Comparison Between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches in Social Sciences PDF

Int ernat ional Journal For Research In Educat ional St udies ISSN: 2208-2115 Comparison between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches: Social Sciences Aida Mehrad1, MohammadHossein Tahriri Zangeneh2 1 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Spain Department of Basic, Evolutionary and Educational Psychology https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4364-5709 2 Islamic Azad University Arak, Iran Faculty of Social Science ABSTRACT Nowadays because of the vast of investigations and high level of technology, majority of investigators endeavor to apply appropriate methods in their research; in this case, focusing on research approaches assumed as one of the critical factors in the science world. In research methodology specifically in the social science area, two approaches of qualitative and quantitative have been considered more. These approaches assumed as two practical and essential methods in most investigations. Therefore, the purpose of the current literature review is to distinguish the imperative comparison of quantitative and qualitative in the research methodology and determining the brilliant differences between these two research factors. Furthermore, realizing the accurate approach and apply it in the correct way in every investigation is super important; then, the researchers endeavor to justify this essential fact for future studies. Keyword: Investigation, Research Methodology, Quantitative, Qualitative, Social Science INTRODUCTION There are different attitudes toward social science possess which facilities new concepts to address subjects inherent in the study of human beings; it likewise determines older questions and concepts in the philosophy of social science in a new generation (Fay, 1996). In fact, the social sciences have been educated within the speculative fold of philosophical foundation where philosophy has emerged in the arena of human thoughts about the social world. Additionally, it starts from where our ideas and thoughts are overextended to their limits on social ground. The reality, philosophy analyses the entities of the social world from dissimilar features; in truth, nature of knowledge, concentration, matter, fact, and logic of abstract phenomena. Its discoveries out the truth first and then logic and cause-effect analysis of the events or things. It is mostly concerned with the construction of whole human knowledge into logically associated systems based on causality and tries to find out how we distinguish the certain things that can be true or false. In other words, the philosophical analysis of scientific explanation starts with basic perceptions such as theory, achievement, fact, and wisdom. The changing pattern of the philosophical foundations continuously supplements itself with new dimensions and views about the social world. The emergence of constitutive conceptions of the relationship form of knowledge bear to the world has Volume-5 | Issue-7 | July,2019 1 Int ernat ional Journal For Research In Educat ional St udies ISSN: 2208-2115 opened new opportunities in the social sciences (Hughes, 1987). The philosophy of science classifies the interminable and spherical quality of general things through questioning about fundamental aspects of things (Uddin & Hamiduzzaman, 2009). In most of the psychological investigation examples, the philosophical scopes within which the detailed research design is enclosed are epistemological and empirical. For the previous, there is a considerable association between positivism and phenomenology which characterized by subjective constructed interpretation. The philosophical direction for any research is completely important for a number of reasons as it helps to explain the research design, it likewise helps to distinguish which plans will work and which will be fail, and it helps the investigator to identify and even create new enterprises that maybe outside of his experience (Insights, 2009). There is an apparently predictable tendency to divide research methods into two types. The labels for the first type comprise quantitative, positivist, and objectivist, and for the second nature, labels comprise qualitative, phenomenological, social constructionist, subjectivist, relativist, and interpretive. The numerous labels for the first type do have dissimilar meanings, as do the labels given for the second type (Mautner, 2005; Thorpe & Holt, 2008); but these changes often tend to be glossed over by the understood assumption that there are only two basic types of research (Wood, 2010). Qualitative Research Design Qualitative research design is obligated its origin to the corrections of anthropology and sociology. Various terms have been applied to signify the qualitative line of investigation, such as cultural investigations, constructivist paradigm, natural inquiry, phenomenological investigation, postmodernism, post-positivism attitude, and post-structuralism (Schwandt, 2001). Comparable to quantitative research, qualitative research is demanding, disciplined, systematic, and it frequently delivers a practical alternative approach to quantitative research techniques (Randy & McKenzie, 2011). All the qualitative approaches have two things in mutual. First, the emphasis on phenomena that happen in natural settings-that in the real world. And the second one, they include studying those phenomena in all their difficulty. But these facts are vice versa in quantitative approach (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010). Quantitative Research Design In the quantitative research design, the principal purpose is situated to regulate the connotation between an independent variable and a dependent or consequence variable in a population. This research design is either descriptive or experimental. In fact, a descriptive study establishes only relations between variables. An experiment likewise establishes interconnection. For an accurate assessment of the association between variables, a descriptive study frequently requirements a sample of hundreds or even thousands of subjects; an experiment, especially a crossover, may need Volume-5 | Issue-7 | July,2019 2 Int ernat ional Journal For Research In Educat ional St udies ISSN: 2208-2115 only tens of subjects. The evaluation of the relationship is less likely to be prejudiced if you have a high participation rate in a sample selected randomly from a population. In experiments, partiality is also less likely if subjects are randomly assigned to treatments, and if subjects and investigators are blind to the identity of the treatments. In all revisions, subject characteristics can impact on the relationship you are investigating. Limit their consequence either by using a less heterogeneous sample of subjects or preferably by calculating the characteristics and including them in the analysis. In an investigation, attempt to measure variables that might clarify the mechanism of the treatment. In an unblinded experiment, such variables can assistance define the magnitude of any placebo effect (Hopkins, 2008). Qualitative versus Quantitative: Intensive or Extensive Investigators frequently face difficulties in selecting between two types of investigation strategies specifically intensive and extensive research. Two terms of intensive and extensive research are related to the terms of qualitative and quantitative research design. The qualitative and quantitative research approaches are separate in several aspects. Qualitative research design assumed as one in which the researcher usually makes information rights based on constructivist viewpoints (Creswell, 2003). The plans which have been used in this research design included inquiry such as narratives, phenomenologist, ethnographies, grounded theory studies, or case studies. In contrast, quantitative research design has diverse thoughts and definition. Quantitative research is one in which the researcher mainly uses post-positivist claims for evolving knowledge for instance; cause and effect thinking, reduction to specific variables and hypotheses and questions, use of measurements and observations, and the test of the theories. Strategies frequently used in this research design are experiments and surveys, and predetermined instruments in data collection that produce statistical data. Even though, Bryman (2004) declares quantitative research usually emphasizes quantification in the collection and analysis of data. Consequently, the main distinction between qualitative and quantitative research designs is about the question of scale or depth versus breath (Sayer, 1992). There are limited preliminary changes between both research designs, for instance: research questions, technique, and methods of data collection used, limitations and how the objects are defined. Nevertheless, the differences between qualitative and quantitative research are not purely the difference between statistical analysis and in-depth interview, survey or case study or about the test of corroboration and replication. The research is not only about the question of methodology, but likewise the selection of research strategy which includes some opinions or politics that underlie the situation of what is being studied (Randall, Gravier, & Prybutok, 2011). In another world qualitative and quantitative research strategies determined as incommensurable. Bryman (2004) recognized qualitative and quantitative research strategies by concentrating on three main features namely the connection between theory and research, epistemology, and ontology. In following these three important aspects illustrates in Figure 1. Volume-5 | Issue-7 | July,2019 3 Int ernat ional Journal For Research In Educat ional St udies