quantitative research vs qualitative research advantages and disadvantages

• Sep 9, 2020

Pros And Cons Of Qualitative Research vs Quantitative Research

Updated: Apr 5

In this post, you will learn the pros and cons of qualitative research vs quantitative research along with the differences and discover how both types of research can help and be applied to different business situations from ethnographic research to online surveys.

Table of contents:

The difference between qualitative and quantitative research

Pros and cons of qualitative research, pros and cons of quantitative research, so when can qualitative and quantitative research be applied, main types of qualitative research methods, key types of quantitative research methods.

The table above shows the advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative research and quantitative research.

[Disclosure: This post contains affiliate links, meaning we get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through these links at no additional cost to you.]

The main purpose of qualitative research is to explore the in-depth behaviour, opinions and attitudes of a small group of individuals in a more open manner instead of strictly following a set of questions. These tend to be face to face in-depth interviews or focus groups, where people can discuss the subject at hand openly with guidance from the interviewer.

While quantitative research is where results can be measured by numbers, which is easy to pick up and understand for those making the decisions . These quantified results are gathered by interviewing a large group of people (from 50 running into the 1000s) that is a reflection of the whole population you are targeting. Hence with a larger sample size, statistical analysis can be applied to provide better consumer insights such as predicted behaviour, best price levels and key drivers of buyers’ decisions.

Other than exploring attitudes and behaviour in detail, qualitative research is also used to test adverts, develop concepts and new products and build a picture of the market. Whereas quantitative research is used more for market measurements such as the number of people who use a product or service, awareness, consideration, preference, segmenting the market and how likely are they to buy.

Pros of qualitative research

Explores attitudes and behaviour in-depth.

Explores attitudes and behaviour in-depth as it’s more on a personal level and can delve in detail to gain a better understanding of their views and actions to generate or examine a hypothesis in more detail.

Encourages discussion

Encourages discussion as it’s more in an open manner instead of strictly following a fixed set of questions. In this way, it gives the research some context rather than just numbers.

Flexibility

Flexibility, where the interviewer can probe and is able to ask any questions around the subject matter, they feel is relevant or had not thought of before during the discussions and can even change the setting.

Cons of qualitative research

The sample size can be an issue.

The sample size can be an issue if you are taking the opinion of 5 people out of 300 of your customers or subscribers as a generalisation.

Bias in the sample selection

Bias in the sample selection, meaning the people you are selecting to take part in the qualitative research may all have a certain opinion of the subject matter rather than a group of people with mixed views, which is more valuable particularly if they are debating with opposing views during focus groups.

Lack of privacy

Lack of privacy, if you are covering sensitive topics then people taking part may not be comfortable in sharing their thoughts and opinions of the subject with others.

Whether you are using a skilled moderator or not

It is of vital importance; the moderator is skilled and experienced in managing the conversations of groups as well as being knowledgeable enough of the subject matter to ask relevant questions that may have not been thought of.

Pros of quantitative research

Larger sample sizes.

Larger sample sizes allowing for robust analysis of the results, so you are able to make more generalisations of your target audience.

Impartiality and accuracy of data

Impartiality and accuracy of the data as it based on the survey questions for screening, grouping and other hard number facts.

Faster and easier to run

Faster and easier to run particularly online and mobile surveys , where you can see the results in real time.

Data is anonymous

Data is anonymous especially with sensitive topics through self-completion exercises like online surveys.

Offers reliable and continuous information

Offers reliable and continuous information where you can repeat the survey again and again weekly, monthly, quarterly, yearly to gain consistent trend data to help you plan ahead or investigate and address issues.

Cons of quantitative research

Limited by the set answers on a survey.

Limited by the set answers on a survey, so you are unable to go beyond that in delving in more detail the behaviours, attitudes and reasons as you do with qualitative research. This is particularly true with self-completion surveys (online), where there is no interviewer probing you even if you include a couple of open-ended questions.

Research is not carried out in their normal environment

Research is not carried out in their normal environment, so can seem artificial and controlled. Answers given by participants are claimed and may not be their actual behaviour in real life.

Unable to follow-up any answers given following completion of survey

Unable to follow-up any answers given after they have completed the survey due to the anonymity of the participants. This is especially true for validity of the findings if the results are inconclusive. Although you can ask at the end of the survey if they would like to do a follow-up survey but not all participants may agree to do so.

Generally qualitative research is used for exploratory purposes to get a picture of what is going on or examining a hypothesis that can be tested later on. Although it can be used independently through a series of depth interviews and focus groups to explore concepts such as ideas for advertising or new products.

While with quantitative research you can gather measurable results that you can draw insights from and take action where needed like there is a drop in the number of visitors to your website page, which may be tackled through redesign of the webpage or promotions.

Read this post if you want run a survey - 5 Best Survey Maker Platforms To Consider Using

Qualitative and quantitative research is best utilised when they are combined and split into phases. For example, phase 1 could be exploratory research with qualitative research and then in phase 2 this is followed up with quantitative research to test the hypothesis that came up in the first phase. A post phase of qualitative research can be applied if there has been redesigns of the concept or to identify experiences after an event.

There are advantages in combining data and information from both methods where you can reap the benefits from the advantages that both methods have as well as countering the limitations through this hybrid approach. This is achieved through:

Enrichment by identifying issues not found in quantitative research

Examination via generating a hypothesis that can be tested.

Explanation through bringing the results to life by understanding any surprising results from the quantitative data.

Below are the most popular types of research within qualitative and quantitative research that you can use to achieve your objectives and answer questions you may have.

The three key tools of qualitative research are:

Focus groups – this is where a group of 5 to 10 people at a set location or on a private online forum discuss a topic of interest who have been pre-selected via screening to take part in. These group discussions are led by a person moderating the group.

Depth interviews – are one to one interviews that are either conducted face to face, over the phone or through video conferencing apps like Skype and Zoom. This allows the participant to talk at length in a more open manner and is especially good for sensitive topics. The interviewer will use a discussion guide to follow a relatively unstructured list of topics.

Ethnography and observation – are a fly on the wall way of listening and observing the behaviour of participants in certain real environments like shopping at a supermarket. Is great to capture the actual actions of participants rather than what they claim to do in a survey.

The 3 most popular methods of quantitative research:

Online surveys – is without a doubt the most popular type of research especially amongst consumer research as it’s quick, easy to do and relatively cheap compared to other methods. The great thing with online surveys is it easily accessible for everyone to take part in whether that’s on a laptop, mobile or tablet and can be on a website or survey links through social media and email. Plus, you can check out the results in real time.

If you are interested in creating a survey, quiz or online forms you can try JotForm which is a easy to use interactive platform to set up surveys from scratch or have customisable templates to get you started with.

Also there is free eBook available called Jotform for Beginners that you can download and will explain the different features available to save time and boost productivity with all kinds of online forms for apps, stores, pdf, tables and more.

Telephone interviews – due to advancements in technology this is now used more for business to business research and interviews tend to last between 15 to 30 minutes. The advantage of this method is you have an interviewer who can probe or clarify any answers to open ended questions.

Face to face interviews – these are normally conducted in specific situations like shopping malls, exhibitions and the high street. As it’s more time consuming, costly and higher a security risk for interviewers, makes it the least popular method to use.

Social listening - is a form of secondary research where you can track, listen and respond to mentions about a brand or key topic on social media and elsewhere on the web. You can read more about it in this post - 3 Social Listening Tools To Consider

If you want to find out more how market research can help you, check out the posts below:

Market Research Online Surveys In 6 Easy Steps

How To Do A Survey: Top 10 Tips

Market Research Online: Benefits, Methods & Tools

Conversational Forms: Discover What So Good About Them

Causal Research: Definition | Advantages | Examples | Components

Top 5 Website Survey Questions About Usability

Learn how to do market research for a new business

M arket Research Meaning 101

Discover the importance of market research

Examples of Market Research Projects

The Best Methods Of Market Research

Primary Research vs Secondary Research

Quota Sampling: What Is It & How To Do It

6 Key Benefits Of Advertising Research

6 Crucial Steps Of NPD Research

TOP 4 Types Of Market Segmentation

How To Design A Good Questionnaire

Monadic Testing: All You Need To Know

Concept Testing: Examples, Types, Costs, Benefits

10 Key Benefits Of Market Research

Market Research Examples For Businesses To Succeed

#qualitativevsquantitativeresearch #anparresearch

• INTRO TO MARKET RESEARCH

Related Posts

10 Key Benefits Of Market Research For All Business Types

Concept Testing: Examples | Types | Costs | Benefits

Qualitative vs Quantitative Research Methods & Data Analysis

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

What is the difference between quantitative and qualitative?

The main difference between quantitative and qualitative research is the type of data they collect and analyze.

Quantitative research collects numerical data and analyzes it using statistical methods. The aim is to produce objective, empirical data that can be measured and expressed in numerical terms. Quantitative research is often used to test hypotheses, identify patterns, and make predictions.

Qualitative research , on the other hand, collects non-numerical data such as words, images, and sounds. The focus is on exploring subjective experiences, opinions, and attitudes, often through observation and interviews.

Qualitative research aims to produce rich and detailed descriptions of the phenomenon being studied, and to uncover new insights and meanings.

Quantitative data is information about quantities, and therefore numbers, and qualitative data is descriptive, and regards phenomenon which can be observed but not measured, such as language.

What Is Qualitative Research?

Qualitative research is the process of collecting, analyzing, and interpreting non-numerical data, such as language. Qualitative research can be used to understand how an individual subjectively perceives and gives meaning to their social reality.

Qualitative data is non-numerical data, such as text, video, photographs, or audio recordings. This type of data can be collected using diary accounts or in-depth interviews and analyzed using grounded theory or thematic analysis.

Qualitative research is multimethod in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. Denzin and Lincoln (1994, p. 2)

Interest in qualitative data came about as the result of the dissatisfaction of some psychologists (e.g., Carl Rogers) with the scientific study of psychologists such as behaviorists (e.g., Skinner ).

Since psychologists study people, the traditional approach to science is not seen as an appropriate way of carrying out research since it fails to capture the totality of human experience and the essence of being human.  Exploring participants’ experiences is known as a phenomenological approach (re: Humanism ).

Qualitative research is primarily concerned with meaning, subjectivity, and lived experience. The goal is to understand the quality and texture of people’s experiences, how they make sense of them, and the implications for their lives.

Qualitative research aims to understand the social reality of individuals, groups, and cultures as nearly as possible as participants feel or live it. Thus, people and groups are studied in their natural setting.

Some examples of qualitative research questions are provided, such as what an experience feels like, how people talk about something, how they make sense of an experience, and how events unfold for people.

Research following a qualitative approach is exploratory and seeks to explain ‘how’ and ‘why’ a particular phenomenon, or behavior, operates as it does in a particular context. It can be used to generate hypotheses and theories from the data.

Qualitative Methods

There are different types of qualitative research methods, including diary accounts, in-depth interviews , documents, focus groups , case study research , and ethnography.

The results of qualitative methods provide a deep understanding of how people perceive their social realities and in consequence, how they act within the social world.

The researcher has several methods for collecting empirical materials, ranging from the interview to direct observation, to the analysis of artifacts, documents, and cultural records, to the use of visual materials or personal experience. Denzin and Lincoln (1994, p. 14)

Here are some examples of qualitative data:

Interview transcripts : Verbatim records of what participants said during an interview or focus group. They allow researchers to identify common themes and patterns, and draw conclusions based on the data. Interview transcripts can also be useful in providing direct quotes and examples to support research findings.

Observations : The researcher typically takes detailed notes on what they observe, including any contextual information, nonverbal cues, or other relevant details. The resulting observational data can be analyzed to gain insights into social phenomena, such as human behavior, social interactions, and cultural practices.

Unstructured interviews : generate qualitative data through the use of open questions.  This allows the respondent to talk in some depth, choosing their own words.  This helps the researcher develop a real sense of a person’s understanding of a situation.

Diaries or journals : Written accounts of personal experiences or reflections.

Notice that qualitative data could be much more than just words or text. Photographs, videos, sound recordings, and so on, can be considered qualitative data. Visual data can be used to understand behaviors, environments, and social interactions.

Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative research is endlessly creative and interpretive. The researcher does not just leave the field with mountains of empirical data and then easily write up his or her findings.

Qualitative interpretations are constructed, and various techniques can be used to make sense of the data, such as content analysis, grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), or discourse analysis.

For example, thematic analysis is a qualitative approach that involves identifying implicit or explicit ideas within the data. Themes will often emerge once the data has been coded.

Key Features

• Events can be understood adequately only if they are seen in context. Therefore, a qualitative researcher immerses her/himself in the field, in natural surroundings. The contexts of inquiry are not contrived; they are natural. Nothing is predefined or taken for granted.
• Qualitative researchers want those who are studied to speak for themselves, to provide their perspectives in words and other actions. Therefore, qualitative research is an interactive process in which the persons studied teach the researcher about their lives.
• The qualitative researcher is an integral part of the data; without the active participation of the researcher, no data exists.
• The study’s design evolves during the research and can be adjusted or changed as it progresses. For the qualitative researcher, there is no single reality. It is subjective and exists only in reference to the observer.
• The theory is data-driven and emerges as part of the research process, evolving from the data as they are collected.

Limitations of Qualitative Research

• Because of the time and costs involved, qualitative designs do not generally draw samples from large-scale data sets.
• The problem of adequate validity or reliability is a major criticism. Because of the subjective nature of qualitative data and its origin in single contexts, it is difficult to apply conventional standards of reliability and validity. For example, because of the central role played by the researcher in the generation of data, it is not possible to replicate qualitative studies.
• Also, contexts, situations, events, conditions, and interactions cannot be replicated to any extent, nor can generalizations be made to a wider context than the one studied with confidence.
• The time required for data collection, analysis, and interpretation is lengthy. Analysis of qualitative data is difficult, and expert knowledge of an area is necessary to interpret qualitative data. Great care must be taken when doing so, for example, looking for mental illness symptoms.

Advantages of Qualitative Research

• Because of close researcher involvement, the researcher gains an insider’s view of the field. This allows the researcher to find issues that are often missed (such as subtleties and complexities) by the scientific, more positivistic inquiries.
• Qualitative descriptions can be important in suggesting possible relationships, causes, effects, and dynamic processes.
• Qualitative analysis allows for ambiguities/contradictions in the data, which reflect social reality (Denscombe, 2010).
• Qualitative research uses a descriptive, narrative style; this research might be of particular benefit to the practitioner as she or he could turn to qualitative reports to examine forms of knowledge that might otherwise be unavailable, thereby gaining new insight.

What Is Quantitative Research?

Quantitative research involves the process of objectively collecting and analyzing numerical data to describe, predict, or control variables of interest.

The goals of quantitative research are to test causal relationships between variables , make predictions, and generalize results to wider populations.

Quantitative researchers aim to establish general laws of behavior and phenomenon across different settings/contexts. Research is used to test a theory and ultimately support or reject it.

Quantitative Methods

Experiments typically yield quantitative data, as they are concerned with measuring things.  However, other research methods, such as controlled observations and questionnaires , can produce both quantitative information.

For example, a rating scale or closed questions on a questionnaire would generate quantitative data as these produce either numerical data or data that can be put into categories (e.g., “yes,” “no” answers).

Experimental methods limit how research participants react to and express appropriate social behavior.

Findings are, therefore, likely to be context-bound and simply a reflection of the assumptions that the researcher brings to the investigation.

There are numerous examples of quantitative data in psychological research, including mental health. Here are a few examples:

Another example is the Experience in Close Relationships Scale (ECR), a self-report questionnaire widely used to assess adult attachment styles .

The ECR provides quantitative data that can be used to assess attachment styles and predict relationship outcomes.

Neuroimaging data : Neuroimaging techniques, such as MRI and fMRI, provide quantitative data on brain structure and function.

This data can be analyzed to identify brain regions involved in specific mental processes or disorders.

For example, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) is a clinician-administered questionnaire widely used to assess the severity of depressive symptoms in individuals.

The BDI consists of 21 questions, each scored on a scale of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe depressive symptoms. 

Quantitative Data Analysis

Statistics help us turn quantitative data into useful information to help with decision-making. We can use statistics to summarize our data, describing patterns, relationships, and connections. Statistics can be descriptive or inferential.

Descriptive statistics help us to summarize our data. In contrast, inferential statistics are used to identify statistically significant differences between groups of data (such as intervention and control groups in a randomized control study).

• Quantitative researchers try to control extraneous variables by conducting their studies in the lab.
• The research aims for objectivity (i.e., without bias) and is separated from the data.
• The design of the study is determined before it begins.
• For the quantitative researcher, the reality is objective, exists separately from the researcher, and can be seen by anyone.
• Research is used to test a theory and ultimately support or reject it.

Limitations of Quantitative Research

• Context: Quantitative experiments do not take place in natural settings. In addition, they do not allow participants to explain their choices or the meaning of the questions they may have for those participants (Carr, 1994).
• Researcher expertise: Poor knowledge of the application of statistical analysis may negatively affect analysis and subsequent interpretation (Black, 1999).
• Variability of data quantity: Large sample sizes are needed for more accurate analysis. Small-scale quantitative studies may be less reliable because of the low quantity of data (Denscombe, 2010). This also affects the ability to generalize study findings to wider populations.
• Confirmation bias: The researcher might miss observing phenomena because of focus on theory or hypothesis testing rather than on the theory of hypothesis generation.

Advantages of Quantitative Research

• Scientific objectivity: Quantitative data can be interpreted with statistical analysis, and since statistics are based on the principles of mathematics, the quantitative approach is viewed as scientifically objective and rational (Carr, 1994; Denscombe, 2010).
• Useful for testing and validating already constructed theories.
• Rapid analysis: Sophisticated software removes much of the need for prolonged data analysis, especially with large volumes of data involved (Antonius, 2003).
• Replication: Quantitative data is based on measured values and can be checked by others because numerical data is less open to ambiguities of interpretation.
• Hypotheses can also be tested because of statistical analysis (Antonius, 2003).

Antonius, R. (2003). Interpreting quantitative data with SPSS . Sage.

Black, T. R. (1999). Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: An integrated approach to research design, measurement and statistics . Sage.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology . Qualitative Research in Psychology , 3, 77–101.

Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research : what method for nursing? Journal of advanced nursing, 20(4) , 716-721.

Denscombe, M. (2010). The Good Research Guide: for small-scale social research. McGraw Hill.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln. Y. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications Inc.

Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Nursing research, 17(4) , 364.

Minichiello, V. (1990). In-Depth Interviewing: Researching People. Longman Cheshire.

Punch, K. (1998). Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: Sage

Further Information

• Designing qualitative research
• Methods of data collection and analysis
• Introduction to quantitative and qualitative research
• Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?
• Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data
• Qualitative data analysis: the framework approach
• Using the framework method for the analysis of
• Qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research
• Content Analysis
• Grounded Theory
• Thematic Analysis

Related Articles

Research Methodology

What Is a Focus Group?

Cross-Cultural Research Methodology In Psychology

What Is Internal Validity In Research?

Research Methodology , Statistics

What Is Face Validity In Research? Importance & How To Measure

Criterion Validity: Definition & Examples

Convergent Validity: Definition and Examples

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research in Psychology

Anabelle Bernard Fournier is a researcher of sexual and reproductive health at the University of Victoria as well as a freelance writer on various health topics.

Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.

• Key Differences

Quantitative Research Methods

Qualitative research methods.

• How They Relate

In psychology and other social sciences, researchers are faced with an unresolved question: Can we measure concepts like love or racism the same way we can measure temperature or the weight of a star? Social phenomena⁠—things that happen because of and through human behavior⁠—are especially difficult to grasp with typical scientific models.

At a Glance

Psychologists rely on quantitative and quantitative research to better understand human thought and behavior.

• Qualitative research involves collecting and evaluating non-numerical data in order to understand concepts or subjective opinions.
• Quantitative research involves collecting and evaluating numerical data. 

This article discusses what qualitative and quantitative research are, how they are different, and how they are used in psychology research.

Qualitative Research vs. Quantitative Research

In order to understand qualitative and quantitative psychology research, it can be helpful to look at the methods that are used and when each type is most appropriate.

Psychologists rely on a few methods to measure behavior, attitudes, and feelings. These include:

• Self-reports , like surveys or questionnaires
• Observation (often used in experiments or fieldwork)
• Implicit attitude tests that measure timing in responding to prompts

Most of these are quantitative methods. The result is a number that can be used to assess differences between groups.

However, most of these methods are static, inflexible (you can't change a question because a participant doesn't understand it), and provide a "what" answer rather than a "why" answer.

Sometimes, researchers are more interested in the "why" and the "how." That's where qualitative methods come in.

Qualitative research is about speaking to people directly and hearing their words. It is grounded in the philosophy that the social world is ultimately unmeasurable, that no measure is truly ever "objective," and that how humans make meaning is just as important as how much they score on a standardized test.

Used to develop theories

Takes a broad, complex approach

Answers "why" and "how" questions

Explores patterns and themes

Used to test theories

Takes a narrow, specific approach

Answers "what" questions

Explores statistical relationships

Quantitative methods have existed ever since people have been able to count things. But it is only with the positivist philosophy of Auguste Comte (which maintains that factual knowledge obtained by observation is trustworthy) that it became a "scientific method."

The scientific method follows this general process. A researcher must:

• Generate a theory or hypothesis (i.e., predict what might happen in an experiment) and determine the variables needed to answer their question
• Develop instruments to measure the phenomenon (such as a survey, a thermometer, etc.)
• Develop experiments to manipulate the variables
• Collect empirical (measured) data
• Analyze data

Quantitative methods are about measuring phenomena, not explaining them.

Quantitative research compares two groups of people. There are all sorts of variables you could measure, and many kinds of experiments to run using quantitative methods.

These comparisons are generally explained using graphs, pie charts, and other visual representations that give the researcher a sense of how the various data points relate to one another.

Basic Assumptions

Quantitative methods assume:

• That the world is measurable
• That humans can observe objectively
• That we can know things for certain about the world from observation

In some fields, these assumptions hold true. Whether you measure the size of the sun 2000 years ago or now, it will always be the same. But when it comes to human behavior, it is not so simple.

As decades of cultural and social research have shown, people behave differently (and even think differently) based on historical context, cultural context, social context, and even identity-based contexts like gender , social class, or sexual orientation .

Therefore, quantitative methods applied to human behavior (as used in psychology and some areas of sociology) should always be rooted in their particular context. In other words: there are no, or very few, human universals.

Statistical information is the primary form of quantitative data used in human and social quantitative research. Statistics provide lots of information about tendencies across large groups of people, but they can never describe every case or every experience. In other words, there are always outliers.

Correlation and Causation

A basic principle of statistics is that correlation is not causation. Researchers can only claim a cause-and-effect relationship under certain conditions:

• The study was a true experiment.
• The independent variable can be manipulated (for example, researchers cannot manipulate gender, but they can change the primer a study subject sees, such as a picture of nature or of a building).
• The dependent variable can be measured through a ratio or a scale.

So when you read a report that "gender was linked to" something (like a behavior or an attitude), remember that gender is NOT a cause of the behavior or attitude. There is an apparent relationship, but the true cause of the difference is hidden.

Pitfalls of Quantitative Research

Quantitative methods are one way to approach the measurement and understanding of human and social phenomena. But what's missing from this picture?

As noted above, statistics do not tell us about personal, individual experiences and meanings. While surveys can give a general idea, respondents have to choose between only a few responses. This can make it difficult to understand the subtleties of different experiences.

Quantitative methods can be helpful when making objective comparisons between groups or when looking for relationships between variables. They can be analyzed statistically, which can be helpful when looking for patterns and relationships.

Qualitative data are not made out of numbers but rather of descriptions, metaphors, symbols, quotes, analysis, concepts, and characteristics. This approach uses interviews, written texts, art, photos, and other materials to make sense of human experiences and to understand what these experiences mean to people.

While quantitative methods ask "what" and "how much," qualitative methods ask "why" and "how."

Qualitative methods are about describing and analyzing phenomena from a human perspective. There are many different philosophical views on qualitative methods, but in general, they agree that some questions are too complex or impossible to answer with standardized instruments.

These methods also accept that it is impossible to be completely objective in observing phenomena. Researchers have their own thoughts, attitudes, experiences, and beliefs, and these always color how people interpret results.

Qualitative Approaches

There are many different approaches to qualitative research, with their own philosophical bases. Different approaches are best for different kinds of projects. For example:

• Case studies and narrative studies are best for single individuals. These involve studying every aspect of a person's life in great depth.
• Phenomenology aims to explain experiences. This type of work aims to describe and explore different events as they are consciously and subjectively experienced.
• Grounded theory develops models and describes processes. This approach allows researchers to construct a theory based on data that is collected, analyzed, and compared to reach new discoveries.
• Ethnography describes cultural groups. In this approach, researchers immerse themselves in a community or group in order to observe behavior.

Qualitative researchers must be aware of several different methods and know each thoroughly enough to produce valuable research.

Some researchers specialize in a single method, but others specialize in a topic or content area and use many different methods to explore the topic, providing different information and a variety of points of view.

There is not a single model or method that can be used for every qualitative project. Depending on the research question, the people participating, and the kind of information they want to produce, researchers will choose the appropriate approach.

Interpretation

Qualitative research does not look into causal relationships between variables, but rather into themes, values, interpretations, and meanings. As a rule, then, qualitative research is not generalizable (cannot be applied to people outside the research participants).

The insights gained from qualitative research can extend to other groups with proper attention to specific historical and social contexts.

Relationship Between Qualitative and Quantitative Research

It might sound like quantitative and qualitative research do not play well together. They have different philosophies, different data, and different outputs. However, this could not be further from the truth.

These two general methods complement each other. By using both, researchers can gain a fuller, more comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon.

For example, a psychologist wanting to develop a new survey instrument about sexuality might and ask a few dozen people questions about their sexual experiences (this is qualitative research). This gives the researcher some information to begin developing questions for their survey (which is a quantitative method).

After the survey, the same or other researchers might want to dig deeper into issues brought up by its data. Follow-up questions like "how does it feel when...?" or "what does this mean to you?" or "how did you experience this?" can only be answered by qualitative research.

By using both quantitative and qualitative data, researchers have a more holistic, well-rounded understanding of a particular topic or phenomenon.

Qualitative and quantitative methods both play an important role in psychology. Where quantitative methods can help answer questions about what is happening in a group and to what degree, qualitative methods can dig deeper into the reasons behind why it is happening. By using both strategies, psychology researchers can learn more about human thought and behavior.

Gough B, Madill A. Subjectivity in psychological science: From problem to prospect . Psychol Methods . 2012;17(3):374-384. doi:10.1037/a0029313

Pearce T. “Science organized”: Positivism and the metaphysical club, 1865–1875 . J Hist Ideas . 2015;76(3):441-465.

Adams G. Context in person, person in context: A cultural psychology approach to social-personality psychology . In: Deaux K, Snyder M, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology . Oxford University Press; 2012:182-208.

Brady HE. Causation and explanation in social science . In: Goodin RE, ed. The Oxford Handbook of Political Science. Oxford University Press; 2011. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199604456.013.0049

Chun Tie Y, Birks M, Francis K. Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers .  SAGE Open Med . 2019;7:2050312118822927. doi:10.1177/2050312118822927

Reeves S, Peller J, Goldman J, Kitto S. Ethnography in qualitative educational research: AMEE Guide No. 80 . Medical Teacher . 2013;35(8):e1365-e1379. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2013.804977

Salkind NJ, ed. Encyclopedia of Research Design . Sage Publishing.

