Qualitative And Quantitative Methods

The story in numbers or numbers that tell a story?

The last two decades have seen much discussion focused on the relative merits and demerits of qualitative and quantitate methods. They are the two central approaches in social science investigations (Morgan, 2007), a sort of the dominant paradigm or as Creswell (1998) put it, a “basic set of assumptions” that guide inquiries and permeate every aspect of a research inquiry (Lincoln, 1990).

The epistemological value of research methods lie in their ability to help explain new ideas or detect hitherto unnoticed patterns in human or technical behavior and in some cases enable action on the information gleaned. Questions need answers and the way we find our answers through research is as S.J. Tracy,

The goal of qualitative research is the development of theories and notions which help us recognize social phenomena in natural (rather than experimental) settings, while emphasizing the meanings, experiences, and views of the participants (Pope & Mays 1995). Quantitative methods on the other hand, “approach their studies with a certain paradigm or worldview, a basic set of assumptions that guide their inquiries” (Creswell, 1998). While the goals of both methods is to find the best answers to reach questions, quantitative methods express their results in numbers while qualitative systems use a narrative graphic style. It’s also an area rife with

We may broadcast information and hope entire communities receive our message but how a group will use and act upon it is naturally individualistic. This distinctiveness doesn’t exist in isolation. People, are as Charles Dickens, said, the “product of their ages” and also creations of their cultural socialization. Qualitative analysis, by its very nature of considering the symbols, culture and community stake in matters encourages an exploration of complex phenomena or areas not often amenable to quantitative research (Mays & Pope,