Research Method in Social Science - Essay Example

Qualitative and quantitative research methods represent two distinctly different ways of approaching research. Critically assess and compare the strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods, using concrete examples to support your arguments. Research is undertaken within most professions. More than a set of skills, research is a way of thinking. It is something like understanding and formulating guiding principles that govern a particular procedure as well as developing and testing new theories that for the enhancement of any practice. It is infact a habit of questioning what you do, and a systematic examination of the observed information to find answers, with a view to instituting appropriate changes for a more effective professional service. One's philosophical orientation might stem from one of the several paradigms and approaches in research - positivist, interpretive, phenomenolist, action or participatory, feminist, qualitative or quantitative. The concept of 'validity' can be applied to any aspect of the research process. It ensures that in a research study correct procedures have been applied to find answers to a question. 'Reliability' refers to the quality of a measurement procedure that provides repeatability and accuracy. 'Unbiased and objective' means that every step has been taken without introducing vested self-interest. Adherences to these three criteria enable the process to be called 'research'. However, the degree to which these criteria are expected to be fulfilled varies from discipline to discipline and so the meaning of 'research' differs from one academic discipline to another. For example, the expectations of the research process are markedly different between the physical and social sciences. In the physical sciences, a research endeavour is expected to be strictly controlled at each step, whereas in social sciences rigid control cannot be enforced and sometimes is not even demanded. There are two main paradigms that form the basis of research in the social sciences. One is the systematic, scientific or positivist approach. The opposite paradigm is the qualitative, ethnographic, ecological or naturalistic approach. A positivist paradigm lends itself to both qualitative and quantitative research. However, there is distinction between qualitative data on the one hand and qualitative research on the other as the first is confined to the measurement of variables and the second to a use of methodology. Qualitative Vs Quantitative Research The term quality comes from the Latin word qualitas which means "of what kind'. There is an element of evaluation and judgement and taste connected to the term quality. Quantity is a different matter. The term quantity comes from the Latin word quantitas meaning "how great" or, for our purposes, "how much" or "how many". In the context of social science, quantitative researchers are sometimes accused of being too narrow, basing their research on what they count, measure and observe, and neglecting other matters. Qualitative researchers, however, are accused of "reading into" texts that are not there or of having opinions or making interpretations that seem odd or excessive. Therefore none of the modes of research are exclusively complete in themselves. A combination of the two approaches is a better way of solving a social science research problem. Qualitative and quantitative research methodologies differ in the philosophy that underpins their mode of inquiry as well as, to some extent, in methods, models and procedures used. Though the research process is broadly the same in both, qualitative and quantitative research are differentiated in terms of methods of data collection, the procedures adopted for data processing and analysis, and the style of communication of the findings. Qualitative and quantitative research can be compared on the basis of certain parameters. Let us delve into the parameters one by one. 1. Underpinning philosophy The underlying philosophy of the quantitative approach is rationalism, "that human beings achieve knowledge because of their capacity to reason." (Bernard 1994:2). However the philosophy of empiricism supports the qualitative approach. According to Bernard (1994: 2), empiricism is the knowledge that human beings acquire from sensory experiences. Thus quantitative research implies social facts to have an objective reality. On the contrary, qualitative approach implies that facts are socially structured. 2. Approach to inquiry Quantitative research adopts a structured and rigid methodology. However qualitative research makes use of an unstructured and flexible methodology. For instance, a social research problem that uses a quantitative approach uses formal instruments and experimentation. It begins with a hypothesis and a certain theory and ends up with reducing data to numerical indices. The approach in a qualitative research is very naturalistic and it culminates with a hypothesis and grounded theory. While the former flows in a deductive pattern, the pattern for the latter is inductive. 3. Purpose of investigation While the purpose of quantitative research is to quantify the extent of variation in a phenomenon, situation or issue; qualitative research gives a description of this variation. For example, consider a research problem that entails studying the effectiveness of a marriage counseling service on extent of marital problems. The quantitative approach would bring forth the percentage effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the service. However, the qualitative approach would explore and ascertain an association or interdependence between the two variables, besides establishing why the problem occurred on the first stance and why the interdependence happened later. This example also throws light on the difference of approach in the measurement of variables. 4. Sample Size The focus is always to have a greater sample size in quantitative research, while it is preferred to view fewer cases when using qualitative approach. It is simple to understand the distinction given the nature of both the approaches. Numerical analyses are more reliable if the data pool to be assessed is large. But in case of descriptive, social analysis it would better to deal with fewer cases in much detail. 5. Focus of inquiry Based on this particular parameter, qualitative research seems a more viable option in social science research. Though it might zero in on few respondents, yet it manages to cover multiple issues. However, the extent of inquiry is very limited in quantitative research. 6. Research methodologies While quantitative research makes use of content analyses, surveys, experiments and descriptive statistics as the main methods of data collection, qualitative research is usually done through interviews, historical analyses, ethnomethodological research and participant observation techniques. The quantitative techniques are more direct in form and operation. However, they are also very specific. The aim is to classify features, count them and construct statistical models in an attempt to explain what is observed. The second category has a broader scope for it provides opportunities for discussions and deviations in something as difficult and complicated as a social system. For instance a problem like effects of domestic violence on children cannot be understood by doing a plain survey of such families. It needs to delve into depth interviews and even participant observation, in addition to extensive survey of literature and historical analysis for a deeper understanding and analysis. 7. Dominant Research Topic Quantitative research deals with topics like prevalence of a certain practice, its incidence, extent, nature of issues, opinions and attitudes, discovers regularities and formulates theories. It seems to fit in the larger framework of concrete findings. However, it falls flat in the context of connotative and denotative dimensions which are the backbone of a social problem and this is where qualitative research takes an edge. 8. Data Analysis The procedures of data analysis are very well defined in quantitative research. The methods subject variables to frequency distributions, cross tabulations or other statistical procedures. All aspects of the study are designed before the data is collected. So there is a predictable certainty about the whole process. However, new research designs emerge as the qualitative research study unfolds. Therefore some chance of error might creep in, keeping in view the fact that qualitative approach is more interpretative and opinionated. Since the researcher tends to immerse subjectively in the subject matter, his/her perspective influence the results to an extent. So one of the major criteria, 'unbiased and objective' might not be fulfilled in qualitative research. Quantitative approach tends to dissociate the researcher from the subject matter. Hence here the approach is quite objective and unbiased. 9. Communication of findings The findings in a quantitative study are organized in a more analytical manner by drawing inferences and conclusions and testing the magnitude and strength of a relationship. In qualitative research, the organization of findings is more descriptive and analytical in nature. The former might give a clearer picture, when it comes to a basic understanding of the problem. But in the larger ambit of social science research, this kind of organization does not take into account the meaning and other inter-related complexities. Thus context loses its meaning, which is a direct assault on the validity of investigating a social problem. Qualitative research in this context seems to be a better approach in exploring and explaining a social research problem. 10. The experts' take In the words of Fred Kerlinger, "There's no such thing as qualitative data. Everything is either 1 or 0." Donald Campbell's statement serves a perfect rejoinder to this, "All research ultimately has a qualitative grounding." The strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative research are a perennial, hot debate, especially in the social sciences. The issues invoke classic 'paradigm war'. Overly focusing on the debate of "qualitative versus quantitative" frames the methods in opposition. It is important to focus also on how the techniques can be integrated; such as in mixed methods research. More good can come of social science researchers developing skills in both realms than debating which method is superior. It would not be correct to label one approach better than the other. Infact, the limitations of one approach are the strengths of the other. Most social research problems cannot be explored and explained by using any one of the two approaches. There has to be an amalgam of both the approaches to understand a social research issue from a rational and contextual perspective. Let us explain this with an example of a social research problem. Suppose a research problem aims to explore the impact of stressful living on heart attacks. Most of us would assume that stress induces greater risk of heart related problems. Sampling and subsequent survey might bring forth the figures to support the hypothesis. But the question is, does social research end here If interviews are conducted and even some historical analysis is done, it would be examined that there is a relationship between both the variables. However, there would also be the emergence of other variables in the course of the research problem. This would throw light on the socio-economic dimensions of the problem as well as explore the 'why' and 'how' of it. The description but would be quite hazy if there are no statistics to support. Consequently, the ideal approach would be to blend the qualitative and quantitative approaches to reach a certain conclusion. All qualitative data can be coded quantitatively. All quantitative data is based on qualitative judgment. Anything that is qualitative can be assigned meaningful numerical values. These values can then be manipulated to help us achieve greater insight into the meaning of the data and to help us examine specific hypotheses. Numbers in and of themselves can't be interpreted without understanding the assumptions which underlie them. The bottom line here is that quantitative and qualitative data are, at some level, virtually inseparable. Neither exists in a vacuum nor can be considered totally devoid of the other. To ask which is "better" or more "valid ignores the intimate connection between them. To do good research we need to use both the qualitative and the quantitative research methods. There are clear demarcations between both the approaches when it comes to their connotative and operational dimensions. However, when it comes to application, one the strengths of one research process make up for the limitations of the other and vice-versa. The point is that the line between qualitative and quantitative is less distinct than we sometimes imagine. All qualitative data can be quantitatively coded in almost infinite varieties of ways. This doesn't detract from the qualitative information. We can still do any kinds of judgmental syntheses or analyses we want. But recognizing the similarities between qualitative and quantitative information opens up new possibilities for interpretation that might otherwise go unutilized. References Qualitative versus Quantitative Research Key points in a classic debate ( Feb 27, 2007) (http://wilderdom.com/research/QualitativeVersusQuantitativeResearch.html), Retrieved on May 4, 2007 The Qualitative Debate, (http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualdeb.php), Retrieved on May 4, 2007 Breuer, Franz; Klbl, Carlos; Reichertz, Jo; Roth, Wolff-Michael, Debate: Quality of Qualitative Research (http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-e/debate-1-e.htm), Retrieved on May 3, 2007 Berger, Arthur Asa (2000), Media and Communication Research Methods: An Introduction to Qualitative and Quantitaive Approaches, Sage Publications Read More