Shaughnessy JJ, Zechmeister EB, Zechmeister JS.  Research Methods in Psychology . McGraw Hill Education.

By Anabelle Bernard Fournier Anabelle Bernard Fournier is a researcher of sexual and reproductive health at the University of Victoria as well as a freelance writer on various health topics.

Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research: Comparing the Methods and Strategies for Education Research

No matter the field of study, all research can be divided into two distinct methodologies: qualitative and quantitative research. Both methodologies offer education researchers important insights.

Education research assesses problems in policy, practices, and curriculum design, and it helps administrators identify solutions. Researchers can conduct small-scale studies to learn more about topics related to instruction or larger-scale ones to gain insight into school systems and investigate how to improve student outcomes.

Education research often relies on the quantitative methodology. Quantitative research in education provides numerical data that can prove or disprove a theory, and administrators can easily share the number-based results with other schools and districts. And while the research may speak to a relatively small sample size, educators and researchers can scale the results from quantifiable data to predict outcomes in larger student populations and groups.

Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research in Education: Definitions

Although there are many overlaps in the objectives of qualitative and quantitative research in education, researchers must understand the fundamental functions of each methodology in order to design and carry out an impactful research study. In addition, they must understand the differences that set qualitative and quantitative research apart in order to determine which methodology is better suited to specific education research topics.

Generate Hypotheses with Qualitative Research

Qualitative research focuses on thoughts, concepts, or experiences. The data collected often comes in narrative form and concentrates on unearthing insights that can lead to testable hypotheses. Educators use qualitative research in a study’s exploratory stages to uncover patterns or new angles.

Form Strong Conclusions with Quantitative Research

Quantitative research in education and other fields of inquiry is expressed in numbers and measurements. This type of research aims to find data to confirm or test a hypothesis.

Differences in Data Collection Methods

Keeping in mind the main distinction in qualitative vs. quantitative research—gathering descriptive information as opposed to numerical data—it stands to reason that there are different ways to acquire data for each research methodology. While certain approaches do overlap, the way researchers apply these collection techniques depends on their goal.

Interviews, for example, are common in both modes of research. An interview with students that features open-ended questions intended to reveal ideas and beliefs around attendance will provide qualitative data. This data may reveal a problem among students, such as a lack of access to transportation, that schools can help address.

An interview can also include questions posed to receive numerical answers. A case in point: how many days a week do students have trouble getting to school, and of those days, how often is a transportation-related issue the cause? In this example, qualitative and quantitative methodologies can lead to similar conclusions, but the research will differ in intent, design, and form.

Taking a look at behavioral observation, another common method used for both qualitative and quantitative research, qualitative data may consider a variety of factors, such as facial expressions, verbal responses, and body language.

On the other hand, a quantitative approach will create a coding scheme for certain predetermined behaviors and observe these in a quantifiable manner.

Qualitative Research Methods

• Case Studies : Researchers conduct in-depth investigations into an individual, group, event, or community, typically gathering data through observation and interviews.
• Focus Groups : A moderator (or researcher) guides conversation around a specific topic among a group of participants.
• Ethnography : Researchers interact with and observe a specific societal or ethnic group in their real-life environment.
• Interviews : Researchers ask participants questions to learn about their perspectives on a particular subject.

Quantitative Research Methods

• Questionnaires and Surveys : Participants receive a list of questions, either closed-ended or multiple choice, which are directed around a particular topic.
• Experiments : Researchers control and test variables to demonstrate cause-and-effect relationships.
• Observations : Researchers look at quantifiable patterns and behavior.
• Structured Interviews : Using a predetermined structure, researchers ask participants a fixed set of questions to acquire numerical data.

Choosing a Research Strategy

When choosing which research strategy to employ for a project or study, a number of considerations apply. One key piece of information to help determine whether to use a qualitative vs. quantitative research method is which phase of development the study is in.

For example, if a project is in its early stages and requires more research to find a testable hypothesis, qualitative research methods might prove most helpful. On the other hand, if the research team has already established a hypothesis or theory, quantitative research methods will provide data that can validate the theory or refine it for further testing.

It’s also important to understand a project’s research goals. For instance, do researchers aim to produce findings that reveal how to best encourage student engagement in math? Or is the goal to determine how many students are passing geometry? These two scenarios require distinct sets of data, which will determine the best methodology to employ.

In some situations, studies will benefit from a mixed-methods approach. Using the goals in the above example, one set of data could find the percentage of students passing geometry, which would be quantitative. The research team could also lead a focus group with the students achieving success to discuss which techniques and teaching practices they find most helpful, which would produce qualitative data.

Learn How to Put Education Research into Action

Those with an interest in learning how to harness research to develop innovative ideas to improve education systems may want to consider pursuing a doctoral degree. American University’s School of Education online offers a Doctor of Education (EdD) in Education Policy and Leadership that prepares future educators, school administrators, and other education professionals to become leaders who effect positive changes in schools. Courses such as Applied Research Methods I: Enacting Critical Research provides students with the techniques and research skills needed to begin conducting research exploring new ways to enhance education. Learn more about American’ University’s EdD in Education Policy and Leadership .

What’s the Difference Between Educational Equity and Equality?

EdD vs. PhD in Education: Requirements, Career Outlook, and Salary

Top Education Technology Jobs for Doctorate in Education Graduates

American University, EdD in Education Policy and Leadership

Edutopia, “2019 Education Research Highlights”

Formplus, “Qualitative vs. Quantitative Data: 15 Key Differences and Similarities”

iMotion, “Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research: What Is What?”

Scribbr, “Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research”

Simply Psychology, “What’s the Difference Between Quantitative and Qualitative Research?”

Typeform, “A Simple Guide to Qualitative and Quantitative Research”

Request Information

Qualitative Vs Quantitative Data (Differences, Pros And Cons)

What is qualitative and quantitative data, what are the main differences between qualitative and quantitative data, advantages and disadvantages of qualitative data, advantages and disadvantages of quantitative data, qualitative vs quantitative data: real-world examples, how can fullsession’s tools help you gather customer feedback, install your first website feedback form right now, fullsession pricing plans, faqs in relation to qualitative vs quantitative data.

Qualitative vs quantitative data. These two are the essence of data analysis, and for some, there is a clear winner. But don’t be too quick to judge.

We’ll walk through what sets these two apart—and then dig into how they work in the real world. From capturing life’s complexities through qualitative means to crunching numbers for clear-cut answers quantitatively, this is where things get interesting.

In this article, we’ll see what they mean, how they differ, and, most importantly, when to use them.

Qualitative and quantitative data are fundamental for all kinds of research and data analysis. They both serve a good purpose and choosing one over another is tricky. Let’s see what each brings to the table.

What is Qualitative Data?

Qualitative data analysis involves examining non-numerical data to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences.

It often comes from interviews, open-ended survey responses , or observational studies focusing on the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of human behavior and experiences.

The data type provides insights that help understand the depth and complexity of the subject under study.

Examples of qualitative data questions:

• What are your main reasons for choosing our product over competitors?
• Can you describe your experience using our customer service?
• How do you feel about the latest changes we made to our software interface?

What is Quantitative Data?

Researchers work with numerical data to analyze quantitative data. It often comes from structured data sources like surveys with closed-ended questions , experiments, and statistical records.

Quantitative data analysis is used to quantify attitudes, opinions, behaviors, and other defined variables.

It often uses different statistical tools to identify patterns, trends, or correlations within the data set. Such analysis is essential for making general conclusions and predicting future trends based on the data.

Examples of quantitative data questions:

• How many hours per day do you use our product?
• On a scale of 1 to 10, how satisfied are you with our customer service?
• How often (in a month) do you encounter issues with our software interface?

Qualitative and quantitative data serve different purposes. Qualitative research is more about the individual; thus, you can create a better image of your ideal customer and profile your target audience more precisely.

However, quantitative data might be a powerful weapon if you can afford a considerable sample size, as you can collect many results and create in-depth charts.

Yet, both methods have pros and cons, and we will touch base in the next section.

Qualitative data is available through many methods, like in-depth interviews and observations in a natural setting. It offers broader pictures of human behavior and social phenomena. While qualitative studies excel in interpreting non-numerical data to provide depth and context, they could be better if used by others.

Advantages of Qualitative Data

• Qualitative data gives a more detailed view of people’s attitudes, behaviors, and experiences.
• Qualitative studies allow for flexibility in research methods since they adapt to changing behaviors.
• Gathering data in natural settings allows qualitative research to spot the complexities and nuances of real-life situations.
• The qualitative approach gives a voice to study participants and lets them express their perspectives and experiences in their own words.
•  Qualitative data is ideal for exploring new areas of research.

Disadvantages of Qualitative Data

• The interpretation of qualitative data can be highly subjective and depends on the researcher’s perspective so it can be biased.
• Due to typically smaller sample sizes and non-standardized data collection methods, the findings from qualitative studies may need to be more usable for colossal sample sizes.
• Collecting and analyzing qualitative data, such as transcribing and interpreting in-depth interviews, might be time-consuming and labor-intensive, requiring significant resources.

Quantitative data shines with its numerical nature and often contrasts with qualitative data collected through open-ended questions. Still, it has its own “place” in many research fields. It provides a strong foundation for statistical analysis and objective conclusions, but like any method, it has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages of Quantitative Data

• Quantitative data offers a significant perk in statistical reliability and is known for its precise and objective analysis that can be replicated and verified.
• Quantitative data can be picked up from large populations, which makes it ideal for studies requiring a broad overview.
• Numerical data simplifies the process of comparing groups or variables. Doing that will help you make straightforward conclusions and trend analysis.
• Due to standardized feedback collection methods, results from quantitative research are often generalizable to a larger population.
•  Modern techniques for collecting quantitative data, like surveys and automated data capture, enable efficient and swift data collection

Disadvantages of Quantitative Data

• Quantitative data may need more depth and detail found in qualitative data, potentially overlooking the subtleties of human behavior and experience.
• The structured nature of quantitative data collection can be restrictive, limiting the ability to explore unanticipated phenomena during the research process.
• Without the contextual background of qualitative data, there’s a risk of misinterpreting quantitative data, significantly when complex human behaviors are reduced to numbers.

Qualitative and Quantitative data are both solid tools if you want to see how people see your product. Let’s see a couple of examples.

Qualitative Data Examples

• Customer Feedback Interviews : Gathering detailed opinions and feelings about a new product through individual interviews.
• Ethnographic Research : Observing and documenting the behaviors and interactions of a specific cultural group in their natural environment.
• Case Studies : In-depth analysis of a single event, situation, or individual to comprehensive insights into complex issues.

Quantitative Data Examples

• Survey Results : Analyzing responses from 1,000 participants on their product preferences, with 60% preferring Product A over Product B.
• Educational Achievement : Measuring students’ performance in a standardized test, where 75% scored above the national average.
• Market Analysis : Evaluating sales data to find that a particular product saw a 30% increase in sales following a marketing campaign.

FullSession is entirely focused on providing valuable insights that you can utilize at a later stage. Our tool will help you understand customers’ demands in much more depth. You can capture and analyze user interactions and draw result-driven conclusions, which are way more efficient than standard “guessing” methods.

With FullSession, you can quickly discover areas of improvement and bolster your strengths to increase your traffic even more.

It takes less than 5 minutes to set up your first website or app feedback form with FullSession , and it’s completely free!

The FullSession platform offers a 14-day free trial. It provides two paid plans—Basic and Business. Here are more details on each plan.

• The Basic plan costs $39/month and allows you to monitor up to 5,000 monthly sessions.
• The Business plan costs $149/month and helps you to track and analyze up to 25,000 monthly sessions.
• The Enterprise plan starts from 100,000 monthly sessions and has custom pricing.

If you need more information, you can get a demo.

So, you’ve journeyed through the maze of qualitative vs quantitative data. You’ve seen how each has its place—qualitative with its rich, detailed narratives and quantitative with its hard numbers.

Remember this : Qualitative paints the picture; quantitative frames it. One gives depth, the other scale.

Combine them, and what do you get? A complete view—a 360-degree take on whatever’s at hand. FullSession can help you blend both, so you can really see the full picture and enjoy much better results.

What is the difference between quantitative and qualitative data?

Difference between quantitative and qualitative data: Quantitative data is numerical and used for measuring and counting, while qualitative data is descriptive and categorizing and conceptualizing.

What is an example of quantitative data?

The percentage of people in a survey who rate service as “excellent,” “good,” “average,” “poor.”

How do you determine if the data is qualitative or quantitative?

If the data can be counted or measured and expressed in numbers, it’s quantitative. In case it’s descriptive and involves characteristics that can’t be counted, it’s qualitative.

Enhance Your Insights With Richer User Behavior Data

Discover FullSession's Digital Experience Intelligence solution firsthand. Explore FullSession for free

Research Library

Qualitative VS. Quantitative Research: How To Use Appropriately and Depict Research Results

What is qualitative and quantitative research?  

Before a researcher begins their research , they would need to establish whether their research results will be quantitative or qualitative. 

Qualitative research observes any subjective matter that can’t be measured with numbers or units, usually answering the questions “how” or “why”. This type of data is usually derived from exploratory sources like, journal entries, semi-structured interviews, videos, and photographs.

On the other hand, quantitative research is numeric and objective, which usually answers the questions “when” or “where”. This data is derived from controlled environments like surveys, structured interviews, and traditional experimental designs. Quantitative data is meant to find objective information.

What are the main differences between qualitative and quantitative research?

The main factor of differentiation between qualitative and quantitative data are the sources that the data is gathered from, as this effects the format of the results. 

When to use qualitative and quantitative research? 

When conducting a study, knowing how the results will be depicted drive the methodology and overall approach to the study. To understand whether qualitative or quantitative research results are best suited for your current project, we take a deeper dive at the several advantages and disadvantages of each. 

• Qualitative research

Advantages: 

• Allows researchers to understand “human experience” that cannot be quantified
• Has fewer limitations, out-of-the-box answers, opinions and beliefs are included in data gathering and analysis
• Researchers can utilise personal instinct and subjective experience to identify and extract information
• Easier to derive and conduct as researchers can adapt to any changes to optimise results 

Disadvantages:

• Responses can be biased, as participants may opt for answers that are desirable. 
• Qualitative studies usually have small sample sizes, this impacts the reliability of the study as it cannot be generalised to certain demographics.
• Researchers and other’s who read the study can have interpretation bias as the information is subjective and open to interpretation
• Quantitative research
• Usually observes a large sample, ensuring a broad percentage is taken into consideration and reflected
• Produces precise results that can be widely interpreted
• Minimises any research bias through the collection and representation of objective information
• Data driven research method that depicts effectiveness, comparisons and further analysis.

Disadvantages: 

• Does not derive “meaningful” and in-depth responses, only precise figures are included in findings
• Quantitative studies are expensive to conduct as they require a large sample 
• When designing a quantitative study, it is important to pay extra attention to all factors within the study, as a small fault can largely impact all results.

How to effectively analyse qualitative and quantitative data?

Since the data collection method for qualitative and quantitative studies are different, so is the analysis and organisation of the gathered information. In this section, we dive into a step-by-step guide to effectively analyse both types of data and information to derive accurate findings and results. 

Analysing qualitative data

• Types of qualitative data analysis
• Steps to analyse qualitative data
• Once your data has been collected, it is important to code and categorise the information to easily identify the source. 
• After organising the information, you will need to correlate the information logically and derive valuable insights.
• Once the correlations are solid, you will need to choose how to depict the information. In qualitative data, researchers usually provide transcripts from interviews and visual evidence from various sources. 

Analysing quantitative data

• Types of quantitative data analysis
• Steps to analyse quantitative data
• Once the data has been collected, you will need to “clean” the data. This essentially means that you’ll need to observe any duplications, errors or omissions and remove them. This ensures the data is accurate and clear before analysis. 
• You will now need to decide whether you will analyse the data using descriptive or inferential analysis, depending on the gathered data set and the findings you’d like to depict.
• Now, you’ll need to visualise the data using charts and graphs to easily communicate the information in your research paper. 

Conduct your research on Zendy today This blog thoroughly covered qualitative and quantitative data and took you through how to analyse, depict and utilise each type appropriately. Continue your research into different types of studies on Zendy today, search and read through millions of studies, research and experiments now.

A step-by-step guide to writing a research paper outline

A research outline guides the flow of the research paper, it is meant to ensure that the ideas, concepts and points are coherent and that the study and research has a well-defined point of focus. The outline sets guidelines for each section of the research paper, what it will address, explore and highlight. Working on a research paper outline is considered an important preliminary activity that improves the structure of the research paper, this is critical for categorising collected data. Think of it as a brainstorm session for your research paper that also implements effective time management. Understanding research paper outline A research paper ideally consists of 5 sections; abstract, introduction, body, conclusion and references. Each of these sections contributes to collating key information on the research design, in this section of the blog we dive into the purpose or each section. AbstractThe abstract sits on the first page of the research paper. It’s main purpose is to provide a brief overview of the paper by highlighting key findings, describing methodology, and summarising conclusive points.IntroductionThe introduction is crucial as it presents the research question, states the objectives or hypotheses, and outlines the scope and structure of the paper.BodyThe body of the research paper is where the content is discussed and highlighted. It can present detailed analysis, support arguments with evidence, address counterarguments and limitations, draw conclusions.ConclusionThe conclusion is a closing statement, it summarises the key findings, restates the aims and research question, reflects on the research process, discusses implications and contributions.ReferencesThe reference list is a crucial part of the paper, it ensures plagiarism is avoided, builds credibility, facilitates further reading to support claims and arguments. Step-by-step guide to conducting research outline Select a Topic: Choose a topic that aligns with your research requirements. Conduct Preliminary Research: Gather background information on your topic by reading through key scholarly articles, books, and credible online sources. Take notes on key ideas, findings, and arguments from reviewing the literature. Identify the Research Question or Thesis Statement: Formulate a focused research question or thesis statement that defines the purpose of your study. Create the Title: Write an informative title that accurately reflects the main topic and focus of your research paper. Write the Abstract: Summarize the objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of your research in a brief abstract. Develop the Introduction: Include background information to contextualize the research. Present the research question or thesis statement. Outline the scope and objectives of the study. Take the reader through the structure of the paper by mapping it out. Outline the Body: Organise and structure the main points and subpoints of your research. Ensure the content flows cohesively. Include supporting evidence, examples, data, or arguments. Craft the Conclusion: Summarise the key findings and insights. Highlight the thesis statement or research question. Discuss the implications of your findings and suggest methods for future research. End the conclusion by highlighting the significance of the study. Compile the References: Create a list of references following the appropriate citation style (e.g., Harvard, APA, MLA, Chicago). Ensure that all sources are accurately cited and formatted. Review and Revise: Review your research outline for coherence and clarity. Edit the outline as needed to improve organization, flow, and accuracy of information. Ensure the reference list follows the requirements of the correct format Research outline formats Traditional outline - Where thesis statement is provided at the end of the introduction, body paragraphs support thesis with research and a conclusion is included to emphasise key concepts of research paper. Alphanumeric outline - Outline format uses letters and numbers in this order: A, I, II, III Decimal outline - This format requires each main point to be labeled with a whole number, and each sub-point Conduct your research on Zendy Today As a thriving AI-powered academic research library, Zendy hosts a wide variety of academic research across various disciplines and branches of study. Draft your next or brush up your current research paper outline by skimming through the millions of credible resources Zendy offers! ul, ol { margin-top: 5px !important; margin-bottom: 5px !important; } p, ul, li, h1, h2, h4 { word-break: normal !important; } ol li ol { list-style: disc !important; margin: 5px 0 5px 15px !important; }

Webinar Recap: Supporting the publishing and discovery journey of young and emerging scholars in the Global South

On the 25th of April, Zendy partnered with Bristol University Press to host an insightful joint webinar titled, supporting the publishing and discovery journey of young and emerging scholars in the Global South. The discussion panel was moderated by the Editorial Director of Bristol University Press, Victoria Pittman and featured the President of African Gong, Elizabeth Rasekoala, the Deputy Editorial Director at Bristol University Press, Stephen Wenham and the Partnerships Relations Manager at Zendy, Sara Crowley Vigneau. In this blog, we summarise the contributions of each speaker to the joint webinar. Elizabeth Rasekoala - President of African Gong Addressed key systematic issues within publishing in the Global South Academic research is predominantly published in English, which is not the first language of many in the Global South, hence publishers should be open to accepting research in different languages. Discussed the concept of “helicopter research syndrome” wherein more established researchers allocate data collection tasks to locals in the Global South and monitor their work but don’t credit them in the final academic papers Highlighted the book published by Bristol University Press titled, Race and cultural inclusion: Innovation, decolonization, and transformation. The book had a total of 30 contributing writers. 10 young scholars, 10 seasoned scholars and 10 senior scholars to facilitate emerging scholars get published. Stephen Wenham - Deputy Editorial Director at Bristol University Press Highlighted BUP’s international reach and efforts to work with young authors Bristol University Press has publications that are available globally. In the global south, BUP tries to match the books to the local market. Local distributors receive a discount and local publishers assist in localising the publications and releasing local editions of books Works with sales agents to ensure publications by local authors are highlighted in relevant regions Sara Crowley Vigneau - Partnerships Relations Manager at Zendy Highlighted the relationship between publishers and libraries in advancing access in developing regions Zendy supports scholars in the Global South through offering an affordable global subscription, while also working with publishers to include research generated by researchers in the Global South. Most of Zendy’s global users are aged between 18-34 and 20% of Zendy’s userbase is situated in African countries and territories. Zendy is actively working on “countries in crisis’ initiative where in Zendy works with publishers to make research content free in developing regions Conduct your research on Zendy As a growing AI-powered research library, Zendy is committed to hosting webinars that address important challenges and highlight key initiatives in the world of academia. Head to Zendy’s YouTube channel now to watch all our webinar recordings. Furthermore, take your research to the next level and head to Zendy now to try out our suite of AI tools including ZAIA! ul { margin-top: 5px !important; margin-bottom: 5px !important; } p, ul, li, h1, h2, h4 { word-break: normal !important; }

What is a DOI? Strengths, Limitations & Components

DOI is short for Digital Object Identifier. It is a unique alphanumeric sequence assigned to digital objects, it is used to identify intellectual property on the internet. DOI’s are usually assigned to scholarly articles, datasets, books, videos and even pieces of software. Understanding DOI's The digital object identifier is a unique number made up of a prefix and suffix, segregated by a forward slash. For example: 10.1000/182 The sequence always begins with a 10. The prefix is a unique 4 or more digit number assigned to establishments and the suffix is assigned by publisher as it is designed to be flexible with publisher identification standards. Where can I find a DOI? In most scholarly articles, the DOI should be on the cover page. If the DOI isn't included in the article, you may search for it on CrossRef.org by using the "Search Metadata" function. How can I use the digital object identifier to find the article it refers to? If the DOI starts with http:// or https://, pasting it on your web browder will help you locate the article. You can turn any DOI starting with 10 into a URL by adding http://doi.org/ before the DOI. For example, 10.3352/jeehp.2013.10.3 becomes https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2013.10.3 If you're off campus when you do this, you'll need to use this URL prefix in front of the DOI to gain access to UIC's full text journal subscriptions: https://proxy.cc.uic.edu/login?url=https://doi.org/ . For example: https://proxy.cc.uic.edu/login?url=http://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2013.10.3 Strengths of Digital Object Identifier Permanent identification: Digital object identifier provides a permanent link to digital content, making sure it remains accessible even if URL or metadata is updated. Citations: It uniquely identifies research papers, which facilitates accurate referencing and citing. Interoperability: DOIs are widely recognized as they can be utilised across different platforms, databases and systems. Tracking and metrics: DOIs provide key information like publication date, authors, keywords and more. This can be used to track usage metrics, measuring impact and improving discoverability Integration with services: DOIs are integrated with various tools like reference managers, academic search engines, and digital libraries. These mediums enhance the visibility and accessibility of research material with DOIs. Limitations of Digital Object Identifier Cost: Digital object identifiers are costly for smaller organisations or individual researchers. While some services offer free digital object identifier registration for certain content, there may be fees associated with others, particularly for maintenance and updates. Accessibility: There may still be barriers to access for individual researchers or organisations in regions with limited resources. Ensuring equitable access to digital object identifier services and content remains a challenge. Content Preservation: While the sequence provide persistent links to digital content, they do not guarantee the preservation or long-term accessibility of that content. Ensuring the preservation of digital objects linked to DOIs require additional efforts and infrastructure beyond the system itself. Granularity: Sequences are assigned to individual digital objects, such as articles, datasets, or books. However, there may be cases where more granular identification is required, such as specific sections within a larger work or versions of a dataset. Addressing these granularity issues within the digital object identifier system can be complex. Conduct your research on Zendy today Now that you’ve gained a better understanding of how DOI works and impacts the world of research, you may begin your search and find your next academic discovery on Zendy! Our advanced search allows you to input DOI, ISSN, ISBN, publication, author, date, keyword and title. Give it a go on Zendy now. ul { margin-top: 5px !important; margin-bottom: 5px !important; } p, ul, li, h1, h2, h4 { word-break: normal !important; }

Advantages & Disadvantages of Qualitative & Quantitative Research

Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods

Selecting the best research method allows you to successfully answer a research question or test a hypothesis. Missteps at the onset of the research process may derail an otherwise promising study. Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative and qualitative methods will help you make a better decision. Both methods are quite useful depending on the type of study. Some dissertations and research studies take a mixed method approach, which incorporates qualitative and quantitative methods in different phases to obtain a broader perspective.

Quantitative Advantages

You may be very familiar with quantitative research from your science classes where you learned and practiced using the scientific method. A problem or question is examined by deductively forming a hypothesis derived from theory. Controlled, objective testing and experimentation ultimately supports or rejects your hypotheses. Each step is standardized to reduce bias when collecting and analyzing data. A big advantage of this approach is that the results are valid, reliable and generalizable to a larger population. Quantitative research is advantageous for studies that involve numbers, such as measuring achievement gaps between different groups of students or assessing the effectiveness of a new blood pressure medication.

Quantitative Disadvantages

While quantitative research methods work well in the laboratory under tightly controlled conditions, measuring phenomena like human behavior in natural settings is trickier. Survey instruments are vulnerable to errors such as mistakes in measurement and flawed sampling techniques. Another disadvantage is that quantitative research involves numbers, but some topics are too difficult to quantify in numbers. For example, constructing an effective survey with closed-ended questions about how people fall in love would be difficult.

Qualitative Advantages

Qualitative research is often used to conduct social and behavioral studies because human interactions are more complex than molecular reactions in a beaker. Subjectivity, nonrandom sampling and small sample size distinguishes qualitative research from quantitative research. A big advantage of qualitative research is the ability to deeply probe and obtain rich descriptive data about social phenomena through structured interviews, cultural immersion, case studies and observation, for instance. Examples include ethnography, narratives and grounded theory.

Qualitative Disadvantages

Qualitative studies often take more time to complete due to the pain staking nature of gathering and analyzing field notes, transcribing interviews, identifying themes and studying photographs, for instance. Studies are not easily replicable or generalizable to the general population. Conscious or unconscious bias can influence the researcher’s conclusions. Lacking rigorous scientific controls and numerical data, qualitative findings may be dismissed by some researchers as anecdotal information.

Mixed Methods

A mixed method approach capitalizes on the advantages of the quantitative and qualitative methods while offsetting the drawbacks of each. For instance, a principal interested in building rapport with parents of school children might undertake a mixed method study. First, the principal would send out a school climate survey to parents asking them to rate their satisfaction with the school and quality of instruction. After analyzing the data, the principal would identify areas needing further exploration such as parent complaints about the school’s response to bullying incidents. Focus groups could then be organized to gather qualitative information from parents to better understand their concerns.

Related Articles

Multivariate Techniques: Advantages and Disadvantages

Strengths & Weakness of Sequential Study

Qualitative Analysis

Advantages & Disadvantages of Cross-Sectional Studies

Types of Primary Data

Types of Observation in the Scientific Method

Advantages & Disadvantages of Triangulation Design

How to Do Case Studies in Qualitative Research

• Temple University: Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory: Advantages and Disadvantages

Dr. Mary Dowd is a dean of students whose job includes student conduct, leading the behavioral consultation team, crisis response, retention and the working with the veterans resource center. She enjoys helping parents and students solve problems through advising, teaching and writing online articles that appear on many sites. Dr. Dowd also contributes to scholarly books and journal articles.

23 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research

Investigating methodologies. Taking a closer look at ethnographic, anthropological, or naturalistic techniques. Data mining through observer recordings. This is what the world of qualitative research is all about. It is the comprehensive and complete data that is collected by having the courage to ask an open-ended question.

Print media has used the principles of qualitative research for generations. Now more industries are seeing the advantages that come from the extra data that is received by asking more than a “yes” or “no” question.

The advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research are quite unique. On one hand, you have the perspective of the data that is being collected. On the other hand, you have the techniques of the data collector and their own unique observations that can alter the information in subtle ways.

That’s why these key points are so important to consider.

What Are the Advantages of Qualitative Research?

1. Subject materials can be evaluated with greater detail. There are many time restrictions that are placed on research methods. The goal of a time restriction is to create a measurable outcome so that metrics can be in place. Qualitative research focuses less on the metrics of the data that is being collected and more on the subtleties of what can be found in that information. This allows for the data to have an enhanced level of detail to it, which can provide more opportunities to glean insights from it during examination.

2. Research frameworks can be fluid and based on incoming or available data. Many research opportunities must follow a specific pattern of questioning, data collection, and information reporting. Qualitative research offers a different approach. It can adapt to the quality of information that is being gathered. If the available data does not seem to be providing any results, the research can immediately shift gears and seek to gather data in a new direction. This offers more opportunities to gather important clues about any subject instead of being confined to a limited and often self-fulfilling perspective.

3. Qualitative research data is based on human experiences and observations. Humans have two very different operating systems. One is a subconscious method of operation, which is the fast and instinctual observations that are made when data is present. The other operating system is slower and more methodical, wanting to evaluate all sources of data before deciding. Many forms of research rely on the second operating system while ignoring the instinctual nature of the human mind. Qualitative research doesn’t ignore the gut instinct. It embraces it and the data that can be collected is often better for it.

4. Gathered data has a predictive quality to it. One of the common mistakes that occurs with qualitative research is an assumption that a personal perspective can be extrapolated into a group perspective. This is only possible when individuals grow up in similar circumstances, have similar perspectives about the world, and operate with similar goals. When these groups can be identified, however, the gathered individualistic data can have a predictive quality for those who are in a like-minded group. At the very least, the data has a predictive quality for the individual from whom it was gathered.

5. Qualitative research operates within structures that are fluid. Because the data being gathered through this type of research is based on observations and experiences, an experienced researcher can follow-up interesting answers with additional questions. Unlike other forms of research that require a specific framework with zero deviation, researchers can follow any data tangent which makes itself known and enhance the overall database of information that is being collected.

6. Data complexities can be incorporated into generated conclusions. Although our modern world tends to prefer statistics and verifiable facts, we cannot simply remove the human experience from the equation. Different people will have remarkably different perceptions about any statistic, fact, or event. This is because our unique experiences generate a different perspective of the data that we see. These complexities, when gathered into a singular database, can generate conclusions with more depth and accuracy, which benefits everyone.

7. Qualitative research is an open-ended process. When a researcher is properly prepared, the open-ended structures of qualitative research make it possible to get underneath superficial responses and rational thoughts to gather information from an individual’s emotional response. This is critically important to this form of researcher because it is an emotional response which often drives a person’s decisions or influences their behavior.

8. Creativity becomes a desirable quality within qualitative research. It can be difficult to analyze data that is obtained from individual sources because many people subconsciously answer in a way that they think someone wants. This desire to “please” another reduces the accuracy of the data and suppresses individual creativity. By embracing the qualitative research method, it becomes possible to encourage respondent creativity, allowing people to express themselves with authenticity. In return, the data collected becomes more accurate and can lead to predictable outcomes.

9. Qualitative research can create industry-specific insights. Brands and businesses today need to build relationships with their core demographics to survive. The terminology, vocabulary, and jargon that consumers use when looking at products or services is just as important as the reputation of the brand that is offering them. If consumers are receiving one context, but the intention of the brand is a different context, then the miscommunication can artificially restrict sales opportunities. Qualitative research gives brands access to these insights so they can accurately communicate their value propositions.

10. Smaller sample sizes are used in qualitative research, which can save on costs. Many qualitative research projects can be completed quickly and on a limited budget because they typically use smaller sample sizes that other research methods. This allows for faster results to be obtained so that projects can move forward with confidence that only good data is able to provide.

11. Qualitative research provides more content for creatives and marketing teams. When your job involves marketing, or creating new campaigns that target a specific demographic, then knowing what makes those people can be quite challenging. By going through the qualitative research approach, it becomes possible to congregate authentic ideas that can be used for marketing and other creative purposes. This makes communication between the two parties to be handled with more accuracy, leading to greater level of happiness for all parties involved.

12. Attitude explanations become possible with qualitative research. Consumer patterns can change on a dime sometimes, leaving a brand out in the cold as to what just happened. Qualitative research allows for a greater understanding of consumer attitudes, providing an explanation for events that occur outside of the predictive matrix that was developed through previous research. This allows the optimal brand/consumer relationship to be maintained.

What Are the Disadvantages of Qualitative Research?

1. The quality of the data gathered in qualitative research is highly subjective. This is where the personal nature of data gathering in qualitative research can also be a negative component of the process. What one researcher might feel is important and necessary to gather can be data that another researcher feels is pointless and won’t spend time pursuing it. Having individual perspectives and including instinctual decisions can lead to incredibly detailed data. It can also lead to data that is generalized or even inaccurate because of its reliance on researcher subjectivisms.

2. Data rigidity is more difficult to assess and demonstrate. Because individual perspectives are often the foundation of the data that is gathered in qualitative research, it is more difficult to prove that there is rigidity in the information that is collective. The human mind tends to remember things in the way it wants to remember them. That is why memories are often looked at fondly, even if the actual events that occurred may have been somewhat disturbing at the time. This innate desire to look at the good in things makes it difficult for researchers to demonstrate data validity.

3. Mining data gathered by qualitative research can be time consuming. The number of details that are often collected while performing qualitative research are often overwhelming. Sorting through that data to pull out the key points can be a time-consuming effort. It is also a subjective effort because what one researcher feels is important may not be pulled out by another researcher. Unless there are some standards in place that cannot be overridden, data mining through a massive number of details can almost be more trouble than it is worth in some instances.

4. Qualitative research creates findings that are valuable, but difficult to present. Presenting the findings which come out of qualitative research is a bit like listening to an interview on CNN. The interviewer will ask a question to the interviewee, but the goal is to receive an answer that will help present a database which presents a specific outcome to the viewer. The goal might be to have a viewer watch an interview and think, “That’s terrible. We need to pass a law to change that.” The subjective nature of the information, however, can cause the viewer to think, “That’s wonderful. Let’s keep things the way they are right now.” That is why findings from qualitative research are difficult to present. What a research gleans from the data can be very different from what an outside observer gleans from the data.

5. Data created through qualitative research is not always accepted. Because of the subjective nature of the data that is collected in qualitative research, findings are not always accepted by the scientific community. A second independent qualitative research effort which can produce similar findings is often necessary to begin the process of community acceptance.

6. Researcher influence can have a negative effect on the collected data. The quality of the data that is collected through qualitative research is highly dependent on the skills and observation of the researcher. If a researcher has a biased point of view, then their perspective will be included with the data collected and influence the outcome. There must be controls in place to help remove the potential for bias so the data collected can be reviewed with integrity. Otherwise, it would be possible for a researcher to make any claim and then use their bias through qualitative research to prove their point.

7. Replicating results can be very difficult with qualitative research. The scientific community wants to see results that can be verified and duplicated to accept research as factual. In the world of qualitative research, this can be very difficult to accomplish. Not only do you have the variability of researcher bias for which to account within the data, but there is also the informational bias that is built into the data itself from the provider. This means the scope of data gathering can be extremely limited, even if the structure of gathering information is fluid, because of each unique perspective.

8. Difficult decisions may require repetitive qualitative research periods. The smaller sample sizes of qualitative research may be an advantage, but they can also be a disadvantage for brands and businesses which are facing a difficult or potentially controversial decision. A small sample is not always representative of a larger population demographic, even if there are deep similarities with the individuals involve. This means a follow-up with a larger quantitative sample may be necessary so that data points can be tracked with more accuracy, allowing for a better overall decision to be made.

9. Unseen data can disappear during the qualitative research process. The amount of trust that is placed on the researcher to gather, and then draw together, the unseen data that is offered by a provider is enormous. The research is dependent upon the skill of the researcher being able to connect all the dots. If the researcher can do this, then the data can be meaningful and help brands and progress forward with their mission. If not, there is no way to alter course until after the first results are received. Then a new qualitative process must begin.

10. Researchers must have industry-related expertise. You can have an excellent researcher on-board for a project, but if they are not familiar with the subject matter, they will have a difficult time gathering accurate data. For qualitative research to be accurate, the interviewer involved must have specific skills, experiences, and expertise in the subject matter being studied. They must also be familiar with the material being evaluated and have the knowledge to interpret responses that are received. If any piece of this skill set is missing, the quality of the data being gathered can be open to interpretation.

11. Qualitative research is not statistically representative. The one disadvantage of qualitative research which is always present is its lack of statistical representation. It is a perspective-based method of research only, which means the responses given are not measured. Comparisons can be made and this can lead toward the duplication which may be required, but for the most part, quantitative data is required for circumstances which need statistical representation and that is not part of the qualitative research process.

The advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research make it possible to gather and analyze individualistic data on deeper levels. This makes it possible to gain new insights into consumer thoughts, demographic behavioral patterns, and emotional reasoning processes. When a research can connect the dots of each information point that is gathered, the information can lead to personalized experiences, better value in products and services, and ongoing brand development.

Quantitative vs Qualitative Data: What’s the Difference?

If you’re considering a career in data—or in any kind of research field, like psychology—you’ll need to get to grips with two types of data: Quantitative and qualitative .

Quantitative data is anything that can be counted or measured ; it refers to numerical data. Qualitative data is descriptive , referring to things that can be observed but not measured—such as colors or emotions.

In this post, we’ll define both quantitative and qualitative data in more detail. We’ll then explore all the key ways in which they differ—from how they are collected and analyzed, to the advantages and disadvantages of each. We’ll also include useful examples throughout.

By the end, you’ll have a clear understanding of the difference between qualitative and quantitative data, and a good idea of when to use which. Want to skip ahead to a specific section? Just use this clickable menu:

• Quantitative vs qualitative data: What are they, and what’s the difference between them?
• What are the different types of quantitative and qualitative data?
• How are quantitative and qualitative data collected?
• Quantitative vs qualitative data: Methods of analysis
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative vs qualitative data?
• When should I use qualitative or quantitative data?
• Quantitative vs. qualitative data: FAQ
• Key takeaways 

Without further ado, let’s jump in.

1. What is the difference between quantitative and qualitative data?

When it comes to conducting research and data analysis, you’ll work with two types of data: quantitative and qualitative. Each requires different collection and analysis methods, so it’s important to understand the difference between the two.

What is quantitative data?

Quantitative data refers to any information that can be quantified. If it can be counted or measured, and given a numerical value, it’s quantitative data. Quantitative data can tell you “how many,” “how much,” or “how often”—for example, how many people attended last week’s webinar? How much revenue did the company make in 2019? How often does a certain customer group use online banking?

To analyze and make sense of quantitative data, you’ll conduct statistical analyses.

Learn more: What is quantitative data? A complete introduction

What is qualitative data?

Unlike quantitative data, qualitative data cannot be measured or counted. It’s descriptive, expressed in terms of language rather than numerical values.

Researchers will often turn to qualitative data to answer “Why?” or “How?” questions. For example, if your quantitative data tells you that a certain website visitor abandoned their shopping cart three times in one week, you’d probably want to investigate why—and this might involve collecting some form of qualitative data from the user. Perhaps you want to know how a user feels about a particular product; again, qualitative data can provide such insights. In this case, you’re not just looking at numbers; you’re asking the user to tell you, using language, why they did something or how they feel.

Qualitative data also refers to the words or labels used to describe certain characteristics or traits—for example, describing the sky as blue or labeling a particular ice cream flavor as vanilla.

What are the main differences between quantitative and qualitative data?

The main differences between quantitative and qualitative data lie in what they tell us , how they are collected , and how they are analyzed. Let’s summarize the key differences before exploring each aspect in more detail:

• Quantitative data is countable or measurable, relating to numbers. Qualitative data is descriptive, relating to language.
• Quantitative data tells us how many, how much, or how often (e.g. “20 people signed up to our email newsletter last week”). Qualitative data can help us to understand the “why” or “how” behind certain behaviors, or it can simply describe a certain attribute—for example, “The postbox is red” or “I signed up to the email newsletter because I’m really interested in hearing about local events.”
• Quantitative data is fixed and “universal,” while qualitative data is subjective and dynamic. For example, if something weighs 20 kilograms, that can be considered an objective fact. However, two people may have very different qualitative accounts of how they experience a particular event.
• Quantitative data is gathered by measuring and counting. Qualitative data is collected by interviewing and observing.
• Quantitative data is analyzed using statistical analysis, while qualitative data is analyzed by grouping it in terms of meaningful categories or themes.

The difference between quantitative and qualitative data: An example

To illustrate the difference between quantitative and qualitative data, let’s use an example. Imagine you want to describe your best friend. What kind of data might you gather or use to paint a vivid picture?

First, you might describe their physical attributes, such as their height, their hair style and color, what size feet they have, and how much they weigh. Then you might describe some of their most prominent personality traits. On top of that, you could describe how many siblings and pets they have, where they live, and how often they go swimming (their favorite hobby).

All of that data will fall into either the quantitative or qualitative categories, as follows:

Quantitative data:

• My best friend is 5 feet and 7 inches tall
• They have size 6 feet
• They weigh 63 kilograms
• My best friend has one older sibling and two younger siblings
• They have two cats
• My best friend lives twenty miles away from me
• They go swimming four times a week

Qualitative data:

• My best friend has curly brown hair
• They have green eyes
• My best friend is funny, loud, and a good listener
• They can also be quite impatient and impulsive at times
• My best friend drives a red car
• They have a very friendly face and a contagious laugh

Of course, when working as a researcher or data analyst, you’ll be handling much more complex data than the examples we’ve given. However, our “best friend” example has hopefully made it easier for you to distinguish between quantitative and qualitative data.

2. Different types of quantitative and qualitative data

When considering the difference between quantitative and qualitative data, it helps to explore some types and examples of each. Let’s do that now, starting with quantitative data.

Types of quantitative data (with examples)

Quantitative data is either discrete or continuous :

• Discrete quantitative data takes on fixed numerical values and cannot be broken down further. An example of discrete data is when you count something, such as the number of people in a room. If you count 32 people, this is fixed and finite.
• Continuous quantitative data can be placed on a continuum and infinitely broken down into smaller units. It can take any value; for example, a piece of string can be 20.4cm in length, or the room temperature can be 30.8 degrees.

What are some real-world examples of quantitative data?

Some everyday examples of quantitative data include:

• Measurements such as height, length, and weight
• Counts, such as the number of website visitors, sales, or email sign-ups
• Calculations, such as revenue
• Projections, such as predicted sales or projected revenue increase expressed as a percentage
• Quantification of qualitative data—for example, asking customers to rate their satisfaction on a scale of 1-5 and then coming up with an overall customer satisfaction score

Types of qualitative data (with examples)

Qualitative data may be classified as nominal or ordinal :

• Nominal data is used to label or categorize certain variables without giving them any type of quantitative value. For example, if you were collecting data about your target audience, you might want to know where they live. Are they based in the UK, the USA, Asia, or Australia? Each of these geographical classifications count as nominal data. Another simple example could be the use of labels like “blue,” “brown,” and “green” to describe eye color.
• Ordinal data is when the categories used to classify your qualitative data fall into a natural order or hierarchy. For example, if you wanted to explore customer satisfaction, you might ask each customer to select whether their experience with your product was “poor,” “satisfactory,” “good,” or “outstanding.” It’s clear that “outstanding” is better than “poor,” but there’s no way of measuring or quantifying the “distance” between the two categories.

Nominal and ordinal data tends to come up within the context of conducting questionnaires and surveys. However, qualitative data is not just limited to labels and categories; it also includes unstructured data such as what people say in an interview, what they write in a product review, or what they post on social media.

What are some real-world examples of qualitative data?

Some examples of qualitative data include:

• Interview transcripts or audio recordings
• The text included in an email or social media post
• Product reviews and customer testimonials
• Observations and descriptions; e.g. “I noticed that the teacher was wearing a red jumper.”
• Labels and categories used in surveys and questionnaires, e.g. selecting whether you are satisfied, dissatisfied, or indifferent to a particular product or service.

3. How are quantitative and qualitative data collected?

One of the key differences between quantitative and qualitative data is in how they are collected or generated.

How is quantitative data generated?

Quantitative data is generated by measuring or counting certain entities, or by performing calculations. Some common quantitative data collection methods include:

• Surveys and questionnaires: This is an especially useful method for gathering large quantities of data. If you wanted to gather quantitative data on employee satisfaction, you might send out a survey asking them to rate various aspects of the organization on a scale of 1-10.
• Analytics tools: Data analysts and data scientists use specialist tools to gather quantitative data from various sources. For example, Google Analytics gathers data in real-time, allowing you to see, at a glance, all the most important metrics for your website—such as traffic, number of page views, and average session length.
• Environmental sensors: A sensor is a device which detects changes in the surrounding environment and sends this information to another electronic device, usually a computer. This information is converted into numbers, providing a continuous stream of quantitative data.
• Manipulation of pre-existing quantitative data: Researchers and analysts will also generate new quantitative data by performing statistical analyses or calculations on existing data. For example, if you have a spreadsheet containing data on the number of sales and expenditures in USD, you could generate new quantitative data by calculating the overall profit margin.

How is qualitative data generated?

Qualitative data is gathered through interviews, surveys, and observations. Let’s take a look at these methods in more detail:

• Interviews are a great way to learn how people feel about any given topic—be it their opinions on a new product or their experience using a particular service. Conducting interviews will eventually provide you with interview transcripts which can then be analyzed.
• Surveys and questionnaires are also used to gather qualitative data. If you wanted to collect demographic data about your target audience, you might ask them to complete a survey where they either select their answers from a number of different options, or write their responses as freeform text.
• Observations: You don’t necessarily have to actively engage with people in order to gather qualitative data. Analysts will also look at “naturally occurring” qualitative data, such as the feedback left in product reviews or what people say in their social media posts.

4. Quantitative vs qualitative data: methods of analysis

Another major difference between quantitative and qualitative data lies in how they are analyzed. Quantitative data is suitable for statistical analysis and mathematical calculations, while qualitative data is usually analyzed by grouping it into meaningful categories or themes.

Quantitative data analysis

How you analyze your quantitative data depends on the kind of data you’ve gathered and the insights you want to uncover. Statistical analysis can be used to identify trends in the data, to establish if there’s any kind of relationship between a set of variables (e.g. does social media spend correlate with sales), to calculate probability in order to accurately predict future outcomes, to understand how the data is distributed—and much, much more.

Some of the most popular methods used by data analysts include:

• Regression analysis
• Monte Carlo simulation
• Factor analysis
• Cohort analysis
• Cluster analysis
• Time series analysis

You’ll find a detailed explanation of these methods in our guide to the most useful data analysis techniques .

Qualitative data analysis

With qualitative data analysis, the focus is on making sense of unstructured data (such as large bodies of text). Given that qualitative data cannot be measured objectively, it is open to subjective interpretation and therefore requires a different approach to analysis.

The main method of analysis used with qualitative data is a technique known as thematic analysis. Essentially, the data is coded in order to identify recurring keywords or topics, and then, based on these codes, grouped into meaningful themes.

Another type of analysis is sentiment analysis , which seeks to classify and interpret the emotions conveyed within textual data. This allows businesses to gauge how customers feel about various aspects of the brand, product, or service, and how common these sentiments are across the entire customer base.

Traditionally, qualitative data analysis has had something of a bad reputation for being extremely time-consuming. However, nowadays the process can be largely automated, and there are plenty of tools and software out there to help you make sense of your qualitative data. To learn more about qualitative analysis and what you can do with it, check out this round-up of the most useful qualitative analysis tools on the market .

5. What are the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative vs qualitative data?

Each type of data comes with advantages and disadvantages, and it’s important to bear these in mind when conducting any kind of research or sourcing data for analysis. We’ll outline the main advantages and disadvantages of each now.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative data?

A big advantage of quantitative data is that it’s relatively quick and easy to collect, meaning you can work with large samples. At the same time, quantitative data is objective; it’s less susceptible to bias than qualitative data, which makes it easier to draw reliable and generalizable conclusions.

The main disadvantage of quantitative data is that it can lack depth and context. The numbers don’t always tell you the full story; for example, you might see that you lost 70% of your newsletter subscribers in one week, but without further investigation, you won’t know why.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative data?

Where quantitative data falls short, qualitative data shines. The biggest advantage of qualitative data is that it offers rich, in-depth insights and allows you to explore the context surrounding a given topic. Through qualitative data, you can really gauge how people feel and why they take certain actions—crucial if you’re running any kind of organization and want to understand how your target audience operates.

However, qualitative data can be harder and more time-consuming to collect, so you may find yourself working with smaller samples. Because of its subjective nature, qualitative data is also open to interpretation, so it’s important to be aware of bias when conducting qualitative analysis.

6. When should I use qualitative or quantitative data?

Put simply, whether you use qualitative or quantitative data (or a combination of both!) depends on the data analytics project you’re undertaking. Here, we’ll discuss which projects are better suited to which data.

Generally, you can use the following criteria to determine whether to go with qualitative data, quantitative data, or a mixed methods approach to collecting data for your project.

• Do you want to understand something, such as a concept, experience, or opinions? Use qualitative data.
• Do you want to confirm or test something, such as a theory or hypothesis? Use quantitative data.
• Are you taking on research? You may benefit from a mixed methods approach to data collection.

You may find that more often than not, both types of data are used in projects, in order to gain a clear overall image—integrating both the numbers side and human side of things.

6. Quantitative vs. qualitative data: FAQ

What are the main differences between qualitative and quantitative research.

Qualitative research is primarily exploratory and uses non-numerical data to understand underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations. Quantitative research, on the other hand, is numerical and seeks to measure variables and relationships through statistical analysis. Additionally, qualitative research tends to be subjective and less structured, while quantitative research is objective and more structured.

What are examples of qualitative and quantitative data?

Examples of qualitative data include open-ended survey responses, interview transcripts, and observational notes. Examples of quantitative data include numerical survey responses, test scores, and website traffic data. Qualitative data is typically subjective and descriptive, while quantitative data is objective and numerical.

7. Key takeaways

Throughout this post, we’ve defined quantitative and qualitative data and explained how they differ. What it really boils down to, in very simple terms, is that quantitative data is countable or measurable, relating to numbers, while qualitative data is descriptive, relating to language.

Understanding the difference between quantitative and qualitative data is one of the very first steps towards becoming a data expert. If you’re considering a career in data, you’ll find links to some useful articles at the end of this post. Had enough theory and want some action? Check out our list of free data analytics courses for beginners , or cut to the chase and simply sign up for a free, five-day introductory data analytics short course .

• A step-by-step guide to the data analysis process
• What is the typical data analyst career path?
• The best data analytics courses in 2022

Qualitative vs Quantitative Data in Surveys: What’s Better?

Deciding whether to collect customer data through stories (qualitative data) or numbers (quantitative data) can be tricky. 

Many researchers and marketers find themselves stuck between the detailed insights of qualitative data and the clear, measurable facts of quantitative data. 

It then creates a big debate about which method, qualitative vs quantitative, is better for surveys. 

Let’s talk about it!

What is qualitative data?

Qualitative data refers to non-numerical information gathered through methods like interviews, focus groups, and open-ended questions in surveys. 

➡️ GOAL : providing in-depth insights into human behavior, motivations, and attitudes. It gives a better understanding of the subject matter.

What is quantitative data?

Quantitative data consists of numerical information that can be measured and analyzed statistically. It is collected through methods such as surveys with closed-ended questions , experiments, and observations

➡️ GOAL: providing a broad overview of trends and patterns across a large sample.

When to use qualitative data in research?

Have you got doubts about that? Let’s clear them.

Exploring new phenomena

When conducting research in areas where little is known, qualitative data collection methods are invaluable. 

They let researchers gather qualitative insights through open-ended questions, focus groups, and interviews . It also provides a rich, detailed understanding of the subject matter. 

Useful in: qualitative studies exploring concepts, behaviors, or experiences in depth, offering a foundation for further quantitative research.

However, you won’t gather the data effectively without a robust tool for that. Surveylab provides many question types suitable for collecting both: qualitative and quantitative data. 

For example: open-ended questions, single choice, multiple choice, matrix, numeric / slider, NPS , and more.

Other Surveylab’s superpowers:

• multi-language surveys , 
• dedicated customer and domain support ,
• ideal for mobile surveys  
• integrations with other tools ( CRM, eShop, BI / DWH)

Check out pricing and other features .

Understanding contexts and complexities

Qualitative research shines when the goal is to understand the context behind behaviors, decisions, or perceptions. 

Through methods like thematic analysis and discourse analysis , qualitative researchers can interpret non-numerical data to uncover patterns and meanings that numerical data cannot reveal. 

Useful in: fields like sociology or anthropology, where the nuances of human interaction and culture are central.

Developing concepts and theories

In the early stages of research, particularly when developing theories or concepts, qualitative data provides the depth and flexibility needed to form hypotheses.  

Useful in: collecting data from focus groups or in-depth interviews to build theoretical frameworks that explain how and why certain phenomena occur.

Gaining user or customer insights

For businesses and designers, qualitative research offers a pathway to deep user or customer insights. 

Gathering qualitative data through user interviews, customer feedback, or focus groups helps understand users’ needs, preferences, and pain points.

Useful in: developing new products, services, or features that closely meet customer expectations and improve the overall user experience.

Evaluating social programs

Qualitative data is essential for evaluating the impact of social programs or interventions. 

Unlike quantitative data, qualitative feedback from participants provides insights into how and why a program succeeded or failed. 

This can include participants’ personal stories, experiences, and perceptions. 

