee Hut, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://koffeehut.com/2009/11/11/case-study-vs-ethnography/ Lewis-Beck, M., Bryman, A. & Liao, T. (2004) The Sage encyclopedia of social science research methods, Volume 1, London: Sage Publishers Matveey, A. (2002) The Advantages of Employing Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Intercultural Research: Practical Implications from the Study of the Perceptions of Intercultural Communication Competence by American and Russian Managers, Russian Communication Association, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.russcomm.ru/eng/rca_biblio/m/matveev01_eng.shtml Muijs, D. (2004) Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS, London: Sage Publishers Myers, M. (1997) Qualitative Research in Information Systems, Association for Information Systems, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.qual.auckland.ac.nz/ Noor, K. (2008) Case Study: A Strategic Research Methodology, American Journal of Applied Sciences, volume 5, number 11, pp. 1602-1604, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.scipub.org/fulltext/ajas/ajas5111602-1604.pdf Punch, K. & Punch, K. (2005) Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches, London: Sage Publishers Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J. (2003) Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students, London: Sage Publishers Shaw, I. & Gould, N. (2001) Qualitative research in social work, London: Sage Publishers Shaw, I. & Lishman, J. (1999) Evaluation and social work practice, London: Sage Publishers Skinner, M. (n.d) Research – the essential guide: Ways to categorise research and methodology, British Film Institute, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.bfi.org.uk/education/teaching/researchguide/pdf/bfi-edu-resources_research-the-essential-guide.pdf Changing Minds (2002) Positivism, viewed 25 October 2010 from http://changingminds.org/explanations/research/philosophies/positivism.htm Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (1998) Mixed methodology: combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, London: Sage Publishers Trochim, W. (2006) Quasi-Experimental Design, Social Research Methods, viewed 25 October 2010 from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/quasiexp.php Walsham, G. (n.d) What is Interpretive Research? Oslo University, viewed 25 October 2010 from http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat/ifi/INF5740/h04/undervisningsmateriale/Lecture_1.ppt Weinreich, N. (2006) Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Social Marketing Research, Social Marketing, viewed 24 October 2010 from http://www.social-marketing.com/research.html Wysocki, D. (2008) Readings in Social Research Methods, London: Thomson Learning Centre Yin, R. (2003) Applications of case study research, London: Sage Publishers Read More