ISSN: 2208-2115 Figure 1: Differences between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Strategies In overall, the quantitative research design and variables are determined previously data collection started. However, in the qualitative research design and variables measured are flexible and to some extent dependent on the context of data collection. The quantitative research requirements the investigator to carefully describe variables that may be counted with numbers. This method has repeatedly been viewed as reductionism; that is, the truth is reduced to a number. In contrast, the qualitative researcher assumed as involved in the complete or holistic perspective, which includes underlying values and the context as a part of phenomena (Morse, Swanson, & Kuzel, 2001). The quantitative investigator may not be predominantly interested in what factors, with whom, where, when, how it was consumed, and other related details, which may be the key interest of the qualitative investigator. The quantitative paradigm assumes that variables can be measured objectively. The study of the case and effect relationships between or among variables is often of interest in this approach. In contrast, the qualitative methods assume as an only partially objective accounts of the world can be produced and hence can be understood in a variety of ways. Quantitative research also is based in part on deductive reasoning, in which the logic proceeds from general to specific. In conclusion, quantitative inquiry entails measurement instruments and data analysis that is expressed in statistics. On the other hand, qualitative research allows a more open-ended and flexible approach to assessment (Randall et al., 2011). Table 1 demonstrations the variances between quantitative and qualitative patterns, comprehensively. Table 1: Assessment of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods Quantitative Qualitative -Researcher defines the truth -Reality is definite by the contributors -Researcher self-determining -Investigator as a communicating observer -Ideas reduced to statistics -Holistic viewpoint -Determination is hypothesis confirmation -Purpose is hypothesis generation -Deductive reasoning (general to specific) -Inductive reasoning -Fixed research design -Dynamic research design -Statistical manipulation required -Statistical testing not obligatory Volume-5 | Issue-7 | July,2019 4 Int ernat ional Journal For Research In Educat ional St udies ISSN: 2208-2115 Then again, in the social investigation, there is much overlap between the type of data and the approach to qualitative and quantitative research but unfortunately, there is a lot of unfriendly will between the followers of each research approach. The two approaches differ in significant ways. Table 2 illustrates these inversely comprised: Table 2: Differences between Quantitative Approach and Qualitative Approach Quantitative Approach Qualitative Approach Measure impartial facts Concept social reality cultural meaning Emphasis on variables Attention to communicating process, events Reliability is important value free Authenticity is important values are present and explicit Theory and data are distinct Theory and data are bonded Independent of setting Situational constrained Many cases, subjected statistical analysis Few cases subjected thematic analysis Researcher is detached Researcher is involved Qualitative and quantitative researches also vary in many ways, but they match each other. In both styles, data are empirical representations of concept, and measurement links data to the concept, yet differences in styles of research and the type of data mean they approach the measurement process differently (Neuman, 2006). Among the differences between quantitative and qualitative research, measurement and sample assumed as two super factors accounted in social sciences research. Compare Quantitative and Qualitative Measurement One of the important factors in the methodology area is the type of measurements that have been used in most investigations. In fact, designing measures of variables presumed as a vital step in planning a study for quantitative researches. The qualitative researches measure with an extensive variety of methods. Generally, quantitative start with an abstract idea follows with empirical data that represent the thoughts. Although the qualitative research primarily begins with empirical data follow with abstract impress, relate idea and data and end with a mixture of thoughts and data. Overall, the procedure is additional interactive in both styles of research. The measurement process for quantitative research follows a conservative forward sequence, first conceptualization, followed by operationalization followed by applying the operational definition or measuring the collect the data. But the conceptualization process in qualitative research varies from quantities research. Conceptualization is situated as a process of forming coherent theoretical meanings as one struggle to make sense or organize the data and one’s preliminary ideas about it. The operationalization process for qualitative research often precedes conceptualization. In the quantitative research, measurement reliability is numerical results shaped by an indicator doing not vary because of characteristics of the measurement instrument itself. But then again in qualitative research the basic principles of reliability and validity accepted by researchers but rarely use the terms because of their association with quantitative measurement and qualitative researchers apply the principles differently (Neuman, 2006). Volume-5 | Issue-7 | July,2019 5 Int ernat ional Journal For Research In Educat ional St udies ISSN: 2208-2115 Compare Qualitative and Quantitative Sampling Regarding the sampling segment, qualitative and quantitative research is different. In the qualitative investigation emphasis less on a sample’s representativeness than on how the sample or small collection of cases, units, or activities brightens social life, the primary purpose of sampling is to collect exact cases, events or actions that can clarify and deep understanding. in qualitative research concern to discover cases that will improve what the researchers learn about the processes of social life in a specific context. In the qualitative research hardly ever used a presentative sample from a huge number of cases to intensely study the sampled cases. In qualitative research have a habit to use no probability or non-random sample. It means, this method applied rarely the sample size in development and has limited acquaintance about the larger group or population from which the sample is occupied. Dissimilar in the quantitative research who uses a pre-planned approach based on mathematical theory, the qualitative researcher selects cases gradually, with the exact content of a case determining whether it is chosen (Neuman, 2006). CONCLUSION According to the specific role of research methodology in the social science area, and its approaches (quantitative and qualitative), considering to each of these styles and counting their differences in the part of measurement and sampling is super valuable. In fact, demonstrating differences of quantitative and qualitative approaches can be extra useful for academicians and investigators in all research area specifically those who are studies in the social science area. In this regard, the investigators endeavour to illustrate and explain more about these tow practical approaches in methodology till the other researchers apply appropriate method or approach based on their investigations and expand the world of science in the correct way based on their knowledge and investigations. The current literature review has been proposed the small segment of expanding information and acquaintance of previous investigators in the methodology; and, showing their brilliant different. Volume-5 | Issue-7 | July,2019 6 Int ernat ional Journal For Research In Educat ional St udies ISSN: 2208-2115 REFRENCE Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. Fay, B. (1996). Contemporary philosophy of Social Science. Blackwell Publishers Inc, U.S.A. Hopkins, D. (2008). A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Hughes, J. (1987). The Philosophy of Social Research. Longman Singapore Publishers (Pte) Ltd, Singapore. Insights, A. (2009). Researching in Organizations - Philosophical Requirements, 1, 1-3. Leedy, P., & Ormrod, J. E. (2010), Practical Research: Planning and Design (10th ed). Pearson. Mautner, T. (2005). The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy. Penguin Books. Morse, J. M., Swanson, J. M., & Kuzel, A. J. (2001). The Nature of Qualitative Evidence. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Pearson, The University of Michigan. Randall, W.S., Gravier, M., & Prybutok, V. R. (2011). Connection, trust, and commitment: Dimensions of co-creation? Journal of Strategic Marketing, 19(1), 3-24. Randy, C., & McKenzie, J. F (2011), Health promotion and education research method (2nd ed.). udbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publisher. Schwandt, T. A. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sayer, A. (1992). Method in social science: A realist approach (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Thorpe, R., & Holt, R. (2008). The Sage dictionary of qualitative management research. London: Sage. Uddin, M., & Hamiduzzaman, M. (2009). The Philosophy of Science in Social Research. The Journal of International Social Research, 2(6), 654-664. Wood, M. (2010). Are ‘Qualitative’ and ‘Quantitative’ Useful Terms for Describing Research? Methodological Innovations Online, 5(1), 56-71. Volume-5 | Issue-7 | July,2019 7 IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 19, Issue 4, Ver. III (Apr. 2014), PP 99-104 e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845. www.iosrjournals.org The Strengths and Weaknesses of Research Methodology: Comparison and Complimentary between Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches Looi Theam Choy (Faculty of Arts and Social Science, University of Malaya, Malaysia) Abstract: The purpose of this study is compared strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies in social science fields. Reviewed recent secondary resources, there is no best approach between both research methodologies due to existing strengths and weaknesses among both types of research methodologies. To plan and implement a research, choosing either one research methodology will still be occurred strengths and weaknesses for the research. This common study only based on existing secondary data and sources to interpret results. No primary data approach on this study due to sufficient source and data from secondary resources. The defined cases have proven that complementary approach between qualitative and quantitative approaches for a same research topic may provide expected results as both references better than just thoroughly considering either one research methodology approach. Keywords: Qualitative Approach, Quantitative Approach, Qualitative Research Methodology, Quantitative Research Methodology. I. Introduction 1.1 Introduction of Quantitative Approach in Research Methodologies The process of conducting a quantitative study begins with a researcher selecting a topic. Quantitative researchers typically start with a general area of study or issue of professional or personal interest. Researchers must narrow it down to, or focus on, a specific research question that can be addressed in the study. Often this requires a careful review of the research literatures and developing hypotheses that frequently come from social theory (Neuman, 2006: 14). Designing the study requires making decisions about the type of case or samples to select how to measure relevant factors and what research techniques such as questionnaires or experiments to be employed (Neuman, 2006: 14). In addition, quantitative methods characteristically refer to standardized questionnaires that are administered to individuals or households, which are identified through various forms of sampling usually random sampling (Dudwick, Kuehnast, Jones and Woolcock, 2006: 3). Basically, probability or non-probability sampling approaches are required researchers to choose a proper way before drawing a sample size. Next is the data collection step. A quantitative researcher will very carefully record and verify information, almost always in one form of numbers and usually transfer the data into computer-readable format (Neuman, 2006: 14). Quantitative data can help establish correlations between given variables and outcomes. Such data should allow others to validate original findings by independently replicating the analysis (Dudwick, Kuehnast, Jones and Woolcock, 2006: 3). After that, analyze data step will be replaced. Often the research ends up with a large quantity of computer-generated output that provides the researcher next has to give meaning to or interpret the data. To draw a theory, quantitative researchers have to look at the analyzed data, using background knowledge on the research topic and questions. A researcher also considers alternative interpretation of the data compares the results of the study with previous studies and draws out its wider implications. The final step is to inform others means writing a report in a specific format for the study (Neuman, 2006: 14). 1.2 Introduction of Qualitative Approach in Research Methodologies Qualitative researchers begin with a self-assessment and reflections about themselves as situated in a social-historical context. It is a highly self-aware acknowledgement of social self, or of a researcher‟s position in society. This type of approach does not narrowly focus on a specific question but ponder the theoretical philosophical paradigm in an inquisitive, open-ended settling in proves as they adopt a perspective (Neuman, 2006: 15). And also, qualitative methods typically refer to a range of data collection and analysis techniques that use purposive sampling and semi-structured, open-ended interviews (Dudwick, Kuehnast, Jones and Woolcock, 2006: 3). www.iosrjournals.org 99 | Page The Strengths and Weaknesses of Research Methodology: Comparison and Complimentary between A qualitative researcher also will design a study, collect data, analyze data and interpret data same like a quantitative researcher does. He or she also tends to build new theory as well as draw on existing theory during these steps. At the interpret data stage, he or she creates new concepts and emphasize constructing theoretical interpretations (Neuman, 2006: 15). At last, the final step called informs others but the report styles to present results to other people vary by approach (Neuman, 2006: 15). 1.3 Background to the Study Problems Qualitative researchers often rely on interpretive or critical social science. They apply “logic in practice” and follow a nonlinear research path. They emphasize conducting detailed examinations of cases that arise in the natural flow of social life. In contrast, most of the quantitative researchers rely on a positivists approach to social science. They apply “reconstructed logic”, and follow a linear research path. Quantitative researchers emphasize precisely measuring variables and testing hypotheses that are linked to general causal explanation (Nueman, 2006: 151). One of the differences between the two styles comes from the nature of the data. Soft data, in the form of impressions, words, sentences, photos, symbols and so forth, dictate different research strategies and data collection techniques than hard data, in the form of numbers. Other differences are different assumptions about social life and different objectives. The differences can make tools used by the other style inappropriate or irrelevant. People who judge qualitative research by standards of quantitative research are often disappointed, and vice-versa (Neuman, 2006: 151). Researchers who use one style alone do not always communicate well with those using the other, but the languages and orientations of the styles are mutually intelligible. It takes time and effort to understand both styles and to see how they can be complementary (Neuman, 2006: 151). The historically negative bias against qualitative research is discussed, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches, with issues highlighted by reference to nursing research. Consideration is given to issues of sampling, the relationship between the researcher and subject, methodologies and collated data, validity, reliability, and ethical dilemmas (Carr, 1994: 716). For other potential biases in data collection procedures, there may be no clear advantage to either qualitative or quantitative approaches, although qualitative research methods have the advantage that they may be able to identify and handle response bias as it occurs, rather than afterwards. For example, biases due to the respondent‟s „mental set‟ refer to the way that perceptions based on previous items influence replies to later ones. In the social desirability bias, a respondent replies so as to appear socially acceptable in eyes of interviewer. Acquiescence bias, similarly, covers responses that are influenced by the respondent‟s perception of what would be desirable to the researcher, especially to an influential one (Mcdowell and Maclean, 1998: 19). 1.4 Objectives of the Study This study is purposely and merely compared the strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research methodologies in social science fields. Evaluation among the strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research methodologies also the objective for this study in the field of social science. Identification of complementary between both qualitative and quantitative approaches also the intention for this study. 1.5 Significance of the Study To identify the strengths and weaknesses of both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies are appropriated paths for researchers selecting their research methodologies according to their specific topics. Thus, researchers can decide their research methodologies referring to this evaluation. In addition, complementary approach between both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies can provide better results. Hence, researchers can apply this approach as alternative solution for their researches especially in social science field. 1.6 Scope of the Study The contents of this scope only focus on the evaluation and comparison between strengths and weaknesses of research methodologies in social science, quantitative and qualitative approaches. The time scope for this study commenced in March 2014 within one week to complete all of it. 1.7 Theoretical Framework The illustrated diagram “Fig. 1” is the entire description of strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies. The left side and right side are consisting specific strengths and weaknesses of both qualitative and quantitative research methodology approaches. The middle of qualitative and www.iosrjournals.org 100 | Page The Strengths and Weaknesses of Research Methodology: Comparison and Complimentary between quantitative research methodology approaches are top-down connected to indicate the better research results for a single research can be achieved through the complementary approach by both qualitative and quantitative approaches but not combining the process of both research methodologies into a single research. Furthermore, the top-down connection also advocated the both research results are totally based on separation of both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies, just only comparing both of the research results as references under a same research topic. The outline of the theoretical framework has illustrated through below diagrams: Strengths Weaknesses 1. View of homogeneous 1. No objectively exploration. verifiable result. Qualitative 2. Raise more issues 2. Skillful requirement Research through broad and Methodology for interviewers. open-ended inquiry. Approach 3. Time consuming 3. Understanding during interviewing behaviors of values, process and beliefs and intensive category assumptions. process. Strengths Weaknesses 1. Reliability by critical 1. No human analyzed. perception and 2. Short time frame for Quantitative beliefs. administered survey. Research 2. Lack of resources 3. Facilitated numerical Methodology for large scale data for groups and Approach research. extents of agree or 3. No depth experience disagree from description. respondents. “Figure 1” The model of strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies Source: owned by author. 