Useful in: comprehensive view of the program’s effectiveness and areas for improvement.

When to use quantitative data in research

As it’s a different approach, you need to know when to use quantitative data.

Measuring variables quantitatively

Quantitative research is the go-to when the objective is to measure variables and analyze numerical data statistically. 

The approach is suited for studies that require quantitative data collection methods like surveys with closed-ended questions or experiments where numerical values can be assigned to outcomes. 

Useful in: fields like psychology or economics, where researchers seek to quantify behaviors, attitudes, or conditions.

Testing hypotheses or theories

When researchers want to test hypotheses or validate theories , quantitative research methods provide the rigor and structure needed. 

Through controlled experiments and statistical analyses , quantitative data allows for hypothesis testing. It enables researchers to draw conclusions based on empirical evidence. 

Useful in: establishing causal relationships and validating theoretical models.

Identifying trends and patterns

Using statistical analysis and descriptive statistics , researchers can analyze quantitative data to uncover significant trends, correlations, or differences within the data. 

Useful in: market research, epidemiology, and other fields where understanding broad patterns is essential.

Generalizing findings to a larger population

Quantitative research methods, particularly those involving a random sample , are designed to generalize findings from a sample to a larger population. 

Useful in: researching broad inferences about a group’s behaviors, attitudes, or characteristics, ensuring that the conclusions drawn are statistically significant and representative.

Comparing groups or conditions

Through quantitative analysis, researchers can use numerical data to conduct comparative studies, and employ statistical analyses to determine if significant differences exist between groups. 

Useful in: clinical trials, educational research, and any study where comparing outcomes is key.

Qualitative and quantitative data: key differences

To make things clearer, we’ve compiled a list of key differences, with a quick explanation.

Nature of data

✔️ Qualitative research focuses on textual data, gathering qualitative data through methods like interviews and focus groups. All to gain insights into the subjective nature of human experiences. 

✔️ Quantitative research deals with numeric data, employing quantitative data collection methods to gather numerical values that can be analyzed using inferential statistics.

Analysis methods

✔️ Qualitative data analysis involves interpreting non-numerical data, often through thematic or content analysis, to uncover patterns and meanings. 

✔️ Quantitative analysis , however, relies on statistical analyses to test hypotheses and draw conclusions based on numerical data, using descriptive and inferential statistics to quantify relationships and differences.

Research aims and objectives

✔️ Qualitative research aims to explore the depth, meaning, and complexity of phenomena. It focuses on the subjective interpretation of data to provide in-depth insights. 

✔️ Quantitative research seeks to quantify variables and generalize findings from a sample to a larger population. The goal is to identify trends, test theories, and establish causal relationships.

📚 Read: how to analyze survey data and best practices for that .

Approach to data collection

✔️ Qualitative researchers gather qualitative data through open-ended questions and discussions. Understanding the participants’ context and perspectives is the goal.

✔️ Quantitative researchers , on the other hand, collect data through structured methods like surveys and experiments. Here, the focus is on generating quantifiable evidence that can be statistically analyzed.

Role of the researcher

✔️ In qualitative research , the researcher often plays a more active role in interpreting data, with a focus on analyzing qualitative insights and the subjective experiences of participants. 

✔️ Quantitative researchers maintain a more detached stance, focusing on objective measurement and analysis to ensure that the findings are not influenced by the researcher’s biases.

📚 Read: what is non-response bias and why it matters?

Key similarities of qualitative and quantitative data collecting methods

As those two methods differ, there are also similarities.

Objective of understanding

Both qualitative and quantitative research share the objective of understanding human behavior, social phenomena, or specific research questions.  

Whether through qualitative or quantitative data, both approaches aim to gain insights into their respective areas of study, contributing valuable knowledge to the field.

Use of mixed methods

Another similarity is the increasing use of mixed methods, combining qualitative and quantitative research in a single study . 

The approach uses the strengths of both methods to provide a more comprehensive understanding of research questions, It allows researchers to explore complex issues with both depth and breadth.

Importance of rigorous data collection

They emphasize the importance of rigorous data collection processes . 

When collecting qualitative or quantitative data, they ensure that the data is reliable and valid so they can make accurate conclusions.

Contribution to knowledge

These research methods contribute to the expansion of knowledge within various fields . 

They explore new concepts and test theories. They also help to fill gaps in understanding, contributing to the development of new theories and practices.

Ethical considerations

Both qualitative and quantitative research are bound by ethical considerations. They ensure the research is conducted responsibly and with respect for participants . 

For example: obtaining informed consent, ensuring confidentiality, and minimizing any potential harm to participants. All to highlight the shared values and standards that guide research practices across methodologies.

📚 Read: 10 tricks to help you build better surveys

How to tackle qualitative vs quantitative in surveys – best practices

Do you feel quite overwhelmed? Check out our tips!

Balancing qualitative and quantitative questions

Start with quantitative data questions to get statistical insights, then use qualitative questions to explore respondents’ thoughts and feelings in more depth. 

It’s a balanced approach that combines numerical value with subjective insights for a deeper understanding.

Designing effective qualitative questions

When crafting qualitative questions, go for open-ended questions that encourage detailed responses. Use qualitative research methods like thematic analysis to identify patterns and themes in the responses. 

You can gain a deeper understanding of the numbers and their context by understanding the nuances behind them.

Utilizing quantitative data for broad insights

Quantitative questions should be designed to collect numeric data that can be easily analyzed through statistical analysis. We can use this quantitative data to catch the trends, patterns, and general behaviors across a large sample. 

Leveraging descriptive statistics and quantitative data analysis, researchers can quantify attitudes and opinions. They get a broad overview of the study population.

Analyzing qualitative data thoroughly

Qualitative data analysis requires a detailed approach to interpreting open-ended responses. Techniques such as qualitative analysis and thematic analysis help researchers to explore textual data, uncover underlying meanings and gain qualitative insights. 

I t’s essential to understand the “why” behind the numbers in quantitative data.

Applying statistical analyses to quantitative data

For quantitative data, employ statistical analyses to validate findings and draw conclusions. Data patterns can be summarized using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. 

Then, you may get robust and reliable results for both quantitative and qualitative research.

Leveraging mixed methods for comprehensive insights

Adopt a mixed methods approach that combines qualitative and quantitative research – it’s a way for enriched data collection and analysis. 

Researchers then can explore a topic through qualitative data and then measure those findings with quantitative data, or vice versa. 

Ensuring quality in data collection methods

High-quality data collection is vital, no matter if the focus is on qualitative or quantitative data. Reliable data collection methods, such as: 

• carefully designed surveys and focus groups for qualitative data, 
• and structured questionnaires for quantitative data, 

Provide the research findings with validity and reliability.

Navigating the advantages and disadvantages

Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative vs quantitative research is key to choosing the right approach for your study. 

While qualitative studies offer depth and detail, quantitative studies provide breadth and generalizability. 

When deciding how to tackle their survey design for optimal results, researchers should consider: 

• their research goals, 
• the nature of the data, 
• and the intended analysis methods 

Source: Designs.ai

Key takeaways

• Combining quantitative and qualitative data in surveys provides a comprehensive understanding of research topics.
• Quantitative data refers to numerical information that can be statistically analyzed for broad insights.
• Qualitative methods involve open-ended questions that explore participants’ thoughts and experiences in depth.
• A quantitative researcher focuses on collecting and analyzing numerical data to identify trends and patterns.
• Gap analysis can benefit from both quantitative and qualitative data to identify and address discrepancies between current and desired states.
• Nursing research often utilizes both qualitative and quantitative studies to improve patient care and healthcare practices.
• Developing strong research skills is essential for effectively designing and conducting mixed-methods research.
• Focus group discussions are a valuable qualitative method for gathering detailed feedback and insights.
• A quantitative study aims to quantify variables and often uses statistical methods to test hypotheses.
• A qualitative study seeks to understand the meaning, characteristics, and descriptions of phenomena, providing rich, detailed insights.

Conclusion on qualitative and quantitative research

Mastering the blend of quantitative and qualitative research is super important to unlocking deeper insights.

Crunching numbers for clear trends? Diving into discussions for nuanced understanding? Each method offers its own strengths. 

As you refine your research skills, remember: the best insights come from combining the clarity of quantitative data with the depth of qualitative analysis. 

Now, it’s your turn to take these strategies and turn them into actionable insights. And it wouldn’t be smooth without the surveying tool. Sign up for SurveyLab , and make data collection a breeze.

FAQ on qualitative vs quantitative data

Do you have any questions? Check out our answers.

Qualitative data includes non-numerical information from interviews, focus groups, and open-ended survey questions. It helps understand human behavior and attitudes deeply.

Quantitative data consists of numerical information from surveys, experiments, and observations, useful for analyzing trends and patterns.

They should use qualitative data to explore new topics deeply, understand complex issues, or when developing new theories and concepts.

Quantitative data helps measure variables, test hypotheses, and generalize findings to larger populations through statistical analysis.

Mixed methods combine the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches, providing comprehensive insights into research topics.

Try SurveyLab for free Best survey tool with great features

14 days trial | view complete list of features

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Generalization and Replication–A Representationalist View

In this paper, we provide a re-interpretation of qualitative and quantitative modeling from a representationalist perspective. In this view, both approaches attempt to construct abstract representations of empirical relational structures. Whereas quantitative research uses variable-based models that abstract from individual cases, qualitative research favors case-based models that abstract from individual characteristics. Variable-based models are usually stated in the form of quantified sentences (scientific laws). This syntactic structure implies that sentences about individual cases are derived using deductive reasoning. In contrast, case-based models are usually stated using context-dependent existential sentences (qualitative statements). This syntactic structure implies that sentences about other cases are justifiable by inductive reasoning. We apply this representationalist perspective to the problems of generalization and replication. Using the analytical framework of modal logic, we argue that the modes of reasoning are often not only applied to the context that has been studied empirically, but also on a between-contexts level. Consequently, quantitative researchers mostly adhere to a top-down strategy of generalization, whereas qualitative researchers usually follow a bottom-up strategy of generalization. Depending on which strategy is employed, the role of replication attempts is very different. In deductive reasoning, replication attempts serve as empirical tests of the underlying theory. Therefore, failed replications imply a faulty theory. From an inductive perspective, however, replication attempts serve to explore the scope of the theory. Consequently, failed replications do not question the theory per se , but help to shape its boundary conditions. We conclude that quantitative research may benefit from a bottom-up generalization strategy as it is employed in most qualitative research programs. Inductive reasoning forces us to think about the boundary conditions of our theories and provides a framework for generalization beyond statistical testing. In this perspective, failed replications are just as informative as successful replications, because they help to explore the scope of our theories.

Introduction

Qualitative and quantitative research strategies have long been treated as opposing paradigms. In recent years, there have been attempts to integrate both strategies. These “mixed methods” approaches treat qualitative and quantitative methodologies as complementary, rather than opposing, strategies (Creswell, 2015 ). However, whilst acknowledging that both strategies have their benefits, this “integration” remains purely pragmatic. Hence, mixed methods methodology does not provide a conceptual unification of the two approaches.

Lacking a common methodological background, qualitative and quantitative research methodologies have developed rather distinct standards with regard to the aims and scope of empirical science (Freeman et al., 2007 ). These different standards affect the way researchers handle contradictory empirical findings. For example, many empirical findings in psychology have failed to replicate in recent years (Klein et al., 2014 ; Open Science, Collaboration, 2015 ). This “replication crisis” has been discussed on statistical, theoretical and social grounds and continues to have a wide impact on quantitative research practices like, for example, open science initiatives, pre-registered studies and a re-evaluation of statistical significance testing (Everett and Earp, 2015 ; Maxwell et al., 2015 ; Shrout and Rodgers, 2018 ; Trafimow, 2018 ; Wiggins and Chrisopherson, 2019 ).

However, qualitative research seems to be hardly affected by this discussion. In this paper, we argue that the latter is a direct consequence of how the concept of generalizability is conceived in the two approaches. Whereas most of quantitative psychology is committed to a top-down strategy of generalization based on the idea of random sampling from an abstract population, qualitative studies usually rely on a bottom-up strategy of generalization that is grounded in the successive exploration of the field by means of theoretically sampled cases.

Here, we show that a common methodological framework for qualitative and quantitative research methodologies is possible. We accomplish this by introducing a formal description of quantitative and qualitative models from a representationalist perspective: both approaches can be reconstructed as special kinds of representations for empirical relational structures. We then use this framework to analyze the generalization strategies used in the two approaches. These turn out to be logically independent of the type of model. This has wide implications for psychological research. First, a top-down generalization strategy is compatible with a qualitative modeling approach. This implies that mainstream psychology may benefit from qualitative methods when a numerical representation turns out to be difficult or impossible, without the need to commit to a “qualitative” philosophy of science. Second, quantitative research may exploit the bottom-up generalization strategy that is inherent to many qualitative approaches. This offers a new perspective on unsuccessful replications by treating them not as scientific failures, but as a valuable source of information about the scope of a theory.

The Quantitative Strategy–Numbers and Functions

Quantitative science is about finding valid mathematical representations for empirical phenomena. In most cases, these mathematical representations have the form of functional relations between a set of variables. One major challenge of quantitative modeling consists in constructing valid measures for these variables. Formally, to measure a variable means to construct a numerical representation of the underlying empirical relational structure (Krantz et al., 1971 ). For example, take the behaviors of a group of students in a classroom: “to listen,” “to take notes,” and “to ask critical questions.” One may now ask whether is possible to assign numbers to the students, such that the relations between the assigned numbers are of the same kind as the relations between the values of an underlying variable, like e.g., “engagement.” The observed behaviors in the classroom constitute an empirical relational structure, in the sense that for every student-behavior tuple, one can observe whether it is true or not. These observations can be represented in a person × behavior matrix 1 (compare Figure 1 ). Given this relational structure satisfies certain conditions (i.e., the axioms of a measurement model), one can assign numbers to the students and the behaviors, such that the relations between the numbers resemble the corresponding numerical relations. For example, if there is a unique ordering in the empirical observations with regard to which person shows which behavior, the assigned numbers have to constitute a corresponding unique ordering, as well. Such an ordering coincides with the person × behavior matrix forming a triangle shaped relation and is formally represented by a Guttman scale (Guttman, 1944 ). There are various measurement models available for different empirical structures (Suppes et al., 1971 ). In the case of probabilistic relations, Item-Response models may be considered as a special kind of measurement model (Borsboom, 2005 ).

Constructing a numerical representation from an empirical relational structure; Due to the unique ordering of persons with regard to behaviors (indicated by the triangular shape of the relation), it is possible to construct a Guttman scale by assigning a number to each of the individuals, representing the number of relevant behaviors shown by the individual. The resulting variable (“engagement”) can then be described by means of statistical analyses, like, e.g., plotting the frequency distribution.

Although essential, measurement is only the first step of quantitative modeling. Consider a slightly richer empirical structure, where we observe three additional behaviors: “to doodle,” “to chat,” and “to play.” Like above, one may ask, whether there is a unique ordering of the students with regard to these behaviors that can be represented by an underlying variable (i.e., whether the matrix forms a Guttman scale). If this is the case, we may assign corresponding numbers to the students and call this variable “distraction.” In our example, such a representation is possible. We can thus assign two numbers to each student, one representing his or her “engagement” and one representing his or her “distraction” (compare Figure 2 ). These measurements can now be used to construct a quantitative model by relating the two variables by a mathematical function. In the simplest case, this may be a linear function. This functional relation constitutes a quantitative model of the empirical relational structure under study (like, e.g., linear regression). Given the model equation and the rules for assigning the numbers (i.e., the instrumentations of the two variables), the set of admissible empirical structures is limited from all possible structures to a rather small subset. This constitutes the empirical content of the model 2 (Popper, 1935 ).

Constructing a numerical model from an empirical relational structure; Since there are two distinct classes of behaviors that each form a Guttman scale, it is possible to assign two numbers to each individual, correspondingly. The resulting variables (“engagement” and “distraction”) can then be related by a mathematical function, which is indicated by the scatterplot and red line on the right hand side.

The Qualitative Strategy–Categories and Typologies

The predominant type of analysis in qualitative research consists in category formation. By constructing descriptive systems for empirical phenomena, it is possible to analyze the underlying empirical structure at a higher level of abstraction. The resulting categories (or types) constitute a conceptual frame for the interpretation of the observations. Qualitative researchers differ considerably in the way they collect and analyze data (Miles et al., 2014 ). However, despite the diverse research strategies followed by different qualitative methodologies, from a formal perspective, most approaches build on some kind of categorization of cases that share some common features. The process of category formation is essential in many qualitative methodologies, like, for example, qualitative content analysis, thematic analysis, grounded theory (see Flick, 2014 for an overview). Sometimes these features are directly observable (like in our classroom example), sometimes they are themselves the result of an interpretative process (e.g., Scheunpflug et al., 2016 ).

In contrast to quantitative methodologies, there have been little attempts to formalize qualitative research strategies (compare, however, Rihoux and Ragin, 2009 ). However, there are several statistical approaches to non-numerical data that deal with constructing abstract categories and establishing relations between these categories (Agresti, 2013 ). Some of these methods are very similar to qualitative category formation on a conceptual level. For example, cluster analysis groups cases into homogenous categories (clusters) based on their similarity on a distance metric.

Although category formation can be formalized in a mathematically rigorous way (Ganter and Wille, 1999 ), qualitative research hardly acknowledges these approaches. 3 However, in order to find a common ground with quantitative science, it is certainly helpful to provide a formal interpretation of category systems.

Let us reconsider the above example of students in a classroom. The quantitative strategy was to assign numbers to the students with regard to variables and to relate these variables via a mathematical function. We can analyze the same empirical structure by grouping the behaviors to form abstract categories. If the aim is to construct an empirically valid category system, this grouping is subject to constraints, analogous to those used to specify a measurement model. The first and most important constraint is that the behaviors must form equivalence classes, i.e., within categories, behaviors need to be equivalent, and across categories, they need to be distinct (formally, the relational structure must obey the axioms of an equivalence relation). When objects are grouped into equivalence classes, it is essential to specify the criterion for empirical equivalence. In qualitative methodology, this is sometimes referred to as the tertium comparationis (Flick, 2014 ). One possible criterion is to group behaviors such that they constitute a set of specific common attributes of a group of people. In our example, we might group the behaviors “to listen,” “to take notes,” and “to doodle,” because these behaviors are common to the cases B, C, and D, and they are also specific for these cases, because no other person shows this particular combination of behaviors. The set of common behaviors then forms an abstract concept (e.g., “moderate distraction”), while the set of persons that show this configuration form a type (e.g., “the silent dreamer”). Formally, this means to identify the maximal rectangles in the underlying empirical relational structure (see Figure 3 ). This procedure is very similar to the way we constructed a Guttman scale, the only difference being that we now use different aspects of the empirical relational structure. 4 In fact, the set of maximal rectangles can be determined by an automated algorithm (Ganter, 2010 ), just like the dimensionality of an empirical structure can be explored by psychometric scaling methods. Consequently, we can identify the empirical content of a category system or a typology as the set of empirical structures that conforms to it. 5 Whereas the quantitative strategy was to search for scalable sub-matrices and then relate the constructed variables by a mathematical function, the qualitative strategy is to construct an empirical typology by grouping cases based on their specific similarities. These types can then be related to one another by a conceptual model that describes their semantic and empirical overlap (see Figure 3 , right hand side).

Constructing a conceptual model from an empirical relational structure; Individual behaviors are grouped to form abstract types based on them being shared among a specific subset of the cases. Each type constitutes a set of specific commonalities of a class of individuals (this is indicated by the rectangles on the left hand side). The resulting types (“active learner,” “silent dreamer,” “distracted listener,” and “troublemaker”) can then be related to one another to explicate their semantic and empirical overlap, as indicated by the Venn-diagram on the right hand side.

Variable-Based Models and Case-Based Models

In the previous section, we have argued that qualitative category formation and quantitative measurement can both be characterized as methods to construct abstract representations of empirical relational structures. Instead of focusing on different philosophical approaches to empirical science, we tried to stress the formal similarities between both approaches. However, it is worth also exploring the dissimilarities from a formal perspective.

Following the above analysis, the quantitative approach can be characterized by the use of variable-based models, whereas the qualitative approach is characterized by case-based models (Ragin, 1987 ). Formally, we can identify the rows of an empirical person × behavior matrix with a person-space, and the columns with a corresponding behavior-space. A variable-based model abstracts from the single individuals in a person-space to describe the structure of behaviors on a population level. A case-based model, on the contrary, abstracts from the single behaviors in a behavior-space to describe individual case configurations on the level of abstract categories (see Table 1 ).

Variable-based models and case-based models.

From a representational perspective, there is no a priori reason to favor one type of model over the other. Both approaches provide different analytical tools to construct an abstract representation of an empirical relational structure. However, since the two modeling approaches make use of different information (person-space vs. behavior-space), this comes with some important implications for the researcher employing one of the two strategies. These are concerned with the role of deductive and inductive reasoning.

In variable-based models, empirical structures are represented by functional relations between variables. These are usually stated as scientific laws (Carnap, 1928 ). Formally, these laws correspond to logical expressions of the form

In plain text, this means that y is a function of x for all objects i in the relational structure under consideration. For example, in the above example, one may formulate the following law: for all students in the classroom it holds that “distraction” is a monotone decreasing function of “engagement.” Such a law can be used to derive predictions for single individuals by means of logical deduction: if the above law applies to all students in the classroom, it is possible to calculate the expected distraction from a student's engagement. An empirical observation can now be evaluated against this prediction. If the prediction turns out to be false, the law can be refuted based on the principle of falsification (Popper, 1935 ). If a scientific law repeatedly withstands such empirical tests, it may be considered to be valid with regard to the relational structure under consideration.

In case-based models, there are no laws about a population, because the model does not abstract from the cases but from the observed behaviors. A case-based model describes the underlying structure in terms of existential sentences. Formally, this corresponds to a logical expression of the form

In plain text, this means that there is at least one case i for which the condition XYZ holds. For example, the above category system implies that there is at least one active learner. This is a statement about a singular observation. It is impossible to deduce a statement about another person from an existential sentence like this. Therefore, the strategy of falsification cannot be applied to test the model's validity in a specific context. If one wishes to generalize to other cases, this is accomplished by inductive reasoning, instead. If we observed one person that fulfills the criteria of calling him or her an active learner, we can hypothesize that there may be other persons that are identical to the observed case in this respect. However, we do not arrive at this conclusion by logical deduction, but by induction.

Despite this important distinction, it would be wrong to conclude that variable-based models are intrinsically deductive and case-based models are intrinsically inductive. 6 Both types of reasoning apply to both types of models, but on different levels. Based on a person-space, in a variable-based model one can use deduction to derive statements about individual persons from abstract population laws. There is an analogous way of reasoning for case-based models: because they are based on a behavior space, it is possible to deduce statements about singular behaviors. For example, if we know that Peter is an active learner, we can deduce that he takes notes in the classroom. This kind of deductive reasoning can also be applied on a higher level of abstraction to deduce thematic categories from theoretical assumptions (Braun and Clarke, 2006 ). Similarly, there is an analog for inductive generalization from the perspective of variable-based modeling: since the laws are only quantified over the person-space, generalizations to other behaviors rely on inductive reasoning. For example, it is plausible to assume that highly engaged students tend to do their homework properly–however, in our example this behavior has never been observed. Hence, in variable-based models we usually generalize to other behaviors by means of induction. This kind of inductive reasoning is very common when empirical results are generalized from the laboratory to other behavioral domains.

Although inductive and deductive reasoning are used in qualitative and quantitative research, it is important to stress the different roles of induction and deduction when models are applied to cases. A variable-based approach implies to draw conclusions about cases by means of logical deduction; a case-based approach implies to draw conclusions about cases by means of inductive reasoning. In the following, we build on this distinction to differentiate between qualitative (bottom-up) and quantitative (top-down) strategies of generalization.

Generalization and the Problem of Replication

We will now extend the formal analysis of quantitative and qualitative approaches to the question of generalization and replicability of empirical findings. For this sake, we have to introduce some concepts of formal logic. Formal logic is concerned with the validity of arguments. It provides conditions to evaluate whether certain sentences (conclusions) can be derived from other sentences (premises). In this context, a theory is nothing but a set of sentences (also called axioms). Formal logic provides tools to derive new sentences that must be true, given the axioms are true (Smith, 2020 ). These derived sentences are called theorems or, in the context of empirical science, predictions or hypotheses . On the syntactic level, the rules of logic only state how to evaluate the truth of a sentence relative to its premises. Whether or not sentences are actually true, is formally specified by logical semantics.

On the semantic level, formal logic is intrinsically linked to set-theory. For example, a logical statement like “all dogs are mammals,” is true if and only if the set of dogs is a subset of the set of mammals. Similarly, the sentence “all chatting students doodle” is true if and only if the set of chatting students is a subset of the set of doodling students (compare Figure 3 ). Whereas, the first sentence is analytically true due to the way we define the words “dog” and “mammal,” the latter can be either true or false, depending on the relational structure we actually observe. We can thus interpret an empirical relational structure as the truth criterion of a scientific theory. From a logical point of view, this corresponds to the semantics of a theory. As shown above, variable-based and case-based models both give a formal representation of the same kinds of empirical structures. Accordingly, both types of models can be stated as formal theories. In the variable-based approach, this corresponds to a set of scientific laws that are quantified over the members of an abstract population (these are the axioms of the theory). In the case-based approach, this corresponds to a set of abstract existential statements about a specific class of individuals.

In contrast to mathematical axiom systems, empirical theories are usually not considered to be necessarily true. This means that even if we find no evidence against a theory, it is still possible that it is actually wrong. We may know that a theory is valid in some contexts, yet it may fail when applied to a new set of behaviors (e.g., if we use a different instrumentation to measure a variable) or a new population (e.g., if we draw a new sample).

From a logical perspective, the possibility that a theory may turn out to be false stems from the problem of contingency . A statement is contingent, if it is both, possibly true and possibly false. Formally, we introduce two modal operators: □ to designate logical necessity, and ◇ to designate logical possibility. Semantically, these operators are very similar to the existential quantifier, ∃, and the universal quantifier, ∀. Whereas ∃ and ∀ refer to the individual objects within one relational structure, the modal operators □ and ◇ range over so-called possible worlds : a statement is possibly true, if and only if it is true in at least one accessible possible world, and a statement is necessarily true if and only if it is true in every accessible possible world (Hughes and Cresswell, 1996 ). Logically, possible worlds are mathematical abstractions, each consisting of a relational structure. Taken together, the relational structures of all accessible possible worlds constitute the formal semantics of necessity, possibility and contingency. 7

In the context of an empirical theory, each possible world may be identified with an empirical relational structure like the above classroom example. Given the set of intended applications of a theory (the scope of the theory, one may say), we can now construct possible world semantics for an empirical theory: each intended application of the theory corresponds to a possible world. For example, a quantified sentence like “all chatting students doodle” may be true in one classroom and false in another one. In terms of possible worlds, this would correspond to a statement of contingency: “it is possible that all chatting students doodle in one classroom, and it is possible that they don't in another classroom.” Note that in the above expression, “all students” refers to the students in only one possible world, whereas “it is possible” refers to the fact that there is at least one possible world for each of the specified cases.

