Qualitative and Quantitative Research - Essay Example

In order to research this theory, the choice of methodology became the next area of exploration. Understanding the differences between the qualitative and quantitative methods needed to be understood to determine which framework to build upon. Quantitative research methodology involves "the inquiry into a social or human problem, based on testing a theory composed of variables, measured with numbers, and analyzed with statistical procedures, in order to determine whether the predictive generalizations of the theory hold true" (Qualitative Paradigm, 1994). In this methodology, a hypothesis is arrived at and research is conducted to prove or disprove the theory put forth. The main draw back in using the quantitative approach in the research is the inflexibility of the methodology itself. Although it does have a long standing tradition, the quantitative research perspective will not allow me the depth required in seeking out answers to emerging questions in this newly, uncharted area" (Qualitative Paradigm, 1994). Qualitative research, conversely, has been defined as "multi-method in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of or interpret phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical materials case study, personal experience, introspective, interactional, and visual texts-that describe routine and problematic moments and meaning in individuals' lives" (Qualitative Paradigm, 1994). Qualitative research allows the flexibility to research areas that do not always have a right or wrong answer. Instead of focusing merely on the outcome and proving a theory is founded or not, qualitative research theory is based on the knowledge that the path itself is as important as arriving at the destination. One of the leading factors for determining to use the qualitative research methodology lies in the fact that the subject of the research itself is newly emerging. The question of the E-vote and the motivation or rationale for its continued support by politicians even after adverse, serious security issues have been brought to light allows for the emergence of the principal agent theory. The benefit of using qualitative research methodology in this particular topic lies also in its greatest weakness - the lack of substantive information and previous research. As it is such a recent topic it has not been, to any extent, researched especially from the political motivation framework. This lends itself to the exploratory, systematic approach of qualitative research as opposed to the fixed methodology of quantitative research. The use of qualitative research in investigating the motivational factors behind the implementation of the electronic voting and the use of the DRE, in particular, from the perspective of those able to exert authority over the process, is the preferred methodology for a variety of reasons. Qualitative research affords a more all encompassing knowledge base for exploration as direct interaction with those having an 'intimate familiarity' with the subject matter leads to a greater depth of understanding than other methodologies afford (Lofland 1976). Rather than merely theorizing the causal effect of the implementation of e-voting systems may have been largely based on the agent-principle theory and relying on empirical study alone to support this, the qualitative approach accommodates for the unforeseen and unexpected occurrences which typify human experiences (Taylor, 1977). The reasoning behind the support of DRE use by politicians and their unwillingness or inability to extricate themselves from the volatility of the political ramifications once severe security issues began to emerge is further supportive of a qualitative approach to research. The complex nature of the questions being investigated involves examination of complex social processes across several different potential spheres of influence (Daly, 1992). Understanding of these complex issues is not easily derived from the more traditional quantitative research methodology as the complex issues do not lend themselves readily to a set pattern of merely yes or no. The complexity of this issue requires methodology which enables one to study the dynamic nature of highly complicated systems and processes involving human nature and behaviour. Qualitative research methodology allows for these individualized actions, experiences, perceptions and beliefs to be used in reaching understanding of 'why' the support of the DRE remained even after serious security issues became highly publicised. Using qualitative methodology allows for this as, according to Babbie, qualitative research allows for a high degree of flexibility and adaptability to meet the challenges faced with use of interviews and other face to face information gathering processes (1986). The adaptability of the qualitative method allows the researcher to adjust the scope and direction of his research as additional information comes to light or new questions or areas previously not considered become known. This is not available in more rigid approaches to research where predetermined data collection methods are set and do not afford the opportunity of direct contact with those involved in the process being researched. When embracing a qualitative method that understands and accounts for the dynamic nature of the complexity of political motivation, the use of interviews and direct contact with the subject becomes imperative. The flexibility of using real time information gathering allows the researcher to not only gather spoken or written data. It allows the researcher to gather information beyond this in the form of a more complete understanding of the individual. Things such as body language, tone of voice, and eye contact bring in-depth knowledge of the subject to the researcher (Babbie, 1986) that would be precluded in other forms of research methodology. In using a qualitative approach to information gathering according to Bogdan and Taylor rather than merely focusing on the result of what happened; in this case the politicians' support for E-voting and a rush to the implementation of such without considering the full implications of the undertaking and then for politically motivated reasons fail to act when severe security questions came to light; the motivations, reasoning and politics behind the act itself can be researched. In short, qualitative methodology allows us to see beyond the end result, the fact that that something did happen, and examine why it occurred. Qualitative Research allows for a better and more complete understanding of the research topic as it involves the flexibility to draw conclusions based on information obtained while researching. Quantitative research methodology, on the other hand, precludes us from doing this. Instead of having a set hypothesis and working only to prove or disprove it via analysis of data collected, Qualitative methodology allows the findings to evolve based on the research. As Chambers, Wedel and Rodwell noted this methodology requires the researcher to remain open to shifts in direction as needed when the "direction of inquiry is shaped through involvement with the participants" (1992, p. 293). In Qualitative research a hypothesis is determined prior to the research phase but as research material is gathered and synthesized flexibility to expand the research and investigate emerging theories based on research results as they occur allow for a more complete understanding and encourages a more in-depth knowledge of the subject area through researching these varied perspectives and paradigm shifts uncovered in the research process References Babbie, E. (1986). "Observing ourselves." Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Publishing. Bogdan, R., & Taylor, S. (1990). "Looking at the bright side: a positive approach to qualitative policy and evaluation research." Qualitative Sociology, 13:1 183-192. Retrieved 9 Jan. 2006, from Academic Search Premier Database. Galileo EBSCO host. Chambers, D., Wedel, K., & Rodwell, M. (1992). Evaluating social programs. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Daly, K. (1992). J. Gilgun, K. Daly, & G. Handel (Eds.), "Qualitative methods in research." Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Lofland, J. (1976). "Doing social life: The qualitative study of human interaction in natural settings". New York: John Wiley & Sons. "Qualitative paradigm." (1994). University of Sheffield Website. Accessed 10 Jan. 2006, from http://www.compapp.dcu.ie/hruskin/RM2.htm Taylor, J. (1977). "Toward alternative forms of social work research: The case for naturalistic methods." Journal of Social Welfare, 4:3, 119-126. Retrieved 9 Jan. 2006, from Academic Search Premier Database. Galileo EBSCO host. Read More