1.8 Hypotheses H0: There is no strength enhancement and weakness reduction for complementary between both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies under a same research. H1: There is a strength enhancement and weakness reduction for complementary between both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies under a same research. 1.9 Research Question Comparatively evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. II. Literature Reviews 2.1 The Strengths of Quantitative Research Methodology The quantitative as survey approach has two significant advantages. First, it can be administered and evaluated quickly. There is no need to spend time at the organization prior to administering the survey, and the responses can be tabulated within a short timeframe. Second, numerical data obtained through this approach facilitates comparisons between organizations or groups, as well as allowing determination of the extent of agreement or disagreement between respondents (Yauch and Steudel, 2003: 473). www.iosrjournals.org 101 | Page The Strengths and Weaknesses of Research Methodology: Comparison and Complimentary between The advantage of legitimate quantitative data, that is data which is collected rigorously, using the appropriate methods and analysed critically, is in its reliability (ACAPS, 2012: 6). 2.2 The Weaknesses of Quantitative Research Methodology The strengths of quantitative research can, however, also be weaknesses. Many important characteristics of people and communities including both rich and poor, for example, identities, perceptions, and beliefs that cannot be meaningfully reduced to numbers or adequately understood without reference to the local context in which people live (Dudwick, Kuehnast, Jones and Woolcock, 2006: 3). Effective quantitative research usually requires a large sample size sometimes several thousand households. However, lack of resources sometimes makes large-scale research of this kind impossible. In many settings particularly developing countries, interested parties (e.g., governments, nongovernmental organizations and public service providers) may lack the skills and especially the resources needed to conduct a thorough quantitative evaluation (Dudwick, Kuehnast, Jones and Woolcock, 2006: 3). In term of disaster survey, the shortcoming of quantitative data is that it fails to provide an in depth description of the experience of the disaster upon the affected population. Knowing how many people are affected and their locations does not provide sufficient information to guide agencies and sectors on what they should plan for in terms of response (ACAPS, 2012: 6). 2.3 The Strengths of Qualitative Research Methodology Qualitative methods that allow researchers to explore the views of homogenous as well as diverse groups of people help unpack these differing perspectives within a community. Because social capital is relational—it exists between people—asking a group of people to respond together to certain questions and hypothetical situations may yield information that is more nuanced than data derived from surveys (Dudwick, Kuehnast, Jones and Woolcock, 2006: 3). The primary strength of the qualitative approach to cultural assessment is the ability to probe for underlying values, beliefs, and assumptions. To gain a full appreciation of an organization, it is necessary to understand what is driving their behavior (Yauch and Steudel, 2003: 472). The other great benefit with a qualitative approach is that the inquiry is broad and open-ended, allowing the participants to raise issues that matter most to them. The qualitative researcher typically does not have a preconceived, finite set of issues to examine (Yauch and Steudel, 2003: 472). 2.4 The Weaknesses of Qualitative Research Methodology The major drawbacks associated with qualitative cultural analysis are firstly, the process is time-consuming, and secondly, a particular, important issue could be overlooked. The second potential problem is that a particular issue could go unnoticed. All researchers‟ interpretations are limited. As positioned subjects, personal experience and knowledge influence the observations and conclusions. Also, because qualitative inquiry is generally open-ended, the participants have more control over the content of the data collected (Yauch and Steudel, 2003: 472-473). ACAPS‟s supporting document states the weaknesses inherent in qualitative data are that it, firstly, results in data which is not objectively verifiable. Secondly, it requires a labour intensive analysis process such as categorization, recoding, etc. and thirdly, it needs skilled interviewers to successfully carry out the primary data collection activities (ACAPS, 2012: 10). III. Materials and Methodologies This part is the outline of the methods to implement and perform the research. For this study, the secondary data or source is the main focus and intentions to discover and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of research methodologies, qualitative and quantitative approaches. Those secondary data could be discovered by related text books, online journal articles and online supporting documents. Apparently, case study, contents or context analysis is the primary method to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of research methodologies on qualitative and quantitative approaches. Due to this study as generic or common research, the secondary data or source is sufficiently to justify the research purposes or targets without primary data approach. IV. Findings and Results 4.1 Case 1: Qualitative Case Study Method at an Information System Organization The case study approach refers to a group of methods which emphasize qualitative analysis. Data are collected from a small number of organizations through methods such as participant-observation, in-depth interviews, and longitudinal studies. The case study approach seeks to understand the problem being investigated. It provides the opportunity to ask penetrating questions and to capture the richness of www.iosrjournals.org 102 | Page The Strengths and Weaknesses of Research Methodology: Comparison and Complimentary between organizational behavior, but the conclusions drawn may be specific to the particular organizations studied and may not be generalizable (Gable, 1994: 2). Fervent critics of qualitative methods are many, and hail largely from the physical sciences. More objective criticism has come from the social sciences. Kerlinger, an author identifies three major weaknesses of qualitative research, the inability to manipulate independent variables, the risk of improper interpretation, and the lack of power to randomize. Another author, Lee identifies four corresponding problems with case study research, a lack of controllability, deductibility, repeatability and generalizability, where the latter two limitations stem largely from the aforementioned lack of power to randomize (Gable, 1994: 2). No doubts, putting a side quantitative approach could not generate a satisfy results for all of them. Hence, the results of quantitative approach are necessary that allowing them to compare the results as references between both research methodologies. For qualitative approach, the author, Benbasat and his group mates identify three strengths of case study research in information systems: (1) the researcher can study information systems in a natural setting, learn about the state of the art, and generate theories from practice; (2) the method allows the researcher to understand the nature and complexity of the process taking place; and (3) valuable insights can be gained into new topics emerging in the rapidly changing information systems field. Another author, Yin suggests that case studies are appropriate where the objective is to study contemporary events, and where it is not necessary to control behavioral events or variables. Yin further suggests single case studies are appropriate if the objective of the research is to explore a previously un-researched subject, whereas multiple-case designs are desirable when the intent of the research is description, theory building, or theory testing. Benbasat aand his group mates suggest that multiple-case designs allow for cross case analysis and the extension of theory. The author, Van Maanen states, "... no matter what the topic of study, qualitative researchers, in contrast to their quantitative colleagues, claim forcefully to know relatively little about what a given piece of observed behavior means until they have developed a description of the context in which the behavior takes place and have attempted to see the behavior from the position of its originator (Gable, 1994: 2). 