QUANTITATIVE VERSUS QUALITATIVE

The ongoing argument over relative merits of what are generally referred to, as quantitative and qualitative research methods are somewhat driven by the researchers ontological and epistemic approach to their research topic and the results they wish to show from their research.

Where quantitative researchers seek causal determination, prediction, and generalization of findings, qualitative researchers seek, instead, illumination, understanding, and extrapolation to similar situations. Qualitative analysis results in a different type of knowledge than does quantitative inquiry. (Ragin, 1987) points

out that all knowledge, including that gained through quantitative research, is referenced in qualities, and that there are many ways to represent our understanding of the world.

Styles of differing researchers basing their work on either quantitative or qualitative methodology will contain traits common to both. Design issues between the two approaches, however, usually differ (Neuman, 2003). (See Table 2: Methodology design comparison, Neuman, 2003: 145)

Quantitative Research Qualitative Research Test Hypothesis that the researcher begins with Capture and discover meaning once the

researcher becomes immersed in the data Concepts are in the form of distinct variables Concepts are in the form of themes, motifs,

generalizations, and taxonomies Measures are systematically created before data

collection, and are standardised

Measures are created in an ad hoc manner and are often more specific to the individual setting or researcher

Data are in the form of numbers from precise measurement

Data are in the form of words and images from documents, observations, and transcripts Theory is largely causal and is deductive Theory can be causal or non-causal and is often

inductive Procedures are standard, and replication is

assumed

Research procedures are particular, and replication is rare

Analysis proceeds by using statistics, tables, or charts and discussing how what they show relates to hypotheses

Analysis proceeds by extracting themes or generalizations from evidence and organising data to present a coherent, consistent picture Source: Neuman, 2003

Table 2: Methodology design comparison

Because of this tendency of overlapping areas within both methodologies, some discussion on both the Quantitative and Qualitative methodology is necessary to understand the reasons and decisions behind the selected approaches taken by this researcher and how the research, whilst sharing common traits with both methodologies is nonetheless particularly suited to the Qualitative approach.

3.2.1

Quantitative Research Method

“The variable is a central idea in quantitative research. Simply defined, a variable is a concept that varies. Quantitative research uses a language of variables and relationships among variables.”(Neuman, 2003)

Briefly - Quantitative research is primarily ontologically objectively based with an epistemologically positivist stance toward how the research is to be conducted (Neuman, 2003, Dick, 1998, Ragin, 1987).

Quantitative research is also based around the appropriation and empirical study of ‘hard data’, that is – data that is confined to numerical in nature, or can be reduced to a numerical form so that it is value free. The data collected is typically from experimental studies or calibrated surveys, which do not allow the researcher to enter the lives of the participants nor does it allow any room for interpretation by the researcher.

This research method was therefore not considered appropriate given the interpretive nature combining cases study analysis with a personal open interview approach (interpreted by the researcher into ‘soft data’ and observation of any themes emergent from this data), as this lacked a foundation of empirical quantifiable data necessary to successfully apply accepted Quantitative techniques.

3.2.2

Qualitative Research Method

Qualitative research, broadly defined, means any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification (Strauss and Corbin, 1990).

The underlying ideology of the Qualitative approach is that behaviour can be explained only by the perceptions, perspectives and highly subjective constructions of a participant, and not by any “objective truth”. The methods of Qualitative research address the important issue of access to personal views (perceptions), attitudes and information.

For most individuals, personal views, attitudes and information are restricted to psychosocial and cultural filters, which determine what information can be exposed to public scrutiny, what information is communicable, and indeed by the very

awareness of such information. The model proposed by (Cooper and Branthwaite, 1977) is very useful for understanding these filters.

Accessibility Layers of Response

Responses by structured interviewing P u b li c _Spontaneous, Reasoned, Conventional C o m m u n ic a b le Concealed, Personal A w a re Intuitive, Imaginative P ri v a te N o n C o m m u n ic a b le U n a w a re Unconscious, Repressed Relative Ease Relative Difficulty Source: Cooper and Branthwaite, (1977) Qualitative Technology: New Perspectives on measurement and meaning through Qualitative Research

Table 3: Cooper and Branthwaite Model

Table 3: Cooper and Branthwaite Model clearly shows the limitations of the structured questionnaire, which is amenable to quantification and statistical analysis. However, although Qualitative Research is impressionistic, as opposed to, conclusive it can provide unique insights from its preoccupation with probing and understanding rather than counting and collating (Mani, 1999).