except write a.. oh wait

From day one of a Psychology degree we are taught quantitative methods in statistics. We are taught how to analyse our data using statistical tests and how to interpret the output of t tests and ANOVAs. I can’t speak for every University but for us it seems that qualitative data doesn’t even get a look in until year 2. It’s as though the syllabus is hinting that qualitative methods are easier and so don’t need to be taught until later on in our degree. It’s overshadowed by SPSS and the use of numbers. In actual fact, qualitative research isn’t “the easy method”.

When using qualitative analysis researchers put a lot of effort into interpreting their data, and their results are not necessarily less scientific than quantitative methods. Qualitative methods can provide a number of things that quantitative methods cant including; underlying reasons and motivations, uncover trends in opinions and thoughts, provide a deep understanding on a subject which can provide the basis of further research.

Qualitative research looks to provide a full picture of the subject and can help researchers decide the direction of the research if they are unsure to begin with, so it’s a good place to start. It is recommended by many researchers during the earlier phases of a project. Donald Campbell said “All research ultimately has a qualitative grounding”.

The downside to qualitative research is that it can be very subjective and un-generalisable. It can also be very time consuming and can result in the researcher having a subjective view on the subject, rather than remaining objective and impartial.

To be fair quantitative research does provide certain benefits such as; generalisable results, use of a larger sample, and the final results are conclusive and can recommend a ‘course of action’ in the real world. Fred Kerlinger said “There’s no such thing as qualitative data. Everything is either 1 or 0”. When using quantitative methods, we can use statistical tests to determine how likely our results are down to chance. It also makes experiments replicable and comparable. This method is a lot more objective and allows the researcher to remain impartial. It also allows hypothesis testing and is more efficient in comparison to qualitative methods.

The downside to the quantitative method is that it doesn’t take into account, context which may be important for the results, for example a study about racism in America in the 1950s would show very different results to a study conducted in England in the 1990s, with the same research design.

Overall, I think that qualitative and quantitative methods are strongest when they’re used together. Depending on the research question, sometimes it more appropriate to use one or the other. It is suggested that researchers start with qualitative to decide the direction of their research and then move in more of a qualitative direction. If this is recommended than I think that their should be more of the syllabus dedicated to qualitative methods, allowing  students to become more familiar with them. This would allow a more informed decision about which direction to go in when starting their own research in the future.




Comments on: "Qualitative vs Quantitative" (4)

  1. I agree that qualitative methods do get overshadowed quite a bit by SPSS and quantitative methods and we are all given the impression that qualitative is easier. Although I have to say that after doing the qualitative report it is a lot of work, and took me twice as long (if not even longer) as quantitative reports I have done before. As you say quantitative research does have certain benefits such as larger samples, and generalisable results but it does lack the flexibility of qualitative research. With qualitative research the investigators often only know the general direction in which they want to go but they do not have a set research question. Some may say this is a good thing as it allows them to go where the research takes them, whilst others may disagree arguing that without the control and knowledge of where the research is going investigators are not being ‘scientific’.
    When anyone mentions qualitative research people are very quick to point out that we cannot generalise, however Hammersley (1992) argued that if there is previous evidence from other studies that supports the findings it is possible to generalise from the study. This is an example of representative generalisation but there are also inferential and theoretical generalisations to consider. Can it be applied across settings (inferential)? Will it open new doors into other fields (theoretical)?
    In my opinion quantitative research is no more trustworthy than qualitative. As Rolfe (2006) said “a study is trustworthy if, and only if, the reader of the reseach report judge it to be so”.


    Hammersley, M. (1996). The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism. In J.T.E. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Research in Psychology and the Social Sciences. Leicester UK: BPS Books
    Rolfe, G. (2006). Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: quality and idea of qualitative research. Journal of advanced nursing, 53, 304-310.

  2. I agree there appears to be more emphasis placed on quantitative research, which may reflect the general view towards this type of research. While it’s important for psychology to be viewed as scientific, partly because the public and the government tend to hold science in high regard, it is also important to bear in mind that psychology involves the study of the human mind and behaviour. Not everything is as simple as “1 or 0”, which is why qualitative methods help because they can be used to explore new areas, gather data and lead onto quantitative research. Some researchers suggest that triangulation should be used in all research, where quantitative & qualitative methods are used; and there are some areas of psychology where qualitative research can be very beneficial, such as counselling psychology (Campbell & Fiske, 1959; Morrow, 2005). However, it is often not feasible for researchers to conduct both types of research because of only being trained in one.

    Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.

    Morrow, S. L. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. Journal of counseling psychology, 52, 250-260.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: