Denzin And Lincoln Qualitative

Denzin and Lincoln (2007) argued that qualitative research, which has become more and more popular in research overtime, is not has strong of a research method for researchers to use. Denzin and Lincoln (2007) states that qualitative research has roots to racism, assimilation, and repression of “the Other,” those who are not dark skinned in a “white world” in the colonial area. Qualitative research does this by listening to the majority’s option, and ignoring the minority’s option. Overtime, this model became a part of many divisions of social science research.

Denzin and Lincoln (2007) claims that qualitative research is subjective. Rather than hearing what individuals have to say, researchers are more likely to looking at numbers and making judgements off on them. Qualitative can measure and analysis relationships between the variables, but is unable to understand the processes of how the relationship is created.

Denzin and Lincoln (2007) argue that qualitative research is a “triangulation” focused, meaning it only can show so many sides of a research. However, quantitative is a “crystal,” meaning that it has many different sides, shapes,

On this perspective, qualitative studies can tell a lot about the population’s options, actions, and reactions when using qualitative methods. It can help guild social workers to better understanding what interventions work best for majority of clients. Rubin and Bellamy (2012) make the claim that qualitative research is both transferable, what is learned can apply quantitative research, and generalizable to the population. Qualitative method can give new insight to a topic, and being able to judge if something is working or not and still using evidence-based practice. However, they do acknowledge that qualitative research can be limiting in getting personal or a “full picture” of whatever a person is studying like quantitative research can