Developing a Research Question
19 Quantitative, Quantitative, & Mixed Methods Research Approaches
Generally speaking, qualitative and quantitative approaches are the most common methods utilized by researchers. While these two approaches are often presented as a dichotomy, in reality it is much more complicated. Certainly, there are researchers who fall on the more extreme ends of these two approaches, most recognize the advantages and usefulness of combining both methods (mixed methods). In the following sections we look at quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodological approaches to undertaking research. Table 2.3 synthesizes the differences between quantitative and qualitative research approaches.
Quantitative research approaches
A quantitative approach to research is probably the most familiar approach for the typical research student studying at the introductory level. Arising from the natural sciences (e.g. chemistry and biology), the quantitative approach is framed by the belief that there is one reality or truth that simply requires discovering (known as realism). Therefore, asking the “right” questions is key. Further, this perspective favours observable causes and effects and is therefore outcome oriented. Typically, aggregate data is used to see patterns and “truth” about the phenomenon under study. True understanding is determined by the ability to predict the phenomenon.
Qualitative research approaches
On the other side of research approaches is the qualitative approach. This is generally considered to be the opposite of the quantitative approach. Qualitative researchers are considered phenomenologists, or human-centred researchers. Any research must account for the humanness (i.e., that they have thoughts, feelings, and experiences that they interpret) of the subjects. Instead of a realist perspective suggesting one reality or truth, qualitative researchers tend to favour the constructionist perspective: knowledge is created, not discovered, and there are multiple realities based on someone’s perspective. Specifically, a researcher needs to understand why, how and to whom a phenomenon applies. This is usually unobservable since it is the thoughts and feelings and experiences of the person. Most importantly, it is a function of their perception of those things rather than what the outside researcher interprets it as being. As a result, there is no such thing as a neutral or objective outsider as there is in the quantitative approach. Rather, the approach is generally process oriented. True understanding, rather than being based on prediction, is based on understanding action and on the interpretive meaning of that action.
| Quantitative research | Qualitative research |
|---|---|
| Tests hypotheses that the researcher generates. | Discovers and encapsulates meanings once the researcher becomes immersed in the data |
| Concepts are in the form of distinct variables. | Concepts tend to be in the form of themes, motifs, generalizations, and taxonomies. However, the objective is still to generate concepts. |
| Measures are systematically created before data collection and are standardized as far as possible; e.g. measures of job satisfaction. | Measures are more specific and may be specific to the individual setting or researcher; e.g. a specific scheme of values. |
| Data are in the form of numbers from precise measurement. | Data are in the form of words from documents, observations, and transcripts. However, quantification is still used in qualitative research. |
| 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 difficult. |
| Analysis proceeds by using statistics, tables, or charts and discussing how they relate to hypotheses. | Analysis proceeds by extracting themes or generalizations from evidence and organizing data to present a coherent, consistent picture. These generalizations can then be used to generate hypotheses. |
Note: Researchers in emergency and safety professions are increasingly turning toward qualitative methods. Here is an interesting peer paper related to qualitative research in emergency care.
Mixed-method research approaches
Increasingly, researchers combine both approaches, and take a mixed methods approach. Mixed methods research represents more of an approach to examining a research problem than a methodology. Mixed methods are characterized by a focus on research problems that require:
- An examination of real-life contextual understandings, multi-level perspectives, and cultural influences;
- An intentional application of rigorous quantitative research assessing magnitude and frequency of constructs and rigorous qualitative research exploring the meaning and understanding of the constructs; and,
- An objective of drawing on the strengths of quantitative and qualitative data gathering techniques to formulate a holistic interpretive framework for generating possible solutions or new understandings of the problem. (from Adjei, n.d.)
Researchers who favour mixed methods believe that the approach can be the most effective at getting to “the truth” or at least “a truth.” It is true that some argue against mixing these approaches. They contend that the fundamentally different beliefs about knowledge and its creation or discovery with the various approaches, hampers one’s ability to get at the truth. However, some of the most highly regarded social scientific investigations combine approaches in an effort to gain the most complete understanding of their topic possible. Using a combination of multiple and different research strategies is called triangulation.[1]
The distinction between qualitative and quantitative methods may seem irrelevant; however, it has led to bitter rivalries and divisions in the research world. Reflecting on Foucault’s idea of power-knowledge and the fact that people tend to like to quantify things, funding often goes to quantitative researchers. It is easier to demonstrate what the money was used for given its focus on cause/ effect and outcomes. Qualitative researchers often are left out of funding decisions. What does this mean for our understanding of the world?
Text Attributions
- This chapter has been adapted from Chapter 5.2 in Principles of Sociological Inquiry, which was adapted by the Saylor Academy without attribution to the original authors or publisher, as requested by the licensor. © Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License.
- There are other forms of triangulation, including triangulation of measures, which occurs when researchers use multiple approaches to measure a single variable. Researchers also use triangulation of theories, which occurs when researchers rely on multiple theories to help explain a single event or phenomenon. ↵
