Qualitative Research Methods

M Phil Social Work

An overview of quantitative and qualitative
research
Tahira Jabeen
The origins
In the known history, some 300 years BC, Alexander the
Great included in his military intelligence information
about the beliefs, worldview, motivations, and patterns of
behavior of those he faced (common people and leaders
in opposing armies) – qualitative inquiry.
Interpretation of the ‘revealed message’ in ‘religion’
 However, historically, especially since enlightenment,
there has been a heavy emphasis on quantification in
science. Mathematics – the “queen of science”.
John Stuart Mill (1843-1906) advised social scientists to
emulate their older, “harder” cousins to mature. But, as it
turned out to be, the older/harder ones have their own
problems.
Quantitative researchers fail to distinguish
people and social institutions from the world
of nature
The measurement process possesses an
artificial and spurious sense of precision and
accuracy
The reliance on instruments and procedures
hinders the connection between research and
everyday life
The analysis of relationships between
variables creates a static view of social life
that is independent of people’s lives
The evolution – problems with/in hard
science inquiry
• Context stripping
• Exclusion of • Theory ladenness of
meaning facts
• Disjunction of grand • Underdetermination
theories with local of theory
context (falsification rather
• Inapplicability of than verification)
general data to • Value ladenness of
individual cases facts
• Exclusion of the • Interactive nature of
discovery dimension the Inquirer-inquired
into dyad
 Words to Distinguish Qualitative from
Quantitative
Qualitative Quantitative
Soft, weak Hard, strong
Subjective Objective
Meaning Measurement
Words Numbers
Writing
Tabulation
Depth, openness,detail
Standardized
Constructivist
measures
Process
Positivistic
Political/social
Generalizability
activism
Value free
 Definitions of Qualitative and Quantitative Research
Quantitative Qualitative Research
Research A type of social research
A type of social research in which the researcher
in which the researcher relies on the views of
decides what to study, participants, asks broad,
asks specific, narrow general questions,
questions, collects collects data consisting
numeric (numbered) data largely of words (or text)
from participants, from participants,
analyzes these numbers describes and analyzes
using statistics, and these words for themes,
conducts
Creswell, the(2008)
J. W., inquiry in an
Research andQualitative,
design: conducts the inquiry
unbiased, and
objective in a subjective, reflexive
quantitative, mixed method approaches. Thousand Oaks,
manner. manner.
CA: Sage Publications.
Criticisms of qualitative research
Qualitative research is too
impressionistic and subjective.

Difficult to replicate.

Problems of generalisation.

Lack of transparency.
 Criticisms of qualitative research
Is it possible to avoid bias in qualitative
research?

Is bias in social research undesirable?

Is it possible to suspend our beliefs and

biases?

Can researchers also be advocates?

Objectivity
 In simple terms refers to the lack of bias or prejudice.

 It is often assumed that if our values do not enter into our

research, it is objective and above criticism.

 Objectivity is therefore defined as

the basic conviction that there is or must be some permanent,

ahistorical framework to which we can ultimately appeal in
determining the nature of rationality, knowledge, truth, reality.

• Many people accept what scientists say as “truth”. Yet the

subject matter of the social sciences is social life itself.

 Is it possible to suspend our belief and bias?

 Is objectivity possible in social research?

Subjectivity
 When we refer to people’s consciousness we are concerned
with what takes place – in terms of thinking and acting –
within each of us. These subjective states refer to our “inner”
world of experiences, rather than the world, “out there”.

 To concentrate on subjectivity we focus on the meanings that

people give to their environment, not the environment itself.

 According to this tradition the only thing we can know with

any certainty is how people interpret the world around them,
contend the claims of objectivists that we can know things
independent of individual world-views or beliefs.
 Is bias in social research undesirable?
 Can researchers also be advocates?
Reliability, validity and generalizability
Reliability is concerned with the question of
whether the results of a study are repeatable.
If a researcher fails to describe their
procedures in detail, replication is impossible.
 External reliability: adopting the same role as
previous social researchers.
 Internal reliability: inter-observer consistency.
 Stability
Validity refers to whether the data collected is a true
picture of what is being studied.
 Measurement validity (construct validity). Does a measure that
is devised of a concept reflect the concept it is supposed to
denote?
 Internal validity is concerned with causality. If we suggest X
causes Y, can we be sure X is responsible for the variation in Y?
 External validity. Can the results of a study be generalised
beyond the specific research context?
 Ecological Validity. Are the research findings applicable to
people’s everyday, natural social setting?
Validity in Qnt research depends on careful instrument
construction – in Qlt research, researcher is the
instrument.
Generalizability is the degree to which one can
apply the results of a study to a broader
context. Research results are considered
generalizable when the findings can be applied
to most contexts, most people, most of the time.
Qualitative research studies, generally, are
meant to study a specific issue or phenomenon
in a certain population, of a focused locality in
a particular context, hence generalizability of
qualitative research findings is usually not an
expected attribute.
(Alternative) criteria for evaluating qualitative research
Various approaches have been suggested, the
two leading schools of thoughts being:
Dixon-Woods et al., which emphasizes on
methodology
 Lincoln et al., which stresses the rigor of
interpretation of results.
By identifying commonalities of qualitative research,
Dixon-Woods et al. produced a checklist of questions
for assessing;
 clarity and appropriateness of the research question
 the description and appropriateness for sampling, data
collection and data analysis
 levels of support and evidence for claims
 coherence between data, interpretation and conclusions
 level of contribution of the paper
However, these methodology-weighted criteria may not
do justice to qualitative studies that differ in
epistemological and philosophical paradigms
Lincoln, Lynham and Guba (2011) stressing
the rigor of interpretation of results chalk out
following ‘goodness’ or quality criteria
(compared with the one used in quantitative
research);
Truth value
Trustworthiness
Applicability
Table 1 Terminology and criteria used to
evaluate the credibility of research findings
Quantitative research terminology and application Alternative terminology associated with credibility
to qualitative research of qualitative research

Truth value
Recognises that multiple realities exist; the
Validity
researchers’ outline personal experiences and
The precision in which the findings accurately
viewpoints that may have resulted in
reflect the data
methodological bias; clearly and accurately
presents participants’ perspectives
Consistency
Relates to the ‘trustworthiness’ by which the
methods have been undertaken and is
dependent on the researcher maintaining a
‘decision-trail’; that is, the researcher's
decisions are clear and transparent. Ultimately
an independent researcher should be able to
Reliability
arrive at similar or comparable findings.
The consistency of the analytical procedures,
Neutrality (or confirmability)
including accounting for personal and research
Achieved when truth value, consistency and
method biases that may have influenced the
applicability have been addressed. Centres on
findings
acknowledging the complexity of prolonged
engagement with participants and that the
methods undertaken and findings are
intrinsically linked to the researchers’
philosophical position, experiences and
perspectives. These should be accounted for
and differentiated from participants’ accounts
Generalisability Applicability
References
Guba and Lincoln (1994) in Denzin and
Lincoln…(chapter shared)
Dixon-Woods M, Shaw RL, Agarwal S, Smith
JA. The problem of appraising qualitative
research. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13:223–
5.
Lincoln, Lynham and Guba (2011, 4th ed).
Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions,
and emerging confluences, revisited. The Sage
Handbook of Qualitative Research; pp. 97–128.