Quantitative and qualitative data

The ontological and epistemological discussion determines the methodology used in research. A positivist research approach is supported by the use of quantitative methodology and the collection of quantitative data. Quantitative research is…

“…research aimed at testing hypotheses with numerical values rather than explaining complex phenomena through verbal descriptions” (Newton Suter, 2006 p41).

With quantitative techniques, Denzin and Lincoln (1994, cited in Sale et al., 2002) point out that…

“…the goal is to measure and analyze causal relationships between variables within a value-free framework” (p44).

An interpretivist approach tends to be reflected in the use of qualitative methods and data, where qualitative research is defined as…

100

“…research aimed at explaining complex phenomena through verbal descriptions rather than testing hypotheses with numerical values” (Newton Suter, 2006 p41),

therefore the emphasis for qualitative research is on understanding and meaning. Methods used in qualitative research include in-depth individual interviews (structured, semi- structured or unstructured), case studies and focus groups, i.e. interviews carried out in smaller groups. These techniques are used not because a researcher wishes to use the results as representative of larger groups but because they can provide important, focussed information for particular situations.

Because positivist and interpretivist stances are, on the surface, at opposite ends of the research spectrum it would follow that the quantitative and qualitative methodologies that support these two stances would also be distinct and discrete. However, Sale et al. (2002) put forward a number of arguments for a mixed-method approach to research, not least of which is that both methodologies have the same ultimate aim, that of providing a greater understanding of the world in which we live and providing knowledge for practical use in that world. Brannen (2005) defines mixed methods research as…

“…adopting a research strategy employing more than one research method. The methods may be a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, a mix of quantitative methods or a mix of qualitative methods” (p4).

In social science fields where we are dealing with multifarious phenomena from a number of research areas there is a need to have data from a range of sources and from a range of perspectives in order to increase our understanding. Indeed Sammons et al. (2005) argue that a range of research methods is justified in situations where complex social contexts require analysis with multiple and diverse perspectives. This latter point is particularly pertinent in the fields of entrepreneurship and international education – fields which are complex but where much of the research is one dimensional.

In all the discussion about ontologies, epistemologies, paradigms, etc. it is easy to lose sight of the essence of research. In the midst of debate about mixed-methods research Howe (1988, in Sale et al., 2002) makes the point that researchers should do what works, i.e. that there is a need for pragmatism in research – the pragmatic worldview as described by Creswell (2009). This perhaps is the reason why much research into entrepreneurship is of a practical nature. This pragmatism, while accepting of the differing philosophical stances, stems from an understanding that sometimes, in order to achieve the research goals, it may

101

be necessary to use a variety of methods. A combination of quantitative and qualitative methods and techniques is now viewed as rational and justifiable in some circumstances (Howe, 1992).

Continuing in this pragmatic vein Moore (2006) argues that there are some phenomena in life that simply are not quantifiable and measurable (e.g. the impact of university education on an individual’s life) and that we therefore need to be realistic and practical in our approach to gaining more understanding and insight into these phenomena:

“We should simply accept that some things are beyond our capacity to measure satisfactorily. In their place we should accept surrogates, subjective judgements or broad assessments rather than try to obtain finely graduated measurements” (p19).

Brannen (2005) talks of the need for pragmatism in terms of the resources available to the researcher and the feasibility of using particular methods within certain projects: the need for pragmatism is certainly true within the research framework and academic requirements for this PhD.

One further argument put forward by Brannen (2005) for the use of mixed-methods is that while the main research questions might be underpinned by one particular epistemological assumption the sub-questions might be underpinned by another – hence the need for mixed methods.

Conclusions? There is little evidence to suggest that any one ontological, epistemological or methodological stance should be applied to this area of research. Therefore the argument for a mixed method approach can be made, and the use of both qualitative and quantitative techniques can be justified. Pragmatism should play a large role in the design of the methodology for this research and it may well be the case that the aims of this research cannot be fulfilled using any one particular technique and that multiple methods that support, complement or provide different perspectives can be employed.

4.4.1 Research design: Use of a mixed method approach According to Creswell (2009):

“Truth is what works at the time. It is not based in a duality between reality independent of the mind or within the mind. Thus, in mixed methods research,

102

investigators use both quantitative and qualitative data because they work to provide the best understanding of a research problem” (p11).

In order to discover whether student mobility brings about certain changes in individuals who undertake it and whether those changes are partly causal to future entrepreneurial behaviour, my research methods need to involve both quantitative instruments (to ‘measure’ change) and qualitative instruments (to understand and explain the causes of and consequences of that change). These requirements would justify the use of a mixed-method approach to my research.

As stated earlier mixed method approaches involve employing a research strategy that uses more than one research method, either integrating quantitative and qualitative methods, or a mix of qualitative, or a mix of quantitative methods, in order to investigate the same underlying phenomenon (Leech and Onwuegbuzie, 2009). This can be done as a means of triangulation (to validate data sets) or complementarity (as a means of connecting data) or as a means of reinforcing results (results from one set of data are used to inform or design or understand another set of data). A definition of triangulation is given by Curtis and Curtis (2011):

“Triangulation is the use of more than one method to double or cross-check the collected and/or partially analysed data from another method” (p289).

Complementarity is about connecting and integrating data. With this…

“…methods are chosen of the basis of their ability to answer a specific part of the problem or because their combination might give a better sense of the whole. The assumption behind this approach is that because qualitative and quantitative approaches address different levels of inquiry, any mixed methods study should play to their different strengths” (May, 2012 p2).

As stated above, I have chosen to use a mixed method approach for my research, as I believe that this approach best fits my research aims and it provides the opportunity to produce a more complete picture of the issues under investigation. My mixed method approach involves the use of an online questionnaire to provide quantitative data to measure change and interviews to provide qualitative data to help understand the mobility experience and give insight into what causes change.

103

Creswell (2009) outlines a number of strategic procedures for mixed methods research, two of which are used in my research. Firstly, in sequential mixed methods the…

“…researcher seeks to elaborate on or expand on the findings of one method with another method…[e.g.] the study may begin with a quantitative method in which a theory or concept is tested, followed by a qualitative method involving detailed exploration with a few cases” (Creswell, 2009 p15).

In as much as I am using interviews with students upon their return from abroad to endeavour to give insight into some of the quantitative results, my methods can be deemed partly sequential.

The second strategy, concurrent mixed methods, is where the various research methods used are carried out concurrently:

“In this design both forms of data are collected at the same time and then the information is integrated in the interpretation of the overall results” (Creswell, 2009 p15).

In as much as I am interviewing graduates in the work place to obtain their reflections on their time abroad at the same time as investigating changes resulting from a mobility experience, and using both of these methods to explain and interpret the overall phenomena of mobility and its impact on entrepreneurship, my methods can be deemed partly concurrent.