To apply these possible world semantics to quantitative research, let us reconsider how generalization to other cases works in variable-based models. Due to the syntactic structure of quantitative laws, we can deduce predictions for singular observations from an expression of the form ∀ i : y i = f ( x i ). Formally, the logical quantifier ∀ ranges only over the objects of the corresponding empirical relational structure (in our example this would refer to the students in the observed classroom). But what if we want to generalize beyond the empirical structure we actually observed? The standard procedure is to assume an infinitely large, abstract population from which a random sample is drawn. Given the truth of the theory, we can deduce predictions about what we may observe in the sample. Since usually we deal with probabilistic models, we can evaluate our theory by means of the conditional probability of the observations, given the theory holds. This concept of conditional probability is the foundation of statistical significance tests (Hogg et al., 2013 ), as well as Bayesian estimation (Watanabe, 2018 ). In terms of possible world semantics, the random sampling model implies that all possible worlds (i.e., all intended applications) can be conceived as empirical sub-structures from a greater population structure. For example, the empirical relational structure constituted by the observed behaviors in a classroom would be conceived as a sub-matrix of the population person × behavior matrix. It follows that, if a scientific law is true in the population, it will be true in all possible worlds, i.e., it will be necessarily true. Formally, this corresponds to an expression of the form

The statistical generalization model thus constitutes a top-down strategy for dealing with individual contexts that is analogous to the way variable-based models are applied to individual cases (compare Table 1 ). Consequently, if we apply a variable-based model to a new context and find out that it does not fit the data (i.e., there is a statistically significant deviation from the model predictions), we have reason to doubt the validity of the theory. This is what makes the problem of low replicability so important: we observe that the predictions are wrong in a new study; and because we apply a top-down strategy of generalization to contexts beyond the ones we observed, we see our whole theory at stake.

Qualitative research, on the contrary, follows a different strategy of generalization. Since case-based models are formulated by a set of context-specific existential sentences, there is no need for universal truth or necessity. In contrast to statistical generalization to other cases by means of random sampling from an abstract population, the usual strategy in case-based modeling is to employ a bottom-up strategy of generalization that is analogous to the way case-based models are applied to individual cases. Formally, this may be expressed by stating that the observed qualia exist in at least one possible world, i.e., the theory is possibly true:

This statement is analogous to the way we apply case-based models to individual cases (compare Table 1 ). Consequently, the set of intended applications of the theory does not follow from a sampling model, but from theoretical assumptions about which cases may be similar to the observed cases with respect to certain relevant characteristics. For example, if we observe that certain behaviors occur together in one classroom, following a bottom-up strategy of generalization, we will hypothesize why this might be the case. If we do not replicate this finding in another context, this does not question the model itself, since it was a context-specific theory all along. Instead, we will revise our hypothetical assumptions about why the new context is apparently less similar to the first one than we originally thought. Therefore, if an empirical finding does not replicate, we are more concerned about our understanding of the cases than about the validity of our theory.

Whereas statistical generalization provides us with a formal (and thus somehow more objective) apparatus to evaluate the universal validity of our theories, the bottom-up strategy forces us to think about the class of intended applications on theoretical grounds. This means that we have to ask: what are the boundary conditions of our theory? In the above classroom example, following a bottom-up strategy, we would build on our preliminary understanding of the cases in one context (e.g., a public school) to search for similar and contrasting cases in other contexts (e.g., a private school). We would then re-evaluate our theoretical description of the data and explore what makes cases similar or dissimilar with regard to our theory. This enables us to expand the class of intended applications alongside with the theory.

Of course, none of these strategies is superior per se . Nevertheless, they rely on different assumptions and may thus be more or less adequate in different contexts. The statistical strategy relies on the assumption of a universal population and invariant measurements. This means, we assume that (a) all samples are drawn from the same population and (b) all variables refer to the same behavioral classes. If these assumptions are true, statistical generalization is valid and therefore provides a valuable tool for the testing of empirical theories. The bottom-up strategy of generalization relies on the idea that contexts may be classified as being more or less similar based on characteristics that are not part of the model being evaluated. If such a similarity relation across contexts is feasible, the bottom-up strategy is valid, as well. Depending on the strategy of generalization, replication of empirical research serves two very different purposes. Following the (top-down) principle of generalization by deduction from scientific laws, replications are empirical tests of the theory itself, and failed replications question the theory on a fundamental level. Following the (bottom-up) principle of generalization by induction to similar contexts, replications are a means to explore the boundary conditions of a theory. Consequently, failed replications question the scope of the theory and help to shape the set of intended applications.

We have argued that quantitative and qualitative research are best understood by means of the structure of the employed models. Quantitative science mainly relies on variable-based models and usually employs a top-down strategy of generalization from an abstract population to individual cases. Qualitative science prefers case-based models and usually employs a bottom-up strategy of generalization. We further showed that failed replications have very different implications depending on the underlying strategy of generalization. Whereas in the top-down strategy, replications are used to test the universal validity of a model, in the bottom-up strategy, replications are used to explore the scope of a model. We will now address the implications of this analysis for psychological research with regard to the problem of replicability.

Modern day psychology almost exclusively follows a top-down strategy of generalization. Given the quantitative background of most psychological theories, this is hardly surprising. Following the general structure of variable-based models, the individual case is not the focus of the analysis. Instead, scientific laws are stated on the level of an abstract population. Therefore, when applying the theory to a new context, a statistical sampling model seems to be the natural consequence. However, this is not the only possible strategy. From a logical point of view, there is no reason to assume that a quantitative law like ∀ i : y i = f ( x i ) implies that the law is necessarily true, i.e.,: □(∀ i : y i = f ( x i )). Instead, one might just as well define the scope of the theory following an inductive strategy. 8 Formally, this would correspond to the assumption that the observed law is possibly true, i.e.,: ◇(∀ i : y i = f ( x i )). For example, we may discover a functional relation between “engagement” and “distraction” without referring to an abstract universal population of students. Instead, we may hypothesize under which conditions this functional relation may be valid and use these assumptions to inductively generalize to other cases.

If we take this seriously, this would require us to specify the intended applications of the theory: in which contexts do we expect the theory to hold? Or, equivalently, what are the boundary conditions of the theory? These boundary conditions may be specified either intensionally, i.e., by giving external criteria for contexts being similar enough to the ones already studied to expect a successful application of the theory. Or they may be specified extensionally, by enumerating the contexts where the theory has already been shown to be valid. These boundary conditions need not be restricted to the population we refer to, but include all kinds of contextual factors. Therefore, adopting a bottom-up strategy, we are forced to think about these factors and make them an integral part of our theories.

In fact, there is good reason to believe that bottom-up generalization may be more adequate in many psychological studies. Apart from the pitfalls associated with statistical generalization that have been extensively discussed in recent years (e.g., p-hacking, underpowered studies, publication bias), it is worth reflecting on whether the underlying assumptions are met in a particular context. For example, many samples used in experimental psychology are not randomly drawn from a large population, but are convenience samples. If we use statistical models with non-random samples, we have to assume that the observations vary as if drawn from a random sample. This may indeed be the case for randomized experiments, because all variation between the experimental conditions apart from the independent variable will be random due to the randomization procedure. In this case, a classical significance test may be regarded as an approximation to a randomization test (Edgington and Onghena, 2007 ). However, if we interpret a significance test as an approximate randomization test, we test not for generalization but for internal validity. Hence, even if we use statistical significance tests when assumptions about random sampling are violated, we still have to use a different strategy of generalization. This issue has been discussed in the context of small-N studies, where variable-based models are applied to very small samples, sometimes consisting of only one individual (Dugard et al., 2012 ). The bottom-up strategy of generalization that is employed by qualitative researchers, provides such an alternative.

Another important issue in this context is the question of measurement invariance. If we construct a variable-based model in one context, the variables refer to those behaviors that constitute the underlying empirical relational structure. For example, we may construct an abstract measure of “distraction” using the observed behaviors in a certain context. We will then use the term “distraction” as a theoretical term referring to the variable we have just constructed to represent the underlying empirical relational structure. Let us now imagine we apply this theory to a new context. Even if the individuals in our new context are part of the same population, we may still get into trouble if the observed behaviors differ from those used in the original study. How do we know whether these behaviors constitute the same variable? We have to ensure that in any new context, our measures are valid for the variables in our theory. Without a proper measurement model, this will be hard to achieve (Buntins et al., 2017 ). Again, we are faced with the necessity to think of the boundary conditions of our theories. In which contexts (i.e., for which sets of individuals and behaviors) do we expect our theory to work?

If we follow the rationale of inductive generalization, we can explore the boundary conditions of a theory with every new empirical study. We thus widen the scope of our theory by comparing successful applications in different contexts and unsuccessful applications in similar contexts. This may ultimately lead to a more general theory, maybe even one of universal scope. However, unless we have such a general theory, we might be better off, if we treat unsuccessful replications not as a sign of failure, but as a chance to learn.

Author Contributions

MB conceived the original idea and wrote the first draft of the paper. MS helped to further elaborate and scrutinize the arguments. All authors contributed to the final version of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Annette Scheunpflug for helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

1 A person × behavior matrix constitutes a very simple relational structure that is common in psychological research. This is why it is chosen here as a minimal example. However, more complex structures are possible, e.g., by relating individuals to behaviors over time, with individuals nested within groups etc. For a systematic overview, compare Coombs ( 1964 ).

2 This notion of empirical content applies only to deterministic models. The empirical content of a probabilistic model consists in the probability distribution over all possible empirical structures.

3 For example, neither the SAGE Handbook of qualitative data analysis edited by Flick ( 2014 ) nor the Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research edited by Leavy ( 2014 ) mention formal approaches to category formation.

4 Note also that the described structure is empirically richer than a nominal scale. Therefore, a reduction of qualitative category formation to be a special (and somehow trivial) kind of measurement is not adequate.

5 It is possible to extend this notion of empirical content to the probabilistic case (this would correspond to applying a latent class analysis). But, since qualitative research usually does not rely on formal algorithms (neither deterministic nor probabilistic), there is currently little practical use of such a concept.

6 We do not elaborate on abductive reasoning here, since, given an empirical relational structure, the concept can be applied to both types of models in the same way (Schurz, 2008 ). One could argue that the underlying relational structure is not given a priori but has to be constructed by the researcher and will itself be influenced by theoretical expectations. Therefore, abductive reasoning may be necessary to establish an empirical relational structure in the first place.

7 We shall not elaborate on the metaphysical meaning of possible worlds here, since we are only concerned with empirical theories [but see Tooley ( 1999 ), for an overview].

8 Of course, this also means that it would be equally reasonable to employ a top-down strategy of generalization using a case-based model by postulating that □(∃ i : XYZ i ). The implications for case-based models are certainly worth exploring, but lie beyond the scope of this article.

• Agresti A. (2013). Categorical Data Analysis, 3rd Edn. Wiley Series In Probability And Statistics . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Borsboom D. (2005). Measuring the Mind: Conceptual Issues in Contemporary Psychometrics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 10.1017/CBO9780511490026 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Braun V., Clarke V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology . Qual. Res. Psychol . 3 , 77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buntins M., Buntins K., Eggert F. (2017). Clarifying the concept of validity: from measurement to everyday language . Theory Psychol. 27 , 703–710. 10.1177/0959354317702256 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnap R. (1928). The Logical Structure of the World . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Coombs C. H. (1964). A Theory of Data . New York, NY: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Creswell J. W. (2015). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research . Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dugard P., File P., Todman J. B. (2012). Single-Case and Small-N Experimental Designs: A Practical Guide to Randomization Tests 2nd Edn . New York, NY: Routledge; 10.4324/9780203180938 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Edgington E., Onghena P. (2007). Randomization Tests, 4th Edn. Statistics. Hoboken, NJ: CRC Press; 10.1201/9781420011814 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Everett J. A. C., Earp B. D. (2015). A tragedy of the (academic) commons: interpreting the replication crisis in psychology as a social dilemma for early-career researchers . Front. Psychol . 6 :1152. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01152 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flick U. (Ed.). (2014). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis . London: Sage; 10.4135/9781446282243 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Freeman M., Demarrais K., Preissle J., Roulston K., St. Pierre E. A. (2007). Standards of evidence in qualitative research: an incitement to discourse . Educ. Res. 36 , 25–32. 10.3102/0013189X06298009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ganter B. (2010). Two basic algorithms in concept analysis , in Lecture Notes In Computer Science. Formal Concept Analysis, Vol. 5986 , eds Hutchison D., Kanade T., Kittler J., Kleinberg J. M., Mattern F., Mitchell J. C., et al. (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; ), 312–340. 10.1007/978-3-642-11928-6_22 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ganter B., Wille R. (1999). Formal Concept Analysis . Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 10.1007/978-3-642-59830-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guttman L. (1944). A basis for scaling qualitative data . Am. Sociol. Rev . 9 :139 10.2307/2086306 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hogg R. V., Mckean J. W., Craig A. T. (2013). Introduction to Mathematical Statistics, 7th Edn . Boston, MA: Pearson. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hughes G. E., Cresswell M. J. (1996). A New Introduction To Modal Logic . London; New York, NY: Routledge; 10.4324/9780203290644 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klein R. A., Ratliff K. A., Vianello M., Adams R. B., Bahník Š., Bernstein M. J., et al. (2014). Investigating variation in replicability . Soc. Psychol. 45 , 142–152. 10.1027/1864-9335/a000178 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krantz D. H., Luce D., Suppes P., Tversky A. (1971). Foundations of Measurement Volume I: Additive And Polynomial Representations . New York, NY; London: Academic Press; 10.1016/B978-0-12-425401-5.50011-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Leavy P. (2014). The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research . New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199811755.001.0001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maxwell S. E., Lau M. Y., Howard G. S. (2015). Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? what does “failure to replicate” really mean? Am. Psychol. 70 , 487–498. 10.1037/a0039400 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miles M. B., Huberman A. M., Saldaña J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, 3rd Edn . Los Angeles, CA; London; New Delhi; Singapore; Washington, DC: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Open Science, Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science . Science 349 :Aac4716. 10.1126/science.aac4716 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Popper K. (1935). Logik Der Forschung . Wien: Springer; 10.1007/978-3-7091-4177-9 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ragin C. (1987). The Comparative Method : Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies . Berkeley, CA: University Of California Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rihoux B., Ragin C. (2009). Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (Qca) And Related Techniques . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 10.4135/9781452226569 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Scheunpflug A., Krogull S., Franz J. (2016). Understanding learning in world society: qualitative reconstructive research in global learning and learning for sustainability . Int. Journal Dev. Educ. Glob. Learn. 7 , 6–23. 10.18546/IJDEGL.07.3.02 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schurz G. (2008). Patterns of abduction . Synthese 164 , 201–234. 10.1007/s11229-007-9223-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shrout P. E., Rodgers J. L. (2018). Psychology, science, and knowledge construction: broadening perspectives from the replication crisis . Annu. Rev. Psychol . 69 , 487–510. 10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011845 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith P. (2020). An Introduction To Formal Logic . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108328999 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Suppes P., Krantz D. H., Luce D., Tversky A. (1971). Foundations of Measurement Volume II: Geometrical, Threshold, and Probabilistic Representations . New York, NY; London: Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tooley M. (Ed.). (1999). Necessity and Possibility. The Metaphysics of Modality . New York, NY; London: Garland Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Trafimow D. (2018). An a priori solution to the replication crisis . Philos. Psychol . 31 , 1188–1214. 10.1080/09515089.2018.1490707 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Watanabe S. (2018). Mathematical Foundations of Bayesian Statistics. CRC Monographs On Statistics And Applied Probability . Boca Raton, FL: Chapman And Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiggins B. J., Chrisopherson C. D. (2019). The replication crisis in psychology: an overview for theoretical and philosophical psychology . J. Theor. Philos. Psychol. 39 , 202–217. 10.1037/teo0000137 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

• Market Research
• Sustainable Businesses
• Supply Chain Management
• Operations & Technology
• Business Law & Taxes
• Business Insurance
• Business Finance
• Becoming an Owner
• University of Washington
• San Jose State University
• University of California, San Diego

Quantitative research is the process of gathering observable data to answer a research question using statistical , computational, or mathematical techniques. It is often seen as more accurate or valuable than qualitative research, which focuses on gathering non-numerical data.

Qualitative research looks at opinions, concepts, characteristics, and descriptions. Quantitative research looks at measurable, numerical relationships. Both kinds of research have their advantages and disadvantages .

How Can Businesses Use Quantitative Research?

Research benefits small businesses by helping you make informed decisions. Conducting market research should be a regular part of any business plan, allowing you to grow efficiently and make good use of your available resources.

Businesses can use research to:

• Learn more about customer opinions and buying patterns .
• Test new products and services before launching them.
• Make decisions about product packaging, branding, and other visual elements.
• Understand patterns in your market or industry.
• Analyze the behavior of your competitors.
• Identify the best use of your marketing resources.
• Compare how successful different promotions will be before scaling up.
• Decide on where new locations or stores should be.

When deciding what type of research will benefit your business, it is important to consider the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research.

Advantages of Quantitative Research

The use of statistical analysis and hard numbers found in quantitative research has distinct advantages in the research process.

• Can be tested and checked. Quantitative research requires careful experimental design and the ability for anyone to replicate both the test and the results. This makes the data you gather more reliable and less open to argument.
• Straightforward analysis. When you collect quantitative data, the type of results will tell you which statistical tests are appropriate to use. As a result, interpreting your data and presenting those findings is straightforward and less open to error and subjectivity.
• Prestige. Research that involves complex statistics and data analysis is considered valuable and impressive because many people don't understand the mathematics involved. Quantitative research is associated with technical advancements like computer modeling, stock selection, portfolio evaluation, and other data-based business decisions. The association of prestige and value with quantitative research can reflect well on your small business.

Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

However, the focus on numbers found in quantitative research can also be limiting, leading to several disadvantages.

• False focus on numbers. Quantitative research can be limited in its pursuit of concrete, statistical relationships, which can lead to researchers overlooking broader themes and relationships. By focusing solely on numbers, you run the risk of missing surprising or big-picture information that can benefit your business.
• Difficulty setting up a research model. When you conduct quantitative research, you need to carefully develop a hypothesis and set up a model for collecting and analyzing data. Any errors in your set up, bias on the part of the researcher, or mistakes in execution can invalidate all your results. Even coming up with a hypothesis can be subjective, especially if you have a specific question that you already know you want to prove or disprove.
• Can be misleading. Many people assume that because quantitative research is based on statistics it is more credible or scientific than observational, qualitative research. However, both kinds of research can be subjective and misleading. The opinions and biases of a researcher are just as likely to impact quantitative approaches to information gathering. In fact, the impact of this bias occurs earlier in the process of quantitative research than it does in qualitative research.

Tips for Conducting Quantitative Research

If you decide to conduct quantitative research for your small business,

• Work with a professional. Professional market researchers and data analysts are trained in how to conduct survey research and run statistical models. To ensure that your research is well-designed and your results are accurate, work with a professional. If you can't afford to hire researchers for the length of the project, look for someone who can help just with set-up or analysis.
• Have a clear research question. To save time and resources, have a clear idea of what question you want answered before you begin researching. You can find areas that need research by looking at your marketing plan and identifying where you struggle to make an informed decision.
• Don't be afraid to change your model. Research is a process, and needing to change direction or start over doesn't mean you have failed or done something wrong. Often, successful research will raise new questions. Keep track of those new questions so that you can continue answering them as you move forward.
• Combine quantitative and qualitative research. Successfully running a small business relies on understanding people, and the behavior of your customers and competitors cannot be reduced to numbers. As you conduct quantitative research, try to collect qualitative data as well. This can take the form of open-ended questions on surveys, panel discussions, or even just keeping track of opinions or concerns that customers share. By combining the two types of research, you'll end up with the best possible picture of how your business can grow and succeed within its market.
• Deductive and Inductive Market Research
• Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods
• Establishing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research
• Market Research 101: Develop the Research Plan
• Surveys Research: Confidence Intervals and Levels
• What Is Market Research?
• How to Conduct Market Research Surveys
• Starting Market Research: Identify Your Marketing Research Problem
• Developing the Overall Research Plan
• Qualitative or Quantitative? How to Choose a Method for Your Survey
• How to Analyze Interview Data and Survey Responses
• How to Use a Codebook for Qualitative Research Analysis
• How to Analyze Small Business Qualitative Market Research
• How the SBA Can Help Your Small Business
• How to Conduct a Delphi Survey
• Best Jobs for Graduates With a Mathematics Degree

Institutvert.org

quantitative research advantages and disadvantages

When it comes to conducting research, there are various methods one can employ. One of the most widely used approaches is quantitative research. This method involves the collection and analysis of numerical data to answer research questions. While quantitative research offers several advantages, it also comes with a set of disadvantages that researchers should consider. In this article, we will explore the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research and discuss why understanding them is important.

Advantages of Quantitative Research

One of the key advantages of quantitative research is its objectivity. By focusing on numerical data, researchers can minimize bias in their analysis. This makes quantitative research highly reliable and allows for more accurate comparisons between different groups or variables.

Another advantage of quantitative research is its potential for generalizability. By using large sample sizes, researchers can draw conclusions that are more likely to hold true for the larger population. This is particularly useful when studying social or psychological phenomena that affect a wide range of individuals.

Additionally, the replicability of quantitative research is worth mentioning. By using standardized procedures and statistical analyses, researchers can easily replicate studies and assess their validity. This not only helps in verifying the results but also contributes to the overall credibility of the research.

Furthermore, quantitative research enables the application of advanced statistical techniques. This allows researchers to uncover patterns, relationships, and trends in their data that may not be readily apparent. These statistical analyses provide a deeper understanding of the research question and can lead to more robust and comprehensive findings.

Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

Despite its advantages, quantitative research also has some limitations that researchers should be aware of. One of the main disadvantages is the lack of contextual understanding. Since quantitative research relies on numerical measures, it may overlook the underlying factors or contexts that contribute to the observed outcomes. This can limit the depth of understanding.

Another disadvantage is the restrictions in question design. Quantitative research generally relies on structured questionnaires or surveys, which limit the types of questions that can be asked. As a result, important nuances or complexities may be overlooked, leading to a less comprehensive understanding of the research topic.

Data validity concerns are also a significant disadvantage of quantitative research. Self-reported measures, such as surveys, are prone to biases and inaccuracies. Participants may provide socially desirable responses or misinterpret the questions, affecting the reliability and validity of the data collected.

Lastly, quantitative research has a limited scope when it comes to exploring complex social, emotional, or cultural phenomena. These phenomena often involve subjective experiences that cannot be easily quantified. Qualitative methodologies, such as interviews or observations, are better suited for capturing the richness and depth of such phenomena.

Benefits of Knowing the Quantitative Research Advantages and Disadvantages

Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research is essential for researchers and practitioners alike. By knowing the strengths and weaknesses of this research approach, researchers can make informed decisions about the methodologies they adopt and the questions they ask. This knowledge can also guide the interpretation and communication of research findings, ensuring a more accurate representation of the data.

For practitioners, knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research is valuable in critically evaluating and synthesizing existing research. It helps them recognize the limitations and potential biases in studies, enabling them to make evidence-based decisions in their respective fields.

Overall, being aware of the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research promotes a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of research outcomes. It encourages researchers to consider alternative research approaches when necessary and highlights the importance of triangulating findings from different methodologies to gain a more holistic understanding of complex phenomena.

In conclusion, quantitative research offers several advantages, including objectivity, generalizability, replicability, and the application of advanced statistical techniques. However, it also has some disadvantages, such as the lack of contextual understanding, restrictions in question design, data validity concerns, and a limited scope for exploring certain phenomena. By understanding these advantages and disadvantages, researchers can make informed decisions, interpret findings accurately, and contribute to the development of robust research in their respective fields.

• quantitative and qualitative research advantages and disadvantages
• secondary research advantages and disadvantages
• total quality management advantages and disadvantages
• authoritative leadership advantages and disadvantages
• matrix organisation advantages and disadvantages
• mixed methods research advantages and disadvantages
• case study advantages and disadvantages

Advantages And Disadvantages of Quantitative and Qualitative Research

• Post author: Edeh Samuel Chukwuemeka ACMC
• Post published: April 19, 2023
• Post category: Scholarly Articles

Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative and Qualitative Research : The purpose of research is to enhance society by advancing knowledge through the development of scientific theories, concepts and ideas. The key aim of research is to have a detailed understanding of a subject matter which can be achieved by exploration, description and explanation.

Recommended: Characteristics of a good researcher

Table of Contents

Meaning of Quantitative Research Method

Quantitative research involves the gathering of information and collection of data in quantities and numbers. It involves the observative strategy of research and uses statistics, computational methods and mathematics in developing theories.

It is purely a scientific/experimental method and does not rely on opinions. Rather this form of research is heavily based on formulating theories about events or phenomena through quantification before reaching a conclusion.

An example of Quantitative research is conducting surveys to determine the approval ratings of students in a Public University regarding the increase of tuition fees. In this scenario, one can distribute paper questionnaires, online surveys and polls to collate the figure representing the number of students who are either in agreement or in disagreement of the increase of tuition fees.

Also see: Major reasons why women don’t participate in politics

Advantages of Quantitative Research

I. It allows you to reach an accurate conclusion no matter how large the subject matter is. Take for example the scenario above, if the number of students were 2000 in number and you want to do a research on the approval ratings annually. The approach makes it simplistic for the researcher to easily deduce the accurate conclusion no matter how fast the number of students grow.

ii. It is less time consuming since it is based on statistical analysis. Thus, researchers are not burdened by drawing out explanatory strategies to generate an outcome.

iii. Quantitative research does not focus on opinions but only on accurate data which is more reliable and concrete.

Also see: Advantages and Disadvantages of a rigid constitution

iv. The research approach keeps the personal information anonymous. It protects the identity of the information provider. It only focuses on collection of data and people with this knowledge of identity preservation give honest opinions.

v. The research does not require a study group to be observed on a frequent basis. The problem of monitoring the subject matter to provide adequate information is eliminated by adopting this research. There is no need for  face to face conversations or time consuming cross examinations to get the data the researcher needs.

Recommended: Most expensive Hospitals in the world currently

vi. Objectivity: The objectivity of quantitative research is one of its key benefits. The foundation of quantitative research is the utilization of numerical data, which is frequently considered to be more unbiased and trustworthy than qualitative data. Statistical methods make it simple to assess numerical data, and the results can be impartially understood and extrapolated to larger populations. This makes it possible for researchers to make accurate and trustworthy findings based on actual data.

Also see: How to become a successful business entrepreneur over night

Disadvantages of Quantitative research

I. As society grows, the opinions of people become so diversified and they are susceptible to the changes in the society when giving their opinions.

ii. There is no accurate generalisation of data the researcher received. In simpler words if for example, a researcher wants to know how many people are in support of secession in Nigeria. Qualitative research may show a large percentage in support of it but because there is no available option to revisit the data, the opinions could change in some time.

So it is an initial success but an eventual fail. Present circumstances may influence the opinions and ultimately the conclusion. It is the dynamic of society; As society evolves, so do the people’s perspectives and quantitative research does nit make provision for this dynamic.

iii. The cost of Quantitative research is relatively high. If you have ever conducted a physical or online survey which involves the distribution of questionnaires among targeted study groups, you will attest to the expensive nature of this research. Sometimes high profile firms and companies are involved which makes the research work more expensive.

Also see: Major barriers to effective communication

iv. Experienced researchers are usually uncertain about the eventual data: The purpose of research is to explore a subject matter and generate an accurate conclusion. What happens when the data collected do not represent the entire study group?

