For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222
Call 1-800-351-0222
QUANTITATIVE & QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS.
Term Paper ID:28561
Get This Paper Free! or
Essay Subject:
Compares & contrasts the 2 methods in 3 basic areas: epistemological foundations, data collection & data analysis methods.... More...
8 Pages / 1800 Words
5 sources, 15 Citations,
APA Format
$32.00
More Papers on This Topic
Paper Abstract:
Compares & contrasts the 2 methods in 3 basic areas: epistemological foundations, data collection & data analysis methods.
Paper Introduction:
COMPARISON OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS
Introduction
This paper compares and contrasts qualitative and quantitative research methods in three basic areas. These are the of their: epistemological foundations, data collection methods, and data analysis methods. The paper ends with a brief summary of the primary points made.
Comparison
Gall, Borg and Gall (1996) discuss several similarities and differences between qualitative and quantitative research methods. With respect to similarities, both kinds of research formulate epistemological positions regarding the nature of causation and reality and both comprise a set of methods for designing research, collecting data, analyzing data, and
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
McKereghan, D.L. The authors point out that manyresearch experts believe it is quite acceptable to use both kinds ofresearch to collect information about a given phenomenon despite theirdiffering assumptions----provided that the two methods are assigneddiffering roles in terms of the contribution they make to understanding thephenomenon being studied. The foregoing assumptions have implications for how scientists shouldstudy reality. Wainwright, D. It does not claim that what is discovered in the process isuniversal and, thus, replicable. For example, McKereghan (1998)notes that qualitative and quantitative research can be distinguished inseveral ways and goes on to list some of these differences. Comparison Gall, Borg and Gall (1996) discuss several similarities anddifferences between qualitative and quantitative research methods. Specifically,it is noted that quantitative research is objective; qualitative researchis subjective. Research methods in education and psychology:Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. In addition, quantitative research was said tomeasures what it assumes to be a static reality in hopes of developinguniversal laws while qualitative research is an exploration of what isassumed to be a dynamic, shifting, interpretative reality. However, theydiffer in terms of the epistemological positions they advocate and in themethods they hold to be appropriate for meaningful scientific inquiry. Rather, in most any given study, elementsof quantitative and qualitative procedures can be found. Quantitative versus qualitative research: Anattempt to clarify the problem. Quantitativemethods would then be used to determine whether this pattern of response ispresent in a much larger collective of special education students. (1996). (1998). Both methods are said toprovide a broader examination of the phenomenon and thus yield a fullerunderstanding of its complex structure. In this regard,the authors state that the reports of quantitative research tend to beimpersonal and objective write-ups of research findings. Gall, Borg and Gall (1996) further report that some researchers donot believe the two research approaches can actually work together in acomplementary fashion; this because of their differing epistemologicalviews of causation and reality -- views which make for not only conceptualbut also profound methodological differences. Examples were offered showing the kindof research to which each method or a combination of methods areparticularly suited. This broader look, in turn, is saidto foster greater insight into the ways the information can be practicallyapplied. However, what McKereghan (1998) points out is that when actualresearch studies are examined in methodological detail, they seldom fit thesharp clear models of differences that are provided in written discussionsof the two research approaches. (1997). Further, the points were made that while quantitative research isobjective; qualitative research is subjective. Document available:http://nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/wain.html.----------------------- 1 Because of this,McKereghan argues that discussing research using this dichotomy may not beespecially applicable to what actually goes on in the world of research.Thus, while the two methods can be distinguished, it is probably importantto note that this clarity of distinction is present far more in theory thanin practice. On the other hand, the conceptual foundation of qualitativeresearch holds that causation itself is predominately a human interpretiveprocess. Gall, Borg and Gall (1996) note that for some domains such aseducation, the existing knowledge base consists of information obtained byboth quantitative and qualitative research. For example, quantitativeresearch stipulates that a researcher must state what can be expected to berevealed by his data analysis based on existing research (hypothesisformulation and testing). Mertes, D.M. One particularly interesting point about qualitative and quantitativeresearch methods is to note that the distinguishing characteristics areactual differences only to a certain extent. However, in terms of practice, there is again an importantissue related to whether practice actually meets the standards set for thisresearch approach. With respect to the foregoing, qualitative methods are assigned therole of intensively observing some small sample and conceptualizingpossible themes, patterns, processes, and/or structures as being involvedin the phenomenon of interest. For example, a quantitative study might be conducted of three specialeducation students' responses to inclusion with possible patterns ofresponse being conceptualized based on this small sample. If these conditionsare satisfied, quantitative measures can then be used to support whetherwhat is present at the individual or case level is also present for largerpopulations and samples. Quantitative research,on the other hand, was said to entail the proper application of statisticsto typically a large number of subjects. COMPARISON OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS Introduction This paper compares and contrasts qualitative and quantitativeresearch methods in three basic areas. Qualitative researchers, however, believe thattheories and concepts are only meaningfully derived AFTER the data has beencollected. The paper ends with a brief summary of the primary points made. Further, quantitative methods are often misinterpreted. Document availableat:http://socrates.fortunecity.com/qvq.html. Quantitative research, based on its assumptions of causation andreality, attempts to arrive at an in-depth understanding of the phenomenonby measuring "it" in some fairly objective manner with results that can beestablished as valid by a set of formal scientific/methodologicalprinciples of inquiry and set criteria for reliability and validity. Mertes (1998) states that there are certain kinds of