4.2 Case 2: Quantitative Survey in Pakistan Conflict In Pakistan in 2008 during large scale conflict related displacement, the child protection cluster wanted to know numbers of separated children in each site visited. The sites comprised a small, purposive sample of all of sites in the area and varied significantly in population size and composition (ACAPS, 2012: 7). Questions were asked to community groups about numbers of separated children. Asking for this information was taxing for the community groups to answer, and field teams found that male and female groups gave vastly different numeric answers to the question making it both impossible to resolve for each site and resulting in un-analyzable information (ACAPS, 2012: 7). Obviously, sample size should be enlarged during this case due to statistically results would be more reliable if sample size large enough. In addition, perceptions and beliefs might vary between male and female. Hence, a qualitative research is necessary for complementary of quantitative research. While it would have been useful to know whether a trend of unaccompanied children resulted from the initial displacement, reliable data on numbers of unaccompanied children could not be generalized from the data, rendering the exercise of collecting this specific piece of data meaningless and wasteful of both time and resources (ACAPS, 2012: 7). 4.3 Case 3: Haiti, Quantitative Survey on RINAH Disaster In previous multi cluster needs assessments, pressure from agencies to include a multitude of sector specific questions in quantitatively framed questionnaire tools resulted in assessment teams collecting quantitative data that was neither reliable nor analyzable and thus unusable. In the Haiti RINAH, for example, 190 questions were included in the questionnaire, but out of the 76 that were usable and reliable for inclusion in the final RINAH report, none were quantitative (ACAPS, 2012: 6). Indeed, proper questionnaires such as reliability and validity factors should be proven before dispatching for those respondents. Moreover, the case might be added open-ended questions such as comments could provide qualitative data for analyzing process but not suitable for quantitative approach. 4.4 Case 4: Qualitative Approach shaped the Political Science Program at Truman Quantitative measures like national exams and surveys force students to give standardized responses to uniform questions and produce data that is easily manipulated and compared. Qualitative exit interviews have allowed the faculty to delve deeper into the reasons behind student attitudes and to probe them with a depth and breadth not possible in quantitative surveys. This benefit echoes the literature of qualitative methods discussed earlier. Also, students see the interview as a nice counter to completion of anonymous and impersonal surveys. On an affective level qualitative interviews give students face-to-face contact with faculty who care about their www.iosrjournals.org 103 | Page The Strengths and Weaknesses of Research Methodology: Comparison and Complimentary between personal well-being and opinions. It is not uncommon for students to generate questions for the faculty, or for both sets of participants to engage in informal exchanges. The power of this human interaction can be strong. Perhaps more importantly faculty members receive feedback face to face from the students themselves (Young and Hagerty, 2007: 8). Unsatisfied quantitative results led the Truman‟s researchers transforming quantitative approach to qualitative approach that could understand student‟s perceptions and motivations. V. Conclusion No matter which types of research methodologies, qualitative or quantitative approach has been selected for research purposely; critics, debates or comments are still appeared between specialists of qualitative and quantitative approaches. Kindly refer to the above mentioned cases, choosing either one type of research methodology has still embraced negative and positive impacts of the results and output. Thus, it could be concluded that there is no perfect between qualitative and quantitative research methodologies. The strengths and weaknesses of both types of research methodologies will still be performed, anticipated and shown for further social science researches. The above mentioned cases also shown that complementary between both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies could provide better solutions. A comparison and complimentary results as references from both separated processes on qualitative and quantitative approaches in a same research topic may reduce or perhaps eliminate those limitations and bias. This is the alternative way to provide better solution in research methodologies. Acknowledgements I would wish to express my appreciation and gratitude to my father, Mr. Looi Yon Cheong and my mother, Mrs. Chong Lan currently both living in Ipoh state, Malaysia, who always provide me with the encouragement, support and understanding throughout my life. References. ACAPS (2012) Qualitative and Quantitative Research Techniques for Humanitarian Needs Assessment.. Carr, L. T. (1994) The Strengths and Weaknesses of Quantitative and Qualitative Research: What Method for Nursing, Journal of Advanced Nursing, No.20, pp. 716-721.. Dudwick, N., Kuehnast, K., Jones, V. N., and Woolcock, M. (2006) Analyzing Social Capital in Context: A Guide to Using Qualitative Methods and Data, World Bank Institute, Washington.. Gable, G. G. (1994) Integrating Case Study and Survey Research Methods: An Example in Information Systems, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp.112-126, URL Accessible: http://eprints.qut.edu.au. Mcdowell, I. and Maclean, L. (1998) Blending qualitative and quantitative study methods in health services research, Health Informatics Journal No.4, pp.15-22.. Neuman, W. L. (2006) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches 6 th Edition, Pearson International Edition, USA.. Yauch, C. A. and Steudel, H. J. (2003) Complementary Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Cultural Assessment Methods, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 465-481.. Young, C. and Hagerty, R. (2007) Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Methods for Program Evaluation: The Application and Insights of the Exit Interview, 4th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association Teaching and Learning Conference, Charlotte. www.iosrjournals.org 104 | Page The Practice of Social Research A Note from the Author W riting is my joy, sociology my passion. I delight in putting words together in a way that makes people learn or laugh or both. Sociology shows up as a set of words, also. It rep- resents our last, best hope for planet-training our race and ﬁnding ways for us to live together. I feel a special excitement at being present when sociol- ogy, at last, comes into focus as an idea whose time has come. I grew up in small-town Vermont and New Hampshire. When I announced I wanted to be an auto-body mechanic, like my dad, my teacher told me I should go to college instead. When Malcolm X announced he wanted to be a lawyer, his teacher became too loud to ignore. For me, teaching is like told him a colored boy should be something more playing jazz. Even if you perform the same number like a carpenter. The difference in our experiences over and over, it never comes out the same twice says something powerful about the idea of a level and you don’t know exactly what it’ll sound like playing ﬁeld. The inequalities among ethnic groups until you hear it. Teaching is like writing with your run deep. voice. I ventured into the outer world by way of At last, I have matured enough to rediscover Harvard, the USMC, U.C. Berkeley, and twelve and appreciate my roots in Vermont each summer. years teaching at the University of Hawaii. I re- Rather than a return to the past, it feels more like signed from teaching in 1980 and wrote full-time the next turn in a widening spiral. I can’t wait to for seven years, until the call of the classroom see what’s around the next bend. ii TWELFTH EDITION The Practice of Social Research Earl Babbie Chapman University Australia Brazil Japan Korea Mexico Singapore Spain United Kingdom United States iii The Practice of Social Research, Twelfth Edition © 2010, 2007 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Earl Babbie ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright Acquisitions Editor: Chris Caldeira herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by Development Editor: Dan Moneypenny any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web distribu- Assistant Editor: Rachael Krapf tion, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, Editorial Assistant: Rebecca Boorsma except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Technology Project Manager: Lauren Keyes Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Marketing Manager: Kim Russell Marketing Assistant: Jillian Myers For product information and technology assistance, contact us at Marketing Communications Manager: Martha Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706. Pfeiﬀer Project Manager, Editorial Production: Cheri Palmer For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions. Creative Director: Rob Hugel Further permissions questions can be e-mailed to Art Director: Caryl Gorska [email protected]. Print Buyer: Linda Hsu Permissions Editors: Bob Kauser and Leitha Library of Congress Control Number: 2008933881 Etheridge-Sims Production Service: Greg Hubit Bookworks ISBN-13: 978-0-495-59841-1 ISBN-10: 0-495-59841-0 Text Designer: Carolyn Deacy Photo Researcher: Pre-Press Wadsworth Copy Editor: Molly D. Roth 10 Davis Drive Illustrator: Lotus Art Belmont, CA 94002-3098 USA Cover Designer: RHDG/Brie Hettey Cover, Part Opener, and Chapter Opener Image: Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions Masterﬁle with oﬃce locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Compositor: Newgen Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil, and Japan. Locate your local oﬃce at international.cengage.com/region. Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Educa- tion, Ltd. For your course and learning solutions, visit academic.cengage.com. Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our pre- ferred online store www.ichapters.com. Printed in the United States of America 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12 11 10 09 Dedication Suzanne Babbie Contents in Brief PA RT 1 11 Unobtrusive Research 331 An Introduction to Inquiry 1 12 Evaluation Research 362 1 Human Inquiry and Science 2 PA RT 4 2 Paradigms, Theory, and Social Research 31 3 The Ethics and Politics of Social Research 62 Analysis of Data: Quantitative and Qualitative 391 PA RT 2 13 Qualitative Data Analysis 393 The Structuring of Inquiry: 14 Quantitative Data Analysis 421 Quantitative and Qualitative 89 15 The Elaboration Model 448 16 Statistical Analyses 466 4 Research Design 90 17 Reading and Writing Social Research 505 5 Conceptualization, Operationalization, and Measurement 124 Appendixes A1 6 Indexes, Scales, and Typologies 160 A Using the Library A2 7 The Logic of Sampling 187 B GSS Household Enumeration Questionnaire A12 C Random Numbers A22 PA RT 3 D Distribution of Chi Square A24 Modes of Observation: Quantitative E Normal Curve Areas A26 and Qualitative 229 F Estimated Sampling Error A27 G Twenty Questions a Journalist Should Ask about 8 Experiments 230 Poll Results A28 9 Survey Research 253 10 Qualitative Field Research 295 vi Contents in Detail Preface xiv CHAPTER 2 Acknowledgments xxiii Paradigms, Theory, Part 1 An Introduction and Social Research 31 to Inquiry 1 Introduction 32 Some Social Science Paradigms 32 Macrotheory and Microtheory 34 CHAPTER 1 Early Positivism 34 Social Darwinism 35 Human Inquiry and Science 2 Conﬂict Paradigm 36 Introduction 3 Symbolic Interactionism 36 Looking for Reality 4 Ethnomethodology 37 Knowledge from Agreement Reality 4 Structural Functionalism 38 Errors in Inquiry, and Some Solutions 6 Feminist Paradigms 39 What’s Really Real? 8 Critical Race Theory 40 Rational Objectivity Reconsidered 41 The Foundations of Social Science 10 Theory, Not Philosophy or Belief 11 Elements of Social Theory 44 Social Regularities 11 Two Logical Systems Revisited 46 Aggregates, Not Individuals 13 The Traditional Model of Science 46 Concepts and Variables 14 Deductive and Inductive Reasoning: The Purposes of Social Research 19 A Case Illustration 48 A Graphic Contrast 51 The Ethics of Human Inquiry 19 Deductive Theory Construction 53 Some Dialectics of Social Research 19 Getting Started 53 Idiographic and Nomothetic Explanation 20 Constructing Your Theory 54 Inductive and Deductive Theory 21 An Example of Deductive Theory: Qualitative and Quantitative Data 23 Distributive Justice 54 Pure and Applied Research 25 Inductive Theory Construction 56 The Research Proposal 27 An Example of Inductive Theory: Why Do People Smoke Marijuana? 57 vii viii Contents The Links between Theory Nomothetic Causal Analysis and Hypothesis- and Research 58 Testing 96 Research Ethics and Theory 59 False Criteria for Nomothetic Causality 96 Necessary and Sufﬁcient Causes 97 Units of Analysis 98 CHAPTER 3 Individuals 100 Groups 100 The Ethics and Politics Organizations 101 of Social Research 62 Social Interactions 101 Social Artifacts 103 Introduction 63 Units of Analysis in Review 103 Ethical Issues in Social Research 64 Faulty Reasoning about Units of Voluntary Participation 64 Analysis: The Ecological Fallacy and No Harm to the Participants 65 Reductionism 104 Anonymity and Conﬁdentiality 67 The Time Dimension 106 Deception 70 Cross-Sectional Studies 106 Analysis and Reporting 71 Longitudinal Studies 107 Institutional Review Boards 72 Approximating Longitudinal Studies 110 Professional Codes of Ethics 75 Examples of Research Strategies 112 Two Ethical Controversies 75 How to Design a Research Project 112 Trouble in the Tearoom 75 Getting Started 113 Observing Human Obedience 76 Conceptualization 115 The Politics of Social Research 77 Choice of Research Method 115 Objectivity and Ideology 78 Operationalization 116 Politics with a Little “p” 81 Population and Sampling 116 Politics in Perspective 82 Observations 116 Data Processing 117 Part 2 The Structuring of Analysis 117 Application 117 Inquiry: Quantitative Research Design in Review 117 and Qualitative 89 The Research Proposal 119 Elements of a Research Proposal 119 The Ethics of Research Design 120 CHAPTER 4 Research Design 90 CHAPTER 5 Introduction 91 Conceptualization, Three Purposes of Research 92 Exploration 92 Operationalization, Description 93 Explanation 94 and Measurement 124 The Logic of Nomothetic Explanation 94 Introduction 125 Criteria for Nomothetic Causality 94 Measuring Anything That Exists 125 Contents ix Conceptions, Concepts, and Reality 126 Handling Missing Data 171 Concepts as Constructs 128 Index Validation 173 Conceptualization 130 The Status of Women: An Illustration of Index Indicators and Dimensions 131 Construction 176 The Interchangeability of Indicators 133 Scale Construction 177 Real, Nominal, and Operational Bogardus Social Distance Scale 177 Deﬁnitions 134 Thurstone Scales 178 Creating Conceptual Order 134 Likert Scaling 179 An Example of Conceptualization: Semantic Differential 180 The Concept of Anomie 136 Guttman Scaling 181 Deﬁnitions in Descriptive Typologies 183 and Explanatory Studies 138 Operationalization Choices 139 CHAPTER 7 Range of Variation 140 Variations between the Extremes 141 The Logic of Sampling 187 A Note on Dimensions 142 Deﬁning Variables and Attributes 142 Introduction 188 Levels of Measurement 143 A Brief History of Sampling 189 Single or Multiple Indicators 147 President Alf Landon 189 Some Illustrations of Operationalization President Thomas E. Dewey 190 Choices 148 Two Types of Sampling Methods 191 Operationalization Goes On and On 149 Nonprobability Sampling 192 Criteria of Measurement Quality 150 Reliance on Available Subjects 192 Precision and Accuracy 150 Purposive or Judgmental Sampling 193 Reliability 150 Snowball Sampling 193 Validity 153 Quota Sampling 194 Who Decides What’s Valid? 155 Selecting Informants 195 Tension between Reliability The Theory and Logic of Probability and Validity 156 Sampling 196 The Ethics of Measurement 156 Conscious and Unconscious Sampling Bias 196 Representativeness and Probability CHAPTER 6 of Selection 198 Random Selection 199 Indexes, Scales, Probability Theory, Sampling Distributions, and Typologies 160 and Estimates of Sampling Error 200 Populations and Sampling Frames 208 Introduction 161 Review of Populations and Sampling Indexes versus Scales 161 Frames 210 Index Construction164 Types of Sampling Designs 211 Item Selection 164 Simple Random Sampling 211 Examination of Empirical Relationships 165 Systematic Sampling 211 Index Scoring 170 Stratiﬁed Sampling 214 x Contents Implicit Stratiﬁcation in Systematic Strengths and Weaknesses Sampling 216 of the Experimental Method 249 Illustration: Sampling University Students 217 Ethics and Experiments 250 Multistage Cluster Sampling 218 Multistage Designs and Sampling Error 218 Stratiﬁcation in Multistage Cluster CHAPTER 9 Sampling 220 Probability Proportionate to Size (PPS) Survey Research 253 Sampling 221 Disproportionate Sampling and Introduction 254 Weighting 222 Topics Appropriate for Survey Probability Sampling in Review 224 Research 254 The Ethics of Sampling 225 Guidelines for Asking Questions 255 Choose Appropriate Question Forms 256 Make Items Clear 257 Part 3 Modes of Observation: Avoid Double-Barreled Questions 257 Quantitative and Respondents Must Be Competent to Answer 258 Qualitative 229 Respondents Must Be Willing to Answer 259 Questions Should Be Relevant 259 CHAPTER 8 Short Items Are Best 260 Avoid Negative Items 260 Experiments 230 Avoid Biased Items and Terms 260 Questionnaire Construction 262 Introduction 231 General Questionnaire Format 262 Topics Appropriate for Experiments 231 Formats for Respondents 262 The Classical Experiment 232 Contingency Questions 263 Independent and Dependent Variables 232 Matrix Questions 264 Pretesting and Posttesting 232 Ordering Items in a Questionnaire 265 Experimental and Control Groups 233 Questionnaire Instructions 266 The Double-Blind Experiment 234 Pretesting the Questionnaire 267 Selecting Subjects 235 A Composite Illustration 267 Probability Sampling 236 Self-Administered Questionnaires 267 Randomization 236 Mail Distribution and Return 270 Matching 236 Monitoring Returns 271 Matching or Randomization? 