It becomes extremely difficult to reach a valid conclusion when the data gathered is not an accurate representation of everyone involved especially when it involves a large study group. This is one of the worries that concern expert researchers.

v. Reductionist: One of the main criticisms of quantitative research is that it can be reductionist in nature. Quantitative research often focuses on specific variables and measures, which may not capture the complexity and richness of human experiences.

It may overlook important nuances, context, and qualitative aspects of a phenomenon, leading to a limited understanding of the research topic.

Recommended: Characteristics of the constitution of South Africa

Meaning of Qualitative Research Method

This type of research involves investigating methodologies by collecting data where the researcher engages in open ended questions. This means that the researcher is more engaging in his questions and attempts to elicit the most positively accurate data from his targeted subject group.

Unlike Quantitative research, it does not quantify hypothesis by numbers or statistical measurements. Rather it has a more exploratory approach with the “ how ” and “ why ” which is more detailed than a “ yes ” or a “ no “. While Quantitative research deals with numerical figures, qualitative research deals more with words and meanings.

Also see: Differences between presidential and parliamentary system of government

Advantages of Qualitative Research

I . Due to the depth of qualitative research, subject matters can be examined on a larger scale in  greater detail.

ii . Qualitative Research has a more real feel as it deals with human experiences and observations. The researcher has a  more concrete foundation to gather accurate data. Take for instance, if there is a survey on the evaluation of academic performance in secondary schools.

A Qualitative researcher has an advantageous position in knowing the reason behind the increase or decline of academic performance by having long and stretched out conversations with the students to get a comprehensive data and accurate conclusion.

iii . The researcher can flow with the initial data by asking further questions in respect of the answers. This is not the case in other forms of research.

iv . Qualitative Research allows the researcher to provide a more generalised data notwithstanding the multiplicity of perspectives and opinions. For example if majority of the students are split concerning the reason for academic decline with half of them saying it is due to bad teaching while the other half attributes the decline to inadequate facilities, all these are different opinions which only a Qualitative researcher can accommodate to arrive at a definite conclusion.

Recommended: Salary of Medical doctors in USA 2023

v . The respondents to the researcher are authentic, unfiltered and creative with their answers which promises a more accurate data.

vi. Rich and Detailed Data: One of the main advantages of qualitative research is its ability to provide rich and detailed data that captures the complexity and nuances of human experiences. Qualitative data can provide in-depth insights into the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals, and can offer a holistic understanding of the research topic.

This can provide a deeper and more nuanced understanding of social phenomena and human behavior.

Recommended: How To Choose The Right Business To Start

Disadvantages of Qualitative Research

I . One of the challenges in this type of research is that the collected data is purely based on open ended discussions. This makes the researcher the controlling figure as the interviewer which results to gathering of data which he may find useful or not, necessary or unnecessary because of its highly subjective nature.

ii . The researcher may become too opinionated in the subject matter which may influence his recollection of data. Hence there is likely to be error in gathering the right information.

iii . Qualitative Research takes a lot of time and effort in execution. The means of eliciting information from a subject group and analysing the data received, filtering the relevant ones from the irrelevant ones are tedious processes. This is more complex when large companies are involved in the research.

Also see: Best art courses to study in the university

iv . There is the possibility of lost data in the process of gathering. Qualitative Research is more demanding and requires a more meticulous approach than quantitative research. It is an enormous responsibility which non experienced researchers may have difficulty to bear.

v. Researchers must be experienced and have detailed knowledge in the subject matter in order to attain the most accurate data. This requires a special skill set and the process of searching for those researchers that fit the right caliber is not only costly but equally difficult, depending on the subject matter.

Recommended: How To Choose A Name For Your Business

vi. Subjectivity and Bias: The subjectivity and potential for bias of qualitative research are two of its key complaints. The interpretation and analysis of data used in qualitative research are subject to the researcher’s own biases, viewpoints, and preconceived beliefs. Given that various researchers may interpret the same data in different ways, the subjective aspect of qualitative research can have an impact on the validity and trustworthiness of the conclusions.

Also see: How to become a successful lawyer

In conclusion, it is worthy to note that both Quantitative and Qualitative researches are equally beneficial in the field of gathering data or information. Whether it is mathematically based or more of open ended discussions, it is imperative for a researcher to evaluate the essence of the research, the size of the target group or subject matter and the expenses involved. All these factors will guide a diligent researcher in determining the most trustworthy approach in research.

Edeh Samuel Chukwuemeka, ACMC, is a lawyer and a certified mediator/conciliator in Nigeria. He is also a developer with knowledge in various programming languages. Samuel is determined to leverage his skills in technology, SEO, and legal practice to revolutionize the legal profession worldwide by creating web and mobile applications that simplify legal research. Sam is also passionate about educating and providing valuable information to people.

10 Advantages & Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

Quantitative research is a powerful tool for those looking to gather empirical data about their topic of study. Using statistical models and math, researchers evaluate their hypothesis.

Quantitative Research

When researchers look at gathering data, there are two types of testing methods they can use: quantitative research, or qualitative research. Quantitative research looks to capture real, measurable data in the form of numbers and figures; whereas qualitative research is concerned with recording opinion data, customer characteristics, and other non-numerical information.

Quantitative research is a powerful tool for those looking to gather empirical data about their topic of study. Using statistical models and math, researchers evaluate their hypothesis. An integral component of quantitative research - and truly, all research - is the careful and considered analysis of the resulting data points.

There are several key advantages and disadvantages to conducting quantitative research that should be considered when deciding which type of testing best fits the occasion.

5 Advantages of Quantitative Research

• Quantitative research is concerned with facts & verifiable information.

Quantitative research is primarily designed to capture numerical data - often for the purpose of studying a fact or phenomenon in their population. This kind of research activity is very helpful for producing data points when looking at a particular group - like a customer demographic. All of this helps us to better identify the key roots of certain customer behaviors. 

Businesses who research their customers intimately often outperform their competitors. Knowing the reasons why a customer makes a particular purchasing decision makes it easier for companies to address issues in their audiences. Data analysis of this kind can be used for a wide range of applications, even outside the world of commerce. 

• Quantitative research can be done anonymously. 

Unlike qualitative research questions - which often ask participants to divulge personal and sometimes sensitive information - quantitative research does not require participants to be named or identified. As long as those conducting the testing are able to independently verify that the participants fit the necessary profile for the test, then more identifying information is unnecessary. 

• Quantitative research processes don't need to be directly observed.

Whereas qualitative research demands close attention be paid to the process of data collection, quantitative research data can be collected passively. Surveys, polls, and other forms of asynchronous data collection generate data points over a defined period of time, freeing up researchers to focus on more important activities. 

• Quantitative research is faster than other methods.

Quantitative research can capture vast amounts of data far quicker than other research activities. The ability to work in real-time allows analysts to immediately begin incorporating new insights and changes into their work - dramatically reducing the turn-around time of their projects. Less delays and a larger sample size ensures you will have a far easier go of managing your data collection process.

• Quantitative research is verifiable and can be used to duplicate results.

The careful and exact way in which quantitative tests must be designed enables other researchers to duplicate the methodology. In order to verify the integrity of any experimental conclusion, others must be able to replicate the study on their own. Independently verifying data is how the scientific community creates precedent and establishes trust in their findings.

5 Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

• Limited to numbers and figures.

Quantitative research is an incredibly precise tool in the way that it only gathers cold hard figures. This double edged sword leaves the quantitative method unable to deal with questions that require specific feedback, and often lacks a human element. For questions like, “What sorts of emotions does our advertisement evoke in our test audiences?” or “Why do customers prefer our product over the competing brand?”, using the quantitative research method will not derive a meaningful answer.

• Testing models are more difficult to create.

Creating a quantitative research model requires careful attention to be paid to your design. From the hypothesis to the testing methods and the analysis that comes after, there are several moving parts that must be brought into alignment in order for your test to succeed. Even one unintentional error can invalidate your results, and send your team back to the drawing board to start all over again.

• Tests can be intentionally manipulative.  

Bad actors looking to push an agenda can sometimes create qualitative tests that are faulty, and designed to support a particular end result. Apolitical facts and figures can be turned political when given a limited context. You can imagine an example in which a politician devises a poll with answers that are designed to give him a favorable outcome - no matter what respondents pick.

• Results are open to subjective interpretation.

Whether due to researchers' bias or simple accident, research data can be manipulated in order to give a subjective result. When numbers are not given their full context, or were gathered in an incorrect or misleading way, the results that follow can not be correctly interpreted. Bias, opinion, and simple mistakes all work to inhibit the experimental process - and must be taken into account when designing your tests. 

• More expensive than other forms of testing. 

Quantitative research often seeks to gather large quantities of data points. While this is beneficial for the purposes of testing, the research does not come free. The grander the scope of your test and the more thorough you are in it’s methodology, the more likely it is that you will be spending a sizable portion of your marketing expenses on research alone. Polling and surveying, while affordable means of gathering quantitative data, can not always generate the kind of quality results a research project necessitates. 

Key Takeaways 

Numerical data is a vital component of almost any research project. Quantitative data can provide meaningful insight into qualitative concerns. Focusing on the facts and figures enables researchers to duplicate tests later on, and create their own data sets.

To streamline your quantitative research process:

Have a plan. Tackling your research project with a clear and focused strategy will allow you to better address any errors or hiccups that might otherwise inhibit your testing. 

Define your audience. Create a clear picture of your target audience before you design your test. Understanding who you want to test beforehand gives you the ability to choose which methodology is going to be the right fit for them. 

Test, test, and test again. Verifying your results through repeated and thorough testing builds confidence in your decision making. It’s not only smart research practice - it’s good business.

About Author

Send Your First Survey Today!

Set up and begin receiving results within minutes. Sign up for free, no contract required.

Helpfull is the easiest way to get feedback from thousands of people in minutes. Our online focus group platform provides a pool of qualified panelists to give you their real detailed opinions helping you make better, more informed decisions.

REVIEW article

On the advantages and disadvantages of choice: future research directions in choice overload and its moderators.

• 1 Department of Political Science and International Relations (DEMS), University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
• 2 Atkinson Graduate School of Management, Willamette University, Salem, OR, United States
• 3 Department of Psychology, Educational Science and Human Movement, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy

Researchers investigating the psychological effects of choice have provided extensive empirical evidence that having choice comes with many advantages, including better performance, more motivation, and greater life satisfaction and disadvantages, such as avoidance of decisions and regret. When the decision task difficulty exceeds the natural cognitive resources of human mind, the possibility to choose becomes more a source of unhappiness and dissatisfaction than an opportunity for a greater well-being, a phenomenon referred to as choice overload. More recently, internal and external moderators that impact when choice overload occurs have been identified. This paper reviews seminal research on the advantages and disadvantages of choice and provides a systematic qualitative review of the research examining moderators of choice overload, laying out multiple critical paths forward for needed research in this area. We organize this literature review using two categories of moderators: the choice environment or context of the decision as well as the decision-maker characteristics.

Introduction

The current marketing orientation adopted by many organizations is to offer a wide range of options that differ in only minor ways. For example, in a common western grocery store contains 285 types of cookies, 120 different pasta sauces, 175 salad-dressing, and 275 types of cereal ( Botti and Iyengar, 2006 ). However, research in psychology and consumer behavior has demonstrated that when the number of alternatives to choose from becomes excessive (or superior to the decision-makers’ cognitive resources), choice is mostly a disadvantage to both the seller and the buyer. This phenomenon has been called choice overload and it refers to a variety of negative consequences stemming from having too many choices, including increased choice deferral, switching likelihood, or decision regret, as well as decreased choice satisfaction and confidence (e.g., Chernev et al., 2015 ). Choice overload has been replicated in numerous fields and laboratory settings, with different items (e.g., jellybeans, pens, coffee, chocolates, etc.), actions (reading, completing projects, and writing essays), and populations (e.g., Chernev, 2003 ; Iyengar et al., 2004 ; Schwartz, 2004 ; Shah and Wolford, 2007 ; Mogilner et al., 2008 ; Fasolo et al., 2009 ; Misuraca and Teuscher, 2013 ; Misuraca and Faraci, 2021 ; Misuraca et al., 2022 ; see also Misuraca, 2013 ). Over time, we have gained insight into numerous moderators of the choice overload phenomena, including aspects of the context or choice environment as well as the individual characteristics of the decision-maker (for a detailed review see Misuraca et al., 2020 ).

The goal of this review is to summarize important research findings that drive our current understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of choice, focusing on the growing body of research investigating moderators of choice overload. Following a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of choice, we review the existing empirical literature examining moderators of choice overload. We organize this literature review using two categories of moderators: the choice environment or context of the decision as well as the decision-maker characteristics. Finally, based on this systematic review of research, we propose a variety of future research directions for choice overload investigators, ranging from exploring underlying mechanisms of choice overload moderators to broadening the area of investigation to include a robust variety of decision-making scenarios.

Theoretical background

The advantages of choice.

Decades of research in psychology have demonstrated the many advantages of choice. Indeed, increased choice options are associated with increase intrinsic motivation ( Deci, 1975 ; Deci et al., 1981 ; Deci and Ryan, 1985 ), improved task performance ( Rotter, 1966 ), enhanced life satisfaction ( Langer and Rodin, 1976 ), and improved well-being ( Taylor and Brown, 1988 ). Increased choice options also have the potential to satisfy heterogeneous preferences and produce greater utility ( Lancaster, 1990 ). Likewise, economic research has demonstrated that larger assortments provide a higher chance to find an option that perfectly matches the individual preferences ( Baumol and Ide, 1956 ). In other words, with larger assortments it is easier to find what a decision-maker wants.

The impact of increased choice options extends into learning, internal motivation, and performance. Zuckerman et al. (1978) asked college students to solve puzzles. Half of the participants could choose the puzzle they would solve from six options. For the other half of participants, instead, the puzzle was imposed by the researchers. It was found that the group free to choose the puzzle was more motivated, more engaged and exhibited better performance than the group that could not choose the puzzle to solve. In similar research, Schraw et al. (1998) asked college students to read a book. Participants were assigned to either a choice condition or a non-choice condition. In the first one, they were free to choose the book to read, whereas in the second condition the books to read were externally imposed, according to a yoked procedure. Results demonstrated the group that was free to make decisions was more motivated to read, more engaged, and more satisfied compared to the group that was not allowed to choose the book to read ( Schraw et al., 1998 ).

These effects remain consistent with children and when choice options are constrained to incidental aspects of the learning context. In the study by Cordova and Lepper (1996) , elementary school children played a computer game designed to teach arithmetic and problem-solving skills. One group could make decisions about incidental aspects of the learning context, including which spaceship was used and its name, whereas another group could not make any choice (all the choices about the game’s features were externally imposed by the experimenters). The results demonstrated that the first group was more motivated to play the game, more engaged in the task, learned more of the arithmetical concepts involved in the game, and preferred to solve more difficult tasks compared to the second group.

Extending benefits of choice into health consequences, Langer and Rodin (1976) examined the impact that choice made in nursing home patients. In this context, it was observed that giving patients the possibility to make decisions about apparently irrelevant aspects of their life (e.g., at what time to watch a movie; how to dispose the furniture in their bedrooms, etc.), increased psychological and physiological well-being. The lack of choice resulted, instead, in a state of learned helplessness, as well as deterioration of physiological and psychological functions.

The above studies lead to the conclusion that choice has important advantages over no choice and, to some extent, limited choice options. It seems that providing more choice options is an improvement – it will be more motivating, more satisfying, and yield greater well-being. In line with this conclusion, the current orientation in marketing is to offer a huge variety of products that differ only in small details (e.g., Botti and Iyengar, 2006 ). However, research in psychology and consumer behavior demonstrated that when the number of alternatives to choose from exceeds the decision-makers’ cognitive resources, choice can become a disadvantage.

The disadvantages of choice

A famous field study conducted by Iyengar and Lepper (2000) in a Californian supermarket demonstrated that too much choice decreases customers’ motivation to buy as well as their post-choice satisfaction. Tasting booths were set up in two different areas of the supermarket, one of which displayed 6 different jars of jam while the other displayed 24 options, with customers free to taste any of the different flavors of jam. As expected, the larger assortment attracted more passers-by compared to the smaller assortment; Indeed, 60% of passers-by stopped at the table displaying 24 different options, whereas only 40% of the passers-by stopped at the table displaying the small variety of 6 jams. This finding was expected given that more choice options are appealing. However, out of the 60% of passers-by who stopped at the table with more choices, only 3% of them decided to buy jam. Conversely, 30% of the consumers who stopped at the table with only 6 jars of jam decided to purchase at least one jar. Additionally, these customers expressed a higher level of satisfaction with their choices, compared to those who purchased a jar of jam from the larger assortment. In other words, it seems that too much choice is at the beginning more appealing (attracts more customers), but it decreases the motivation to choose and the post-choice satisfaction.

This classic and seminal example of choice overload was quickly followed by many replications that expanded the findings from simple purchasing decisions into other realms of life. For example, Iyengar and Lepper (2000) , asked college students to write an essay. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the following two experimental conditions: limited-choice condition, in which they could choose from a list of six topics for the essay, and extensive-choice condition, in which they could choose from a list of 30 different topics for the essay. Results showed that a higher percentage of college students (74%) turned in the essay in the first condition compared to the second condition (60%). Moreover, the essays written by the students in the limited-choice conditions were evaluated as being higher quality compared to the essays written by the students in the extensive choice condition. In a separate study, college students were asked to choose one chocolate from two randomly assigned choice conditions with either 6 or 30 different chocolates. Those participants in the limited choice condition reporting being more satisfied with their choice and more willing to purchase chocolates at the end of the experiment, compared to participants who chose from the larger assortment ( Iyengar and Lepper, 2000 ).

In the field of financial decision-making, Iyengar et al. (2004) analyzed 800,000 employees’ decisions about their participation in 401(k) plans that offered from a minimum of 2 to a maximum of 59 different fund options. The researchers observed that as the fund options increased, the participation rate decreased. Specifically, plans offering less than 10 options had the highest participation rate, whereas plans offering 59 options had the lowest participation rate.

The negative consequences of having too much choice driven by cognitive limitations. Simon (1957) noted that decision-makers have a bounded rationality. In other words, the human mind cannot process an unlimited amount of information. Individuals’ working memory has a span of about 7 (plus or minus two) items ( Miller, 1956 ), which means that of all the options to choose from, individuals can mentally process only about 7 alternatives at a time. Because of these cognitive limitations, when the number of choices becomes too high, the comparison of all the available items becomes cognitively unmanageable and, consequently, decision-makers feel overwhelmed, confused, less motivated to choose and less satisfied (e.g., Iyengar and Lepper, 2000 ). However, a more recent meta-analytic work [ Chernev et al., 2015 : see also Misuraca et al. (2020) ] has shown that choice overload occurs only under certain conditions. Many moderators that mitigate the phenomenon have been identified by researchers in psychology and consumer behavior (e.g., Mogilner et al., 2008 ; Misuraca et al., 2016a ). In the next sections, we describe our review methodology and provide a detailed discussion of the main external and internal moderators of choice overload.

Literature search and inclusion criteria

Our investigation consisted of a literature review of peer-reviewed empirical research examining moderators of choice overload. We took several steps to locate and identify eligible studies. First, we sought to establish a list of moderators examined in the choice overload literature. For this, we referenced reviews conducted by Chernev et al. (2015) , McShane and Böckenholt (2017) , as well as Misuraca et al. (2020) and reviewed the references sections of the identified articles to locate additional studies. Using the list of moderators generated from this examination, we conducted a literature search using PsycInfo (Psychological Abstracts), EBSCO and Google Scholar. This search included such specific terms such as choice set complexity, visual preference heuristic, and choice preference uncertainty, as well as broad searches for ‘choice overload’ and ‘moderator’.

We used several inclusion criteria to select relevant articles. First, the article had to note that it was examining the choice overload phenomena. Studies examining other theories and/or related variables were excluded. Second, to ensure that we were including high-quality research methods that have been evaluated by scholars, only peer-reviewed journal articles were included. Third, the article had to include primary empirical data (qualitative or quantitative). Thus, studies that were conceptual in nature were excluded. This process yielded 49 articles for the subsequent review.

Moderators of choice overload

Choice environment and context.

Regarding external moderators of choice overload, several aspects about the choice environment become increasingly relevant. Specifically, these include the perceptual attributes of the information, complexity of the set of options, decision task difficulty, as well as the presence of brand names.

Perceptual characteristics

As Miller (1956) noted, humans have “channel capacity” for information processing and these differ for divergent stimuli: for taste, we have a capacity to accommodate four; for tones, the capacity increased to six; and for visual stimuli, we have the capacity for 10–15 items. Accordingly, perceptual attributes of choice options are an important moderator of choice overload, with visual presentation being one of the most important perceptual attributes ( Townsend and Kahn, 2014 ). The visual preference heuristic refers to the tendency to prefer a visual rather than verbal representation of choice options, regardless of assortment size ( Townsend and Kahn, 2014 ). However, despite this preference, visual presentations of large assortments lead to suboptimal decisions compared to verbal presentations, as visual presentations activate a less systematic decision-making approach ( Townsend and Kahn, 2014 ). Visual presentation of large choice sets is also associated with increased perceptions of complexity and likelihood of decisions deferral. Visual representations are particularly effective with small assortments, as they increase consumers’ perception of variety, improve the likelihood of making a choice, and reduce the time spent examining options ( Townsend and Kahn, 2014 ).

Choice set complexity

Choice set complexity refers to a wide range of aspects of a decision task that affect the value of the available choice options without influencing the structural characteristics of the decision problem ( Payne et al., 1993 ). Thus, choice set complexity does not influence aspects such as the number of options, number of attributes of each option, or format in which the information is presented. Rather, choice set complexity concerns factors such as the attractiveness of options, the presence of a dominant option, and the complementarity or alignability of the options.

Choice set complexity increases when the options include higher-quality, more attractive options ( Chernev and Hamilton, 2009 ). Indeed, when the variability in the relative attractiveness of the choice alternatives increases, the certainty about the choice and the satisfaction with the task increase ( Malhotra, 1982 ). Accordingly, when the number of attractive options increases, more choice options led to a decline in consumer satisfaction and likelihood of a decision being made, but satisfaction increases and decision deferral decreased when the number of unattractive options increases ( Dhar, 1997 ). This occurs when increased choice options make the weakness and strengths of attractive and unattractive options more salient ( Chan, 2015 ).

Similarly, the presence of a dominant option simplifies large choice sets and increased the preference for the chosen option; however, the opposite effect happens in small choice sets ( Chernev, 2003 ). Choice sets containing an ideal option have been associated with increased brain activity in the areas involved in reward and value processing as well as in the integration of costs and benefits (striatum and the anterior cingulate cortex; Reutskaja et al., 2018 ) which could explain why larger choice sets are not always associated with choice overload. As Misuraca et al. (2020 , p. 639) noted, “ the benefits of having an ideal item in the set might compensate for the costs of overwhelming set size in the bounded rational mind of humans . ”

Finally, choice set complexity is impacted by the alignability and complementarity of the attributes that differentiate the options ( Chernev et al., 2015 ). When unique attributes of options exist within a choice set, complexity and choice overload increase as the unique attributes make comparison more difficult and trade-offs more salient. Indeed, feature alignability and complementarity (meaning that the options have additive utility and need to be co-present to fully satisfy the decision-maker’s need) 1 have been associated with decision deferral ( Chernev, 2005 ; Gourville and Soman, 2005 ) and changes in satisfaction ( Griffin and Broniarczyk, 2010 ).

Decision task difficulty

Decision task difficulty refers to the structural characteristics of a decision problem; unlike choice set complexity, decision task difficulty does not influence the value of the choice options ( Payne et al., 1993 ). Decision task difficulty is influenced by the number of attributes used to describe available options, decision accountability, time constraints, and presentation format.

The number of attributes used to describe the available options within an assortment influences decision task difficulty and choice overload ( Hoch et al., 1999 ; Chernev, 2003 ; Greifeneder et al., 2010 ), such that choice overload increases with the number of dimensions upon which the options differ. With each additional dimension, decision-makers have another piece of information that must be attended to and evaluated. Along with increasing the cognitive complexity of the choice, additional dimensions likely increase the odds that each option is inferior to other options on one dimension or another (e.g., Chernev et al., 2015 ).

When individuals have decision accountability or are required to justify their choice of an assortment to others, they tend to prefer larger assortments; However, when individuals must justify their particular choice from an assortment to others, they tend to prefer smaller choice sets ( Ratner and Kahn, 2002 ; Chernev, 2006 ; Scheibehenne et al., 2009 ). Indeed, decision accountability is associated with decision deferral when choice sets are larger compared to smaller ( Gourville and Soman, 2005 ). Thus, decision accountability influences decision task difficulty differently depending on whether an individual is selecting an assortment or choosing an option from an assortment.

Time pressure or constraint is an important contextual factor for decision task difficulty, choice overload, and decision regret ( Payne et al., 1993 ). Time pressure affects the strategies that are used to make decisions as well as the quality of the decisions made. When confronted with time pressure, decision-makers tend to speed up information processing, which could be accomplished by limiting the amount of information that they process and use ( Payne et al., 1993 ; Pieters and Warlop, 1999 ; Reutskaja et al., 2011 ). Decision deferral becomes a more likely outcome, as is choosing at random and regretting the decision later ( Inbar et al., 2011 ).

The physical arrangement and presentation of options and information affect information perception, processing, and decision-making. This moderates the effect of choice overload because these aspects facilitate or inhibit decision-makers’ ability to process a greater information load (e.g., Chernev et al., 2015 ; Anderson and Misuraca, 2017 ). The location of options and structure of presented information allow the retrieval of information about the options, thus allowing choosers to distinguish and evaluate various options (e.g., Chandon et al., 2009 ). Specifically, organizing information into “chunks” facilitates information processing ( Miller, 1956 ) as well as the perception of greater variety in large choice sets ( Kahn and Wansink, 2004 ). Interestingly, these “chunks” do not have to be informative; Mogilner et al. (2008) found that choice overload was mitigated to the same extent when large choice sets were grouped into generic categories (i.e., A, B, etc.) as when the categories were meaningful descriptions of characteristics.

Beyond organization, the presentation order can facilitate or inhibit decision-makers cognitive processing ability. Levav et al. (2010) found that choice overload decreased and choice satisfaction increased when smaller choice sets were followed by larger choice sets, compared to the opposite order of presentation. When sets are highly varied, Huffman and Kahn (1998) found that decision-makers were more satisfied and willing to make a choice when information was presented about attributes (i.e., price and characteristics) rather than available alternatives (i.e., images of options). Finally, presenting information simultaneously, rather than sequentially, increases decision satisfaction ( Mogilner et al., 2013 ), likely due to decision-makers choosing among an available set rather than comparing each option to an imaged ideal option.

Brand names

The presence of brand names is an important moderator of choice overload. As recently demonstrated by researchers in psychology and consumer behavior, choice overload occurs only when options are not associated with brands, choice overload occurs when the same choice options are presented without any brand names ( Misuraca et al., 2019 , 2021a ). When choosing between 6 or 24 different mobile phones, choice overload did not occur in the condition in which phones were associated with a well-known brand (i.e., Apple, Samsung, Nokia, etc.), although it did occur when the same cell phones were displayed without information about their brand. These findings have been replicated with a population of adolescents ( Misuraca et al., 2021a ).

Decision-maker characteristics

Beyond the choice environment and context, individual differences in decision-maker characteristics are significant moderators of choice overload. Several critical characteristics include the decision goal as well as an individual’s preference uncertainty, affective state, decision style, and demographic variables such as age, gender, and cultural background (e.g., Misuraca et al., 2021a ).

Decision goal

A decision goal refers to the extent to which a decision-maker aims to minimize the cognitive resources spent making a decision ( Chernev, 2003 ). Decision goals have been associated with choice overload, with choice overload increasing along with choice set options, likely due to decision-makers unwillingness to make tradeoffs between various options. As a moderator of choice overload, there are several factors which impact the effect of decision goals, including decision intent (choosing or browsing) and decision focus (choosing an assortment or an option) ( Misuraca et al., 2020 ).

Decision intent varies between choosing, with the goal of making a decision among the available options, and browsing, with the goal of learning more about the options. Cognitive overload is more likely to occur than when decision makers’ goal is choosing compared to browsing. For choosing goals, decision-makers need to make trade-offs among the pros and cons of the options, something that demands more cognitive resources. Accordingly, decision-makers whose goal is browsing, rather than choosing, are less likely to experience cognitive overload when facing large assortments ( Chernev and Hamilton, 2009 ). Furthermore, when decision-makers have a goal of choosing, brain research reveals inverted-U-shaped function, with neither too much nor too little choice providing optimal cognitive net benefits ( Reutskaja et al., 2018 ).

Decision focus can target selecting an assortment or selecting an option from an assortment. When selecting an assortment, cognitive overload is less likely to occur, likely due to the lack of individual option evaluation and trade-offs ( Chernev et al., 2015 ). Thus, when choosing an assortment, decision-makers tend to prefer larger assortments that provide more variety. Conversely, decision-makers focused on choosing an option from an assortment report increased decision difficulty and tend to prefer smaller assortments ( Chernev, 2006 ). Decision overload is further moderated by the order of decision focus. Scheibehenne et al. (2010) found that when decision-makers first decide on an assortment, they are more likely to choose an option from that assortment, rather than an option from an assortment they did not first select.

Preference uncertainty

The degree to which decision-makers have preferences varies regarding comprehension and prioritization of the costs and benefits of the choice options. This is referred to as preference uncertainty ( Chernev, 2003 ). Preference uncertainty is influenced by decision-maker expertise and an articulated ideal option, which indicates well-defined preferences. When decision-makers have limited expertise, larger choice sets are associated with weaker preferences as well as increased choice deferral and choice overload compared to smaller choice sets. Conversely, high expertise decision-makers experience weaker preferences and increased choice deferral in the context of smaller choice sets compared to larger ( Mogilner et al., 2008 ; Morrin et al., 2012 ). Likewise, an articulated ideal option, which implies that the decision-maker has already engaged in trade-offs, is associated with reduced decision complexity. The effect is more pronounced in larger choice sets compared to smaller choice sets ( Chernev, 2003 ).

Positive affect

Positive affect tends to moderate the impact of choice overload on decision satisfaction. Indeed, Spassova and Isen (2013) found that decision-makers reporting positive affect did not report experiencing dissatisfaction when choosing from larger choice sets while those with neutral affect reported being more satisfied when choosing from smaller choice sets. This affect may be associated with the affect heuristic, or a cognitive shortcut that enables efficient decisions based on the immediate emotional response to a stimulus ( Slovic et al., 2007 ).

Decision-making tendencies

Satisfaction with extensive choice options may depend on whether one is a maximizer or a satisficer. Maximizing refers to the tendency to search for the best option. Maximizers approach decision tasks with the goal to find the absolute best ( Carmeci et al., 2009 ; Misuraca et al., 2015 , 2016b , 2021b ; Misuraca and Fasolo, 2018 ). To do that, they tend to process all the information available and try to compare all the possible options. Conversely, satisficers are decision-makers whose goal is to select an option that is good enough, rather than the best choice. To find such an option, satisficers evaluate a smaller range of options, and choose as soon as they find one alternative that surpasses their threshold of acceptability ( Schwartz, 2004 ). Given the different approach of maximizers and satisficers when choosing, it is easy to see why choice overload represents more of a problem for maximizers than for satisficers. If the number of choices exceeds the individuals’ cognitive resources, maximizers more than satisficers would feel overwhelmed, frustrated, and dissatisfied, because an evaluation of all the available options to select the best one is cognitively impossible.

Maximizers attracted considerable attention from researchers because of the paradoxical finding that even though they make objectively better decisions than satisficers, they report greater regret and dissatisfaction. Specifically, Iyengar et al. (2006) , analyzed the job search outcomes of college students during their final college year and found that maximizer students selected jobs with 20% higher salaries compared to satisficers, but they felt less satisfied and happy, as well as more stressed, frustrated, anxious, and regretful than students who were satisficers. The reasons for these negative feelings of maximizers lies in their tendency to believe that a better option is among those that they could not evaluate, given their time and cognitive limitations.

Choosing for others versus oneself

When decision-makers must make a choice for someone else, choice overload does not occur ( Polman, 2012 ). When making choices for others (about wines, ice-cream flavors, school courses, etc.), decision makers reported greater satisfaction when choosing from larger assortments rather than smaller assortments. However, when choosing for themselves, they reported higher satisfaction after choosing from smaller rather than larger assortments.

Demographics

Demographic variables such as gender, age, and cultural background moderate reactions concerning choice overload. Regarding gender, men and women may often employ different information-processing strategies, with women being more likely to attend to and use details than men (e.g., Meyers-Levy and Maheswaran, 1991 ). Gender differences also arise in desire for variety and satisfaction depending on choice type. While women were more satisfied with their choice of gift boxes regardless of assortment size, women become more selective than men when speed-dating with larger groups of speed daters compared to smaller groups ( Fisman et al., 2006 ).

Age moderates the choice overload experience such that, when choosing from an extensive array of options, adolescents and adults suffer similar negative consequences (i.e., greater difficulty and dissatisfaction), while children and seniors suffer fewer negative consequences (i.e., less difficulty and dissatisfaction than adolescents and adults) ( Misuraca et al., 2016a ). This could be associated with decision-making tendencies. Indeed, adults and adolescents tend to adopt maximizing approaches ( Furby and Beyth-Marom, 1992 ). This maximizing tendency aligns with their greater perceived difficulty and post-choice dissatisfaction when facing a high number of options ( Iyengar et al., 2006 ). Seniors tend to adopt a satisficing approach when making decisions ( Tanius et al., 2009 ), as well as become overconfident in their judgments ( Stankov and Crawford, 1996 ) and focused on positive information ( Mather and Carstensen, 2005 ). Taken together, these could explain why the negative consequences of too many choice options were milder among seniors. Finally, children tend to approach decisions in an intuitive manner and quickly develop strong preferences ( Schlottmann and Wilkening, 2011 ). This mitigates the negative consequences of choice overload for this age group.

Finally, decision-makers from different cultures have different preferences for variety (e.g., Iyengar, 2010 ). Eastern Europeans report greater satisfaction with larger choice sets than Western Europeans ( Reutskaja et al., 2022 ). Likewise, cultural differences in perception may impact how choice options affect decision-makers from Western and non-Western cultures (e.g., Miyamoto et al., 2006 ).

Future research directions

As researchers continue to investigate the choice overload phenomenon, future investigations can provide a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms that influence when and how individuals experience the negative impacts of choice overload as well as illuminate how this phenomenon can affect people in diverse contexts (such as hiring decisions, sports, social media platforms, streaming services, etc.).

For instance, the visual preference heuristic indicates, and subsequent research supports, the human tendency to prefer visual rather than verbal representations of choice options ( Townsend and Kahn, 2014 ). However, in Huffman and Kahn’s (1998) research, decision-makers preferred written information, such as characteristics of the sofa, rather than visual representations of alternatives. Future researchers can investigate the circumstances that underlie when individuals prefer detailed written or verbal information as opposed to visual images.

Furthermore, future researchers can examine the extent to which the mechanisms underlying the impact of chunking align with those underlying the effect of brand names. Research has supported that chunking information reduces choice overload, regardless of the sophistication of the categories ( Kahn and Wansink, 2004 ; Mogilner et al., 2008 ). The presence of a brand name has a seemingly similar effect ( Misuraca et al., 2019 , 2021a ). The extent to which the cognitive processes underlying these two areas of research the similar, as well as the ways in which they might differ, can provide valuable insights for researchers and practitioners.

More research is needed that considers the role of the specific culture and cultural values of the decision-maker on choice overload. Indeed, the traditional studies on the choice overload phenomenon mentioned above predominantly focused on western cultures, which are known for being individualistic cultures. Future research should explore whether choice overload replicates in collectivistic cultures, which value the importance of making personal decisions differently than individualist cultures. Additional cultural values, such as long-term or short-term time orientation, may also impact decision-makers and the extent to which they experience choice overload ( Hofstede and Minkov, 2010 ).

While future research that expands our understanding of the currently known and identified moderators of choice overload can critically inform our understanding of when and how this phenomenon occurs, there are many new and exciting directions into which researchers can expand.

For example, traditional research on choice overload focused on choice scenarios where decision-makers had to choose only one option out of either a small or a large assortment of options. This is clearly an important scenario, yet it represents only one of many scenarios that choice overload may impact. Future research could investigate when and how this phenomenon occurs in a wide variety of scenarios that are common in the real-world but currently neglected in classical studies on choice overload. These could include situations in which the individual can choose more than one option (e.g., more than one type of ice cream or cereal) (see Fasolo et al., 2024 ).

Historically, a significant amount of research on choice overload has focused on purchasing decisions. Some evidence also indicates that the phenomenon occurs in a variety of situations (e.g., online dating, career choices, retirement planning, travel and tourism, and education), potentially hindering decision-making processes and outcomes. Future research should further investigate how choice overload impacts individuals in a variety of untested situations. For instance, how might choice overload impact the hiring manager with a robust pool of qualified applicants? How would the occurrence of choice overload in a hiring situation impact the quality of the decision, making an optimal hire? Likewise, does choice overload play a role in procrastination? When confronted with an overwhelming number of task options, does choice overload play a role in decision deferral? It could be that similar cognitive processes underlie deferring a choice on a purchase and deferring a choice on a to-do list. Research is needed to understand how choice overload (and its moderators) may differ across these scenarios.

Finally, as society continues to adapt and develop, future research will be needed to evaluate the impact these technological and sociological changes have on individual decision-makers. The technology that we interact with has become substantially more sophisticated and omnipresent, particularly in the form of artificial intelligence (AI). As AI is adopted into our work, shopping, and online experiences, future researchers should investigate if AI and interactive decision-aids (e.g., Anderson and Misuraca, 2017 ) can be effectively leveraged to reduce the negative consequences of having too many alternatives without impairing the sense of freedom of decision-makers.

As with technological advancements, future research could examine how new sociological roles contribute to or minimize choice overload. For example, a social media influencer could reduce the complexity of the decision when there is a large number of choice options. If social media influencers have an impact, is that impact consistent across age groups and culturally diverse individuals? Deepening our understanding of how historical and sociological events have impacted decision-makers, along with how cultural differences in our perceptions of the world as noted above, could provide a rich and needed area of future research.

Discussion and conclusion

Research in psychology demonstrated the advantages of being able to make choices from a variety of alternatives, particularly when compared to no choice at all. Having the possibility to choose, indeed, enhances individuals’ feeling of self-determination, motivation, performance, well-being, and satisfaction with life (e.g., Zuckerman et al., 1978 ; Cordova and Lepper, 1996 ). As the world continues to globalize through sophisticated supply chains and seemingly infinite online shopping options, our societies have become characterized by a proliferation of choice options. Today, not only stores, but universities, hospitals, financial advisors, sport centers, and many other businesses offer a huge number of options from which to choose. The variety offered is often so large that decision-makers can become overwhelmed when trying to compare and evaluate all the potential options and experience choice overload ( Iyengar and Lepper, 2000 ). Rather than lose the benefits associated with choice options, researchers and practitioners should understand and leverage the existence of the many moderators that affect the occurrence of choice overload. The findings presented in this review indicate that choice overload is influenced by several factors, including perceptual attributes, choice set complexity, decision task difficulty, and brand association. Understanding these moderators can aid in designing choice environments that optimize decision-making processes and alleviate choice overload. For instance, organizing options effectively and leveraging brand association can enhance decision satisfaction and reduce choice overload. Additionally, considering individual differences such as decision goals, preference uncertainty, affective state, decision-making tendencies, and demographics can tailor decision-making environments to better suit the needs and preferences of individuals, ultimately improving decision outcomes. Future research is needed to fully understand the role of many variables that might be responsible for the negative consequences of choice overload and to better understand under which conditions the phenomenon occurs.

Author contributions

RM: Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft. AN: Writing – review & editing. SM: Writing – review & editing. GD: Methodology, Writing – review & editing. CS: Writing – review & editing, Supervision.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

1. ^ For example, gloves and socks have complementary features, in that they provide warmth to different parts of the body.

Anderson, B. F., and Misuraca, R. (2017). Perceptual commensuration in decision tables. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 70, 544–553. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2016.1139603

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Baumol, W., and Ide, E. A. (1956). Variety in retailing. Manag. Sci. 3, 93–101. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.3.1.93

Botti, S., and Iyengar, S. S. (2006). The dark side of choice: when choice impairs social welfare. J. Public Policy Mark. 25, 24–38. doi: 10.1509/jppm.25.1.24

Carmeci, F., Misuraca, R., and Cardaci, M. (2009). A study of temporal estimation from the perspective of the mental clock model. J. Gen. Psychol. 136, 117–128. doi: 10.3200/GENP.136.2.117-128

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chan, E. Y. (2015). Attractiveness of options moderates the effect of choice overload. Int. J. Res. Mark. 32, 425–427. doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.04.001

Chandon, P., Hutchinson, J. W., Bradlow, E. T., and Young, S. H. (2009). Does in-store marketing work? Effects of the number and position of shelf facings on brand attention and evaluation at the point of purchase. J. Mark. 73, 1–17. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.73.6.1

Chernev, A. (2003). When more is less and less is more: the role of ideal point availability and assortment in consumer choice. J. Consum. Res. 30, 170–183. doi: 10.1086/376808

Chernev, A. (2005). Feature complementarity and assortment in choice. J. Consum. Res. 31, 748–759. doi: 10.1086/426608

Chernev, A. (2006). Decision focus and consumer choice among assortments. J. Consum. Res. 33, 50–59. doi: 10.1086/504135

Chernev, A., Böckenholt, U., and Goodman, J. (2015). Choice overload: a conceptual review and meta-analysis. J. Consum. Psychol. 25, 333–358. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.002

Chernev, A., and Hamilton, R. (2009). Assortment size and option attractiveness in consumer choice among retailers. J. Mark. Res. 46, 410–420. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.46.3.410

Cordova, D. I., and Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. J. Educ. Psychol. 88, 715–730. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.715

Deci, E. (1975). Intrinsic motivation . New York, NY, London: Plenum Press.

Google Scholar

Deci, E. L., Nezlek, J., and Sheinman, L. (1981). Characteristics of the rewarder and intrinsic motivation of the rewardee. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 40, 1–10. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.40.1.1

Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior . Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

Dhar, R. (1997). Context and task effects on choice deferral. Mark. Lett. 8, 119–130. doi: 10.1023/A:1007997613607

Fasolo, B., Carmeci, F. A., and Misuraca, R. (2009). The effect of choice complexity on perception of time spent choosing: when choice takes longer but feels shorter. Psychol. Mark. 26, 213–228. doi: 10.1002/mar.20270

Fasolo, B., Misuraca, R., and Reutskaja, E. (2024). Choose as much as you wish: freedom cues in the marketplace help consumers feel more satisfied with what they choose and improve customer experience. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 30, 156–168. doi: 10.1037/xap0000481

Fisman, R., Iyengar, S. S., Kamenica, E., and Simonson, I. (2006). Gender differences in mate selection: evidence from a speed dating experiment. Q. J. Econ. 121, 673–697. doi: 10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.673

Furby, L., and Beyth-Marom, R. (1992). Risk taking in adolescence: a decision-making perspective. Dev. Rev. 12, 1–44. doi: 10.1016/0273-2297(92)90002-J

Gourville, J. T., and Soman, D. (2005). Overchoice and assortment type: when and why variety backfires. Mark. Sci. 24, 382–395. doi: 10.1287/mksc.1040.0109

Greifeneder, R., Scheibehenne, B., and Kleber, N. (2010). Less may be more when choosing is difficult: choice complexity and too much choice. Acta Psychol. 133, 45–50. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.08.005

Griffin, J. G., and Broniarczyk, S. M. (2010). The slippery slope: the impact of feature alignability on search and satisfaction. J. Mark. Res. 47, 323–334. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.47.2.323

Hoch, S. J., Bradlow, E. T., and Wansink, B. (1999). The variety of an assortment. Mark. Sci. 18, 527–546. doi: 10.1287/mksc.18.4.527

Hofstede, G., and Minkov, M. (2010). Long-versus short-term orientation: new perspectives. Asia Pac. Bus. Rev. 16, 493–504. doi: 10.1080/13602381003637609

Huffman, C., and Kahn, B. E. (1998). Variety for sale: mass customization or mass confusion? J. Retail. 74, 491–513. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80105-5

Inbar, Y., Botti, S., and Hanko, K. (2011). Decision speed and choice regret: when haste feels like waste. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 47, 533–540. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.01.011

Iyengar, S. S. (2010). The art of choosing . London: Little Brown.

Iyengar, S. S., Huberman, G., and Jiang, W. (2004). “How much choice is too much? Contributions to 401 (k) retirement plans” in Pension design and structure New Lessons from Behavioral Finance . Oxford University Press, 83–95.

Iyengar, S. S., and Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 79, 995–1006. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995

Iyengar, S. S., Wells, R. E., and Schwartz, B. (2006). Doing better but feeling worse looking for the ‘best’ job undermines satisfaction. Psychol. Sci. 17, 143–150. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01677.x

Kahn, B. E., and Wansink, B. (2004). The influence of assortment structure on perceived variety and consumption quantities. J. Consum. Res. 30, 519–533. doi: 10.1086/380286

Lancaster, K. (1990). The economics of product variety: a survey. Mark. Sci. 9, 189–206. doi: 10.1287/mksc.9.3.189

Langer, E. J., and Rodin, J. (1976). The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for aged: a field experiment in an institutional setting. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 34, 191–198. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.34.2.191

Levav, J., Heitmann, M., Herrmann, A., and Iyengar, S. S. (2010). Order in product customization decisions: evidence from field experiments. J. Polit. Econ. 118, 274–299. doi: 10.1086/652463

Malhotra, N. K. (1982). Information load and consumer decision making. J. Consum. Res. 8, 419–430. doi: 10.1086/208882

Mather, M., and Carstensen, L. L. (2005). Aging and motivated cognition: the positivity effect in attention and memory. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 496–502. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.005

McShane, B. B., and Böckenholt, U. (2017). Multilevel multivariate Meta-analysis with application to choice overload. Psychometrika 83, 255–271. doi: 10.1007/s11336-017-9571-z

Meyers-Levy, J., and Maheswaran, D. (1991). Exploring differences in males' and females' processing strategies. J. Consum. Res. 18, 63–70. doi: 10.1086/209241

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magic number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 81–97. doi: 10.1037/h0043158

Misuraca, R. (2013). Do too many choices have negative consequences? An empirical review. Troppa scelta ha veramente conseguenze negative? Una rassegna di studi empirici. G. Ital. Psicol. 35, 129–154,

Misuraca, R., Ceresia, F., Nixon, A. E., and Scaffidi Abbate, C. (2021a). When is more really more? The effect of brands on choice overload in adolescents. J. Consum. Mark. 38, 168–177. doi: 10.1108/JCM-08-2020-4021

Misuraca, R., Ceresia, F., Teuscher, U., and Faraci, P. (2019). The role of the brand on choice overload. Mind Soc. 18, 57–76. doi: 10.1007/s11299-019-00210-7

Misuraca, R., and Faraci, P. (2021). Choice overload: A study on children, adolescents, adults and seniors/L’effetto del sovraccarico di scelta: un’indagine su bambini, adolescent, adulti e anziani. Ricerche Psicol. 43, 835–847,

Misuraca, R., Faraci, P., Gangemi, A., Carmeci, F. A., and Miceli, S. (2015). The decision-making tendency inventory: a new measure to assess maximizing, satisficing, and minimizing. Personal. Individ. Differ. 85, 111–116. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.043

Misuraca, R., Faraci, P., Ruthruff, E., and Ceresia, F. (2021b). Are maximizers more normative decision-makers? An experimental investigation of maximizers' susceptibility to cognitive biases. Personal. Individ. Differ. 183:111123. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111123

Misuraca, R., Faraci, P., and Scaffidi-Abbate, C. (2022). Maximizers’ susceptibility to the effect of frequency vs. percentage format in risk representation. Behav. Sci. 12:496. doi: 10.3390/bs12120496

Misuraca, R., and Fasolo, B. (2018). Maximizing versus satisficing in the digital age: disjoint scales and the case for “construct consensus”. Personal. Individ. Differ. 121, 152–160. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.09.031

Misuraca, R., Reutskaja, E., Fasolo, B., and Iyengar, S. S. (2020). “How much choice is ‘good enough’? Moderators of information and choice overload” in Routledge handbook of bounded rationality . ed. R. Viale (Abingdon, UK: Routledge).

Misuraca, R., and Teuscher, U. (2013). Time flies when you maximize – maximizers and satisficers perceive time differently when making decisions. Acta Psychol. 143, 176–180. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.03.004

Misuraca, R., Teuscher, U., and Carmeci, F. A. (2016b). Who are maximizers? Future oriented and highly numerate individuals. Int. J. Psychol. 51, 307–311. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12169

Misuraca, R., Teuscher, U., and Faraci, P. (2016a). Is more choice always worse? Age differences in the overchoice effect. J. Cogn. Psychol. 28, 242–255. doi: 10.1080/20445911.2015.1118107

Miyamoto, Y., Nisbett, R. E., and Masuda, T. (2006). Culture and the physical environment: holistic versus analytic perceptual affordances. Psychol. Sci. 17, 113–119. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01673.x

Mogilner, C., Rudnick, T., and Iyengar, S. S. (2008). The mere categorization effect: how the presence of categories increases choosers’ perceptions of assortment variety and outcome satisfaction. J. Consum. Res. 35, 202–215. doi: 10.1086/588698

Mogilner, C., Shiv, B., and Iyengar, S. S. (2013). Eternal quest for the best: sequential (vs. simultaneous) option presentation undermines choice commitment. J. Consum. Res. 39, 1300–1312. doi: 10.1086/668534

Morrin, M., Broniarczyk, S. M., and Inman, J. J. (2012). Plan format and participation in 401 (k) plans: the moderating role of investor knowledge. J. Public Policy Mark. 31, 254–268. doi: 10.1509/jppm.10.122

Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., and Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pieters, R., and Warlop, L. (1999). Visual attention during brand choice: the impact of time pressure and task motivation. Int. J. Res. Mark. 16, 1–16. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8116(98)00022-6

Polman, E. (2012). Effects of self-other decision making on regulatory focus and choice overload. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 102, 980–993. doi: 10.1037/a0026966

Ratner, R. K., and Kahn, B. E. (2002). The impact of private versus public consumption on variety-seeking behavior. J. Consum. Res. 29, 246–257. doi: 10.1086/341574

Reutskaja, E., Cheek, N. N., Iyengar, S., and Schwartz, B. (2022). Choice deprivation, choice overload, and satisfaction with choices across six nations. J. Int. Mark. 30, 18–34. doi: 10.1177/1069031X211073821

Reutskaja, E., Lindner, A., Nagel, R., Andersen, R. A., and Camerer, C. F. (2018). Choice overload reduces neural signatures of choice set value in dorsal striatum and anterior cingulate cortex. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 925–935. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0440-2

Reutskaja, E., Nagel, R., Camerer, C. F., and Rangel, A. (2011). Search dynamics in consumer choice under time pressure: an eye-tracking study. Am. Econ. Rev. 101, 900–926. doi: 10.1257/aer.101.2.900

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychol. Monogr. Gen. Appl. 80, 1–28. doi: 10.1037/h0092976

Scheibehenne, B., Greifeneder, R., and Todd, P. M. (2009). What moderates the too-much-choice effect? Psychol. Mark. 26, 229–253. doi: 10.1002/mar.20271

Scheibehenne, B., Greifeneder, R., and Todd, P. M. (2010). Can there ever be too many options? A meta-analytic review of choice overload. J. Consum. Res. 37, 409–425.

Schlottmann, A., and Wilkening, F. (2011). Judgment and decision making in young children . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schraw, G., Flowerday, T., and Reisetter, M. F. (1998). The role of choice in reader engagement. J. Educ. Psychol. 90, 705–714. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.90.4.705

Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice: why more is less . New York, NY: Ecco.

Shah, A. M., and Wolford, G. (2007). Buying behavior as a function of parametric variation of number of choices. Psychol. Sci. 18, 369–370. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01906.x

Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man: social and rational . Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.

Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., and MacGregor, D. G. (2007). The affect heuristic. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 177, 1333–1352. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2005.04.006

Spassova, G., and Isen, A. M. (2013). Positive affect moderates the impact of assortment size on choice satisfaction. J. Retail. 89, 397–408. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2013.05.003

Stankov, L., and Crawford, J. D. (1996). Confidence judgments in studies of individual differences. Personal. Individ. Differ. 21, 971–986. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00130-4

Tanius, B. E., Wood, S., Hanoch, Y., and Rice, T. (2009). Aging and choice: applications to Medicare part D. Judgm. Decis. Mak. 4, 92–101. doi: 10.1017/S1930297500000735

Taylor, S. E., and Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: a social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychol. Bull. 103, 193–210. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193

Townsend, C., and Kahn, B. E. (2014). The “visual preference heuristic”: the influence of visual versus verbal depiction on assortment processing, perceived variety, and choice overload. J. Consum. Res. 40, 993–1015. doi: 10.1086/673521

Zuckerman, M., Porac, J., Latin, D., Smith, R., and Deci, E. L. (1978). On the importance of self-determination for intrinsically motivated behavior. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 4, 443–446. doi: 10.1177/014616727800400317

Keywords: choice-overload, decision-making, choice set complexity, decision task difficulty, decision goal, decision-making tendency

Citation: Misuraca R, Nixon AE, Miceli S, Di Stefano G and Scaffidi Abbate C (2024) On the advantages and disadvantages of choice: future research directions in choice overload and its moderators. Front. Psychol . 15:1290359. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1290359

Received: 07 September 2023; Accepted: 24 April 2024; Published: 09 May 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Misuraca, Nixon, Miceli, Di Stefano and Scaffidi Abbate. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Raffaella Misuraca, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Python For Data Analysis
• Data Science
• Data Analysis with R
• Data Analysis with Python
• Data Visualization with Python
• Data Analysis Examples
• Math for Data Analysis
• Data Analysis Interview questions
• Artificial Intelligence
• Data Analysis Projects
• Machine Learning
• Deep Learning
• Computer Vision
• What is Data Analytics?
• What is Statistical Analysis in Data Science?
• What Is Spatial Analysis, and How Does It Work
• What is Data Analysis?
• What is Data Munging in Analysis?
• What is Geospatial Data Analysis?
• What is Exploratory Data Analysis ?
• Qualitative and Quantitative Data
• What are Descriptive Analytics?
• What is Prescriptive Analytics in Data Science?
• Qualitative Data
• Data Analysis Tutorial
• Why Data Visualization Matters in Data Analytics?
• What is Data Lineage?
• Data analysis using R
• What is Data Organization?
• What is a Data Science Platform?

What is Qualitative Data Analysis?

Understanding qualitative information analysis is important for researchers searching for to uncover nuanced insights from non-numerical statistics. By exploring qualitative statistics evaluation, you can still draw close its importance in studies, understand its methodologies, and determine while and the way to apply it successfully to extract meaningful insights from qualitative records.

The article goals to provide a complete manual to expertise qualitative records evaluation, masking its significance, methodologies, steps, advantages, disadvantages, and applications.

Table of Content

Understanding Qualitative Data Analysis

Importance of qualitative data analysis, steps to perform qualitative data analysis, 1. craft clear research questions, 2. gather rich customer insights, 3. organize and categorize data, 4. uncover themes and patterns : coding, 5. make hypotheses and validating, methodologies in qualitative data analysis, advantages of qualitative data analysis, disadvantages of qualitative data analysis, when qualitative data analysis is used, applications of qualitative data analysis.

Qualitative data analysis is the process of systematically examining and deciphering qualitative facts (such as textual content, pix, motion pictures, or observations) to discover patterns, themes, and meanings inside the statistics· Unlike quantitative statistics evaluation, which focuses on numerical measurements and statistical strategies, qualitative statistics analysis emphasizes know-how the context, nuances, and subjective views embedded inside the information.

Qualitative facts evaluation is crucial because it is going past the bloodless hard information and numbers to provide a richer expertise of why and the way things appear. Qualitative statistics analysis is important for numerous motives:

• Understanding Complexity and unveils the “Why” : Quantitative facts tells you “what” came about (e· g·, sales figures), however qualitative evaluation sheds light on the motives in the back of it (e·g·, consumer comments on product features).
• Contextual Insight : Numbers don’t exist in a vacuum. Qualitative information affords context to quantitative findings, making the bigger photo clearer· Imagine high customer churn – interviews would possibly monitor lacking functionalities or perplexing interfaces.
• Uncovers Emotions and Opinions: Qualitative records faucets into the human element· Surveys with open ended questions or awareness companies can display emotions, critiques, and motivations that can’t be captured by using numbers on my own.
• Informs Better Decisions: By understanding the “why” and the “how” at the back of customer behavior or employee sentiment, companies can make greater knowledgeable decisions about product improvement, advertising techniques, and internal techniques.
• Generates New Ideas : Qualitative analysis can spark clean thoughts and hypotheses· For example, via analyzing consumer interviews, commonplace subject matters may emerge that cause totally new product features.
• Complements Quantitative Data : While each facts sorts are precious, they paintings quality collectively· Imagine combining website site visitors records (quantitative) with person comments (qualitative) to apprehend user revel in on a particular webpage.

In essence, qualitative data evaluation bridges the gap among the what and the why, providing a nuanced know-how that empowers better choice making·

Qualitative data analysis process, follow the structure in below steps:

Qualitative information evaluation procedure, comply with the shape in underneath steps:

Before diving into evaluation, it is critical to outline clear and particular studies questions. These questions ought to articulate what you want to study from the data and manual your analysis towards actionable insights. For instance, asking “How do employees understand the organizational culture inside our agency?” helps makes a speciality of know-how personnel’ perceptions of the organizational subculture inside a selected business enterprise. By exploring employees’ perspectives, attitudes, and stories related to organizational tradition, researchers can find valuable insights into workplace dynamics, communication patterns, management patterns, and worker delight degrees.

There are numerous methods to acquire qualitative information, each offering specific insights into client perceptions and reviews.

• User Feedback: In-app surveys, app rankings, and social media feedback provide direct remarks from users approximately their studies with the products or services.
• In-Depth Interviews : One-on-one interviews allow for deeper exploration of particular topics and offer wealthy, special insights into individuals’ views and behaviors.
• Focus Groups : Facilitating group discussions allows the exploration of numerous viewpoints and permits individuals to construct upon every different’s ideas.
• Review Sites : Analyzing purchaser critiques on systems like Amazon, Yelp, or app shops can monitor not unusual pain points, pride levels, and areas for improvement.
• NPS Follow-Up Questions : Following up on Net Promoter Score (NPS) surveys with open-ended questions allows customers to elaborate on their rankings and provides qualitative context to quantitative ratings.

Efficient facts below is crucial for powerful analysis and interpretation.

• Centralize: Gather all qualitative statistics, along with recordings, notes, and transcripts, right into a valuable repository for smooth get admission to and control.
• Categorize through Research Question : Group facts primarily based at the specific studies questions they deal with. This organizational structure allows maintain consciousness in the course of analysis and guarantees that insights are aligned with the research objectives.

Coding is a scientific manner of assigning labels or categories to segments of qualitative statistics to uncover underlying issues and patterns.

• Theme Identification : Themes are overarching principles or ideas that emerge from the records· During coding, researchers perceive and label segments of statistics that relate to those themes, bearing in mind the identification of vital principles in the dataset.
• Pattern Detection : Patterns seek advice from relationships or connections between exceptional elements in the statistics. By reading coded segments, researchers can locate trends, repetitions, or cause-and-effect relationships, imparting deeper insights into patron perceptions and behaviors.

Based on the identified topics and styles, researchers can formulate hypotheses and draw conclusions about patron experiences and choices.

• Hypothesis Formulation: Hypotheses are tentative causes or predictions based on found styles within the information. Researchers formulate hypotheses to provide an explanation for why certain themes or styles emerge and make predictions approximately their effect on patron behavior.
• Validation : Researchers validate hypotheses by means of segmenting the facts based on one-of-a-kind standards (e.g., demographic elements, usage patterns) and analyzing variations or relationships inside the records. This procedure enables enhance the validity of findings and offers proof to assist conclusions drawn from qualitative evaluation.

There are five common methodologies utilized in Qualitative Data Analysis·

• Thematic Analysis : Thematic Analysis involves systematically figuring out and reading habitual subject matters or styles within qualitative statistics. Researchers begin with the aid of coding the facts, breaking it down into significant segments, and then categorizing these segments based on shared traits. Through iterative analysis, themes are advanced and refined, permitting researchers to benefit insight into the underlying phenomena being studied.
• Content Analysis: Content Analysis focuses on reading textual information to pick out and quantify particular styles or issues. Researchers code the statistics primarily based on predefined classes or subject matters, taking into consideration systematic agency and interpretation of the content. By analyzing how frequently positive themes occur and the way they’re represented inside the data, researchers can draw conclusions and insights relevant to their research objectives.
• Narrative Analysis: Narrative Analysis delves into the narrative or story within qualitative statistics, that specialize in its structure, content, and meaning. Researchers examine the narrative to understand its context and attitude, exploring how individuals assemble and speak their reports thru storytelling. By analyzing the nuances and intricacies of the narrative, researchers can find underlying issues and advantage a deeper know-how of the phenomena being studied.
• Grounded Theory : Grounded Theory is an iterative technique to growing and checking out theoretical frameworks primarily based on empirical facts. Researchers gather, code, and examine information without preconceived hypotheses, permitting theories to emerge from the information itself. Through constant assessment and theoretical sampling, researchers validate and refine theories, main to a deeper knowledge of the phenomenon under investigation.
• Phenomenological Analysis : Phenomenological Analysis objectives to discover and recognize the lived stories and views of people. Researchers analyze and interpret the meanings, essences, and systems of these reviews, figuring out not unusual topics and styles across individual debts. By immersing themselves in members’ subjective stories, researchers advantage perception into the underlying phenomena from the individuals’ perspectives, enriching our expertise of human behavior and phenomena.
• Richness and Depth: Qualitative records evaluation lets in researchers to discover complex phenomena intensive, shooting the richness and complexity of human stories, behaviors, and social processes.
• Flexibility : Qualitative techniques offer flexibility in statistics collection and evaluation, allowing researchers to conform their method based on emergent topics and evolving studies questions.
• Contextual Understanding: Qualitative evaluation presents perception into the context and meaning of information, helping researchers recognize the social, cultural, and historic elements that form human conduct and interactions.
• Subjective Perspectives : Qualitative methods allow researchers to explore subjective perspectives, beliefs, and reviews, offering a nuanced know-how of people’ mind, emotions, and motivations.
• Theory Generation : Qualitative information analysis can cause the generation of recent theories or hypotheses, as researchers uncover patterns, themes, and relationships in the records that might not were formerly recognized.
• Subjectivity: Qualitative records evaluation is inherently subjective, as interpretations can be stimulated with the aid of researchers’ biases, views, and preconceptions .
• Time-Intensive : Qualitative records analysis may be time-consuming, requiring giant data collection, transcription, coding, and interpretation.
• Generalizability: Findings from qualitative studies might not be effortlessly generalizable to larger populations, as the focus is often on know-how unique contexts and reviews in preference to making statistical inferences.
• Validity and Reliability : Ensuring the validity and reliability of qualitative findings may be difficult, as there are fewer standardized methods for assessing and establishing rigor in comparison to quantitative studies.
• Data Management : Managing and organizing qualitative information, together with transcripts, subject notes, and multimedia recordings, can be complicated and require careful documentation and garage.
• Exploratory Research: Qualitative records evaluation is nicely-suited for exploratory studies, wherein the aim is to generate hypotheses, theories, or insights into complex phenomena.
• Understanding Context : Qualitative techniques are precious for knowledge the context and which means of statistics, in particular in studies wherein social, cultural, or ancient factors are vital.
• Subjective Experiences : Qualitative evaluation is good for exploring subjective stories, beliefs, and views, providing a deeper knowledge of people’ mind, feelings, and behaviors.
• Complex Phenomena: Qualitative strategies are effective for studying complex phenomena that can not be effortlessly quantified or measured, allowing researchers to seize the richness and depth of human stories and interactions.
• Complementary to Quantitative Data: Qualitative information analysis can complement quantitative research by means of offering context, intensity, and insight into the meanings at the back of numerical statistics, enriching our knowledge of studies findings.
• Social Sciences: Qualitative information analysis is widely utilized in social sciences to apprehend human conduct, attitudes, and perceptions. Researchers employ qualitative methods to delve into the complexities of social interactions, cultural dynamics, and societal norms. By analyzing qualitative records which include interviews, observations, and textual resources, social scientists benefit insights into the elaborate nuances of human relationships, identity formation, and societal structures.
• Psychology : In psychology, qualitative data evaluation is instrumental in exploring and deciphering person reports, emotions, and motivations. Qualitative methods along with in-depth interviews, cognizance businesses, and narrative evaluation allow psychologists to delve deep into the subjective stories of individuals. This approach facilitates discover underlying meanings, beliefs, and emotions, dropping light on psychological processes, coping mechanisms, and personal narratives.
• Anthropology : Anthropologists use qualitative records evaluation to look at cultural practices, ideals, and social interactions inside various groups and societies. Through ethnographic research strategies such as player statement and interviews, anthropologists immerse themselves within the cultural contexts of different agencies. Qualitative analysis permits them to find the symbolic meanings, rituals, and social systems that form cultural identification and behavior.
• Qualitative Market Research : In the sphere of marketplace research, qualitative statistics analysis is vital for exploring consumer options, perceptions, and behaviors. Qualitative techniques which include consciousness groups, in-depth interviews, and ethnographic research permit marketplace researchers to gain a deeper understanding of customer motivations, choice-making methods, and logo perceptions· By analyzing qualitative facts, entrepreneurs can identify emerging developments, discover unmet wishes, and tell product development and advertising and marketing techniques.
• Healthcare: Qualitative statistics analysis plays a important function in healthcare studies via investigating patient experiences, delight, and healthcare practices. Researchers use qualitative techniques which includes interviews, observations, and patient narratives to explore the subjective reviews of people inside healthcare settings. Qualitative evaluation helps find affected person perspectives on healthcare services, treatment consequences, and pleasant of care, facilitating enhancements in patient-targeted care delivery and healthcare policy.

Qualitative data evaluation offers intensity, context, and know-how to investigate endeavors, enabling researchers to find wealthy insights and discover complicated phenomena via systematic examination of non-numerical information.

Please Login to comment...

Similar reads.

• Data Analysis

Improve your Coding Skills with Practice

What kind of Experience do you want to share?

Latent Content Analysis | Definition & Method

Introduction

What is content analysis, latent content analysis defined, what is an example of latent analysis, how is latent content analysis different from manifest content analysis, when should i use latent over manifest analysis, conducting latent content analysis, advantages of latent content analysis, disadvantages of latent content analysis.

Content analysis is a research process used in qualitative analysis to interpret text data through systematic coding and identifying themes or patterns. As a research technique, it plays a crucial role in the study of communication and media. Among its various forms, latent content analysis offers a unique approach by focusing on the underlying meaning within the data, rather than just the explicit content. This article outlines the definition, research methods , and applications of latent content analysis, comparing it to manifest content analysis and discussing when one might be preferred over the other. The subsequent sections will provide a clear and concise overview of conducting latent content analysis, its advantages, and its disadvantages, equipping researchers with the knowledge to effectively apply this method in their studies.

Content analysis is an analytical approach used to quantify and analyze the presence, meanings, and relationships of certain words, themes, or concepts within qualitative data . Initially used in the field of mass communication, content analysis has since expanded to be utilized in various fields such as sociology, psychology, and marketing. It allows researchers to sift through large volumes of data and systematically identify specific characteristics of messages that can be qualitative , quantitative , or both .

The process of content analysis begins with defining the research questions and choosing a sample or samples of text data to be analyzed. This data can come from various sources such as books, articles, essays, interviews, discussions, and media postings. Researchers then develop a coding frame , which is essentially a set of categories designed to capture the relevant elements of the data. Each category is defined by a coding rule, helping to ensure that the coding process remains systematic and that the data are interpreted accurately and consistently.

Once the coding frame is established, researchers can apply it to their text data, marking passages, words, or themes that correspond to their predefined categories. This often involves using both manual techniques, where researchers read through the text and apply codes, and automated methods, such as software tools that can help speed up the process and ensure consistent application of codes across large datasets.

The results of quantitative content analysis are typically numbers or percentages that reflect the presence of the coded elements within the text data. These results can then be further built on in a qualitative content analysis to make inferences about the meanings, themes, and patterns in the data relative to the research questions.

For instance, content analysis might reveal how often certain topics are discussed in media over time, the prevalence of specific terms in corporate mission statements, or the frequency and context of language related to mental health in public forums. By converting qualitative data into quantitative data, content analysis allows researchers to use statistical methods to analyze their findings, providing a robust framework for interpreting complex textual data. When combined with qualitative analysis methods, researchers can understand both what content is present and also offers insights into the context and implications of the content, enhancing the depth of qualitative research.

Latent content analysis is a specific approach within the broader field of content analysis that focuses on uncovering the underlying meanings and themes that are not immediately apparent in the text. Unlike manifest content analysis, which concentrates on the visible, explicit content, latent analysis looks deeper into the subtleties and nuances that reveal the hidden aspects of the communication.

The process of latent content analysis involves a detailed and interpretative examination of the text. Researchers must look beyond the surface level of words and phrases to grasp the symbolic meanings and connotations embedded within the text. This requires a thorough understanding of the context in which the communication occurs as well as the socio-cultural norms that might influence the implicit messages conveyed.

For example, in analyzing a political speech, latent content analysis would not just catalog the occurrence of words like "freedom" or "rights," but would also interpret what these terms suggest about the speaker's underlying political ideologies or the emotional responses they intend to evoke in the audience. This level of analysis helps researchers understand how language is used to shape perceptions, construct reality, and exert influence.

To effectively conduct latent content analysis, researchers typically employ a qualitative methodology . They start by familiarizing themselves with the material through extensive reading and re-reading, which helps in identifying potential underlying themes. Researchers then develop a set of codes based on their interpretation of the text's deeper meanings. These codes are applied systematically across the text to ensure that the analysis captures all relevant instances of the latent content.

This method to qualitative data analysis requires a high degree of interpretative skill and theoretical knowledge, as the researcher must make informed inferences about the text's indirect messages and meanings. The validity of the findings from latent content analysis heavily relies on the researcher's ability to transparently describe their methods and justify their interpretations based on the text and its context.

Overall, latent content analysis offers a powerful method for researchers interested in the complex dynamics of communication that lie beneath the surface of the textual data. By focusing on the subtle, often unspoken aspects of content, this approach provides deeper insights into the social and psychological underpinnings of communication.

Coding is more powerful than ever with ATLAS.ti

Intuitive tools with the capabilities of artificial intelligence. Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti today.

An illustrative example of latent content analysis that relies on qualitative analytical techniques can be seen in the study of television advertising. Let's consider a project where researchers aim to understand how family values are portrayed in commercials from different cultural contexts. This analysis would go beyond simply noting the presence of family members in advertisements to interpret the deeper messages about cultural norms, roles, and values conveyed through both the verbal and non-verbal elements of the ads.

In a qualitative study, researchers first conduct data collection with a sample of television commercials from multiple countries that explicitly mention or depict family scenarios. The initial analytic step involves watching these advertisements multiple times to capture not just the overt content but to sense the implicit messages being communicated. For instance, the interactions between family members, the roles they portray, the settings, and even the products being advertised provide insights into underlying cultural perceptions and values about family.

After the initial viewing, researchers develop a coding scheme that includes categories for implicit content such as "gender roles," "parental authority," "affection," and "lifestyle aspirations." Each of these categories is carefully defined to capture specific latent meanings. For example, the category "gender roles" might include codes for activities assigned implicitly to mothers versus fathers, like who is shown cooking dinner or who is managing finances.

As the analysis proceeds, each commercial is meticulously coded according to these predefined categories. Researchers note not only what is explicitly said but also infer the subtler cues from non-verbal communication, background settings, and even the choice of music. These elements might suggest, for instance, that a culture values independence and individual achievement over family cohesion, or vice versa.

The findings from such a latent content analysis could reveal significant cross-cultural differences in how family is conceptualized and represented in media. For example, commercials from individualistic cultures might frequently show family members pursuing personal interests, while those from collectivistic cultures might emphasize family togetherness and collective activities.

By uncovering these implicit messages, latent content analysis helps researchers understand the deeper social and cultural narratives that influence public perceptions and behaviors. This example not only demonstrates the application of latent content analysis but also highlights its importance in revealing the nuanced ways in which media shapes societal values.

Latent content analysis and manifest content analysis are two methods used to examine text within the broader framework of content analysis . While both approaches are instrumental in qualitative research , they differ fundamentally in their focus and methodologies. Manifest content analysis is concerned with the overt and visible components of the text, such as the frequency and context of specific words or phrases. In contrast, latent content analysis seeks to uncover the underlying, less obvious meanings conveyed by the text.

Focus on surface vs. underlying meanings

The primary distinction between manifest and latent content analysis lies in the depth of content they examine. Manifest content analysis quantifies the visible, explicit elements of the text. It involves counting words, phrases, or instances of expressed ideas and categorizing them into predefined codes based on their surface meaning. For example, in a study analyzing speeches, manifest content analysis might focus on how often a politician mentions terms like "economy" or "education." Even a qualitative manifest content analysis will look at the visible and explicit meanings while examining these instances in the broader context. On the other hand, latent content analysis delves deeper into the implicit or symbolic meanings that are not directly stated but implied. This method requires a more interpretative approach, where the researcher infers underlying themes or attitudes based on the context and cultural or societal norms that may not be immediately apparent.

Methodological approach

Manifest content analysis typically employs a more structured, quantitative approach . It relies heavily on statistical methods and objective metrics to evaluate the text, providing a numerical basis to support findings. This form of analysis is relatively straightforward because it deals with tangible, countable data. Conversely, latent content analysis is inherently qualitative and subjective. It involves a significant amount of interpretation and contextual understanding. Researchers must infer meanings and read between the lines, often basing their conclusions on theoretical perspectives or cultural insights. This makes the process less about counting occurrences and more about understanding their significance and connotation.

Researcher involvement

The level of researcher involvement also differs significantly between the two methods. In manifest content analysis, the researcher's role is relatively detached, focusing on explicit measurement without needing to interpret the data deeply. This approach minimizes the influence of the researcher's theoretical leanings or interpretations on the results. Latent content analysis, however, requires a high degree of researcher engagement and interpretive insight. The researchers must immerse themselves in the text, understanding the subtleties and complexities of language that convey deeper meanings. Their interpretations are crucial to the analysis, making the process subjective and heavily dependent on the researcher’s skills and perspective.

Choosing between latent and manifest content analysis depends on the research goals, the nature of the data, and what the researcher aims to uncover. While manifest content analysis provides quantitative insights into the text, latent content analysis offers a deeper, more nuanced understanding of underlying themes and contexts. Here are three main reasons to opt for latent content analysis over manifest content analysis.

Exploring deeper societal and cultural contexts

Latent content analysis is particularly valuable when the research objective is to understand the broader societal and cultural implications of a text. This method allows researchers to explore how societal norms, values, and ideologies are subtly embedded within communication. For instance, a study on media coverage of social events might use latent content analysis to uncover underlying values or perspectives that influence public opinion subtly but profoundly. This approach is essential when the text's impact extends beyond its overt content, influencing cultural perceptions and societal behaviors.

Studying complex psychological and emotional underpinnings

When the research focuses on psychological or emotional dimensions, latent content analysis is often more appropriate. This method can reveal the emotional tone, hidden motivations, and psychological states of individuals or groups, which are not immediately obvious from the manifest content. For example, analyzing therapeutic sessions to understand the deeper concerns and fears of patients or examining political speeches to decode the emotional appeals made by leaders are areas where latent content analysis can provide crucial insights that manifest analysis might overlook.

Handling ambiguous or metaphorical language

Latent content analysis is indispensable when texts are rich in metaphors, symbolism, or ambiguity. In literary analysis, for example, the meaning often lies not in the words themselves but in what they suggest or imply. Latent content analysis helps to interpret these texts by considering not just the literal meaning of words but their symbolic or metaphorical significance. This method is also useful in analyzing advertising, where the effectiveness and appeal often rely on implicit messages conveyed through visuals and nuanced language, which require a deeper interpretative approach to be fully understood.

Conducting latent content analysis involves a detailed and systematic approach to uncover the implicit meaning within textual data. We'll use this section to outline the main stages of a latent content analysis employing qualitative methods and using nursing research as an example.

Preparation

The first stage is the preparation phase , where the researcher defines the scope and objectives of the analysis. This involves selecting the text to be analyzed, which could be patient interviews, nursing notes, or policy documents. For example, a researcher might choose to analyze nurse-patient communication during initial consultations to understand underlying anxieties or misconceptions about treatments.

Familiarization

Once the data is gathered , researchers immerse themselves in the content to become familiar with its depth and nuances. This involves reading and re-reading the data, noting initial ideas and impressions. In our nursing research example, this might mean identifying recurring themes or sentiments expressed by patients, such as fear, reassurance, or confusion, that are not explicitly stated but can be inferred from how they talk about their health conditions.

Developing codes

After familiarization, the next step is to develop a coding scheme for categorizing the latent content. This involves identifying a set of themes, concepts, or indicators that relate to the research question. Codes are typically derived both deductively from theory and inductively from the data itself. In the nursing example, codes might include "patient trust," "nurse empathy," or "emotional support," which capture the implicit aspects of the interactions.

Coding data

Using the established codes, the researcher then systematically applies them to the entire dataset, tagging segments of text that correspond to each code. This process often reveals connections between different parts of the data, helping to refine the codes and identify overarching themes. In nursing research, this could involve exploring how expressions of empathy by nurses are related to patient trust and treatment adherence.

Interpretation and reporting

The final stage is the interpretation of the coded data to construct a narrative that answers the research questions. This includes synthesizing the findings to highlight how the identified latent contents influence patient outcomes or nursing practices. The researcher contextualizes the results within existing literature and theory to draw meaningful conclusions. In our example, the researcher might conclude that subtle cues in nurse communication, such as tone of voice and non-verbal expressions, significantly impact patient anxiety levels and perceptions of care.

Latent content analysis offers several advantages that make it a valuable tool in qualitative research , particularly when the aim is to uncover deeper, more subtle meanings within the data. This method enables researchers to interpret the underlying themes and motivations that may not be readily apparent through surface-level analysis. Here are three key advantages of employing latent content analysis in research studies.

Uncovering deeper insights

One of the primary benefits of latent content analysis is its ability to delve beyond the explicit content to reveal the implicit meanings and hidden messages in a text. This depth of analysis is crucial in fields such as psychology, sociology, and marketing, where understanding the underlying motivations and attitudes can provide richer insights than merely analyzing the manifest content. For instance, in consumer research, latent content analysis can help identify the emotional and psychological appeals made in advertising that are not explicitly stated but strongly influence consumer behavior.

Contextual understanding

Latent content analysis also excels in interpreting data within its broader social, cultural, and historical context. This approach considers how the meanings of words and phrases can be shaped by the contexts in which they are used, offering a comprehensive view of the data. For example, analyzing political speeches through latent content analysis can reveal how historical references and cultural symbols are used to persuade or mobilize audiences, providing insights into the speaker's strategic use of language.

Flexibility in data interpretation

Another advantage is the flexibility latent content analysis offers in terms of data interpretation. This method does not rely strictly on predefined categories and can adapt as new themes emerge during the analysis process. Such flexibility is particularly useful in exploratory studies where there is not enough pre-existing research to establish propositions about what kinds of outcomes may be expected. It allows for a more open-ended approach, encouraging the discovery of novel insights that might be overlooked with more rigid analytical methods.

While latent content analysis is a powerful tool for uncovering deeper meanings in qualitative research , it also comes with certain disadvantages that can affect its application and the interpretation of results. These limitations are primarily related to the method's inherent subjectivity and the demands it places on the researcher. Understanding these drawbacks is crucial for effectively navigating the challenges they present.

High level of subjectivity

One significant challenge of latent content analysis is its high level of subjectivity. Unlike manifest content analysis, which relies on observable and often quantifiable elements, latent analysis depends heavily on the researcher's interpretation. This can lead to variability in results, as different researchers might draw different conclusions from the same data set based on their personal preconceptions, theoretical orientations, or cultural backgrounds. While subjectivity in qualitative data interpretation is an inherent strength for developing novel insights, it is important that researchers transparently describe their analytic process and ground their interpretations in the data to credibly convey their research to audiences.

Intensive time and resource requirements

Conducting latent content analysis is also time-consuming and resource-intensive. The process requires a deep engagement with the text and a thorough understanding of the context and theoretical framework. Researchers must read and reread the data, often multiple times, to identify and interpret the latent content. This level of detail not only demands a significant amount of time but also requires a high degree of expertise in qualitative analysis, which can limit the method's accessibility to researchers with less experience in this area.

Potential for overlooking manifest content

Another drawback is the potential for researchers to focus so intently on uncovering latent meanings that they overlook the value of manifest content. While latent analysis provides deep insights, it can sometimes lead to overinterpretation, where researchers infer meanings that are not supported by the data. This can obscure straightforward, surface-level insights that are also valuable, especially in contexts where the explicit content is directly relevant to the research questions .

Do more with your qualitative data with ATLAS.ti

Powerful tools to code and analyze your data. Get started with a free trial.