informationneeds that are better suited to being answered using qualitative methodsthan quantitative methods. On the other hand, Mertes (1998) states that quantitative research isprobably the best choice if there is a need to determine "how many" or tomeasure some volume-related characteristic of a collective. Itseeks for results that are stable across time. Qualitativeresearch reports, on the other hand, are said to reflect the researcher'sanalytical reconstruction and interpretation of data provided to readerswith an awareness that the readers themselves will, in fact, reinterpretwhat is reported. Quantitative research seeks explanatory laws; qualitativeresearch aims at in-depth description. Quantitative research measures whatit assumes to be a static reality in hopes of developing universal laws.Qualitative research is an exploration of what is assumed to be a dynamicreality. The Qualitative Report, 3(2). Also, it was noted thatquantitative research seeks explanatory laws; qualitative research aims atin-depth description. For example, it was noted that qualitativeresearch typically entails in-depth analysis of relatively few subjects forwhich a rich set of data is collected and organized. Similarly, the two research types differ in the methods they use toderive meaningful information from the data. One primary difference between the two research methods according toGall, Borg and Gall (1996) involves their epistemological assumptions aboutthe nature that causality. These are said to include: (1) the need tounderstand in detail why an individual does something; (2) the need todetermine what aspects, components, or elements of a given issue orphenomenon are important and why they are important; (3) the need toidentify a full range of responses or opinions existing in a givencollective; and (4) the need to find areas of consensus in patterns ofresponse. Thispoint has been discussed by Wainwright (1997) who states that typicallyqualitative research seeks to discover information about any givenphenomenon by obtaining an in-depth understanding of the meanings anddefinitions of the phenomenon that are conceptualized by informants;moreover, these need not be many informants; a simple case study of oneindividual is said to yield much given the subjective element of reality. However, since it is likely that the epistemological structures ofboth research methods have some truth and some error in theirepistemological frameworks, Gall, Borg and Gall (1996) state that it isquite possible that both methods can contribute valid data and so edifyscientists' attempts to understand a given phenomena when used together ina complementary fashion. Withrespect to similarities, both kinds of research formulate epistemologicalpositions regarding the nature of causation and reality and both comprise aset of methods for designing research, collecting data, analyzing data, andderiving information from data collection and analysis. Quantitative methods are then called uponto determine whether the conceptualized constructs are supportable orconfirmed. The quantitative method, according to theauthors, rests on a view of causation as an external, measurable force thatoccurs independently of the observer and can be used to explain diversephenomena. Gall, Borg and Gall (1996) report that the extent to which the twotypes of research can work to complement each other, in actual practice, isdependent on two contingencies. Can sociological research be qualitative,critical and valid? Finally, it can be noted that quantitative methods help to makegeneralizations to larger groups and follow a well-established andrespected set of statistical procedures, of which the properties are well-understood. Gall, M.D., Borg, W.R. It was noted that the two researchapproaches differ in terms of their epistemological positions on causationand reality and this in turn makes for a number of methodologicaldifferences in the approaches. Given the foregoing, it seems reasonable to suggest that thedetermination as to whether a given researcher should use qualitative orquantitative methods, or use both conjointly, may depend upon the nature ofinformation he desires and the use to which it shall be put. It was noted that due to the differing nature of the two researchapproaches, it is likely that the selection of which to use will dependupon the nature of the information sought by the researcher and the use towhich this information will be put. (1996). Quantitative research roots its methods of acquiringinformation in a view that holds that reality is external to the observerwhereas the qualitative method grounds its methodological principles andpractices in the notion of reality as an interpretative construct. Thus,qualitative and quantitative research can be seen as working together incomplementary fashion. As noted by Gall, Borg and Gall (1996), many studies aredesigned poorly, i.e., many studies cannot find a significant differencewhen one exists, due to insufficient sample sizes or to extremely smalleffect sizes. Fundamentals of educational research (2nd ed.)Madison, WI: Brown and Benchmark. For example,Crowl (1996) states that if a researcher desires to focus on some complexissue and to use it in a pragmatic way, then it is wise to conduct researchusing both qualitative and quantitative methods. Educational research: Anintroduction (6th ed.) White Plains, NY: Longman. Thus, while qualitativeresearch aims at discovering how a very small collective interpret aphenomenon, quantitative research looks at some objective index of thephenomenon attempting to produce information that is stable and valid forlarge populations and samples. & Gall, J.P. Second, qualitative researchers must provide constructsthat can be operationalized which is to say that can be measured in someobjective way using a numerical system of some sort. Finally, the point was made that while there appear tobe large differences between the approach from a philosophical/conceptualposition, in actual research, methods from both approaches are often used.Further, the standards set for conducting each particular type of research,especially quantitative research, are often not met. (1998). References Crowl, T.K. First, the phenomena being studied must bestable across time. These are the of their:epistemological foundations, data collection methods, and data analysismethods. Gall, Borg and Gall (1996) have also listed some of the differencesbetween qualitative and quantitative research methods in terms of thereports each side outputs following their investigations. Quantitative methods hold thatthe data should be analyzed statistically while quantitative research holdsthat it should be analyzed using formal methods of reasoning andinterpretation. In other words,quantitative research should be used when there is an interest in how manypeople in a population have a particular characteristic or response.Further, Mertes (1998) reports that quantitative research is appropriatefor measuring attitudes and behaviors, for profiling certain groups, andfor formulating predictions. Summary In this paper's comparison of qualitative and quantitative researchmethods, several points were made.
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
We can write a Custom Essay just for you.
Browse Essays by Subject