I’m aware that I spoke of qualitative vs quantitative research in my blog last week however from looking at other’s blogs on similar topics this has really sparked my interest in the comparisons and arguments that people put forward towards the HUGE debate of quantitative research versus qualitative. This debate is so huge and has been going on for so long that you want to stay as far away from it as possible, however the argument that qualitative is less scientific that quantitative research really caught my attention and made me want to write further on the topic for this weeks blog.
Although quantitative is seen as more scientific than qualitative research, I believe that this does not make qualitative research any less valid or relavant. Qualitative takes the extremely difficult job of trying to understand complex phenomena and their effect of individuals and how they view the issues that they are faced with. Though the research is conducted in a “non-scientific” manner this does not make them any less vital and should not be disregarded because of this. Therefore I raise the question- is being scientific really a necessity in qualitative research?
Firstly, it would be beneficial to define both qualitative and quantitative research. Quantitative research is defined as “formal, objective and systematic process in which numerical data are used to obtain information about the world.”
(sourced-http://www.researchproposalsforhealthprofessionals.com/definition_of_quantitative_resea.htm)
What I take from this definition is that it is all to do with numbers- it’s about taking an issue or a hypothesis and giving it numerical value so that it can be statistically analysed. Quantitative research is usually conducted in labs and is usually done in the form of testing- either where you will actually have to take a test or maybe take part in a computer program that will give you scores etc. Also it can be done in the form of scanning- using MRI of fMRI- or measuring your physiological process using medical equipment.
Qualitative research however is very different, as it doesn’t involve numbers. It is defined as “the study of things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of meanings people bring to them”
Therefore what qualitative research does is it takes complex issues, issues that can’t be tested or given numerical value and studies them in depth- according to the views that participants have about them. This is done through different techniques- the most popular being interview situations whether they be in person or over the phone. There is also observation and analysis of already written documents such as articles, websites, chatroom transcripts, blogs etc
In research terms being scientific is described through the scientific method- this is done through a process that runs as follows.
1- Researchers asks a question
2- Background research is conducted
3- Hypothesis is constructed
4- Experiments are performed in order to test the hypothesis
5-Data is analysed
6- Conclusions are drawn
7-Report Results- and if the null is not rejected find a new hypothesis and start the process again.
So if we were to go purely on the scientific method it would be fair to say that qualitative research is less scientific than quantitative. However I do not believe this makes it less useful and I don’t think it should seen as less valuable.
Therefore an argument that I’m putting forward is- is being scientific really a necessity with qualitative research? Qualitative research looks into really complex and sometimes sensitive phenomena and issues such as views on god and religion or the death penalty and others similar to those- these are not things that lend themselves to being easily quantifiable and cannot necessarily be made scientific- but are the details of people’s in depth views on these issues less relevant or valid- should they just be disregarded purely because they weren’t collected in a specified scientific structured setting or in a scientific manner of testing – personally I don’t think so- therefore being scientific isn’t always necessary in discovering a greater understanding certain issues and phenomena.
A great blog, way to put your point out there. Although I did really enjoy reading your blog I can’t quite necessarily say I agree with you. Scientific research is objective, so we can say either yes or no to a question. I agree that with potentially problematic area’s like religion there is a lot of umming and ahhing about it, which is where the qualitative method comes in to its own. Where the qualitative method is lacking is in its objectivity. This is being worked on and we can use methods like Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to really understand qualitative research and help define research questions and help in certain areas of psychology, like the health sector (http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08870449608400256). I understand where you come from when you ask if it is necessary for it to be scientific but without any defining answer which science does provide then how can we be sure on any outcome?
[…] https://stach22.wordpress.com/2011/12/05/is-being-scientific-really-a-necessity-with-qualitative-rese… Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in Uncategorized by maspb. Bookmark the permalink. […]
Lovely blog, as you are Im very interested in the whole debate between which is the better half. But in that statement holds the fact of the matter, in my opinion both make up our science as a whole and both are indespensible to our greater understanding. I agree with you completley on the importance of qualitative data, to study something as boundless and intricate as the human mind it seems foolish to think you can quantify it with numbers alone. We gain a broader understanding through this method rather than the narrow and often anal aproach of quantitative which is essential to getting the whole picture. Dont get me wrong I dont think either is more important than the other I just dont agree with the position that one is less scientific. Hybird studies in my opinion are the way forward, using qualitative as a fore runner to gain a hypothesis then quantitative to test its affect seems the most meticulous form of research to me. But other than that great blog on an interesting subject that you managed to cover well:).