Qualitative vs Quantitative Methods

In science rational intellectual thought dominates over our emotions and sentimentality. Emotions are often seen as the opposite of reason and rational behaviour, to be avoided, as they hinder meaning and action based on our intellect (Lutz, 1986). However, while rational thought prevails, feelings, emotions, and viewpoints still exist but are often left out of research (Oakley, 1981). The two approaches differ, one based on statistically- based thought and the other on feelings, viewpoints, and opinions - with both important

in all research. Thus two different orientations are embedded in different research methodologies and each relates to assumptions about the social world being explored with the difference in how they collect and analyse data. Comparing qualitative and quantitative research further, a number of these differences are noted and highlighted in Figure 3.1.

Table 3.1 Aspects of Quantitative and Qualitative Research *

Component Qualitative Quantitative

1.Hypothesis Inductive-interpret what is found Deductive-rules/knowledge from the research 2.Sample Purpose/small eg focus group Random, large eg surveys

3. Setting Natural/real world Laboratory

4. Data gathering Researcher Objective/instrument 5. Design Flexible/changeable Determined design 6. Analysis Descriptive/interpret results Statistics used 7.Questions Open ended/descriptive Closed/scales 8.Reality Explore from within Explore from outside 9.Value Value laden-sample contact Value free-little contact 10. Methods. Personal and open-ended Mathematical and statistical 11 Analysis- Before or during data collection Done after data collection *Adapted from Patton (1987).

Quantitative research is positivistic and deductive where reality is a sum of related parts (variables), which are removed through research (Bazeley, 2004). It explores cause and effect relationships of statements, measures phenomena, puts it into numbers and conducts statistical analysis and provides us with for example the number of people who vote green. Conversely, qualitative research is interpretive with the result coming from the data and changes observed from the data and written into explanations such as explaining why people voted green (Giddens, 1976). Regarding data, even using identical sources, the system of collection and analysis may differ (Denscombe, 2003).

Other differences between the methods are: the quantitative researcher is removed, value neutral and not a part of reality as they explore it from the outside. Qualitative researchers are close to the sample, see things through the participants, exploring from

the inside, therefore qualitative design research is still fluid, can change and is flexible. Quantitative design is usually set and does not change. Sample size in qualitative research is small but rich with the researcher gathering data, while quantitative research uses large, random samples of participants, with data gathered by an instrument usually a questionnaire or survey. The quantitative researcher’s analysis takes place after data collection is complete, while qualitative researchers may do it before and during a study (Flick et al., 1991; Lamnek, 1993; Miles & Huberman, 1994).

While a number of differences in concepts and methods exist, the two deal with the collection and exploration of data in a logical manner to discover answers to questions. They are based on a structure, conducted by a system of procedures, for both data collection and analysis. While these may differ they are both searching for valid,

reliable answers to the research question (Creswell, 2003; 2006; Neuman, 1994, 2012).

Quantitative research condenses or reduces data into units, while qualitative enhances data by adding valuable additions to existing data (Neuman, 1994, 2012). Both

methods incorporate literature reviews, measure and analyse data, and report results and findings (Neuman, 2012).

Both approaches operate in the same field, conducting research to add to our knowledge base but seen as separate and incompatible by some sectors of the research community (Thomas & Nelson, 2001). This is changing with a number of researchers moving to qualitative research as reported by Shah and Corley (2006), in leisure and social capital (Burnett, 2006; Rock, Valle, & Grabman, 2013; Schulenkorf, 2013; Wagnsson,

Ausutsson, & Patriksson, 2013).

When comparing qualitative and quantitative methods, they are not separate or exclusive of one another. Many researchers use aspects of both as highlighted by Tonts, (2005), and Son, Yarnal, and Kerstetter (2010), who used quantitative methods (surveys) with open ended questions and interviews. Additionally, distinctions are too rigid: some quantitative tools can benefit from the use of questionnaires or open-ended questions which are qualitative tools(Denscombe, 2003). Therefore, many researchers use aspects of both, however in most research one approach dominates the other. The

relationship between approaches is not exclusive and at times approaches blend together (Denscombe, 2003).

The role of the researcher is to know the potential strength and weakness of each approach and not be confined to working in one approach over another, but use

whatever addresses the research question best. Researchers should explore the benefits of a quantitative (linear path) approach with a number of fixed steps or alternatively, if the qualitative nonlinear path would better suit. Knowing the models and the research question allows for decision to be made to follow one or the other or a mixed model incorporating both. The main issues to consider are the research problem, practical issues such as time and understanding, and being open to new ideas while questioning evidence, and maintaining accuracy (Neuman, 2012).

Some individuals still champion one approach over the other however this is changing. This was supported by King, Keohane, and Verba (1994), who stated that good research often combines features of each method to best answer the question.