237 Follow-up Mailings 272 Variations on Experimental Design 238 Response Rates 272 Preexperimental Research Designs 238 A Case Study 273 Validity Issues in Experimental Research 240 Interview Surveys 274 An Illustration of Experimentation 244 The Role of the Survey Interviewer 274 Alternative Experimental Settings 247 General Guidelines for Survey Web-Based Experiments 247 Interviewing 275 “Natural” Experiments 247 Coordination and Control 278 Contents xi Telephone Surveys 279 Ethics and Qualitative Field Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing Research 328 (CATI) 281 Response Rates in Interview Surveys 282 Online Surveys 283 CHAPTER 11 Comparison of the Different Survey Methods 285 Unobtrusive Research 331 Strengths and Weaknesses of Survey Introduction 332 Research 287 Content Analysis 333 Secondary Analysis 288 Topics Appropriate for Content Analysis 333 Ethics and Survey Research 292 Sampling in Content Analysis 334 Coding in Content Analysis 338 Illustrations of Content Analysis 342 CHAPTER 10 Strengths and Weaknesses of Content Analysis 344 Qualitative Field Research 295 Analyzing Existing Statistics 344 Introduction 296 Durkheim’s Study of Suicide 345 Topics Appropriate for Field The Consequences of Globalization 346 Research 296 Units of Analysis 347 Problems of Validity 347 Special Considerations in Qualitative Problems of Reliability 348 Field Research 299 Sources of Existing Statistics 349 The Various Roles of the Observer 299 Relations to Subjects 301 Comparative and Historical Research 350 Some Qualitative Field Research Examples of Comparative and Historical Paradigms 303 Research 351 Naturalism 303 Sources of Comparative and Historical Ethnomethodology 306 Data 355 Grounded Theory 307 Analytic Techniques 357 Case Studies and the Extended Case Method 309 Ethics and Unobtrusive Measures 259 Institutional Ethnography 311 Participatory Action Research 313 CHAPTER 12 Conducting Qualitative Field Research 316 Preparing for the Field 316 Evaluation Research 362 Qualitative Interviewing 318 Introduction 363 Focus Groups 322 Topics Appropriate for Evaluation Recording Observations 324 Research 364 Strengths and Weaknesses of Qualitative Formulating the Problem: Issues Field Research 326 of Measurement 366 Validity 327 Specifying Outcomes 367 Reliability 328 Measuring Experimental Contexts 368 xii Contents Specifying Interventions 368 The Qualitative Analysis of Quantitative Specifying the Population 369 Data 413 New versus Existing Measures 369 Evaluating the Quality of Qualitative Operationalizing Success/Failure 369 Research 414 Types of Evaluation Research Ethics and Qualitative Data Analysis 418 Designs 370 Experimental Designs 370 Quasi-Experimental Designs 371 CHAPTER 14 Qualitative Evaluations 375 The Social Context 377 Quantitative Data Analysis 421 Logistical Problems 377 Use of Research Results 379 Introduction 422 Quantiﬁcation of Data 422 Social Indicators Research 384 Developing Code Categories 423 The Death Penalty and Deterrence 384 Codebook Construction 425 Computer Simulation 385 Data Entry 426 Ethics and Evaluation Research 386 Univariate Analysis 426 Distributions 427 Central Tendency 428 Part 4 Analysis of Data: Dispersion 431 Quantitative and Continuous and Discrete Variables 432 Detail versus Manageability 433 Qualitative 391 Subgroup Comparisons 433 “Collapsing” Response Categories 434 Handling “Don’t Knows” 435 CHAPTER 13 Numerical Descriptions in Qualitative Research 436 Qualitative Data Analysis 393 Bivariate Analysis 436 Introduction 394 Percentaging a Table 438 Linking Theory and Analysis 394 Constructing and Reading Bivariate Discovering Patterns 394 Tables 440 Grounded Theory Method 396 Introduction to Multivariate Semiotics 397 Analysis 441 Conversation Analysis 399 Sociological Diagnostics 442 Qualitative Data Processing 400 Ethics and Quantitative Data Coding 400 Analysis 444 Memoing 404 Concept Mapping 405 Computer Programs for Qualitative CHAPTER 15 Data 406 QDA Programs 406 The Elaboration Model 448 Leviticus as Seen through NUD*IST 407 Using NVivo to Understand Women Film Introduction 449 Directors, by Sandrine Zerbib 411 The Origins of the Elaboration Model 449 Contents xiii The Elaboration Paradigm 454 Organizing a Review of the Literature 506 Replication 455 Reading Journals versus Books 507 Explanation 455 Evaluating Research Reports 508 Interpretation 457 Using the Internet Wisely 513 Speciﬁcation 457 Some Useful Websites 513 Reﬁnements to the Paradigm 460 Searching the Web 514 Elaboration and Ex Post Facto Evaluating the Quality of Internet Hypothesizing 462 Materials 518 Citing Internet Materials 520 Writing Social Research 521 CHAPTER 16 Some Basic Considerations 521 Organization of the Report 523 Statistical Analyses 466 Guidelines for Reporting Analyses 526 Going Public 527 Introduction 467 The Ethics of Reading and Writing Social Descriptive Statistics 467 Research 528 Data Reduction 467 Measures of Association 468 Regression Analysis 472 Appendixes A1 Inferential Statistics 476 A Using the Library A2 Univariate Inferences 476 Tests of Statistical Signiﬁcance 478 B GSS Household Enumeration The Logic of Statistical Signiﬁcance 479 Chi Square 483 Questionnaire A12 t-Test 485 Some Words of Caution 486 C Random Numbers A22 Other Multivariate Techniques 488 D Distribution of Chi Square A24 Path Analysis 488 Time-Series Analysis 489 E Normal Curve Areas A26 Factor Analysis 491 Analysis of Variance 493 F Estimated Sampling Error A27 Discriminant Analysis 495 Log-Linear Models 498 G Twenty Questions a Geographic Information Systems Journalist Should Ask (GIS) 500 about Poll Results A28 CHAPTER 17 Glossary G1 Reading and Writing Social Bibliography B1 Research 505 Index I1 Introduction 506 Reading Social Research 506 Photo Credits I10 Preface A “few” years ago (I hate to tell you how many), permit the routine application of established I began teaching my ﬁrst course in social research techniques. methods. The course focused speciﬁcally on survey research methods, and I had only six students in The next day, unexpectedly, Wadsworth called and the class. As the semester progressed, I became asked me to write a methods text! more relaxed as a teacher. Before long, my students Survey Research Methods was published in 1973. and I began meeting in my ofﬁce, where I could My editors and I immediately received some good grab and lend books from my own library as their news, some bad news, and some additional good relevance occurred to me during class meetings. news. The ﬁrst good news was that all survey One nagging problem I faced then was the lack research instructors seemed to love the book, and of a good textbook on survey research. The avail- it was being used in virtually every survey research able books fell into one of two groups. Some books course in the country. The bad news was that there presented the theoretical logic of research methods weren’t all that many survey research courses. in such abstract terms that I didn’t think students The ﬁnal good news, however, was that many would be able to apply any of the general principles instructors who taught general social research to the practical world of “doing” research. The courses—covering survey research alongside other other books were just the opposite. Often termed research methods—were inclined to use our book “cookbooks,” they presented detailed, step-by-step and supplement it with other books dealing with instructions on how to conduct a survey. Unfor- ﬁeld research, experiments, and so on. While tunately, this approach only prepared students to adjusting to our specialized book, however, many conduct surveys very much like the one described instructors suggested that Wadsworth have “that by the authors. Neither the abstract nor the “cook- same guy” write a more general social research book” approach seemed truly useful to students or text. their instructors. The preface of the ﬁrst edition of The Practice of One day I found myself jotting down the table Social Research (1975) acknowledged the assistance of contents for my ideal research methods text- of a dozen social research instructors from Califor- book. It was organized around three theoretical nia to Florida. The book was a collaboration in a principles on which scientiﬁc research is based: very real sense, even though only my name was on the cover and I was ultimately responsible for it. 1. Understanding the theoretical principles on The Practice of Social Research was an immedi- which scientiﬁc research is based. ate success. Although it was initially written for 2. Seeing how those principles are reﬂected in the sociology courses, subsequent editions have been established techniques for doing research. increasingly used in ﬁelds such as psychology, 3. Being prepared to make appropriate com- public administration, urban studies, education, promises whenever ﬁeld conditions do not communications, social sciences, and political xiv Preface xv science—in some 30 different disciplines, I’m told. This edition of the book contains some new Moreover, it’s being used by teachers and research- features, all of which were suggested by faculty ers in numerous countries around the world, and reviewers and users. in 2000 a Beijing publisher released a two-volume Research Ethics: In 1973, Survey Research Chinese edition. Methods contained an appendix on research I’ve laid out this lengthy history of the book for ethics, which was one of the few things a couple of reasons. First, when I was a student, reviewers criticized: They were against it. I suppose I thought of textbooks the same way Regarding the section “The Rights of Subjects,” that I thought about government buildings: They one reviewer angrily wrote, “What about were just there. I never really thought about them the rights of science?” Over the years, as being written by human beings. I certainly concern for research ethics has steadily in- never thought about textbooks as evolving: being creased among social researchers, and the topic updated, getting better, having errors corrected. has become steadily more prominent in the As a student, I would have been horriﬁed by the various editions of this book. In the 12th edi- thought that any of my textbooks might contain tion, most chapters end with a section exam- mistakes! ining the ethical implications of the chapter’s Second, pointing out the evolution of the book topics. sets the stage for a preview of the changes that have gone into this 12th edition. As with previous Research Proposal: Many instructors now revisions, several factors have prompted changes. use the research proposal as a vehicle for For example, because social research technology training students in social research, and and practices are continually changing, the book several of the reviewers asked for more at- must be updated to remain current and useful. In tention to that topic. As a consequence, each my own teaching, I frequently ﬁnd improved ways chapter concludes with a continuing exercise to present standard materials. Colleagues also often inviting students to apply what they’ve share their ideas for ways to teach speciﬁc topics. learned in the chapter to an evolving research Some of these appear as boxed inserts in the book. proposal. Both students and instructors often suggest that Keeping Humanity in Focus: Sometimes, various topics be reorganized, expanded, clariﬁed, social research requires us to delve deeply into shrunk, or—gasp—deleted. the relationships among variables and/or take apart intricate social structures. This leads some researchers and research consumers to worry that we might lose sight of the human beings who lie at the core of our concerns. Some social New to the 12th Edition research efforts, however, undertake sophis- In an earlier edition of this book, I said, “Revising a ticated analyses while keeping an immediate textbook such as this is a humbling experience. No focus on the people involved. A new series of matter how good it seems to be, there is no end of boxes in this edition highlights some of those ideas about how it could be improved.” That obser- studies, as follows: vation still holds true. When we asked instructors what could be improved, they once again thought Chapter 1: Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas, of things, and I’ve considered all their suggestions, Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Mother- followed many of them, and chosen to “think some hood before Marriage (Berkeley: University of more” about others. I’ve also received numerous California Press, 2005). comments and suggestions from students who Chapter 5: Elijah Anderson, A Place on the Cor- have been assigned the book; many of the changes ner: A Study of Black Street Corner Men (Chicago: come from them. University of Chicago Press, 2004). xvi Preface Chapter 10: Rachel Sherman, Class Acts: Service Clariﬁed the top portion of Figure 1-4 and Inequality in Luxury Hotels (Berkeley: Uni- versity of California Press, 2005). Cited evaluation research as a special kind of applied research, to be examined in Chapter 12 Chapter 14: Kristen Schilt, “Just One of the Guys? How Transmen Make Gender Visible Chapter 2, “Paradigms, Theory, and Social in the Workplace,” Gender and Society 20, no. 4 Research” (2006): 465–90. Added discussion of feminist standpoint theory Chapter 17: Sudhir Venkatesh, Gang Leader for a Day: A Rogue Sociologist Takes to the Streets (New Added discussion of critical realism York: Penguin, 2008). Introduced the term mesotheory How to Do It: Another new series of boxes in Dropped references to control variables as “test” variables the book provides practical, step-by-step guidance to assist students in dealing with what instructors Reviewed concepts of idiographic and nomo- have identiﬁed as especially elusive tasks. These thetic in “Elements of Social Theory” are the boxes in the series, some of which adapted Chapter 3, “The Ethics and Politics of Social materials already existing in the book: Research” Chapter 2: Framing a Hypothesis Included discussion of the “politicization of science” Chapter 4: Identifying the Unit of Analysis Chapter 7: Using a Table of Random Numbers Added a comment on the positive results of the Tearoom Trade research Chapter 9: Conducting an Online Survey Added discussion of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison Chapter 10: Establishing Rapport experiment Chapter 17: Using Google Scholar Provided new discussion of DHHS “Certiﬁcate Chapter 17: Citing Bibliographic Sources of Conﬁdentiality” In addition to these identiﬁable features, I have Mentioned Nuremberg trials continued to pursue my intention to demonstrate Discussed Tuskegee syphilis experiments social research as an international, not just Ameri- Chapter 4, “Research Design” can, undertaking. Since researchers in different parts of the world sometimes face unique problems, the Provided example of using cohorts to infer process over time ways in which they deal with those problems often reveal new dimensions to the logic of social inquiry. Included a new diagram to illustrate a cohort Here are some of the other changes in this edi- study tion, arranged by chapter: Provided new section: “Nomothetic Causal Analysis and Hypothesis Testing” Chapter 1, “Human Inquiry and Science” Provided new section on the purposes of social Changed Figure 4-5 in previous edition to 4-6 in current research Added materials on using both qualitative and Chapter 5, “Conceptualization, Operational- quantitative approaches ization, and Measurement” Clariﬁed the original meaning of “the exception Gave new opening example of college that proves the rule” satisfaction Included glossary deﬁnitions of epistemology and Discussed many names for snow to illustrate methodology concepts and conceptualization Coordinated deﬁnitions of theory in text and in Provided “fear of crime” example to illustrate glossary deﬁnition dimensions Preface xvii Included a new box: “Measuring College Added reference to registration-based sampling Satisfaction” (RBS) Discussed the Geertz concept of “thick Referenced discussion of random-digit dialing description” and problems of cell phones in Chapter 9 Gave a new summary table reviewing direct Chapter 8, “Experiments” and indirect observables and constructs Explained why experiments are discussed ﬁrst Added a paragraph illustrating the importance Introduced the term ﬁeld experiment of keeping the operationalization process open Mentioned why we might use preexperimental Clariﬁed the deﬁnition of validity methods Added a paragraph distinguishing sex and gender Chapter 9, “Survey Research” Changed the diagram of the conceptualization process to a table with examples Updated and expanded section on online sur- vey research Discussed differences in qualitative and quantitative conceptualization and Included box on using Survey Monkey operationalization Expanded description of random-digit dialing Expanded discussion of problems created by Chapter 6, “Indexes, Scales, and Typologies” cell phones Discussed how indicators of a variable may be unrelated to one another Referenced cognitive interviewing regarding pretesting questionnaires Added discussion of “Webometrics Ranking” of universities to the box on U.S. News ranking Reported that interviewer behavior changes over the course of a survey project Expanded the captions for Figures 6-2 and 6-3 Used Obama-Clinton primary as example for Provided new box on “Indexing the World” social desirability showing a variety of indexes rating various aspects of life Noted suggestion that interviewers might be given more latitude in correcting respondent Chapter 7, “The Logic of Sampling” errors Mentioned that standard error can be calcu- Discussed the use of PDAs for survey interview- lated for means and other measures ing or self-administered surveys Discussed the problems of bias that cell phones Expanded and updated the discussion of re- create for telephone survey sampling sponse rates Revised the glossary deﬁnition of sampling error Discussed the decline in interview survey re- Gave new example of snowball sampling: using sponse rates social networks of nonheterosexual women in Chapter 10, “Qualitative Field Research” small-town U.K. Updated Loﬂand references with new, greatly Corrected the discussion of the ﬁnite popula- revised version tion correction Gave example of using Internet for qualitative Worked in the quip: “Statistics means never interviewing having to say you are certain.” Discussed researcher responsibilities in partici- Expanded discussion of cell-phone-only patory action research population Discussed and deﬁned emancipatory research Added a discussion of “theoretical sampling” in qualitative research projects Provided box on giving pencils and cameras to Peruvian Indians in rainforest Discussed recent address-based sampling (ABS) xviii Preface Mentioned study of globalization impact among Used Peter Rossi et al. deﬁnition of evaluation Irish young people that used drawings, poems, research and songs Chapter 13, “Qualitative Data Analysis” Discussed study combining focus groups and Provided major new section on the evaluation in-depth interviews in Sweden of qualitative research Added pictures of some leading qualitative ﬁeld Included new section on QDA programs researchers Updated Loﬂand to newest edition Updated discussion of focus groups Chapter 14, “Quantitative Data Analysis” Introduced the “ethnographic fallacy” Clariﬁed the base for percentaging tables Added example of Jeffrey Kidder’s study of bike messengers in New York City Illustrated subgroup comparison with GSS example Introduced Loﬂand’s notion of “selective com- petence” in subjects and discussed it in terms of Introduced GapMinder as resource for display- rapport ing data Discussed how to continue interviewing dif- Provided new discussion on how to read tables ﬁcult informants Updated and clariﬁed discussion of Table 14-12 Referenced article on the difﬁculty of writing Updated and clariﬁed the discussion of Table autoethnography 14-4 Described kaupapa Maori research as an ex- Updated data on example of gender, age, and ample of PAR church attendance Mentioned Silent Racism as an example of non- Updated data on example of income by educa- political, nonmarketing focus groups tion and gender Chapter 11, “Unobtrusive Research” Updated the data on example of age and at- titude toward marijuana Updated Megatrends studies Gave lengthy example of qualitative content Chapters 15, “The Elaboration Model” analysis of rap music No signiﬁcant chan

Comparison Between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches in Social Sciences PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue