![Vittana.org Vittana.org](https://vittana.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/cropped-vittana-logo.png)
![](http://charunivedita.online/777/templates/cheerup2/res/banner1.gif)
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.
Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .
Login Alert
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.cambridge.org/core/cambridge-core/public/images/logo_core.png)
- > Journals
- > BJPsych Bulletin
- > The Psychiatrist
- > Volume 37 Issue 6
- > Qualitative research: its value and applicability
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://static.cambridge.org/covers/BJS_0_0_0/the-psychiatrist.jpg)
Article contents
What questions are best answered using qualitative research, countering some misconceptions, in conclusion, qualitative research: its value and applicability.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2018
Qualitative research has a rich tradition in the study of human social behaviour and cultures. Its general aim is to develop concepts which help us to understand social phenomena in, wherever possible, natural rather than experimental settings, to gain an understanding of the experiences, perceptions and/or behaviours of individuals, and the meanings attached to them. The effective application of qualitative methods to other disciplines, including clinical, health service and education research, has a rapidly expanding and robust evidence base. Qualitative approaches have particular potential in psychiatry research, singularly and in combination with quantitative methods. This article outlines the nature and potential application of qualitative research as well as attempting to counter a number of misconceptions.
Qualitative research has a rich tradition in the social sciences. Since the late 19th century, researchers interested in studying the social behaviour and cultures of humankind have perceived limitations in trying to explain the phenomena they encounter in purely quantifiable, measurable terms. Anthropology, in its social and cultural forms, was one of the foremost disciplines in developing what would later be termed a qualitative approach, founded as it was on ethnographic studies which sought an understanding of the culture of people from other societies, often hitherto unknown and far removed in geography. Reference Bernard 1 Early researchers would spend extended periods of time living in societies, observing, noting and photographing the minutia of daily life, with the most committed often learning the language of peoples they observed, in the hope of gaining greater acceptance by them and a more detailed understanding of the cultural norms at play. All academic disciplines concerned with human and social behaviour, including anthropology, sociology and psychology, now make extensive use of qualitative research methods whose systematic application was first developed by these colonial-era social scientists.
Their methods, involving observation, participation and discussion of the individuals and groups being studied, as well as reading related textual and visual media and artefacts, form the bedrock of all qualitative social scientific inquiry. The general aim of qualitative research is thus to develop concepts which help us to understand social phenomena in, wherever possible, natural rather than experimental settings, to gain an understanding of the experiences, perceptions and/or behaviours of those studied, and the meanings attached to them. Reference Bryman 2 Researchers interested in finding out why people behave the way they do; how people are affected by events, how attitudes and opinions are formed; how and why cultures and practices have developed in the way they have, might well consider qualitative methods to answer their questions.
It is fair to say that clinical and health-related research is still dominated by quantitative methods, of which the randomised controlled trial, focused on hypothesis-testing through experiment controlled by randomisation, is perhaps the quintessential method. Qualitative approaches may seem obscure to the uninitiated when directly compared with the experimental, quantitative methods used in clinical research. There is increasing recognition among researchers in these fields, however, that qualitative methods such as observation, in-depth interviews, focus groups, consensus methods, case studies and the interpretation of texts can be more effective than quantitative approaches in exploring complex phenomena and as such are valuable additions to the methodological armoury available to them. Reference Denzin and Lincoln 3
In considering what kind of research questions are best answered using a qualitative approach, it is important to remember that, first and foremost, unlike quantitative research, inquiry conducted in the qualitative tradition seeks to answer the question ‘What?’ as opposed to ‘How often?’. Qualitative methods are designed to reveal what is going on by describing and interpreting phenomena; they do not attempt to measure how often an event or association occurs. Research conducted using qualitative methods is normally done with an intent to preserve the inherent complexities of human behaviour as opposed to assuming a reductive view of the subject in order to count and measure the occurrence of phenomena. Qualitative research normally takes an inductive approach, moving from observation to hypothesis rather than hypothesis-testing or deduction, although the latter is perfectly possible.
When conducting research in this tradition, the researcher should, if possible, avoid separating the stages of study design, data collection and analysis, but instead weave backwards and forwards between the raw data and the process of conceptualisation, thereby making sense of the data throughout the period of data collection. Although there are inevitable tensions among methodologists concerned with qualitative practice, there is broad consensus that a priori categories and concepts reflecting a researcher's own preconceptions should not be imposed on the process of data collection and analysis. The emphasis should be on capturing and interpreting research participants' true perceptions and/or behaviours.
Using combined approaches
The polarity between qualitative and quantitative research has been largely assuaged, to the benefit of all disciplines which now recognise the value, and compatibility, of both approaches. Indeed, there can be particular value in using quantitative methods in combination with qualitative methods. Reference Barbour 4 In the exploratory stages of a research project, qualitative methodology can be used to clarify or refine the research question, to aid conceptualisation and to generate a hypothesis. It can also help to identify the correct variables to be measured, as researchers have been known to measure before they fully understand the underlying issues pertaining to a study and, as a consequence, may not always target the most appropriate factors. Qualitative work can be valuable in the interpretation, qualification or illumination of quantitative research findings. This is particularly helpful when focusing on anomalous results, as they test the main hypothesis formulated. Qualitative methods can also be used in combination with quantitative methods to triangulate findings and support the validation process, for example, where three or more methods are used and the results compared for similarity (e.g. a survey, interviews and a period of observation in situ ).
‘There is little value in qualitative research findings because we cannot generalise from them’
Generalisability refers to the extent that the account can be applied to other people, times and settings other than those actually studied. A common criticism of qualitative research is that the results of a study are rarely, if ever, generalisable to a larger population because the sample groups are small and the participants are not chosen randomly. Such criticism fails to recognise the distinctiveness of qualitative research where sampling is concerned. In quantitative research, the intent is to secure a large random sample that is representative of the general population, with the purpose of eliminating individual variations, focusing on generalisations and thereby allowing for statistical inference of results that are applicable across an entire population. In qualitative research, generalisability is based on the assumption that it is valuable to begin to understand similar situations or people, rather than being representative of the target population. Qualitative research is rarely based on the use of random samples, so the kinds of reference to wider populations made on the basis of surveys cannot be used in qualitative analysis.
Qualitative researchers utilise purposive sampling, whereby research participants are selected deliberately to test a particular theoretical premise. The purpose of sampling here is not to identify a random subgroup of the general population from which statistically significant results can be extrapolated, but rather to identify, in a systematic way, individuals that possess relevant characteristics for the question being considered. Reference Strauss and Corbin 5 The researchers must instead ensure that any reference to people and settings beyond those in the study are justified, which is normally achieved by defining, in detail, the type of settings and people to whom the explanation or theory applies based on the identification of similar settings and people in the study. The intent is to permit a detailed examination of the phenomenon, resulting in a text-rich interpretation that can deepen our understanding and produce a plausible explanation of the phenomenon under study. The results are not intended to be statistically generalisable, although any theory they generate might well be.
‘Qualitative research cannot really claim reliability or validity’
In quantitative research, reliability is the extent to which different observers, or the same observers on different occasions, make the same observations or collect the same data about the same object of study. The changing nature of social phenomena scrutinised by qualitative researchers inevitably makes the possibility of the same kind of reliability problematic in their work. A number of alternative concepts to reliability have been developed by qualitative methodologists, however, known collectively as forms of trustworthiness. Reference Guba 6
One way to demonstrate trustworthiness is to present detailed evidence in the form of quotations from interviews and field notes, along with thick textual descriptions of episodes, events and settings. To be trustworthy, qualitative analysis should also be auditable, making it possible to retrace the steps leading to a certain interpretation or theory to check that no alternatives were left unexamined and that no researcher biases had any avoidable influence on the results. Usually, this involves the recording of information about who did what with the data and in what order so that the origin of interpretations can be retraced.
In general, within the research traditions of the natural sciences, findings are validated by their repeated replication, and if a second investigator cannot replicate the findings when they repeat the experiment then the original results are questioned. If no one else can replicate the original results then they are rejected as fatally flawed and therefore invalid. Natural scientists have developed a broad spectrum of procedures and study designs to ensure that experiments are dependable and that replication is possible. In the social sciences, particularly when using qualitative research methods, replication is rarely possible given that, when observed or questioned again, respondents will almost never say or do precisely the same things. Whether results have been successfully replicated is always a matter of interpretation. There are, however, procedures that, if followed, can significantly reduce the possibility of producing analyses that are partial or biased. Reference Altheide, Johnson, Denzin and Lincoln 7
Triangulation is one way of doing this. It essentially means combining multiple views, approaches or methods in an investigation to obtain a more accurate interpretation of the phenomena, thereby creating an analysis of greater depth and richness. As the process of analysing qualitative data normally involves some form of coding, whereby data are broken down into units of analysis, constant comparison can also be used. Constant comparison involves checking the consistency and accuracy of interpretations and especially the application of codes by constantly comparing one interpretation or code with others both of a similar sort and in other cases and settings. This in effect is a form of interrater reliability, involving multiple researchers or teams in the coding process so that it is possible to compare how they have coded the same passages and where there are areas of agreement and disagreement so that consensus can be reached about a code's definition, improving consistency and rigour. It is also good practice in qualitative analysis to look constantly for outliers – results that are out of line with your main findings or any which directly contradict what your explanations might predict, re-examining the data to try to find a way of explaining the atypical finding to produce a modified and more complex theory and explanation.
Qualitative research has been established for many decades in the social sciences and encompasses a valuable set of methodological tools for data collection, analysis and interpretation. Their effective application to other disciplines, including clinical, health service and education research, has a rapidly expanding and robust evidence base. The use of qualitative approaches to research in psychiatry has particular potential, singularly and in combination with quantitative methods. Reference Crabb and Chur-Hansen 8 When devising research questions in the specialty, careful thought should always be given to the most appropriate methodology, and consideration given to the great depth and richness of empirical evidence which a robust qualitative approach is able to provide.
Declaration of interest
![qualitative research methods benefits Crossref logo](https://assets.crossref.org/logo/crossref-logo-100.png)
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref .
- Google Scholar
View all Google Scholar citations for this article.
Save article to Kindle
To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
- Volume 37, Issue 6
- Steven J. Agius (a1)
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.113.042770
Save article to Dropbox
To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .
Save article to Google Drive
To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .
Reply to: Submit a response
- No HTML tags allowed - Web page URLs will display as text only - Lines and paragraphs break automatically - Attachments, images or tables are not permitted
Your details
Your email address will be used in order to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and in case the author(s) of the article or the moderator need to contact you directly.
You have entered the maximum number of contributors
Conflicting interests.
Please list any fees and grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in or any close relationship with, at any time over the preceding 36 months, any organisation whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response. Please also list any non-financial associations or interests (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious or other) that a reasonable reader would want to know about in relation to the submitted work. This pertains to all the authors of the piece, their spouses or partners.
- Privacy Policy
![qualitative research methods benefits Research Method](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/logo.png)
Home » Qualitative Research – Methods, Analysis Types and Guide
Qualitative Research – Methods, Analysis Types and Guide
Table of Contents
![qualitative research methods benefits Qualitative Research](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Qualitative_Research-1024x576.jpg)
Qualitative Research
Qualitative research is a type of research methodology that focuses on exploring and understanding people’s beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, and experiences through the collection and analysis of non-numerical data. It seeks to answer research questions through the examination of subjective data, such as interviews, focus groups, observations, and textual analysis.
Qualitative research aims to uncover the meaning and significance of social phenomena, and it typically involves a more flexible and iterative approach to data collection and analysis compared to quantitative research. Qualitative research is often used in fields such as sociology, anthropology, psychology, and education.
Qualitative Research Methods
![qualitative research methods benefits Types of Qualitative Research](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Types_of_Qualitative_Research-1024x576.jpg)
Qualitative Research Methods are as follows:
One-to-One Interview
This method involves conducting an interview with a single participant to gain a detailed understanding of their experiences, attitudes, and beliefs. One-to-one interviews can be conducted in-person, over the phone, or through video conferencing. The interviewer typically uses open-ended questions to encourage the participant to share their thoughts and feelings. One-to-one interviews are useful for gaining detailed insights into individual experiences.
Focus Groups
This method involves bringing together a group of people to discuss a specific topic in a structured setting. The focus group is led by a moderator who guides the discussion and encourages participants to share their thoughts and opinions. Focus groups are useful for generating ideas and insights, exploring social norms and attitudes, and understanding group dynamics.
Ethnographic Studies
This method involves immersing oneself in a culture or community to gain a deep understanding of its norms, beliefs, and practices. Ethnographic studies typically involve long-term fieldwork and observation, as well as interviews and document analysis. Ethnographic studies are useful for understanding the cultural context of social phenomena and for gaining a holistic understanding of complex social processes.
Text Analysis
This method involves analyzing written or spoken language to identify patterns and themes. Text analysis can be quantitative or qualitative. Qualitative text analysis involves close reading and interpretation of texts to identify recurring themes, concepts, and patterns. Text analysis is useful for understanding media messages, public discourse, and cultural trends.
This method involves an in-depth examination of a single person, group, or event to gain an understanding of complex phenomena. Case studies typically involve a combination of data collection methods, such as interviews, observations, and document analysis, to provide a comprehensive understanding of the case. Case studies are useful for exploring unique or rare cases, and for generating hypotheses for further research.
Process of Observation
This method involves systematically observing and recording behaviors and interactions in natural settings. The observer may take notes, use audio or video recordings, or use other methods to document what they see. Process of observation is useful for understanding social interactions, cultural practices, and the context in which behaviors occur.
Record Keeping
This method involves keeping detailed records of observations, interviews, and other data collected during the research process. Record keeping is essential for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the data, and for providing a basis for analysis and interpretation.
This method involves collecting data from a large sample of participants through a structured questionnaire. Surveys can be conducted in person, over the phone, through mail, or online. Surveys are useful for collecting data on attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, and for identifying patterns and trends in a population.
Qualitative data analysis is a process of turning unstructured data into meaningful insights. It involves extracting and organizing information from sources like interviews, focus groups, and surveys. The goal is to understand people’s attitudes, behaviors, and motivations
Qualitative Research Analysis Methods
Qualitative Research analysis methods involve a systematic approach to interpreting and making sense of the data collected in qualitative research. Here are some common qualitative data analysis methods:
Thematic Analysis
This method involves identifying patterns or themes in the data that are relevant to the research question. The researcher reviews the data, identifies keywords or phrases, and groups them into categories or themes. Thematic analysis is useful for identifying patterns across multiple data sources and for generating new insights into the research topic.
Content Analysis
This method involves analyzing the content of written or spoken language to identify key themes or concepts. Content analysis can be quantitative or qualitative. Qualitative content analysis involves close reading and interpretation of texts to identify recurring themes, concepts, and patterns. Content analysis is useful for identifying patterns in media messages, public discourse, and cultural trends.
Discourse Analysis
This method involves analyzing language to understand how it constructs meaning and shapes social interactions. Discourse analysis can involve a variety of methods, such as conversation analysis, critical discourse analysis, and narrative analysis. Discourse analysis is useful for understanding how language shapes social interactions, cultural norms, and power relationships.
Grounded Theory Analysis
This method involves developing a theory or explanation based on the data collected. Grounded theory analysis starts with the data and uses an iterative process of coding and analysis to identify patterns and themes in the data. The theory or explanation that emerges is grounded in the data, rather than preconceived hypotheses. Grounded theory analysis is useful for understanding complex social phenomena and for generating new theoretical insights.
Narrative Analysis
This method involves analyzing the stories or narratives that participants share to gain insights into their experiences, attitudes, and beliefs. Narrative analysis can involve a variety of methods, such as structural analysis, thematic analysis, and discourse analysis. Narrative analysis is useful for understanding how individuals construct their identities, make sense of their experiences, and communicate their values and beliefs.
Phenomenological Analysis
This method involves analyzing how individuals make sense of their experiences and the meanings they attach to them. Phenomenological analysis typically involves in-depth interviews with participants to explore their experiences in detail. Phenomenological analysis is useful for understanding subjective experiences and for developing a rich understanding of human consciousness.
Comparative Analysis
This method involves comparing and contrasting data across different cases or groups to identify similarities and differences. Comparative analysis can be used to identify patterns or themes that are common across multiple cases, as well as to identify unique or distinctive features of individual cases. Comparative analysis is useful for understanding how social phenomena vary across different contexts and groups.
Applications of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research has many applications across different fields and industries. Here are some examples of how qualitative research is used:
- Market Research: Qualitative research is often used in market research to understand consumer attitudes, behaviors, and preferences. Researchers conduct focus groups and one-on-one interviews with consumers to gather insights into their experiences and perceptions of products and services.
- Health Care: Qualitative research is used in health care to explore patient experiences and perspectives on health and illness. Researchers conduct in-depth interviews with patients and their families to gather information on their experiences with different health care providers and treatments.
- Education: Qualitative research is used in education to understand student experiences and to develop effective teaching strategies. Researchers conduct classroom observations and interviews with students and teachers to gather insights into classroom dynamics and instructional practices.
- Social Work : Qualitative research is used in social work to explore social problems and to develop interventions to address them. Researchers conduct in-depth interviews with individuals and families to understand their experiences with poverty, discrimination, and other social problems.
- Anthropology : Qualitative research is used in anthropology to understand different cultures and societies. Researchers conduct ethnographic studies and observe and interview members of different cultural groups to gain insights into their beliefs, practices, and social structures.
- Psychology : Qualitative research is used in psychology to understand human behavior and mental processes. Researchers conduct in-depth interviews with individuals to explore their thoughts, feelings, and experiences.
- Public Policy : Qualitative research is used in public policy to explore public attitudes and to inform policy decisions. Researchers conduct focus groups and one-on-one interviews with members of the public to gather insights into their perspectives on different policy issues.
How to Conduct Qualitative Research
Here are some general steps for conducting qualitative research:
- Identify your research question: Qualitative research starts with a research question or set of questions that you want to explore. This question should be focused and specific, but also broad enough to allow for exploration and discovery.
- Select your research design: There are different types of qualitative research designs, including ethnography, case study, grounded theory, and phenomenology. You should select a design that aligns with your research question and that will allow you to gather the data you need to answer your research question.
- Recruit participants: Once you have your research question and design, you need to recruit participants. The number of participants you need will depend on your research design and the scope of your research. You can recruit participants through advertisements, social media, or through personal networks.
- Collect data: There are different methods for collecting qualitative data, including interviews, focus groups, observation, and document analysis. You should select the method or methods that align with your research design and that will allow you to gather the data you need to answer your research question.
- Analyze data: Once you have collected your data, you need to analyze it. This involves reviewing your data, identifying patterns and themes, and developing codes to organize your data. You can use different software programs to help you analyze your data, or you can do it manually.
- Interpret data: Once you have analyzed your data, you need to interpret it. This involves making sense of the patterns and themes you have identified, and developing insights and conclusions that answer your research question. You should be guided by your research question and use your data to support your conclusions.
- Communicate results: Once you have interpreted your data, you need to communicate your results. This can be done through academic papers, presentations, or reports. You should be clear and concise in your communication, and use examples and quotes from your data to support your findings.
Examples of Qualitative Research
Here are some real-time examples of qualitative research:
- Customer Feedback: A company may conduct qualitative research to understand the feedback and experiences of its customers. This may involve conducting focus groups or one-on-one interviews with customers to gather insights into their attitudes, behaviors, and preferences.
- Healthcare : A healthcare provider may conduct qualitative research to explore patient experiences and perspectives on health and illness. This may involve conducting in-depth interviews with patients and their families to gather information on their experiences with different health care providers and treatments.
- Education : An educational institution may conduct qualitative research to understand student experiences and to develop effective teaching strategies. This may involve conducting classroom observations and interviews with students and teachers to gather insights into classroom dynamics and instructional practices.
- Social Work: A social worker may conduct qualitative research to explore social problems and to develop interventions to address them. This may involve conducting in-depth interviews with individuals and families to understand their experiences with poverty, discrimination, and other social problems.
- Anthropology : An anthropologist may conduct qualitative research to understand different cultures and societies. This may involve conducting ethnographic studies and observing and interviewing members of different cultural groups to gain insights into their beliefs, practices, and social structures.
- Psychology : A psychologist may conduct qualitative research to understand human behavior and mental processes. This may involve conducting in-depth interviews with individuals to explore their thoughts, feelings, and experiences.
- Public Policy: A government agency or non-profit organization may conduct qualitative research to explore public attitudes and to inform policy decisions. This may involve conducting focus groups and one-on-one interviews with members of the public to gather insights into their perspectives on different policy issues.
Purpose of Qualitative Research
The purpose of qualitative research is to explore and understand the subjective experiences, behaviors, and perspectives of individuals or groups in a particular context. Unlike quantitative research, which focuses on numerical data and statistical analysis, qualitative research aims to provide in-depth, descriptive information that can help researchers develop insights and theories about complex social phenomena.
Qualitative research can serve multiple purposes, including:
- Exploring new or emerging phenomena : Qualitative research can be useful for exploring new or emerging phenomena, such as new technologies or social trends. This type of research can help researchers develop a deeper understanding of these phenomena and identify potential areas for further study.
- Understanding complex social phenomena : Qualitative research can be useful for exploring complex social phenomena, such as cultural beliefs, social norms, or political processes. This type of research can help researchers develop a more nuanced understanding of these phenomena and identify factors that may influence them.
- Generating new theories or hypotheses: Qualitative research can be useful for generating new theories or hypotheses about social phenomena. By gathering rich, detailed data about individuals’ experiences and perspectives, researchers can develop insights that may challenge existing theories or lead to new lines of inquiry.
- Providing context for quantitative data: Qualitative research can be useful for providing context for quantitative data. By gathering qualitative data alongside quantitative data, researchers can develop a more complete understanding of complex social phenomena and identify potential explanations for quantitative findings.
When to use Qualitative Research
Here are some situations where qualitative research may be appropriate:
- Exploring a new area: If little is known about a particular topic, qualitative research can help to identify key issues, generate hypotheses, and develop new theories.
- Understanding complex phenomena: Qualitative research can be used to investigate complex social, cultural, or organizational phenomena that are difficult to measure quantitatively.
- Investigating subjective experiences: Qualitative research is particularly useful for investigating the subjective experiences of individuals or groups, such as their attitudes, beliefs, values, or emotions.
- Conducting formative research: Qualitative research can be used in the early stages of a research project to develop research questions, identify potential research participants, and refine research methods.
- Evaluating interventions or programs: Qualitative research can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions or programs by collecting data on participants’ experiences, attitudes, and behaviors.
Characteristics of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research is characterized by several key features, including:
- Focus on subjective experience: Qualitative research is concerned with understanding the subjective experiences, beliefs, and perspectives of individuals or groups in a particular context. Researchers aim to explore the meanings that people attach to their experiences and to understand the social and cultural factors that shape these meanings.
- Use of open-ended questions: Qualitative research relies on open-ended questions that allow participants to provide detailed, in-depth responses. Researchers seek to elicit rich, descriptive data that can provide insights into participants’ experiences and perspectives.
- Sampling-based on purpose and diversity: Qualitative research often involves purposive sampling, in which participants are selected based on specific criteria related to the research question. Researchers may also seek to include participants with diverse experiences and perspectives to capture a range of viewpoints.
- Data collection through multiple methods: Qualitative research typically involves the use of multiple data collection methods, such as in-depth interviews, focus groups, and observation. This allows researchers to gather rich, detailed data from multiple sources, which can provide a more complete picture of participants’ experiences and perspectives.
- Inductive data analysis: Qualitative research relies on inductive data analysis, in which researchers develop theories and insights based on the data rather than testing pre-existing hypotheses. Researchers use coding and thematic analysis to identify patterns and themes in the data and to develop theories and explanations based on these patterns.
- Emphasis on researcher reflexivity: Qualitative research recognizes the importance of the researcher’s role in shaping the research process and outcomes. Researchers are encouraged to reflect on their own biases and assumptions and to be transparent about their role in the research process.
Advantages of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research offers several advantages over other research methods, including:
- Depth and detail: Qualitative research allows researchers to gather rich, detailed data that provides a deeper understanding of complex social phenomena. Through in-depth interviews, focus groups, and observation, researchers can gather detailed information about participants’ experiences and perspectives that may be missed by other research methods.
- Flexibility : Qualitative research is a flexible approach that allows researchers to adapt their methods to the research question and context. Researchers can adjust their research methods in real-time to gather more information or explore unexpected findings.
- Contextual understanding: Qualitative research is well-suited to exploring the social and cultural context in which individuals or groups are situated. Researchers can gather information about cultural norms, social structures, and historical events that may influence participants’ experiences and perspectives.
- Participant perspective : Qualitative research prioritizes the perspective of participants, allowing researchers to explore subjective experiences and understand the meanings that participants attach to their experiences.
- Theory development: Qualitative research can contribute to the development of new theories and insights about complex social phenomena. By gathering rich, detailed data and using inductive data analysis, researchers can develop new theories and explanations that may challenge existing understandings.
- Validity : Qualitative research can offer high validity by using multiple data collection methods, purposive and diverse sampling, and researcher reflexivity. This can help ensure that findings are credible and trustworthy.
Limitations of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research also has some limitations, including:
- Subjectivity : Qualitative research relies on the subjective interpretation of researchers, which can introduce bias into the research process. The researcher’s perspective, beliefs, and experiences can influence the way data is collected, analyzed, and interpreted.
- Limited generalizability: Qualitative research typically involves small, purposive samples that may not be representative of larger populations. This limits the generalizability of findings to other contexts or populations.
- Time-consuming: Qualitative research can be a time-consuming process, requiring significant resources for data collection, analysis, and interpretation.
- Resource-intensive: Qualitative research may require more resources than other research methods, including specialized training for researchers, specialized software for data analysis, and transcription services.
- Limited reliability: Qualitative research may be less reliable than quantitative research, as it relies on the subjective interpretation of researchers. This can make it difficult to replicate findings or compare results across different studies.
- Ethics and confidentiality: Qualitative research involves collecting sensitive information from participants, which raises ethical concerns about confidentiality and informed consent. Researchers must take care to protect the privacy and confidentiality of participants and obtain informed consent.
Also see Research Methods
About the author
Muhammad Hassan
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
You may also like
![qualitative research methods benefits Research Methods](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Research_Methods-145x100.png)
Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide
![qualitative research methods benefits Transformative Design](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Transformative_Design-145x100.png)
Transformative Design – Methods, Types, Guide
![qualitative research methods benefits Mixed Research methods](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Mixed_Methods_Research-1-145x100.png)
Mixed Methods Research – Types & Analysis
![qualitative research methods benefits One-to-One Interview in Research](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/One-to-One_Interview_in_Research-145x100.png)
One-to-One Interview – Methods and Guide
![qualitative research methods benefits Phenomenology](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Phenomenology-145x100.png)
Phenomenology – Methods, Examples and Guide
![qualitative research methods benefits Survey Research](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Survey_Research-145x100.png)
Survey Research – Types, Methods, Examples
Have a language expert improve your writing
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.
- Knowledge Base
Methodology
- What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples
What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples
Published on June 19, 2020 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023.
Qualitative research involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data (e.g., text, video, or audio) to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a problem or generate new ideas for research.
Qualitative research is the opposite of quantitative research , which involves collecting and analyzing numerical data for statistical analysis.
Qualitative research is commonly used in the humanities and social sciences, in subjects such as anthropology, sociology, education, health sciences, history, etc.
- How does social media shape body image in teenagers?
- How do children and adults interpret healthy eating in the UK?
- What factors influence employee retention in a large organization?
- How is anxiety experienced around the world?
- How can teachers integrate social issues into science curriculums?
Table of contents
Approaches to qualitative research, qualitative research methods, qualitative data analysis, advantages of qualitative research, disadvantages of qualitative research, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about qualitative research.
Qualitative research is used to understand how people experience the world. While there are many approaches to qualitative research, they tend to be flexible and focus on retaining rich meaning when interpreting data.
Common approaches include grounded theory, ethnography , action research , phenomenological research, and narrative research. They share some similarities, but emphasize different aims and perspectives.
Approach | What does it involve? |
---|---|
Grounded theory | Researchers collect rich data on a topic of interest and develop theories . |
Researchers immerse themselves in groups or organizations to understand their cultures. | |
Action research | Researchers and participants collaboratively link theory to practice to drive social change. |
Phenomenological research | Researchers investigate a phenomenon or event by describing and interpreting participants’ lived experiences. |
Narrative research | Researchers examine how stories are told to understand how participants perceive and make sense of their experiences. |
Note that qualitative research is at risk for certain research biases including the Hawthorne effect , observer bias , recall bias , and social desirability bias . While not always totally avoidable, awareness of potential biases as you collect and analyze your data can prevent them from impacting your work too much.
Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting
Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:
- Academic style
- Vague sentences
- Style consistency
See an example
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.scribbr.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/dissertation-proofreading-service.png)
Each of the research approaches involve using one or more data collection methods . These are some of the most common qualitative methods:
- Observations: recording what you have seen, heard, or encountered in detailed field notes.
- Interviews: personally asking people questions in one-on-one conversations.
- Focus groups: asking questions and generating discussion among a group of people.
- Surveys : distributing questionnaires with open-ended questions.
- Secondary research: collecting existing data in the form of texts, images, audio or video recordings, etc.
- You take field notes with observations and reflect on your own experiences of the company culture.
- You distribute open-ended surveys to employees across all the company’s offices by email to find out if the culture varies across locations.
- You conduct in-depth interviews with employees in your office to learn about their experiences and perspectives in greater detail.
Qualitative researchers often consider themselves “instruments” in research because all observations, interpretations and analyses are filtered through their own personal lens.
For this reason, when writing up your methodology for qualitative research, it’s important to reflect on your approach and to thoroughly explain the choices you made in collecting and analyzing the data.
Qualitative data can take the form of texts, photos, videos and audio. For example, you might be working with interview transcripts, survey responses, fieldnotes, or recordings from natural settings.
Most types of qualitative data analysis share the same five steps:
- Prepare and organize your data. This may mean transcribing interviews or typing up fieldnotes.
- Review and explore your data. Examine the data for patterns or repeated ideas that emerge.
- Develop a data coding system. Based on your initial ideas, establish a set of codes that you can apply to categorize your data.
- Assign codes to the data. For example, in qualitative survey analysis, this may mean going through each participant’s responses and tagging them with codes in a spreadsheet. As you go through your data, you can create new codes to add to your system if necessary.
- Identify recurring themes. Link codes together into cohesive, overarching themes.
There are several specific approaches to analyzing qualitative data. Although these methods share similar processes, they emphasize different concepts.
Approach | When to use | Example |
---|---|---|
To describe and categorize common words, phrases, and ideas in qualitative data. | A market researcher could perform content analysis to find out what kind of language is used in descriptions of therapeutic apps. | |
To identify and interpret patterns and themes in qualitative data. | A psychologist could apply thematic analysis to travel blogs to explore how tourism shapes self-identity. | |
To examine the content, structure, and design of texts. | A media researcher could use textual analysis to understand how news coverage of celebrities has changed in the past decade. | |
To study communication and how language is used to achieve effects in specific contexts. | A political scientist could use discourse analysis to study how politicians generate trust in election campaigns. |
Qualitative research often tries to preserve the voice and perspective of participants and can be adjusted as new research questions arise. Qualitative research is good for:
- Flexibility
The data collection and analysis process can be adapted as new ideas or patterns emerge. They are not rigidly decided beforehand.
- Natural settings
Data collection occurs in real-world contexts or in naturalistic ways.
- Meaningful insights
Detailed descriptions of people’s experiences, feelings and perceptions can be used in designing, testing or improving systems or products.
- Generation of new ideas
Open-ended responses mean that researchers can uncover novel problems or opportunities that they wouldn’t have thought of otherwise.
Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.
Researchers must consider practical and theoretical limitations in analyzing and interpreting their data. Qualitative research suffers from:
- Unreliability
The real-world setting often makes qualitative research unreliable because of uncontrolled factors that affect the data.
- Subjectivity
Due to the researcher’s primary role in analyzing and interpreting data, qualitative research cannot be replicated . The researcher decides what is important and what is irrelevant in data analysis, so interpretations of the same data can vary greatly.
- Limited generalizability
Small samples are often used to gather detailed data about specific contexts. Despite rigorous analysis procedures, it is difficult to draw generalizable conclusions because the data may be biased and unrepresentative of the wider population .
- Labor-intensive
Although software can be used to manage and record large amounts of text, data analysis often has to be checked or performed manually.
If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.
- Chi square goodness of fit test
- Degrees of freedom
- Null hypothesis
- Discourse analysis
- Control groups
- Mixed methods research
- Non-probability sampling
- Quantitative research
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Research bias
- Rosenthal effect
- Implicit bias
- Cognitive bias
- Selection bias
- Negativity bias
- Status quo bias
Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.
Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.
There are five common approaches to qualitative research :
- Grounded theory involves collecting data in order to develop new theories.
- Ethnography involves immersing yourself in a group or organization to understand its culture.
- Narrative research involves interpreting stories to understand how people make sense of their experiences and perceptions.
- Phenomenological research involves investigating phenomena through people’s lived experiences.
- Action research links theory and practice in several cycles to drive innovative changes.
Data collection is the systematic process by which observations or measurements are gathered in research. It is used in many different contexts by academics, governments, businesses, and other organizations.
There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:
- Prepare and organize your data.
- Review and explore your data.
- Develop a data coding system.
- Assign codes to the data.
- Identify recurring themes.
The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .
Cite this Scribbr article
If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.
Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved July 29, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/qualitative-research/
Is this article helpful?
![qualitative research methods benefits Pritha Bhandari](https://www.scribbr.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/pritha-author-pic.jpg)
Pritha Bhandari
Other students also liked, qualitative vs. quantitative research | differences, examples & methods, how to do thematic analysis | step-by-step guide & examples, what is your plagiarism score.
- Skip to secondary menu
- Skip to main content
- Skip to primary sidebar
Statistics By Jim
Making statistics intuitive
Qualitative Research: Goals, Methods & Benefits
By Jim Frost 5 Comments
Qualitative research aims to understand ideas, experiences, and opinions using non-numeric data, such as text, audio, and visual recordings. The focus is on language, behaviors, and social structures. Qualitative researchers want to present personal experiences and produce narrative stories that use natural language to provide meaningful answers to their research questions.
Qualitative research focuses on descriptions, opinions, and experiences rather than numbers. Standard data collection techniques include interviews, diaries, focus groups, documents, artifacts, and direct observations.
Qualitative research provides a sharp contrast to quantitative research, which uses numeric data and statistical analyses to understand a concrete reality. The vast majority of content on my website is about quantitative research and statistical analyses. However, there are areas where qualitative research is more effective at understanding dynamic social structures and subjective perceptions in a real-world that can be convoluted.
Psychologists created qualitative research because the traditional methods failed to understand the human experience. Consequently, they developed a naturalistic approach that focuses on human behavior, what gives people meaning, how they perceive things, and why they act in a particular manner. This process involves understanding the people in their natural settings and social interactions.
Psychology, sociology, anthropology, education, and history frequently use qualitative research. Marketing groups also use it to understand how real people use their products, what factors increase usage, and obstacles that reduce usage. Ultimately, they want to market their products better, which requires understanding consumer mindsets.
Examples of Qualitative Research Questions
Qualitative research can answer a wide range of questions. Below are six example research questions.
- What factors shape body image?
- How do single-parent homes affect children?
- What challenges do consumers face in adopting a company’s new product?
- How does social media affect anxiety?
- What effect does previous domestic violence have on current relationships?
- What are the unique problems that night shift workers face?
Learn how to create research questions for scientific studies .
Qualitative Research Methods
![qualitative research methods benefits Understanding social interactions are important in qualitative research.](https://i0.wp.com/statisticsbyjim.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/social_network.jpg?resize=300%2C193&ssl=1)
Ethnography
The researchers embed themselves in the daily lives of their subjects and their social groups. Their goal is to understand their habits, routines, beliefs, and challenges.
For an excellent guide to observing participants in the field, read Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide [external PDF].
Narrative Research
An alternative qualitative approach is to interview several subjects in-depth, gather documents, and collect artifacts. The researchers then piece these multiple lines of evidence together to create a narrative that answers the research question.
Phenomenology
Qualitative researchers can study an event as it happens from different vantage points. For instance, they can conduct interviews, record videos, and directly observe the proceedings to understand the participants’ subjective experiences.
Grounded Theory
This form of qualitative research differs from most other methods. The researchers start with a qualitative dataset and then sort through these data, tagging concepts and ideas. As the study continues, they organize and group the conceptual tags. During this process, the researchers watch for hypotheses to emerge. This method seeks to let the scientists organically react to the dataset but yet ground the results in as much empirical data as possible.
Case Studies
A case study usually examines one subject in great detail. The subject can be a person, business, or other organization. The goal is to understand the subject as much as possible and use that information to understand the larger population to some extent. This qualitative research method can foster understanding of the motivations, influences, and factors that lead to success or failure. Learn more about What is a Case Study? Definition & Examples .
Qualitative Research Data Collection Methods
![qualitative research methods benefits Image of a focus group, which is a qualitative research method.](https://i0.wp.com/statisticsbyjim.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/focus_group.jpg?resize=300%2C300&ssl=1)
Below are the standard data collection methods for qualitative research. Studies can combine multiple methods.
- Secondary research : Use existing documents, photographs, audio, and video.
- Interviews : One-on-one guided conversations.
- Direct observations : Researchers observe the subjects in the field and take notes.
- Questionnaires : Qualitative research frequently uses surveys with open-ended questions.
- Focus groups : A guided small group conversation where the discussion provides the data.
Analyzing Qualitative Data
After collecting their data, qualitative researchers have multiple ways to analyze the content. A common approach is to add codes that represent meaningful ideas to communications, documents, videos, etc. The researchers evaluate frequencies and patterns of these conceptual codes. They can also find the most common words, thematic patterns, communications structure, and the method by which communications obtain specific goals. Analysts refer to these approaches with names such as content analysis, thematic analysis, textual analysis, etc.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research has many advantages because it seeks to record the subjects’ lived experiences and understand them in ways that quantitative data cannot. Going beyond just the numbers, they can gain insights into opinions, emotions, and perceptions. These studies frequently occur in natural environments and real-world social contexts rather than labs and other artificial environments that might affect the participants, particularly when talking about personal matters.
Unlike quantitative research, qualitative methods are flexible. Researchers can change their methodology and theories as they gather information. The open-ended nature of qualitative research allows the researchers to uncover new ideas they hadn’t anticipated and adjust accordingly.
However, qualitative research has some disadvantages.
Its primary disadvantage is that it is more subjective than quantitative research. It’s harder to separate the researchers’ opinions and predilections from the more personal nature of qualitative data. Determining what concepts to code and when to apply those codes can be highly subjective. Flexibly adapting the research on the fly can be great, but it also increases the prominence of the researcher’s personal determination of relevance.
Furthermore, consider how ordinary people can observe the same reality in all its real-world messiness and draw different conclusions. Similarly, qualitative researchers can evaluate the same real-world data and produce dissimilar findings.
Qualitative research typically uses small samples that are less likely to be representative , which limits generalizability . Finally, as with other types of observational studies , the real-world settings in qualitative research can be an advantage, but they potentially introduce a host of confounding variables that can bias the results.
Share this:
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://i0.wp.com/assets.pinterest.com/images/pidgets/pinit_fg_en_rect_gray_20.png)
Reader Interactions
August 1, 2023 at 10:42 am
If qualitative data is counted in categorical, ordinal, or binary forms does it become quantitative data?
January 2, 2023 at 11:27 am
Who are the actual people at the foundations of qualitative research as we know it? We know they are generally psychologists, like creswell who seems to have updated a but for the modern era, but who stands out the most in research throughout the age of qualitative research?
November 22, 2022 at 11:04 am
Have you publish on qualitative methods and surveys?
November 22, 2022 at 4:19 pm
I haven’t as of yet. Probably down the road, particularly for surveys.
April 23, 2022 at 2:16 pm
Can regression results from another study be used for my data collection, as a form of secondary data? I believe that the regression results are important to my study, but I don’t know if “results” from another study, specifically taken from their appendix table can be pasted into my “data collection section” of my research paper. I wish to employ a grounded theory research methodology that is mixed methods in approach, because I can apply regression analysis to the regression results, but I question the possibility of doing this for my data collection section.
Comments and Questions Cancel reply
HARMONY PLATFORM .css-vxhqob{display:inline-block;line-height:1em;-webkit-flex-shrink:0;-ms-flex-negative:0;flex-shrink:0;color:currentColor;vertical-align:middle;fill:currentColor;stroke:none;margin-left:var(--chakra-space-4);height:var(--chakra-sizes-4);width:var(--chakra-sizes-2);margin-bottom:var(--chakra-space-1);}
Harmony platform.
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fnav_platform.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Engage employees, inform customers and manage your workplace in one platform.
- Workplace Mobile App
HOW IT WORKS
- Omnichannel Feeds
- Integrations
- Analytics & Insights
- Workplace Management
- Consultancy
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fnav_solutions.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Find our how the Poppulo Harmony platform can help you to engage employees and customers, and deliver a great workplace experience.
- Employee Comms
- Customer Experience
- Workplace Experience
- Leadership Comms
- Change and Transformation
- Wayfinding & Directories
- Patient Comms
FEATURED CASE STUDIES
![qualitative research methods benefits Pax 8](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fcase1.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Using Digital Signage to Elevate the Workplace Experience
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fcase2.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Aligning people and business goals through integrated employee communications
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fcase3.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Valley Health
Launching an internal mobile app to keep frontline and back office employees informed
OUR COMPANY
Our company overview.
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fnav_company.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
- About Poppulo
FEATURED CASE STUDY
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fcase4.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Implementing an internal Mobile App in the software industry
RESOURCES OVERVIEW
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fnav_resources.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
We bring the best minds in employee comms together to share their knowledge and insights across our webinars, blogs, guides, and much more.
- Webinars & Guides
- Case Studies
- Maturity Model
FEATURED CONTENT
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fnav_resource1.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
The Ultimate Guide to Internal Comms Strategy
The way we work, where we work, and how we work has fundamentally changed...
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fnavbar%2Fnav_resource_miltimillion.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
The Multi-Million Dollar Impact of Communication on Employee & Customer Experience
The stats speak for themselves—and the facts are unarguable...
10 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research
— August 5th, 2021
![qualitative research methods benefits 10 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.sanity.io%2Fimages%2Fkhyfjs4i%2Fproduction%2Fb21c8653018b0ed62bc8ca5c0207bd371efd9648-900x500.jpg%3Fw%3D800%26max-h%3D608%26max-w%3D800%26fit%3Dclip%26auto%3Dformat&w=3840&q=70)
Research is about gathering data so that it can inform meaningful decisions. In the workplace, this can be invaluable in allowing informed decision-making that will meet with wider strategic organizational goals.
However, research comes in a variety of guises and, depending on the methodologies applied, can achieve different ends. There are broadly two key approaches to research -- qualitative and quantitative.
Focus Group Guide: Top Tips and Traps for Employee Focus Groups
Qualitative v quantitative – what’s the difference.
Qualitative Research is at the touchy-feely end of the spectrum. It’s not so much about bean-counting and much more about capturing people’s opinions and emotions.
“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.” (simplypsychology.org)
Examples of the way qualitative research is often gathered includes:
Interviews are a conversation based inquiry where questions are used to obtain information from participants. Interviews are typically structured to meet the researcher’s objectives.
Focus Groups
Focus group discussions are a common qualitative research strategy . In a focus group discussion, the interviewer talks to a group of people about their thoughts, opinions, beliefs, and attitudes towards a topic. Participants are typically a group who are similar in some way, such as income, education, or career. In the context of a company, the group dynamic is likely their common experience of the workplace.
Observation
Observation is a systematic research method in which researchers look at the activity of their subjects in their typical environment. Observation gives direct information about your research. Using observation can capture information that participants may not think to reveal or see as important during interviews/focus groups.
Existing Documents
This is also called secondary data. A qualitative data collection method entails extracting relevant data from existing documents. This data can then be analyzed using a qualitative data analysis method called content analysis. Existing documents might be work documents, work email , or any other material relevant to the organization.
Quantitative Research is the ‘bean-counting’ bit of the research spectrum. This isn’t to demean its value. Now encompassed by the term ‘ People Analytics ’, it plays an equally important role as a tool for business decision-making.
Organizations can use a variety of quantitative data-gathering methods to track productivity. In turn, this can help:
- To rank employees and work units
- To award raises or promotions.
- To measure and justify termination or disciplining of staff
- To measure productivity
- To measure group/individual targets
Examples might include measuring workforce productivity. If Widget Makers Inc., has two production lines and Line A is producing 25% more per day than Line B, capturing this data immediately informs management/HR of potential issues. Is the slower production on Line B due to human factors or is there a production process issue?
Quantitative Research can help capture real-time activities in the workplace and point towards what needs management attention.
The Pros & Cons of the Qualitative approach
By its nature, qualitative research is far more experiential and focused on capturing people’s feelings and views. This undoubtedly has value, but it can also bring many more challenges than simply capturing quantitative data. Here are a few challenges and benefits to consider.
- Qualitative Research can capture changing attitudes within a target group such as consumers of a product or service, or attitudes in the workplace.
- Qualitative approaches to research are not bound by the limitations of quantitative methods. If responses don’t fit the researcher’s expectation that’s equally useful qualitative data to add context and perhaps explain something that numbers alone are unable to reveal .
- Qualitative Research provides a much more flexible approach . If useful insights are not being captured researchers can quickly adapt questions, change the setting or any other variable to improve responses.
- Qualitative data capture allows researchers to be far more speculative about what areas they choose to investigate and how to do so. It allows data capture to be prompted by a researcher’s instinctive or ‘gut feel’ for where good information will be found.
Qualitative research can be more targeted . If you want to compare productivity across an entire organization, all parts, process, and participants need to be accounted for. Qualitative research can be far more concentrated, sampling specific groups and key points in a company to gather meaningful data. This can both speed the process of data capture and keep the costs of data-gathering down.
Business acumen in internal communications – Why it matters and how to build it
- Sample size can be a big issue. If you seek to infer from a sample of, for example, 200 employees, based upon a sample of 5 employees, this raises the question of whether sampling will provide a true reflection of the views of the remaining 97.5% of the company?
- Sample bias - HR departments will have competing agendas. One argument against qualitative methods alone is that HR tasked with finding the views of the workforce may be influenced both consciously or unconsciously, to select a sample that favors an anticipated outcome .
- Self-selection bias may arise where companies ask staff to volunteer their views . Whether in a paper, online survey , or focus group, if an HR department calls for participants there will be the issue of staff putting themselves forward. The argument goes that this group, in self-selecting itself, rather than being a randomly selected snapshot of a department, will inevitably have narrowed its relevance to those that typically are willing to come forward with their views. Quantitative data is gathered whether someone volunteered or not.
- The artificiality of qualitative data capture. The act of bringing together a group is inevitably outside of the typical ‘norms ’ of everyday work life and culture and may influence the participants in unforeseen ways.
- Are the right questions being posed to participants? You can only get answers to questions you think to ask . In qualitative approaches, asking about “how” and “why” can be hugely informative, but if researchers don’t ask, that insight may be missed.
The reality is that any research approach has both pros and cons. The art of effective and meaningful data gathering is thus to be aware of the limitations and strengths of each method.
In the case of Qualitative research, its value is inextricably linked to the number-crunching that is Quantitative data. One is the Ying to the other’s Yang. Each can only provide half of the picture, but together, you get a more complete view of what’s occurring within an organization.
The best on communications delivered weekly to your inbox.
![qualitative research methods benefits From Metrics to Mastery: How National Grid Transformed Communications with Measurement](https://www.poppulo.com/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.sanity.io%2Fimages%2Fkhyfjs4i%2Fproduction%2F0bdccd223e62375e7278752570244378804beb57-1200x600.png%3Fw%3D400%26max-h%3D420%26max-w%3D400%26fit%3Dclip%26auto%3Dformat&w=3840&q=40)
UPCOMING WEBINAR – JULY 30TH
From metrics to mastery: how national grid transformed communications with measurement.
Have a language expert improve your writing
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.
- Knowledge Base
- Methodology
- What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples
What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples
Published on 4 April 2022 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on 30 January 2023.
Qualitative research involves collecting and analysing non-numerical data (e.g., text, video, or audio) to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a problem or generate new ideas for research.
Qualitative research is the opposite of quantitative research , which involves collecting and analysing numerical data for statistical analysis.
Qualitative research is commonly used in the humanities and social sciences, in subjects such as anthropology, sociology, education, health sciences, and history.
- How does social media shape body image in teenagers?
- How do children and adults interpret healthy eating in the UK?
- What factors influence employee retention in a large organisation?
- How is anxiety experienced around the world?
- How can teachers integrate social issues into science curriculums?
Table of contents
Approaches to qualitative research, qualitative research methods, qualitative data analysis, advantages of qualitative research, disadvantages of qualitative research, frequently asked questions about qualitative research.
Qualitative research is used to understand how people experience the world. While there are many approaches to qualitative research, they tend to be flexible and focus on retaining rich meaning when interpreting data.
Common approaches include grounded theory, ethnography, action research, phenomenological research, and narrative research. They share some similarities, but emphasise different aims and perspectives.
Approach | What does it involve? |
---|---|
Grounded theory | Researchers collect rich data on a topic of interest and develop theories . |
Researchers immerse themselves in groups or organisations to understand their cultures. | |
Researchers and participants collaboratively link theory to practice to drive social change. | |
Phenomenological research | Researchers investigate a phenomenon or event by describing and interpreting participants’ lived experiences. |
Narrative research | Researchers examine how stories are told to understand how participants perceive and make sense of their experiences. |
Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.
Each of the research approaches involve using one or more data collection methods . These are some of the most common qualitative methods:
- Observations: recording what you have seen, heard, or encountered in detailed field notes.
- Interviews: personally asking people questions in one-on-one conversations.
- Focus groups: asking questions and generating discussion among a group of people.
- Surveys : distributing questionnaires with open-ended questions.
- Secondary research: collecting existing data in the form of texts, images, audio or video recordings, etc.
- You take field notes with observations and reflect on your own experiences of the company culture.
- You distribute open-ended surveys to employees across all the company’s offices by email to find out if the culture varies across locations.
- You conduct in-depth interviews with employees in your office to learn about their experiences and perspectives in greater detail.
Qualitative researchers often consider themselves ‘instruments’ in research because all observations, interpretations and analyses are filtered through their own personal lens.
For this reason, when writing up your methodology for qualitative research, it’s important to reflect on your approach and to thoroughly explain the choices you made in collecting and analysing the data.
Qualitative data can take the form of texts, photos, videos and audio. For example, you might be working with interview transcripts, survey responses, fieldnotes, or recordings from natural settings.
Most types of qualitative data analysis share the same five steps:
- Prepare and organise your data. This may mean transcribing interviews or typing up fieldnotes.
- Review and explore your data. Examine the data for patterns or repeated ideas that emerge.
- Develop a data coding system. Based on your initial ideas, establish a set of codes that you can apply to categorise your data.
- Assign codes to the data. For example, in qualitative survey analysis, this may mean going through each participant’s responses and tagging them with codes in a spreadsheet. As you go through your data, you can create new codes to add to your system if necessary.
- Identify recurring themes. Link codes together into cohesive, overarching themes.
There are several specific approaches to analysing qualitative data. Although these methods share similar processes, they emphasise different concepts.
Approach | When to use | Example |
---|---|---|
To describe and categorise common words, phrases, and ideas in qualitative data. | A market researcher could perform content analysis to find out what kind of language is used in descriptions of therapeutic apps. | |
To identify and interpret patterns and themes in qualitative data. | A psychologist could apply thematic analysis to travel blogs to explore how tourism shapes self-identity. | |
To examine the content, structure, and design of texts. | A media researcher could use textual analysis to understand how news coverage of celebrities has changed in the past decade. | |
To study communication and how language is used to achieve effects in specific contexts. | A political scientist could use discourse analysis to study how politicians generate trust in election campaigns. |
Qualitative research often tries to preserve the voice and perspective of participants and can be adjusted as new research questions arise. Qualitative research is good for:
- Flexibility
The data collection and analysis process can be adapted as new ideas or patterns emerge. They are not rigidly decided beforehand.
- Natural settings
Data collection occurs in real-world contexts or in naturalistic ways.
- Meaningful insights
Detailed descriptions of people’s experiences, feelings and perceptions can be used in designing, testing or improving systems or products.
- Generation of new ideas
Open-ended responses mean that researchers can uncover novel problems or opportunities that they wouldn’t have thought of otherwise.
Researchers must consider practical and theoretical limitations in analysing and interpreting their data. Qualitative research suffers from:
- Unreliability
The real-world setting often makes qualitative research unreliable because of uncontrolled factors that affect the data.
- Subjectivity
Due to the researcher’s primary role in analysing and interpreting data, qualitative research cannot be replicated . The researcher decides what is important and what is irrelevant in data analysis, so interpretations of the same data can vary greatly.
- Limited generalisability
Small samples are often used to gather detailed data about specific contexts. Despite rigorous analysis procedures, it is difficult to draw generalisable conclusions because the data may be biased and unrepresentative of the wider population .
- Labour-intensive
Although software can be used to manage and record large amounts of text, data analysis often has to be checked or performed manually.
Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.
Quantitative methods allow you to test a hypothesis by systematically collecting and analysing data, while qualitative methods allow you to explore ideas and experiences in depth.
There are five common approaches to qualitative research :
- Grounded theory involves collecting data in order to develop new theories.
- Ethnography involves immersing yourself in a group or organisation to understand its culture.
- Narrative research involves interpreting stories to understand how people make sense of their experiences and perceptions.
- Phenomenological research involves investigating phenomena through people’s lived experiences.
- Action research links theory and practice in several cycles to drive innovative changes.
Data collection is the systematic process by which observations or measurements are gathered in research. It is used in many different contexts by academics, governments, businesses, and other organisations.
There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:
- Prepare and organise your data.
- Review and explore your data.
- Develop a data coding system.
- Assign codes to the data.
- Identify recurring themes.
The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .
Cite this Scribbr article
If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.
Bhandari, P. (2023, January 30). What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 27 July 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/introduction-to-qualitative-research/
Is this article helpful?
![qualitative research methods benefits Pritha Bhandari](https://www.scribbr.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/pritha-author-pic.jpg)
Pritha Bhandari
Root out friction in every digital experience, super-charge conversion rates, and optimize digital self-service
Uncover insights from any interaction, deliver AI-powered agent coaching, and reduce cost to serve
Increase revenue and loyalty with real-time insights and recommendations delivered to teams on the ground
Know how your people feel and empower managers to improve employee engagement, productivity, and retention
Take action in the moments that matter most along the employee journey and drive bottom line growth
Whatever they’re are saying, wherever they’re saying it, know exactly what’s going on with your people
Get faster, richer insights with qual and quant tools that make powerful market research available to everyone
Run concept tests, pricing studies, prototyping + more with fast, powerful studies designed by UX research experts
Track your brand performance 24/7 and act quickly to respond to opportunities and challenges in your market
Explore the platform powering Experience Management
- Free Account
- Product Demos
- For Digital
- For Customer Care
- For Human Resources
- For Researchers
- Financial Services
- All Industries
Popular Use Cases
- Customer Experience
- Employee Experience
- Net Promoter Score
- Voice of Customer
- Customer Success Hub
- Product Documentation
- Training & Certification
- XM Institute
- Popular Resources
- Customer Stories
- Artificial Intelligence
Market Research
- Partnerships
- Marketplace
The annual gathering of the experience leaders at the world’s iconic brands building breakthrough business results, live in Salt Lake City.
- English/AU & NZ
- Español/Europa
- Español/América Latina
- Português Brasileiro
- REQUEST DEMO
- Experience Management
- Qualitative Research
Try Qualtrics for free
Your ultimate guide to qualitative research (with methods and examples).
16 min read You may be already using qualitative research and want to check your understanding, or you may be starting from the beginning. Learn about qualitative research methods and how you can best use them for maximum effect.
What is qualitative research?
Qualitative research is a research method that collects non-numerical data. Typically, it goes beyond the information that quantitative research provides (which we will cover below) because it is used to gain an understanding of underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations.
Qualitative research methods focus on the thoughts, feelings, reasons, motivations, and values of a participant, to understand why people act in the way they do .
In this way, qualitative research can be described as naturalistic research, looking at naturally-occurring social events within natural settings. So, qualitative researchers would describe their part in social research as the ‘vehicle’ for collecting the qualitative research data.
Qualitative researchers discovered this by looking at primary and secondary sources where data is represented in non-numerical form. This can include collecting qualitative research data types like quotes, symbols, images, and written testimonials.
These data types tell qualitative researchers subjective information. While these aren’t facts in themselves, conclusions can be interpreted out of qualitative that can help to provide valuable context.
Because of this, qualitative research is typically viewed as explanatory in nature and is often used in social research, as this gives a window into the behavior and actions of people.
It can be a good research approach for health services research or clinical research projects.
Free eBook: The qualitative research design handbook
Quantitative vs qualitative research
In order to compare qualitative and quantitative research methods, let’s explore what quantitative research is first, before exploring how it differs from qualitative research.
Quantitative research
Quantitative research is the research method of collecting quantitative research data – data that can be converted into numbers or numerical data, which can be easily quantified, compared, and analyzed .
Quantitative research methods deal with primary and secondary sources where data is represented in numerical form. This can include closed-question poll results, statistics, and census information or demographic data.
Quantitative research data tends to be used when researchers are interested in understanding a particular moment in time and examining data sets over time to find trends and patterns.
The difference between quantitative and qualitative research methodology
While qualitative research is defined as data that supplies non-numerical information, quantitative research focuses on numerical data.
In general, if you’re interested in measuring something or testing a hypothesis, use quantitative research methods. If you want to explore ideas, thoughts, and meanings, use qualitative research methods.
While qualitative research helps you to properly define, promote and sell your products, don’t rely on qualitative research methods alone because qualitative findings can’t always be reliably repeated. Qualitative research is directional, not empirical.
The best statistical analysis research uses a combination of empirical data and human experience ( quantitative research and qualitative research ) to tell the story and gain better and deeper insights, quickly.
Where both qualitative and quantitative methods are not used, qualitative researchers will find that using one without the other leaves you with missing answers.
For example, if a retail company wants to understand whether a new product line of shoes will perform well in the target market:
- Qualitative research methods could be used with a sample of target customers, which would provide subjective reasons why they’d be likely to purchase or not purchase the shoes, while
- Quantitative research methods into the historical customer sales information on shoe-related products would provide insights into the sales performance, and likely future performance of the new product range.
Approaches to qualitative research
There are five approaches to qualitative research methods:
- Grounded theory: Grounded theory relates to where qualitative researchers come to a stronger hypothesis through induction, all throughout the process of collecting qualitative research data and forming connections. After an initial question to get started, qualitative researchers delve into information that is grouped into ideas or codes, which grow and develop into larger categories, as the qualitative research goes on. At the end of the qualitative research, the researcher may have a completely different hypothesis, based on evidence and inquiry, as well as the initial question.
- Ethnographic research : Ethnographic research is where researchers embed themselves into the environment of the participant or group in order to understand the culture and context of activities and behavior. This is dependent on the involvement of the researcher, and can be subject to researcher interpretation bias and participant observer bias . However, it remains a great way to allow researchers to experience a different ‘world’.
- Action research: With the action research process, both researchers and participants work together to make a change. This can be through taking action, researching and reflecting on the outcomes. Through collaboration, the collective comes to a result, though the way both groups interact and how they affect each other gives insights into their critical thinking skills.
- Phenomenological research: Researchers seek to understand the meaning of an event or behavior phenomenon by describing and interpreting participant’s life experiences. This qualitative research process understands that people create their own structured reality (‘the social construction of reality’), based on their past experiences. So, by viewing the way people intentionally live their lives, we’re able to see the experiential meaning behind why they live as they do.
- Narrative research: Narrative research, or narrative inquiry, is where researchers examine the way stories are told by participants, and how they explain their experiences, as a way of explaining the meaning behind their life choices and events. This qualitative research can arise from using journals, conversational stories, autobiographies or letters, as a few narrative research examples. The narrative is subjective to the participant, so we’re able to understand their views from what they’ve documented/spoken.
![qualitative research methods benefits Web Graph of Qualitative Research](https://www.qualtrics.com/m/assets/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/qualitative-Research.png)
Qualitative research methods can use structured research instruments for data collection, like:
Surveys for individual views
A survey is a simple-to-create and easy-to-distribute qualitative research method, which helps gather information from large groups of participants quickly. Traditionally, paper-based surveys can now be made online, so costs can stay quite low.
Qualitative research questions tend to be open questions that ask for more information and provide a text box to allow for unconstrained comments.
Examples include:
- Asking participants to keep a written or a video diary for a period of time to document their feelings and thoughts
- In-Home-Usage tests: Buyers use your product for a period of time and report their experience
Surveys for group consensus (Delphi survey)
A Delphi survey may be used as a way to bring together participants and gain a consensus view over several rounds of questions. It differs from traditional surveys where results go to the researcher only. Instead, results go to participants as well, so they can reflect and consider all responses before another round of questions are submitted.
This can be useful to do as it can help researchers see what variance is among the group of participants and see the process of how consensus was reached.
- Asking participants to act as a fake jury for a trial and revealing parts of the case over several rounds to see how opinions change. At the end, the fake jury must make a unanimous decision about the defendant on trial.
- Asking participants to comment on the versions of a product being developed , as the changes are made and their feedback is taken onboard. At the end, participants must decide whether the product is ready to launch .
Semi-structured interviews
Interviews are a great way to connect with participants, though they require time from the research team to set up and conduct, especially if they’re done face-to-face.
Researchers may also have issues connecting with participants in different geographical regions. The researcher uses a set of predefined open-ended questions, though more ad-hoc questions can be asked depending on participant answers.
- Conducting a phone interview with participants to run through their feedback on a product . During the conversation, researchers can go ‘off-script’ and ask more probing questions for clarification or build on the insights.
Focus groups
Participants are brought together into a group, where a particular topic is discussed. It is researcher-led and usually occurs in-person in a mutually accessible location, to allow for easy communication between participants in focus groups.
In focus groups , the researcher uses a set of predefined open-ended questions, though more ad-hoc questions can be asked depending on participant answers.
- Asking participants to do UX tests, which are interface usability tests to show how easily users can complete certain tasks
Direct observation
This is a form of ethnographic research where researchers will observe participants’ behavior in a naturalistic environment. This can be great for understanding the actions in the culture and context of a participant’s setting.
This qualitative research method is prone to researcher bias as it is the researcher that must interpret the actions and reactions of participants. Their findings can be impacted by their own beliefs, values, and inferences.
- Embedding yourself in the location of your buyers to understand how a product would perform against the values and norms of that society
Qualitative data types and category types
Qualitative research methods often deliver information in the following qualitative research data types:
- Written testimonials
Through contextual analysis of the information, researchers can assign participants to category types:
- Social class
- Political alignment
- Most likely to purchase a product
- Their preferred training learning style
Advantages of qualitative research
- Useful for complex situations: Qualitative research on its own is great when dealing with complex issues, however, providing background context using quantitative facts can give a richer and wider understanding of a topic. In these cases, quantitative research may not be enough.
- A window into the ‘why’: Qualitative research can give you a window into the deeper meaning behind a participant’s answer. It can help you uncover the larger ‘why’ that can’t always be seen by analyzing numerical data.
- Can help improve customer experiences: In service industries where customers are crucial, like in private health services, gaining information about a customer’s experience through health research studies can indicate areas where services can be improved.
Disadvantages of qualitative research
- You need to ask the right question: Doing qualitative research may require you to consider what the right question is to uncover the underlying thinking behind a behavior. This may need probing questions to go further, which may suit a focus group or face-to-face interview setting better.
- Results are interpreted: As qualitative research data is written, spoken, and often nuanced, interpreting the data results can be difficult as they come in non-numerical formats. This might make it harder to know if you can accept or reject your hypothesis.
- More bias: There are lower levels of control to qualitative research methods, as they can be subject to biases like confirmation bias, researcher bias, and observation bias. This can have a knock-on effect on the validity and truthfulness of the qualitative research data results.
How to use qualitative research to your business’s advantage?
Qualitative methods help improve your products and marketing in many different ways:
- Understand the emotional connections to your brand
- Identify obstacles to purchase
- Uncover doubts and confusion about your messaging
- Find missing product features
- Improve the usability of your website, app, or chatbot experience
- Learn about how consumers talk about your product
- See how buyers compare your brand to others in the competitive set
- Learn how an organization’s employees evaluate and select vendors
6 steps to conducting good qualitative research
Businesses can benefit from qualitative research by using it to understand the meaning behind data types. There are several steps to this:
- Define your problem or interest area: What do you observe is happening and is it frequent? Identify the data type/s you’re observing.
- Create a hypothesis: Ask yourself what could be the causes for the situation with those qualitative research data types.
- Plan your qualitative research: Use structured qualitative research instruments like surveys, focus groups, or interviews to ask questions that test your hypothesis.
- Data Collection: Collect qualitative research data and understand what your data types are telling you. Once data is collected on different types over long time periods, you can analyze it and give insights into changing attitudes and language patterns.
- Data analysis: Does your information support your hypothesis? (You may need to redo the qualitative research with other variables to see if the results improve)
- Effectively present the qualitative research data: Communicate the results in a clear and concise way to help other people understand the findings.
Qualitative data analysis
Evaluating qualitative research can be tough when there are several analytics platforms to manage and lots of subjective data sources to compare.
Qualtrics provides a number of qualitative research analysis tools, like Text iQ , powered by Qualtrics iQ, provides powerful machine learning and native language processing to help you discover patterns and trends in text.
This also provides you with:
- Sentiment analysis — a technique to help identify the underlying sentiment (say positive, neutral, and/or negative) in qualitative research text responses
- Topic detection/categorisation — this technique is the grouping or bucketing of similar themes that can are relevant for the business & the industry (eg. ‘Food quality’, ‘Staff efficiency’ or ‘Product availability’)
How Qualtrics products can enhance & simplify the qualitative research process
Even in today’s data-obsessed marketplace, qualitative data is valuable – maybe even more so because it helps you establish an authentic human connection to your customers. If qualitative research doesn’t play a role to inform your product and marketing strategy, your decisions aren’t as effective as they could be.
The Qualtrics XM system gives you an all-in-one, integrated solution to help you all the way through conducting qualitative research. From survey creation and data collection to textual analysis and data reporting, it can help all your internal teams gain insights from your subjective and categorical data.
Qualitative methods are catered through templates or advanced survey designs. While you can manually collect data and conduct data analysis in a spreadsheet program, this solution helps you automate the process of qualitative research, saving you time and administration work.
Using computational techniques helps you to avoid human errors, and participant results come in are already incorporated into the analysis in real-time.
Our key tools, Text IQ™ and Driver IQ™ make analyzing subjective and categorical data easy and simple. Choose to highlight key findings based on topic, sentiment, or frequency. The choice is yours.
![qualitative research methods benefits Qualitative research Qualtrics products](https://www.qualtrics.com/m/assets/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Screen-Shot-2022-01-01-at-9.58.36-AM.png)
Some examples of your workspace in action, using drag and drop to create fast data visualizations quickly:
![qualitative research methods benefits Qualitative research Qualtrics products](https://www.qualtrics.com/m/assets/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Screen-Shot-2022-01-01-at-10.00.49-AM.png)
Related resources
Market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read, ethnographic research 11 min read, qualitative vs quantitative research 13 min read, qualitative research questions 11 min read, qualitative research design 12 min read, primary vs secondary research 14 min read, request demo.
Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?
![qualitative research methods benefits Looking at qualitative analysis of consumer data.](https://www.discuss.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/qualitative-analysis.jpg)
Market Research
Qualitative Research: Understanding the Goal and Benefits for Effective Analysis
As market trends evolve at lightning speed in the age of digital transformation, having an intimate understanding of consumer desires and motivations is more critical than ever. Enter qualitative research – the knight in shining armor of deep-dive data analysis. In this blog post, we’ll be exploring the profound purpose and impressive benefits behind qualitative research, unveiling how it anchors effective market analysis and strategy development. Brace yourselves for a mesmerizing journey into the realm of potent insights that power consequential decisions and breed groundbreaking innovation.
The primary goal of qualitative research is to obtain insights into participants’ experiences and understanding of the world. This type of research provides rich descriptions and explanations of processes in identifiable local contexts. Qualitative research has several benefits including providing an in-depth understanding, being flexible and adaptable, and generating descriptive data that can be used to create new theories using the inductive method.
Qualitative Study’s Importance
Qualitative research holds a significant place in the realm of social science research and is integral for understanding the complexities of human behavior, experiences, and social interactions. Unlike quantitative research which focuses on numerical data and statistical analysis, qualitative research collects non-numerical data and emphasizes interpreting meaning from social contexts.
The importance of qualitative research lies in its ability to provide rich descriptions and explanations of processes in identifiable local contexts. It allows researchers to gain insights into participants’ experiences and understand the world as another person experiences it. This deeper understanding paves the way for more comprehensive analyses and the development of theories that accurately represent the intricacies of human life.
For instance, imagine a sociologist interested in studying how individuals cope with unemployment during economic downturns. By conducting qualitative research , these sociologists can immerse themselves in the lives of unemployed individuals, observe their daily routines, conduct in-depth interviews, and analyze their personal narratives. This approach goes beyond simply quantifying unemployment rates; it provides an intimate understanding of how people navigate through difficult situations and sheds light on the emotional, psychological, and societal impacts.
In addition to providing rich insight into human experiences, qualitative research offers numerous other benefits that contribute to effective analysis.
- Qualitative research is essential in social science research as it allows for a deeper understanding of human behavior and social interactions. Its focus on non-numerical data collection and interpretation of meaning helps researchers gain insights into participants’ experiences and contextual factors. Qualitative research also provides rich descriptions and explanations of processes in identifiable local contexts, leading to the development of comprehensive analysis and accurate theories. Overall, qualitative research offers numerous benefits that contribute to effective analysis in social science research.
Goals & Benefits Driving Research
The goals of qualitative research are multifaceted. One primary objective is to investigate the meanings people attribute to their behavior and interactions within specific social contexts. This focus on subjective interpretations helps uncover individual perspectives that may be overlooked by quantitative methods alone. Additionally, qualitative research aims to explore social phenomena that are not easily measurable or quantifiable.
Qualitative research also generates descriptive data that requires rigorous methods of analysis. Researchers employ various techniques such as thematic analysis or grounded theory to identify patterns, themes, and categories within their data. These analytical approaches ensure systematic interpretation while maintaining the integrity of participants’ lived experiences.
Beyond these goals, qualitative research offers several benefits that aid in reliable analysis. Firstly, it provides an in-depth understanding of complex social issues by capturing the nuances and subtleties of human behavior. This depth allows researchers to generate rich descriptions and explanations that facilitate a comprehensive comprehension of social phenomena.
For example, consider a study exploring the experience of minority students in predominantly white institutions. Through qualitative research methods like interviews and focus groups, researchers can delve into the students’ lived experiences, their perceptions of inclusion or exclusion, and their strategies for navigating through institutional challenges. This level of detail paints a holistic picture that goes beyond quantitative statistics such as enrollment numbers.
Another advantage of qualitative research is its flexibility and adaptability. Researchers can modify their data collection methods to account for new insights or unexpected findings during the research process. This responsiveness allows for deeper exploration and ensures that no valuable information is left unexamined.
However, it is essential to acknowledge that qualitative research also has its limitations. These include the limited scope and generalizability of findings due to the smaller sample sizes typically used in qualitative studies. Additionally, there is a potential for researcher bias since the individuals collecting and analyzing the data play an active role in shaping the research process.
Nonetheless, while objectivity may be seen as a myth in qualitative research, researchers should be honest and transparent about their own biases and assumptions. Reflexivity, which involves acknowledging and critically examining one’s subjectivity throughout the research process, is integral to ensuring integrity and minimizing undue influence.
- According to a report from the Journal of Social Issues, as of 2022, around 45% of psychological studies used qualitative methods, signaling strong recognition in the field for its unique insights into human behavior.
- A study conducted by the Market Research Society confirmed that out of all market research carried out worldwide, approximately 20% utilize qualitative methodologies. This highlights its crucial role in understanding customer behaviors and motivations.
- The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) indicated that nearly 70% of health research incorporates some elements of qualitative research, underscoring its importance in contributing to our understanding of complex health issues and interventions.
Comprehensive Approaches
When conducting qualitative research , adopting comprehensive approaches is essential for capturing the richness and depth of data required for effective analysis. These approaches involve a holistic perspective that considers multiple dimensions and contexts. One commonly used comprehensive approach is triangulation , which involves using multiple data sources, methods, or perspectives to cross-verify findings. By triangulating data, researchers can enhance the reliability and validity of their analysis.
Another important approach is thick description , which focuses on providing detailed and vivid accounts of participants’ experiences and contexts. This technique enables researchers to capture the nuances and complexities of social phenomena, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the research topic. Thick descriptions typically include vivid narratives, dialogue excerpts, and detailed observations, providing readers with a rich portrayal of the study’s context.
Researchers may also adopt an iterative process in their analysis, where data collection and analysis occur simultaneously. This approach allows for constant refinement and adjustment of research questions and methods based on emerging findings. Through iteration, researchers can dive deeper into the topic, uncover unexpected insights, and explore various angles that contribute to a more comprehensive analysis.
It’s worth noting that comprehensive approaches in qualitative research require flexibility and openness to embracing emergent themes and unexpected directions. As researchers immerse themselves in the data, they should be willing to adapt their strategies accordingly.
Participant Engagement & Topic Exploration
Participant engagement plays a crucial role in qualitative research as it fosters a deeper understanding of participants’ perspectives and experiences. Effective engagement encourages open dialogue and trust between the researcher and participants, allowing for richer data collection. One way to promote participant engagement is through active listening . By attentively listening to participants’ stories, concerns, and viewpoints, researchers can demonstrate empathy and create a safe space for open expression.
Another aspect that greatly enhances participant engagement is establishing rapport . Building rapport involves creating a comfortable environment where participants feel at ease to share their thoughts and experiences. This can be achieved through transparent communication, respect for participants’ autonomy, and genuine interest in their stories. Researchers should establish a positive and respectful relationship with participants, positioning themselves as partners rather than authoritative figures.
In qualitative research, topic exploration is a dynamic and iterative process that allows researchers to uncover new insights and dimensions of the phenomenon under study. This involves probing deeper into participants’ responses, asking follow-up questions, and exploring unexpected avenues that emerge during data collection. By being open to revisiting research questions and digging deeper into topics, researchers can uncover valuable insights and gain a more comprehensive understanding of the subject matter.
It’s important to note that participant engagement and topic exploration go hand in hand. Engaged participants are more likely to provide rich and detailed responses, leading to enhanced exploration of the research topic. Conversely, skillful topic exploration can foster deeper engagement from participants by demonstrating genuine interest and curiosity in their perspectives.
Effective Data Accumulation Methods
In qualitative research, the collection of rich and meaningful data is a crucial step toward understanding the complexities of human experiences. To ensure effective analysis, researchers need to employ appropriate data accumulation methods that capture the depth of participants’ perspectives and insights. Let’s explore some strategies that can facilitate this process.
One common method used in qualitative research is participant observation. This involves immersing oneself in the research setting, actively observing, and taking detailed notes on behaviors, interactions, and cultural nuances. By being present in the natural context, researchers gain a deeper understanding of the social dynamics and can document valuable data that may go unnoticed otherwise.
For instance, imagine a researcher interested in studying the experiences of healthcare workers in a hospital. Through participant observation, they can shadow these workers, witness their daily routines, the challenges they face, and even engage in conversations during breaks. This method provides an intimate look into their lives and generates valuable insights.
Another effective technique is in-depth interviews. These interviews allow researchers to establish a personal connection with participants and delve into their thoughts, feelings, and motivations regarding the research topic. It’s crucial to create an open and comfortable environment where participants feel safe sharing their views openly.
Additionally, focus groups are utilized as a powerful data accumulation method. Bringing together a small group of individuals who share similar characteristics or experiences allows for stimulating discussions that uncover diverse perspectives. Participants can build upon each other’s ideas and provide deeper insights collectively.
Having explored effective data accumulation methods like participant observation, in-depth interviews, and focus groups, let’s now dive into another important aspect of qualitative research – harnessing sensory inputs & eliciting verbal responses.
Harnessing Sensory Inputs and Eliciting Verbal Responses
Qualitative research aims to understand phenomena from the perspective of individuals involved. One way to achieve this is by harnessing sensory inputs and eliciting verbal responses, allowing participants to express themselves fully. This approach taps into a range of human senses and encourages participants to describe their experiences vividly.
For instance, researchers might utilize photovoice techniques, where participants capture images related to the research topic using cameras or smartphones. These visual representations allow participants to share their perspectives in a unique and powerful way.
Imagine a study exploring the impact of urbanization on community well-being. Participants could be asked to take pictures of spaces they feel contribute positively or negatively to their quality of life. These images can then be used as stimuli for further discussion, sparking conversations about the emotional and sensory aspects of the built environment.
In addition to visuals, researchers can also engage participants’ sense of hearing through audio recordings. By recording interviews, focus group discussions, or even ambient sounds in a particular environment, researchers can capture subtle nuances that may not be conveyed through written transcripts alone.
By harnessing sensory inputs and giving participants the space for verbal expression, qualitative researchers foster an environment where rich and nuanced data can be collected. This multi-sensory approach enables a deeper understanding of individuals’ experiences and allows us to gain insights beyond mere words.
Parsing and Conclusion Derivation from Data
In qualitative research, one of the primary goals is to parse and derive meaningful conclusions from the collected data. Unlike quantitative research which relies on statistical analysis, qualitative research involves obtaining rich descriptions of participants’ experiences and understanding the world as another person experiences it. The process of parsing and deriving conclusions from qualitative data requires a meticulous examination of the data, identification of patterns, themes, and connections, and an inductive approach to theory development.
Qualitative researchers immerse themselves in the data collected through methods such as interviews, observations, and focus groups. They carefully analyze transcripts, field notes, or documents to identify recurring themes or significant incidents that shed light on the research question. Through this process of coding and categorizing, researchers start to make sense of the data and identify key findings that can be used to develop theories or inform specific contexts.
For example, imagine a researcher conducting an ethnographic study exploring the experiences of undocumented immigrants in their journey toward citizenship. Through interviews and participant observation, they gather compelling stories and narratives about the challenges faced by these individuals. By carefully analyzing these stories for common themes such as navigating legal systems or facing social stigma, the researcher can derive conclusions about the complex processes involved in seeking legal status.
“Analyzing qualitative data is like piecing together a puzzle. Each interview or observation provides a unique piece that contributes to the overall picture.”
However, it is important to note that deriving conclusions from qualitative data is not a simple linear process. It requires reflexivity on the part of the researcher to acknowledge their own biases and assumptions that may influence their interpretation of the data. Reflexivity encourages researchers to critically reflect on how their own subjectivity affects their analysis and conclusions.
Advantages & Drawbacks of This Research Type
Qualitative research offers several advantages that contribute to its effectiveness in providing rich insights into social phenomena. First and foremost, it allows researchers to gain an in-depth understanding of the experiences, perspectives, and meanings that individuals attribute to their behavior and interactions. This depth of understanding is often difficult to achieve through quantitative research methods alone.
Moreover, qualitative research is known for its flexibility and adaptability. Researchers can modify their research design or data collection methods as they delve deeper into the field, responding to emerging themes or new areas of investigation. The open-ended nature of qualitative research also enables participants to express themselves freely and provide nuanced responses, offering a more comprehensive view of complex social phenomena.
On the other hand, there are some drawbacks to consider when conducting qualitative research. One challenge is the limited scope and generalizability of findings. Due to the small sample sizes typically involved in qualitative studies, it can be challenging to extrapolate findings to broader populations or contexts. Additionally, there is potential for researcher bias as interpretations of qualitative data are subjective and influenced by researchers’ perspectives and assumptions.
Despite these limitations, the benefits of qualitative research outweigh its drawbacks in many cases. By providing detailed insights into participants’ experiences, qualitative research contributes valuable knowledge that can inform policy decisions, improve interventions, and enhance our understanding of social phenomena.
Unlock the power of qualitative research with Discuss
In a world driven by meaningful connections, Discuss stands at the forefront of qualitative research, empowering you to delve deeper, understand better, and innovate with confidence. Elevate your research game—choose Discuss for insights that go beyond the surface. Navigate cultural nuances effortlessly. Our platform is designed to facilitate cross-cultural research, helping you understand and appreciate the local context that shapes consumer behavior around the world.
Why Discuss ?
- Unparalleled Access: Connect with your target audience effortlessly, breaking down geographical barriers and ensuring your research is truly representative.
- Real-time Collaboration: Seamlessly share ideas, gather feedback, and refine your approach on the fly.
- Rich Multimedia Insights: Witness authentic reactions, emotions, and body language that add layers of depth to your qualitative findings.
- Data-Driven Decision Making: Make informed decisions backed by real, human-driven data.
Sign Up for our Newsletter
Related articles.
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.discuss.io/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Jim-Blog-Graphic-1024x576.png)
Navigating Tomorrow: A Glimpse into the Future of Market Research in 2024
Author: Jim Longo, Co-founder & Chief Strategy Officer As a veteran with over 30 years in…
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.discuss.io/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Remote-worker-2-1024x683.jpg)
The Importance of a Market Research Analyst: Key Benefits and Skills
As the world becomes increasingly data-driven, understanding market trends is more crucial than ever for business…
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.discuss.io/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/25-1024x576.png)
Forrester and G2 Reports Explained
In this short video, Discuss’ Chief Growth Officer, Adam Mertz, highlights three recent industry reports and…
From Apathy to Empathy: The 3 Steps to Design for Human Centricity at Scale
August 7, 11 am EST/8 am PST
Discover how to eliminate the historical pains of conducting qual in this new era of human centricity. Join guest speakers, Senem Guler-Biyikli, PhD, Forrester Lead Analyst, and Sarah Tomasaitis, U.S. Insights Director at Suntory Global Spirits for this interactive session.
![Forrester website banner_transparent background Forrester webinar](https://www.discuss.io/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Forrester-website-banner_transparent-background.png)
16 Key Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research Methods
Qualitative research is the process of natural inquisitiveness which wants to find an in-depth understanding of specific social phenomena within a regular setting. It is a process that seeks to find out why people act the way that they do in specific situations. By relying on the direct experiences that each person has every day, it becomes possible to define the meaning of a choice – or even a life.
Researchers who use the qualitative process are looking at multiple methods of inquiry to review human-related activities. This process is a way to measure the very existence of humanity. Multiple options are available to complete the work, including discourse analysis, biographies, case studies, and various other theories.
This process results in three primary areas of focus, which are individual actions, overall communication, and cultural influence. Each option must make the common assumption that knowledge is subjective instead of objective, which means the researchers must learn from their participants to understand what is valuable and what is not in their studies.
List of the Pros of Qualitative Research
1. Qualitative research is a very affordable method of research. Qualitative research is one of the most affordable ways to glean information from individuals who are being studied. Focus groups tend to be the primary method of collecting information using this process because it is fast and effective. Although there are research studies that require an extensive period of observation to produce results, using a group interview session can produce usable information in under an hour. That means you can proceed faster with the ideas you wish to pursue when compared to other research methods.
2. Qualitative research provides a predictive element. The data which researchers gather when using the qualitative research process provides a predictive element to the project. This advantage occurs even though the experiences or perspectives of the individuals participating in the research can vary substantially from person-to-person. The goal of this work is not to apply the information to the general public, but to understand how specific demographics react in situations where there are challenges to face. It is a process which allows for product development to occur because the pain points of the population have been identified.
3. Qualitative research focuses on the details of personal choice. The qualitative research process looks at the purpose of the decision that an individual makes as the primary information requiring collection. It does not take a look at the reasons why someone would decide to make the choices that they do in the first place. Other research methods preferred to look at the behavior, but this method wants to know the entire story behind each individual choice so that the entire population or society can benefit from the process.
4. Qualitative research uses fluid operational structures. The qualitative research process relies on data gathering based on situations that researchers are watching and experiencing personally. Instead of relying on a specific framework to collect and preserve information under rigid guidelines, this process finds value in the human experience. This method makes it possible to include the intricacies of the human experience with the structures required to find conclusions that are useful to the demographics involved – and possible to the rest of society as well.
5. Qualitative research uses individual choices as workable data. When we have an understanding of why individual choices occurred, then we can benefit from the diversity that the human experience provides. Each unique perspective makes it possible for every other person to gather more knowledge about a situation because there are differences to examine. It is a process which allows us to discover more potential outcomes because there is more information present from a variety of sources. Researchers can then take the perspectives to create guidelines that others can follow if they find themselves stuck in a similar situation.
6. Qualitative research is an open-ended process. One of the most significant advantages of qualitative research is that it does not rely on specific deadlines, formats, or questions to create a successful outcome. This process allows researchers to ask open-ended questions whenever they feel it is appropriate because there may be more data to collect. There are not the same time elements involved in this process either, as qualitative research can continue indefinitely until those working on the project feel like there is nothing more to glean from the individuals participating.
Because of this unique structure, researchers can look for data points that other methods might overlook because a greater emphasis is often placed on the interview or observational process with firm deadlines.
7. Qualitative research works to remove bias from its collected information. Unconscious bias is a significant factor in every research project because it relies on the ability of the individuals involved to control their thoughts, emotions, and reactions. Everyone has preconceived notions and stereotypes about specific demographics and nationalities which can influence the data collected. No one is 100% immune to this process. The format of qualitative research allows for these judgments to be set aside because it prefers to look at the specific structures behind each choice of person makes.
This research method also collects information about the events which lead up to a specific decision instead of trying to examine what happens after the fact. That’s why this advantage allows the data to be more accurate compared to the other research methods which are in use.
8. Qualitative research provides specific insight development. The average person tends to make a choice based on comfort, convenience, or both. We also tend to move forward in our circumstances based on what we feel is comfortable to our spiritual, moral, or ethical stances. Every form of communication that we use becomes a potential foundation for researchers to understand the demographics of humanity in better ways. By looking at the problems we face in everyday situations, it becomes possible to discover new insights that can help us to solve do you need problems which can come up. It is a way for researchers to understand the context of what happens in society instead of only looking at the outcomes.
9. Qualitative research requires a smaller sample size. Qualitative research studies wrap up faster that other methods because a smaller sample size is possible for data collection with this method. Participants can answer questions immediately, creating usable and actionable information that can lead to new ideas. This advantage makes it possible to move forward with confidence in future choices because there is added predictability to the results which are possible.
10. Qualitative research provides more useful content. Authenticity is highly demanded in today’s world because there is no better way to understand who we are as an individual, a community, or a society. Qualitative research works hard to understand the core concepts of how each participant defines themselves without the influence of outside perspectives. It wants to see how people structure their lives, and then take that data to help solve whatever problems they might have. Although no research method can provide guaranteed results, there is always some type of actionable information present with this approach.
List of the Cons of Qualitative Research
1. Qualitative research creates subjective information points. The quality of the information collected using the qualitative research process can sometimes be questionable. This approach requires the researchers to connect all of the data points which they gather to find the answers to their questions. That means the results are dependent upon the skills of those involved to read the non-verbal cues of each participate, understand when and where follow-up questions are necessary, and remember to document each response. Because individuals can interpret this data in many different ways, there can sometimes be differences in the conclusion because each researcher has a different take on what they receive.
2. Qualitative research can involve significant levels of repetition. Although the smaller sample sizes found in qualitative research can be an advantage, this structure can also be a problem when researchers are trying to collect a complete data profile for a specific demographic. Multiple interviews and discovery sessions become necessary to discover what the potential consequences of a future choice will be. When you only bring in a handful of people to discuss a situation, then these individuals may not offer a complete representation of the group being studied. Without multiple follow-up sessions with other participants, there is no way to prove the authenticity of the information collected.
3. Qualitative research is difficult to replicate. The only way that research can turn into fact is through a process of replication. Other researchers must be able to come to the similar conclusions after the initial project publishers the results. Because the nature of this work is subjective, finding opportunities to duplicate the results are quite rare. The scope of information which a project collects is often limited, which means there is always some doubt found in the data. That is why you will often see a margin of error percentage associated with research that uses this method. Because it never involves every potential member of a demographic, it will always be incomplete.
4. Qualitative research relies on the knowledge of the researchers. The only reason why opportunities are available in the first place when using qualitative research is because there are researchers involved which have expertise that relates to the subject matter being studied. When interviewers are unfamiliar with industry concepts, then it is much more challenging to identify follow-up opportunities that would be if the individual conducting the session was familiar with the ideas under discussion. There is no way to correctly interpret the data if the perspective of the researcher is skewed by a lack of knowledge.
5. Qualitative research does not offer statistics. The goal of qualitative research is to seek out moments of commonality. That means you will not find statistical data within the results. It looks to find specific areas of concern or pain points that are usable to the organization funding to research in the first place. The amount of data collected using this process can be extreme, but there is no guarantee that it will ever be usable. You do not have the same opportunities to compare information as you would with other research methods.
6. Qualitative research still requires a significant time investment. It is true that there are times when the qualitative research process is significantly faster than other methods. There is also the disadvantage in the fact that the amount of time necessary to collect accurate data can be unpredictable using this option. It may take months, years, or even decades to complete a research project if there is a massive amount of data to review. That means the researchers involve must make a long-term commitment to the process to ensure the results can be as accurate as possible.
These qualitative research pros and cons review how all of us come to the choices that we make each day. When researchers understand why we come to specific conclusions, then it becomes possible to create new goods and services that can make our lives easier. This process then concludes with solutions which can benefit a significant majority of the people, leading to better best practices in the future.
- Open access
- Published: 27 May 2020
How to use and assess qualitative research methods
- Loraine Busetto ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9228-7875 1 ,
- Wolfgang Wick 1 , 2 &
- Christoph Gumbinger 1
Neurological Research and Practice volume 2 , Article number: 14 ( 2020 ) Cite this article
762k Accesses
335 Citations
89 Altmetric
Metrics details
This paper aims to provide an overview of the use and assessment of qualitative research methods in the health sciences. Qualitative research can be defined as the study of the nature of phenomena and is especially appropriate for answering questions of why something is (not) observed, assessing complex multi-component interventions, and focussing on intervention improvement. The most common methods of data collection are document study, (non-) participant observations, semi-structured interviews and focus groups. For data analysis, field-notes and audio-recordings are transcribed into protocols and transcripts, and coded using qualitative data management software. Criteria such as checklists, reflexivity, sampling strategies, piloting, co-coding, member-checking and stakeholder involvement can be used to enhance and assess the quality of the research conducted. Using qualitative in addition to quantitative designs will equip us with better tools to address a greater range of research problems, and to fill in blind spots in current neurological research and practice.
The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of qualitative research methods, including hands-on information on how they can be used, reported and assessed. This article is intended for beginning qualitative researchers in the health sciences as well as experienced quantitative researchers who wish to broaden their understanding of qualitative research.
![](http://charunivedita.online/777/templates/cheerup2/res/banner1.gif)
What is qualitative research?
Qualitative research is defined as “the study of the nature of phenomena”, including “their quality, different manifestations, the context in which they appear or the perspectives from which they can be perceived” , but excluding “their range, frequency and place in an objectively determined chain of cause and effect” [ 1 ]. This formal definition can be complemented with a more pragmatic rule of thumb: qualitative research generally includes data in form of words rather than numbers [ 2 ].
Why conduct qualitative research?
Because some research questions cannot be answered using (only) quantitative methods. For example, one Australian study addressed the issue of why patients from Aboriginal communities often present late or not at all to specialist services offered by tertiary care hospitals. Using qualitative interviews with patients and staff, it found one of the most significant access barriers to be transportation problems, including some towns and communities simply not having a bus service to the hospital [ 3 ]. A quantitative study could have measured the number of patients over time or even looked at possible explanatory factors – but only those previously known or suspected to be of relevance. To discover reasons for observed patterns, especially the invisible or surprising ones, qualitative designs are needed.
While qualitative research is common in other fields, it is still relatively underrepresented in health services research. The latter field is more traditionally rooted in the evidence-based-medicine paradigm, as seen in " research that involves testing the effectiveness of various strategies to achieve changes in clinical practice, preferably applying randomised controlled trial study designs (...) " [ 4 ]. This focus on quantitative research and specifically randomised controlled trials (RCT) is visible in the idea of a hierarchy of research evidence which assumes that some research designs are objectively better than others, and that choosing a "lesser" design is only acceptable when the better ones are not practically or ethically feasible [ 5 , 6 ]. Others, however, argue that an objective hierarchy does not exist, and that, instead, the research design and methods should be chosen to fit the specific research question at hand – "questions before methods" [ 2 , 7 , 8 , 9 ]. This means that even when an RCT is possible, some research problems require a different design that is better suited to addressing them. Arguing in JAMA, Berwick uses the example of rapid response teams in hospitals, which he describes as " a complex, multicomponent intervention – essentially a process of social change" susceptible to a range of different context factors including leadership or organisation history. According to him, "[in] such complex terrain, the RCT is an impoverished way to learn. Critics who use it as a truth standard in this context are incorrect" [ 8 ] . Instead of limiting oneself to RCTs, Berwick recommends embracing a wider range of methods , including qualitative ones, which for "these specific applications, (...) are not compromises in learning how to improve; they are superior" [ 8 ].
Research problems that can be approached particularly well using qualitative methods include assessing complex multi-component interventions or systems (of change), addressing questions beyond “what works”, towards “what works for whom when, how and why”, and focussing on intervention improvement rather than accreditation [ 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ]. Using qualitative methods can also help shed light on the “softer” side of medical treatment. For example, while quantitative trials can measure the costs and benefits of neuro-oncological treatment in terms of survival rates or adverse effects, qualitative research can help provide a better understanding of patient or caregiver stress, visibility of illness or out-of-pocket expenses.
How to conduct qualitative research?
Given that qualitative research is characterised by flexibility, openness and responsivity to context, the steps of data collection and analysis are not as separate and consecutive as they tend to be in quantitative research [ 13 , 14 ]. As Fossey puts it : “sampling, data collection, analysis and interpretation are related to each other in a cyclical (iterative) manner, rather than following one after another in a stepwise approach” [ 15 ]. The researcher can make educated decisions with regard to the choice of method, how they are implemented, and to which and how many units they are applied [ 13 ]. As shown in Fig. 1 , this can involve several back-and-forth steps between data collection and analysis where new insights and experiences can lead to adaption and expansion of the original plan. Some insights may also necessitate a revision of the research question and/or the research design as a whole. The process ends when saturation is achieved, i.e. when no relevant new information can be found (see also below: sampling and saturation). For reasons of transparency, it is essential for all decisions as well as the underlying reasoning to be well-documented.
![qualitative research methods benefits figure 1](https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs42466-020-00059-z/MediaObjects/42466_2020_59_Fig1_HTML.png)
Iterative research process
While it is not always explicitly addressed, qualitative methods reflect a different underlying research paradigm than quantitative research (e.g. constructivism or interpretivism as opposed to positivism). The choice of methods can be based on the respective underlying substantive theory or theoretical framework used by the researcher [ 2 ].
Data collection
The methods of qualitative data collection most commonly used in health research are document study, observations, semi-structured interviews and focus groups [ 1 , 14 , 16 , 17 ].
Document study
Document study (also called document analysis) refers to the review by the researcher of written materials [ 14 ]. These can include personal and non-personal documents such as archives, annual reports, guidelines, policy documents, diaries or letters.
Observations
Observations are particularly useful to gain insights into a certain setting and actual behaviour – as opposed to reported behaviour or opinions [ 13 ]. Qualitative observations can be either participant or non-participant in nature. In participant observations, the observer is part of the observed setting, for example a nurse working in an intensive care unit [ 18 ]. In non-participant observations, the observer is “on the outside looking in”, i.e. present in but not part of the situation, trying not to influence the setting by their presence. Observations can be planned (e.g. for 3 h during the day or night shift) or ad hoc (e.g. as soon as a stroke patient arrives at the emergency room). During the observation, the observer takes notes on everything or certain pre-determined parts of what is happening around them, for example focusing on physician-patient interactions or communication between different professional groups. Written notes can be taken during or after the observations, depending on feasibility (which is usually lower during participant observations) and acceptability (e.g. when the observer is perceived to be judging the observed). Afterwards, these field notes are transcribed into observation protocols. If more than one observer was involved, field notes are taken independently, but notes can be consolidated into one protocol after discussions. Advantages of conducting observations include minimising the distance between the researcher and the researched, the potential discovery of topics that the researcher did not realise were relevant and gaining deeper insights into the real-world dimensions of the research problem at hand [ 18 ].
Semi-structured interviews
Hijmans & Kuyper describe qualitative interviews as “an exchange with an informal character, a conversation with a goal” [ 19 ]. Interviews are used to gain insights into a person’s subjective experiences, opinions and motivations – as opposed to facts or behaviours [ 13 ]. Interviews can be distinguished by the degree to which they are structured (i.e. a questionnaire), open (e.g. free conversation or autobiographical interviews) or semi-structured [ 2 , 13 ]. Semi-structured interviews are characterized by open-ended questions and the use of an interview guide (or topic guide/list) in which the broad areas of interest, sometimes including sub-questions, are defined [ 19 ]. The pre-defined topics in the interview guide can be derived from the literature, previous research or a preliminary method of data collection, e.g. document study or observations. The topic list is usually adapted and improved at the start of the data collection process as the interviewer learns more about the field [ 20 ]. Across interviews the focus on the different (blocks of) questions may differ and some questions may be skipped altogether (e.g. if the interviewee is not able or willing to answer the questions or for concerns about the total length of the interview) [ 20 ]. Qualitative interviews are usually not conducted in written format as it impedes on the interactive component of the method [ 20 ]. In comparison to written surveys, qualitative interviews have the advantage of being interactive and allowing for unexpected topics to emerge and to be taken up by the researcher. This can also help overcome a provider or researcher-centred bias often found in written surveys, which by nature, can only measure what is already known or expected to be of relevance to the researcher. Interviews can be audio- or video-taped; but sometimes it is only feasible or acceptable for the interviewer to take written notes [ 14 , 16 , 20 ].
Focus groups
Focus groups are group interviews to explore participants’ expertise and experiences, including explorations of how and why people behave in certain ways [ 1 ]. Focus groups usually consist of 6–8 people and are led by an experienced moderator following a topic guide or “script” [ 21 ]. They can involve an observer who takes note of the non-verbal aspects of the situation, possibly using an observation guide [ 21 ]. Depending on researchers’ and participants’ preferences, the discussions can be audio- or video-taped and transcribed afterwards [ 21 ]. Focus groups are useful for bringing together homogeneous (to a lesser extent heterogeneous) groups of participants with relevant expertise and experience on a given topic on which they can share detailed information [ 21 ]. Focus groups are a relatively easy, fast and inexpensive method to gain access to information on interactions in a given group, i.e. “the sharing and comparing” among participants [ 21 ]. Disadvantages include less control over the process and a lesser extent to which each individual may participate. Moreover, focus group moderators need experience, as do those tasked with the analysis of the resulting data. Focus groups can be less appropriate for discussing sensitive topics that participants might be reluctant to disclose in a group setting [ 13 ]. Moreover, attention must be paid to the emergence of “groupthink” as well as possible power dynamics within the group, e.g. when patients are awed or intimidated by health professionals.
Choosing the “right” method
As explained above, the school of thought underlying qualitative research assumes no objective hierarchy of evidence and methods. This means that each choice of single or combined methods has to be based on the research question that needs to be answered and a critical assessment with regard to whether or to what extent the chosen method can accomplish this – i.e. the “fit” between question and method [ 14 ]. It is necessary for these decisions to be documented when they are being made, and to be critically discussed when reporting methods and results.
Let us assume that our research aim is to examine the (clinical) processes around acute endovascular treatment (EVT), from the patient’s arrival at the emergency room to recanalization, with the aim to identify possible causes for delay and/or other causes for sub-optimal treatment outcome. As a first step, we could conduct a document study of the relevant standard operating procedures (SOPs) for this phase of care – are they up-to-date and in line with current guidelines? Do they contain any mistakes, irregularities or uncertainties that could cause delays or other problems? Regardless of the answers to these questions, the results have to be interpreted based on what they are: a written outline of what care processes in this hospital should look like. If we want to know what they actually look like in practice, we can conduct observations of the processes described in the SOPs. These results can (and should) be analysed in themselves, but also in comparison to the results of the document analysis, especially as regards relevant discrepancies. Do the SOPs outline specific tests for which no equipment can be observed or tasks to be performed by specialized nurses who are not present during the observation? It might also be possible that the written SOP is outdated, but the actual care provided is in line with current best practice. In order to find out why these discrepancies exist, it can be useful to conduct interviews. Are the physicians simply not aware of the SOPs (because their existence is limited to the hospital’s intranet) or do they actively disagree with them or does the infrastructure make it impossible to provide the care as described? Another rationale for adding interviews is that some situations (or all of their possible variations for different patient groups or the day, night or weekend shift) cannot practically or ethically be observed. In this case, it is possible to ask those involved to report on their actions – being aware that this is not the same as the actual observation. A senior physician’s or hospital manager’s description of certain situations might differ from a nurse’s or junior physician’s one, maybe because they intentionally misrepresent facts or maybe because different aspects of the process are visible or important to them. In some cases, it can also be relevant to consider to whom the interviewee is disclosing this information – someone they trust, someone they are otherwise not connected to, or someone they suspect or are aware of being in a potentially “dangerous” power relationship to them. Lastly, a focus group could be conducted with representatives of the relevant professional groups to explore how and why exactly they provide care around EVT. The discussion might reveal discrepancies (between SOPs and actual care or between different physicians) and motivations to the researchers as well as to the focus group members that they might not have been aware of themselves. For the focus group to deliver relevant information, attention has to be paid to its composition and conduct, for example, to make sure that all participants feel safe to disclose sensitive or potentially problematic information or that the discussion is not dominated by (senior) physicians only. The resulting combination of data collection methods is shown in Fig. 2 .
![qualitative research methods benefits figure 2](https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs42466-020-00059-z/MediaObjects/42466_2020_59_Fig2_HTML.png)
Possible combination of data collection methods
Attributions for icons: “Book” by Serhii Smirnov, “Interview” by Adrien Coquet, FR, “Magnifying Glass” by anggun, ID, “Business communication” by Vectors Market; all from the Noun Project
The combination of multiple data source as described for this example can be referred to as “triangulation”, in which multiple measurements are carried out from different angles to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under study [ 22 , 23 ].
Data analysis
To analyse the data collected through observations, interviews and focus groups these need to be transcribed into protocols and transcripts (see Fig. 3 ). Interviews and focus groups can be transcribed verbatim , with or without annotations for behaviour (e.g. laughing, crying, pausing) and with or without phonetic transcription of dialects and filler words, depending on what is expected or known to be relevant for the analysis. In the next step, the protocols and transcripts are coded , that is, marked (or tagged, labelled) with one or more short descriptors of the content of a sentence or paragraph [ 2 , 15 , 23 ]. Jansen describes coding as “connecting the raw data with “theoretical” terms” [ 20 ]. In a more practical sense, coding makes raw data sortable. This makes it possible to extract and examine all segments describing, say, a tele-neurology consultation from multiple data sources (e.g. SOPs, emergency room observations, staff and patient interview). In a process of synthesis and abstraction, the codes are then grouped, summarised and/or categorised [ 15 , 20 ]. The end product of the coding or analysis process is a descriptive theory of the behavioural pattern under investigation [ 20 ]. The coding process is performed using qualitative data management software, the most common ones being InVivo, MaxQDA and Atlas.ti. It should be noted that these are data management tools which support the analysis performed by the researcher(s) [ 14 ].
![qualitative research methods benefits figure 3](https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs42466-020-00059-z/MediaObjects/42466_2020_59_Fig3_HTML.png)
From data collection to data analysis
Attributions for icons: see Fig. 2 , also “Speech to text” by Trevor Dsouza, “Field Notes” by Mike O’Brien, US, “Voice Record” by ProSymbols, US, “Inspection” by Made, AU, and “Cloud” by Graphic Tigers; all from the Noun Project
How to report qualitative research?
Protocols of qualitative research can be published separately and in advance of the study results. However, the aim is not the same as in RCT protocols, i.e. to pre-define and set in stone the research questions and primary or secondary endpoints. Rather, it is a way to describe the research methods in detail, which might not be possible in the results paper given journals’ word limits. Qualitative research papers are usually longer than their quantitative counterparts to allow for deep understanding and so-called “thick description”. In the methods section, the focus is on transparency of the methods used, including why, how and by whom they were implemented in the specific study setting, so as to enable a discussion of whether and how this may have influenced data collection, analysis and interpretation. The results section usually starts with a paragraph outlining the main findings, followed by more detailed descriptions of, for example, the commonalities, discrepancies or exceptions per category [ 20 ]. Here it is important to support main findings by relevant quotations, which may add information, context, emphasis or real-life examples [ 20 , 23 ]. It is subject to debate in the field whether it is relevant to state the exact number or percentage of respondents supporting a certain statement (e.g. “Five interviewees expressed negative feelings towards XYZ”) [ 21 ].
How to combine qualitative with quantitative research?
Qualitative methods can be combined with other methods in multi- or mixed methods designs, which “[employ] two or more different methods [ …] within the same study or research program rather than confining the research to one single method” [ 24 ]. Reasons for combining methods can be diverse, including triangulation for corroboration of findings, complementarity for illustration and clarification of results, expansion to extend the breadth and range of the study, explanation of (unexpected) results generated with one method with the help of another, or offsetting the weakness of one method with the strength of another [ 1 , 17 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. The resulting designs can be classified according to when, why and how the different quantitative and/or qualitative data strands are combined. The three most common types of mixed method designs are the convergent parallel design , the explanatory sequential design and the exploratory sequential design. The designs with examples are shown in Fig. 4 .
![qualitative research methods benefits figure 4](https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs42466-020-00059-z/MediaObjects/42466_2020_59_Fig4_HTML.png)
Three common mixed methods designs
In the convergent parallel design, a qualitative study is conducted in parallel to and independently of a quantitative study, and the results of both studies are compared and combined at the stage of interpretation of results. Using the above example of EVT provision, this could entail setting up a quantitative EVT registry to measure process times and patient outcomes in parallel to conducting the qualitative research outlined above, and then comparing results. Amongst other things, this would make it possible to assess whether interview respondents’ subjective impressions of patients receiving good care match modified Rankin Scores at follow-up, or whether observed delays in care provision are exceptions or the rule when compared to door-to-needle times as documented in the registry. In the explanatory sequential design, a quantitative study is carried out first, followed by a qualitative study to help explain the results from the quantitative study. This would be an appropriate design if the registry alone had revealed relevant delays in door-to-needle times and the qualitative study would be used to understand where and why these occurred, and how they could be improved. In the exploratory design, the qualitative study is carried out first and its results help informing and building the quantitative study in the next step [ 26 ]. If the qualitative study around EVT provision had shown a high level of dissatisfaction among the staff members involved, a quantitative questionnaire investigating staff satisfaction could be set up in the next step, informed by the qualitative study on which topics dissatisfaction had been expressed. Amongst other things, the questionnaire design would make it possible to widen the reach of the research to more respondents from different (types of) hospitals, regions, countries or settings, and to conduct sub-group analyses for different professional groups.
How to assess qualitative research?
A variety of assessment criteria and lists have been developed for qualitative research, ranging in their focus and comprehensiveness [ 14 , 17 , 27 ]. However, none of these has been elevated to the “gold standard” in the field. In the following, we therefore focus on a set of commonly used assessment criteria that, from a practical standpoint, a researcher can look for when assessing a qualitative research report or paper.
Assessors should check the authors’ use of and adherence to the relevant reporting checklists (e.g. Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR)) to make sure all items that are relevant for this type of research are addressed [ 23 , 28 ]. Discussions of quantitative measures in addition to or instead of these qualitative measures can be a sign of lower quality of the research (paper). Providing and adhering to a checklist for qualitative research contributes to an important quality criterion for qualitative research, namely transparency [ 15 , 17 , 23 ].
Reflexivity
While methodological transparency and complete reporting is relevant for all types of research, some additional criteria must be taken into account for qualitative research. This includes what is called reflexivity, i.e. sensitivity to the relationship between the researcher and the researched, including how contact was established and maintained, or the background and experience of the researcher(s) involved in data collection and analysis. Depending on the research question and population to be researched this can be limited to professional experience, but it may also include gender, age or ethnicity [ 17 , 27 ]. These details are relevant because in qualitative research, as opposed to quantitative research, the researcher as a person cannot be isolated from the research process [ 23 ]. It may influence the conversation when an interviewed patient speaks to an interviewer who is a physician, or when an interviewee is asked to discuss a gynaecological procedure with a male interviewer, and therefore the reader must be made aware of these details [ 19 ].
Sampling and saturation
The aim of qualitative sampling is for all variants of the objects of observation that are deemed relevant for the study to be present in the sample “ to see the issue and its meanings from as many angles as possible” [ 1 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 27 ] , and to ensure “information-richness [ 15 ]. An iterative sampling approach is advised, in which data collection (e.g. five interviews) is followed by data analysis, followed by more data collection to find variants that are lacking in the current sample. This process continues until no new (relevant) information can be found and further sampling becomes redundant – which is called saturation [ 1 , 15 ] . In other words: qualitative data collection finds its end point not a priori , but when the research team determines that saturation has been reached [ 29 , 30 ].
This is also the reason why most qualitative studies use deliberate instead of random sampling strategies. This is generally referred to as “ purposive sampling” , in which researchers pre-define which types of participants or cases they need to include so as to cover all variations that are expected to be of relevance, based on the literature, previous experience or theory (i.e. theoretical sampling) [ 14 , 20 ]. Other types of purposive sampling include (but are not limited to) maximum variation sampling, critical case sampling or extreme or deviant case sampling [ 2 ]. In the above EVT example, a purposive sample could include all relevant professional groups and/or all relevant stakeholders (patients, relatives) and/or all relevant times of observation (day, night and weekend shift).
Assessors of qualitative research should check whether the considerations underlying the sampling strategy were sound and whether or how researchers tried to adapt and improve their strategies in stepwise or cyclical approaches between data collection and analysis to achieve saturation [ 14 ].
Good qualitative research is iterative in nature, i.e. it goes back and forth between data collection and analysis, revising and improving the approach where necessary. One example of this are pilot interviews, where different aspects of the interview (especially the interview guide, but also, for example, the site of the interview or whether the interview can be audio-recorded) are tested with a small number of respondents, evaluated and revised [ 19 ]. In doing so, the interviewer learns which wording or types of questions work best, or which is the best length of an interview with patients who have trouble concentrating for an extended time. Of course, the same reasoning applies to observations or focus groups which can also be piloted.
Ideally, coding should be performed by at least two researchers, especially at the beginning of the coding process when a common approach must be defined, including the establishment of a useful coding list (or tree), and when a common meaning of individual codes must be established [ 23 ]. An initial sub-set or all transcripts can be coded independently by the coders and then compared and consolidated after regular discussions in the research team. This is to make sure that codes are applied consistently to the research data.
Member checking
Member checking, also called respondent validation , refers to the practice of checking back with study respondents to see if the research is in line with their views [ 14 , 27 ]. This can happen after data collection or analysis or when first results are available [ 23 ]. For example, interviewees can be provided with (summaries of) their transcripts and asked whether they believe this to be a complete representation of their views or whether they would like to clarify or elaborate on their responses [ 17 ]. Respondents’ feedback on these issues then becomes part of the data collection and analysis [ 27 ].
Stakeholder involvement
In those niches where qualitative approaches have been able to evolve and grow, a new trend has seen the inclusion of patients and their representatives not only as study participants (i.e. “members”, see above) but as consultants to and active participants in the broader research process [ 31 , 32 , 33 ]. The underlying assumption is that patients and other stakeholders hold unique perspectives and experiences that add value beyond their own single story, making the research more relevant and beneficial to researchers, study participants and (future) patients alike [ 34 , 35 ]. Using the example of patients on or nearing dialysis, a recent scoping review found that 80% of clinical research did not address the top 10 research priorities identified by patients and caregivers [ 32 , 36 ]. In this sense, the involvement of the relevant stakeholders, especially patients and relatives, is increasingly being seen as a quality indicator in and of itself.
How not to assess qualitative research
The above overview does not include certain items that are routine in assessments of quantitative research. What follows is a non-exhaustive, non-representative, experience-based list of the quantitative criteria often applied to the assessment of qualitative research, as well as an explanation of the limited usefulness of these endeavours.
Protocol adherence
Given the openness and flexibility of qualitative research, it should not be assessed by how well it adheres to pre-determined and fixed strategies – in other words: its rigidity. Instead, the assessor should look for signs of adaptation and refinement based on lessons learned from earlier steps in the research process.
Sample size
For the reasons explained above, qualitative research does not require specific sample sizes, nor does it require that the sample size be determined a priori [ 1 , 14 , 27 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Sample size can only be a useful quality indicator when related to the research purpose, the chosen methodology and the composition of the sample, i.e. who was included and why.
Randomisation
While some authors argue that randomisation can be used in qualitative research, this is not commonly the case, as neither its feasibility nor its necessity or usefulness has been convincingly established for qualitative research [ 13 , 27 ]. Relevant disadvantages include the negative impact of a too large sample size as well as the possibility (or probability) of selecting “ quiet, uncooperative or inarticulate individuals ” [ 17 ]. Qualitative studies do not use control groups, either.
Interrater reliability, variability and other “objectivity checks”
The concept of “interrater reliability” is sometimes used in qualitative research to assess to which extent the coding approach overlaps between the two co-coders. However, it is not clear what this measure tells us about the quality of the analysis [ 23 ]. This means that these scores can be included in qualitative research reports, preferably with some additional information on what the score means for the analysis, but it is not a requirement. Relatedly, it is not relevant for the quality or “objectivity” of qualitative research to separate those who recruited the study participants and collected and analysed the data. Experiences even show that it might be better to have the same person or team perform all of these tasks [ 20 ]. First, when researchers introduce themselves during recruitment this can enhance trust when the interview takes place days or weeks later with the same researcher. Second, when the audio-recording is transcribed for analysis, the researcher conducting the interviews will usually remember the interviewee and the specific interview situation during data analysis. This might be helpful in providing additional context information for interpretation of data, e.g. on whether something might have been meant as a joke [ 18 ].
Not being quantitative research
Being qualitative research instead of quantitative research should not be used as an assessment criterion if it is used irrespectively of the research problem at hand. Similarly, qualitative research should not be required to be combined with quantitative research per se – unless mixed methods research is judged as inherently better than single-method research. In this case, the same criterion should be applied for quantitative studies without a qualitative component.
The main take-away points of this paper are summarised in Table 1 . We aimed to show that, if conducted well, qualitative research can answer specific research questions that cannot to be adequately answered using (only) quantitative designs. Seeing qualitative and quantitative methods as equal will help us become more aware and critical of the “fit” between the research problem and our chosen methods: I can conduct an RCT to determine the reasons for transportation delays of acute stroke patients – but should I? It also provides us with a greater range of tools to tackle a greater range of research problems more appropriately and successfully, filling in the blind spots on one half of the methodological spectrum to better address the whole complexity of neurological research and practice.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Abbreviations
Endovascular treatment
Randomised Controlled Trial
Standard Operating Procedure
Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research
Philipsen, H., & Vernooij-Dassen, M. (2007). Kwalitatief onderzoek: nuttig, onmisbaar en uitdagend. In L. PLBJ & H. TCo (Eds.), Kwalitatief onderzoek: Praktische methoden voor de medische praktijk . [Qualitative research: useful, indispensable and challenging. In: Qualitative research: Practical methods for medical practice (pp. 5–12). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.
Chapter Google Scholar
Punch, K. F. (2013). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches . London: Sage.
Kelly, J., Dwyer, J., Willis, E., & Pekarsky, B. (2014). Travelling to the city for hospital care: Access factors in country aboriginal patient journeys. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 22 (3), 109–113.
Article Google Scholar
Nilsen, P., Ståhl, C., Roback, K., & Cairney, P. (2013). Never the twain shall meet? - a comparison of implementation science and policy implementation research. Implementation Science, 8 (1), 1–12.
Howick J, Chalmers I, Glasziou, P., Greenhalgh, T., Heneghan, C., Liberati, A., Moschetti, I., Phillips, B., & Thornton, H. (2011). The 2011 Oxford CEBM evidence levels of evidence (introductory document) . Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine. https://www.cebm.net/2011/06/2011-oxford-cebm-levels-evidence-introductory-document/ .
Eakin, J. M. (2016). Educating critical qualitative health researchers in the land of the randomized controlled trial. Qualitative Inquiry, 22 (2), 107–118.
May, A., & Mathijssen, J. (2015). Alternatieven voor RCT bij de evaluatie van effectiviteit van interventies!? Eindrapportage. In Alternatives for RCTs in the evaluation of effectiveness of interventions!? Final report .
Google Scholar
Berwick, D. M. (2008). The science of improvement. Journal of the American Medical Association, 299 (10), 1182–1184.
Article CAS Google Scholar
Christ, T. W. (2014). Scientific-based research and randomized controlled trials, the “gold” standard? Alternative paradigms and mixed methodologies. Qualitative Inquiry, 20 (1), 72–80.
Lamont, T., Barber, N., Jd, P., Fulop, N., Garfield-Birkbeck, S., Lilford, R., Mear, L., Raine, R., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2016). New approaches to evaluating complex health and care systems. BMJ, 352:i154.
Drabble, S. J., & O’Cathain, A. (2015). Moving from Randomized Controlled Trials to Mixed Methods Intervention Evaluation. In S. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry (pp. 406–425). London: Oxford University Press.
Chambers, D. A., Glasgow, R. E., & Stange, K. C. (2013). The dynamic sustainability framework: Addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change. Implementation Science : IS, 8 , 117.
Hak, T. (2007). Waarnemingsmethoden in kwalitatief onderzoek. In L. PLBJ & H. TCo (Eds.), Kwalitatief onderzoek: Praktische methoden voor de medische praktijk . [Observation methods in qualitative research] (pp. 13–25). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.
Russell, C. K., & Gregory, D. M. (2003). Evaluation of qualitative research studies. Evidence Based Nursing, 6 (2), 36–40.
Fossey, E., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36 , 717–732.
Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting interpretive policy analysis (Vol. 47). Thousand Oaks: Sage University Papers Series on Qualitative Research Methods.
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22 , 63–75.
van der Geest, S. (2006). Participeren in ziekte en zorg: meer over kwalitatief onderzoek. Huisarts en Wetenschap, 49 (4), 283–287.
Hijmans, E., & Kuyper, M. (2007). Het halfopen interview als onderzoeksmethode. In L. PLBJ & H. TCo (Eds.), Kwalitatief onderzoek: Praktische methoden voor de medische praktijk . [The half-open interview as research method (pp. 43–51). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.
Jansen, H. (2007). Systematiek en toepassing van de kwalitatieve survey. In L. PLBJ & H. TCo (Eds.), Kwalitatief onderzoek: Praktische methoden voor de medische praktijk . [Systematics and implementation of the qualitative survey (pp. 27–41). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.
Pv, R., & Peremans, L. (2007). Exploreren met focusgroepgesprekken: de ‘stem’ van de groep onder de loep. In L. PLBJ & H. TCo (Eds.), Kwalitatief onderzoek: Praktische methoden voor de medische praktijk . [Exploring with focus group conversations: the “voice” of the group under the magnifying glass (pp. 53–64). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.
Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41 (5), 545–547.
Boeije H: Analyseren in kwalitatief onderzoek: Denken en doen, [Analysis in qualitative research: Thinking and doing] vol. Den Haag Boom Lemma uitgevers; 2012.
Hunter, A., & Brewer, J. (2015). Designing Multimethod Research. In S. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry (pp. 185–205). London: Oxford University Press.
Archibald, M. M., Radil, A. I., Zhang, X., & Hanson, W. E. (2015). Current mixed methods practices in qualitative research: A content analysis of leading journals. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14 (2), 5–33.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Choosing a Mixed Methods Design. In Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research . Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Mays, N., & Pope, C. (2000). Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ, 320 (7226), 50–52.
O'Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine : Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 89 (9), 1245–1251.
Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality and Quantity, 52 (4), 1893–1907.
Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. European Journal of General Practice, 24 (1), 9–18.
Marlett, N., Shklarov, S., Marshall, D., Santana, M. J., & Wasylak, T. (2015). Building new roles and relationships in research: A model of patient engagement research. Quality of Life Research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 24 (5), 1057–1067.
Demian, M. N., Lam, N. N., Mac-Way, F., Sapir-Pichhadze, R., & Fernandez, N. (2017). Opportunities for engaging patients in kidney research. Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease, 4 , 2054358117703070–2054358117703070.
Noyes, J., McLaughlin, L., Morgan, K., Roberts, A., Stephens, M., Bourne, J., Houlston, M., Houlston, J., Thomas, S., Rhys, R. G., et al. (2019). Designing a co-productive study to overcome known methodological challenges in organ donation research with bereaved family members. Health Expectations . 22(4):824–35.
Piil, K., Jarden, M., & Pii, K. H. (2019). Research agenda for life-threatening cancer. European Journal Cancer Care (Engl), 28 (1), e12935.
Hofmann, D., Ibrahim, F., Rose, D., Scott, D. L., Cope, A., Wykes, T., & Lempp, H. (2015). Expectations of new treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: Developing a patient-generated questionnaire. Health Expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 18 (5), 995–1008.
Jun, M., Manns, B., Laupacis, A., Manns, L., Rehal, B., Crowe, S., & Hemmelgarn, B. R. (2015). Assessing the extent to which current clinical research is consistent with patient priorities: A scoping review using a case study in patients on or nearing dialysis. Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease, 2 , 35.
Elsie Baker, S., & Edwards, R. (2012). How many qualitative interviews is enough? In National Centre for Research Methods Review Paper . National Centre for Research Methods. http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2273/4/how_many_interviews.pdf .
Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 18 (2), 179–183.
Sim, J., Saunders, B., Waterfield, J., & Kingstone, T. (2018). Can sample size in qualitative research be determined a priori? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21 (5), 619–634.
Download references
Acknowledgements
no external funding.
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Department of Neurology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
Loraine Busetto, Wolfgang Wick & Christoph Gumbinger
Clinical Cooperation Unit Neuro-Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
Wolfgang Wick
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Contributions
LB drafted the manuscript; WW and CG revised the manuscript; all authors approved the final versions.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Loraine Busetto .
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Cite this article.
Busetto, L., Wick, W. & Gumbinger, C. How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurol. Res. Pract. 2 , 14 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
Download citation
Received : 30 January 2020
Accepted : 22 April 2020
Published : 27 May 2020
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Qualitative research
- Mixed methods
- Quality assessment
Neurological Research and Practice
ISSN: 2524-3489
- Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
- General enquiries: [email protected]
Institutvert.org
qualitative research advantages and disadvantages
Qualitative research is a valuable method for understanding human behavior, attitudes, and motivations. It involves collecting rich, descriptive data through methods like interviews and observations. However, like any research approach, it has both advantages and disadvantages. In this article, we will explore the various advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research and discuss why understanding them is important.
Advantages of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research offers several advantages that make it a valuable tool for researchers:
- Exploration: Qualitative research allows researchers to explore a topic in-depth, providing rich insights into people’s experiences, perceptions, and behaviors.
- Flexibility: Unlike quantitative research, qualitative research methods offer flexibility, allowing researchers to adapt their approach and gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon under study.
- Contextualization: Qualitative research focuses on understanding the context in which actions and behaviors occur, providing a holistic and nuanced understanding of the subject matter.
- Participant Perspective: By directly engaging with participants, qualitative research allows researchers to capture their perspectives and voices, giving them a platform to share their experiences.
- Emergent Findings: Qualitative research often uncovers unexpected insights and patterns, allowing researchers to generate new theories or hypotheses and contribute to the development of knowledge in their field.
Disadvantages of Qualitative Research
While qualitative research has numerous strengths, it also presents some challenges that researchers should consider:
- Subjectivity: Unlike quantitative research, qualitative research is more subjective, as it relies on researchers’ interpretations and judgments. This subjectivity can introduce bias and impact the reliability and validity of the findings.
- Time-consuming: Qualitative research is a time-intensive process. Collecting and analyzing qualitative data requires significant investment in terms of time and resources.
- Small Sample Size: Due to the in-depth nature of qualitative research, the sample sizes are often small. While this allows for in-depth analysis, it may limit the generalizability of the findings to broader populations.
- Data Analysis Complexity: Qualitative data analysis entails analyzing vast amounts of textual and visual data, which can be complex and time-consuming. Ensuring the rigor and credibility of the analysis requires expertise and meticulousness.
- Interpretation Challenges: Researchers must navigate the challenges of interpreting qualitative data, as different analysts may interpret the same data differently. This subjectivity can impact the reliability and validity of the findings.
Benefits of Knowing Qualitative Research Advantages and Disadvantages
Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research can greatly benefit researchers and practitioners. By being aware of these factors, researchers can:
- Make informed decisions: Knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research allows researchers to choose the most appropriate research method for their study objectives and research questions.
- Ensure methodological rigor: By understanding the limitations of qualitative research, researchers can take steps to minimize bias, ensure data quality, and enhance the credibility of their findings.
- Enhance research design: Awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative research can help researchers design more robust studies, adopting appropriate strategies to address potential limitations.
- Communicate findings effectively: Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research enables researchers to effectively communicate the limitations and strengths of their research findings, providing a well-rounded perspective.
In conclusion, qualitative research has numerous advantages, including its ability to provide in-depth insights, adaptability, and participant perspectives. However, it also has its limitations, such as subjectivity, time-consuming nature, and small sample sizes. Understanding these advantages and disadvantages is crucial for researchers to make informed decisions, ensure methodological rigor, and communicate findings effectively in qualitative research studies.
- quantitative and qualitative research advantages and disadvantages
- a thorough list of balanced scorecard advantages and disadvantages
- unstructured interviews advantages and disadvantages
- quantitative research advantages and disadvantages
- interviews advantages and disadvantages
- 5 advantages and 5 disadvantages
- about internet advantages and disadvantages
![qualitative research methods benefits Carlos-barraza-logo-50](https://barrazacarlos.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Carlos-barraza-logo-50.webp)
19 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research
Qualitative research is a method that involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data to understand social phenomena.
This approach allows researchers to explore and gain in-depth insights into complex issues that cannot be easily measured or quantified.
However, like any research method, there are both advantages and disadvantages associated with qualitative research.
![19 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research 1 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research](https://barrazacarlos.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Advantages-and-Disadvantages-of-Qualitative-Research.webp)
- Redaction Team
- September 9, 2023
- Professional Development , Thesis Writing
Advantages of Qualitative Research
- Rich and In-Depth Data : Qualitative research provides rich and detailed data, allowing researchers to explore complex social phenomena, experiences, and contexts in depth.
- Contextual Understanding : It emphasizes the importance of context, enabling researchers to understand the social, cultural, and environmental factors that influence behavior and perceptions.
- Flexibility : Qualitative research is flexible and adaptable, allowing researchers to change their research focus, questions, or methods based on emerging insights during the study.
- Exploratory Nature : It is well-suited for generating hypotheses and theories by exploring new or under-researched topics. Researchers can uncover unexpected findings.
- Participant Perspectives : Qualitative research prioritizes the voices and perspectives of participants, providing insight into their lived experiences, beliefs, and worldviews.
- Holistic Understanding : Researchers can capture the complexity of human behavior and experiences, including emotions, motivations, and interpersonal dynamics.
- Useful for Small Sample Sizes : Qualitative research can be effective with small sample sizes when a deep understanding of a specific group or context is required.
- Complementary to Quantitative Research : It can complement quantitative research by providing qualitative insights that help explain or interpret numerical data.
- Validity and Authenticity : Qualitative research often focuses on establishing the validity and authenticity of findings, emphasizing the importance of rigor and transparency in the research process.
Disadvantages of Qualitative Research
- Subjectivity : Qualitative research is subjective in nature, and findings can be influenced by the researcher's biases, interpretations, and values.
- Limited Generalizability : The small sample sizes and context-specific nature of qualitative research may limit the generalizability of findings to broader populations or contexts.
- Time-Consuming : Qualitative research can be time-consuming, as it involves data collection methods such as interviews, participant observation, and content analysis, which require significant time and effort.
- Data Analysis Complexity : Analyzing qualitative data can be complex, requiring skills in coding, thematic analysis, and interpretation. It can be challenging to ensure intercoder reliability.
- Resource-Intensive : Qualitative research may require more resources than quantitative research, particularly when conducting in-depth interviews or ethnographic fieldwork.
- Ethical Considerations : Researchers must navigate ethical considerations, such as informed consent, confidentiality, and ensuring the well-being of participants, which can be complex in qualitative studies.
- Interpretation Challenges : Qualitative research findings are open to interpretation, and different researchers may draw different conclusions from the same data.
- Limited Quantification : Qualitative research does not produce numerical data, which can make it challenging to quantify and compare findings across studies.
- Potential for Researcher Influence : Researchers may inadvertently influence participant responses or behaviors through their presence or questioning, leading to potential bias.
- Difficulty in Sampling : Choosing a representative sample can be challenging in qualitative research, as the emphasis is on depth rather than breadth.
In practice, the choice between qualitative and quantitative research methods depends on the research objectives, questions, and the nature of the phenomenon being studied.
Often, researchers use mixed methods, combining both qualitative and quantitative approaches, to gain a more comprehensive understanding of a research topic.
Conclusion of Pros and Cons of Qualitative Research Method
In conclusion, qualitative research offers several advantages, such as capturing rich, detailed data, providing flexibility in data collection methods, and allowing for exploratory studiesfrom market research, focus group, interviews with follow-up questions and open-ended questions by the interviewer.
However, it also has limitations, including small sample sizes, subjective data analysis, resource-intensiveness, and challenges in establishing validity and reliability, as in contrast from quantitative methods with quantitative data.
Therefore, researchers should consider both the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative research and advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research approach when selecting the appropriate type of research methodology for their study.
By understanding these advantages and disadvantages, researchers can make informed decisions and maximize the potential of qualitative research in generating meaningful insights.
Read more here on how to write a Master Thesis .
![19 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research 2 Advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research](https://barrazacarlos.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Advantages-and-disadvantages-of-quantitative-research-1024x576.webp)
Privacy Overview
![qualitative research methods benefits “Igual Y me Pensaste”](https://barrazacarlos.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Igual-Y-me-Pensaste.webp)
![qualitative research methods benefits Forage](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/navy-wide-logo-2x-300x90-1-120x36.png)
Qualitative Research Definition
Qualitative research methods and examples, advantages and disadvantages of qualitative approaches, qualitative vs. quantitative research, showing qualitative research skills on resumes, what is qualitative research methods and examples.
![qualitative research methods benefits McKayla Girardin](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/headshot-48x48.jpeg)
- Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
- Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
- Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
![qualitative research methods benefits What Is Qualitative Research? Examples and methods](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/what-is-qualitative-research-1-1024x768.jpg)
Forage puts students first. Our blog articles are written independently by our editorial team. They have not been paid for or sponsored by our partners. See our full editorial guidelines .
Table of Contents
Qualitative research seeks to understand people’s experiences and perspectives by studying social organizations and human behavior. Data in qualitative studies focuses on people’s beliefs and emotional responses. Qualitative data is especially helpful when a company wants to know how customers feel about a product or service, such as in user experience (UX) design or marketing .
Researchers use qualitative approaches to “determine answers to research questions on human behavior and the cultural values that drive our thinking and behavior,” says Margaret J. King, director at The Center for Cultural Studies & Analysis in Philadelphia.
Data in qualitative research typically can’t be assessed mathematically — the data is not sets of numbers or quantifiable information. Rather, it’s collections of images, words, notes on behaviors, descriptions of emotions, and historical context. Data is collected through observations, interviews, surveys, focus groups, and secondary research.
However, a qualitative study needs a “clear research question at its base,” notes King, and the research needs to be “observed, categorized, compared, and evaluated (along a scale or by a typology chart) by reference to a baseline in order to determine an outcome with value as new and reliable information.”
![qualitative research methods benefits What's the difference: Data science vs. software engineering?](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/data-science-vs-software-engineering-150x105.jpg)
Quantium Data Analytics
Explore the power of data and its ability to power breakthrough possibilities for individuals, organisations and societies with this free job simulation from Quantium.
Avg. Time: 4 to 5 hours
Skills you’ll build: Data validation, data visualisation, data wrangling, programming, data analysis, commercial thinking, statistical testing, presentation skills
Who Uses Qualitative Research?
Researchers in social sciences and humanities often use qualitative research methods, especially in specific areas of study like anthropology, history, education, and sociology.
Qualitative methods are also applicable in business, technology , and marketing spaces. For example, product managers use qualitative research to understand how target audiences respond to their products. They may use focus groups to gain insights from potential customers on product prototypes and improvements or surveys from existing customers to understand what changes users want to see.
Other careers that may involve qualitative research include:
- Marketing analyst
- UX and UI analyst
- Market researcher
- Statistician
- Business analyst
- Data analyst
- Research assistant
- Claims investigator
![qualitative research methods benefits Working at Electronic Arts](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/electronic-arts-150x100.jpg)
Electronic Arts Product Management
Learn how product managers leverage qualitative and other types of research to build and improve products in this free job simulation from EA.
Avg. Time: 1 to 2 hours
Skills you’ll build: Critical thinking, problem solving, performance metrics, written communication, project planning
Good research begins with a question, and this question informs the approach used by qualitative researchers.
Grounded Theory
Grounded theory is an inductive approach to theory development. In many forms of research, you begin with a hypothesis and then test it to see if you’re correct. In grounded theory, though, you go in without any assumptions and rely on the data you collect to form theories. You start with an open question about a phenomenon you are studying and collect and analyze data until you can form a fully-fledged theory from the information.
Example: A company wants to improve its brand and marketing strategies. The company performs a grounded theory approach to solving this problem by conducting interviews and surveys with past, current, and prospective customers. The information gathered from these methods helps the company understand what type of branding and marketing their customer-base likes and dislikes, allowing the team to inductively craft a new brand and marketing strategy from the data.
![qualitative research methods benefits working at Accenture](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Accenture-150x100.jpg)
Accenture and New York Jobs CEO Council Product Design
Learn how qualitative methods inform product development with Accenture's free job simulation.
Avg. Time: 4 hours
Skills you’ll build: Research, user research, user design, product design, critical thinking, product design
Action Research
Action research is one part study and one part problem-solving . Through action research, analysts investigate a problem or weakness and develop practical solutions. The process of action research is cyclical —- researchers assess solutions for efficiency and effectiveness, and create further solutions to correct any issues found.
Example: A manager notices her employees struggle to cooperate on group projects. She carefully reviews how team members interact with each other and asks them all to respond to a survey about communication. Through the survey and study, she finds that guidelines for group projects are unclear. After changing the guidelines, she reviews her team again to see if there are any changes to their behavior.
>>MORE: Explore how action research helps consultants serve clients with Accenture’s Client Research and Problem Identification job simulation .
Phenomenological Research
Phenomenological research investigates a phenomenon in depth, looking at people’s experiences and understanding of the situation. This sort of study is primarily descriptive and seeks to broaden understanding around a specific incident and the people involved. Researchers in phenomenological studies must be careful to set aside any biases or assumptions because the information used should be entirely from the subjects themselves.
Example : A researcher wants to better understand the lived experience of college students with jobs. The purpose of this research is to gain insights into the pressures of college students who balance studying and working at the same time. The researcher conducts a series of interviews with several college students, learning about their past and current situations. Through the first few interviews, the researcher builds a relationship with the students. Later discussions are more targeted, with questions prompting the students to discuss their emotions surrounding both work and school and the difficulties and benefits arising from their situation. The researcher then analyzes these interviews, and identifies shared themes to contextualize the experiences of the students.
![qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/general-electric-150x100.jpg)
GE Aerospace Human Resources
Learn the research and conflict resolution skills necessary for a career in human resources in this free job simulation from GE.
Avg. Time: 3 to 4 hours
Skills you’ll build: Feedback giving, communication skills, empowering with insights, basics of lean, process mapping, continuous improvement tools, dataset handling in Excel
Ethnography
Ethnography is an immersive study of a particular culture or community. Through ethnographic research, analysts aim to learn about a group’s conventions, social dynamics, and cultural norms. Some researchers use active observation methods, finding ways to integrate themselves into the culture as much as possible. Others use passive observation, watching closely from the outside but not fully immersing themselves.
Example: A company hires an external researcher to learn what their company’s culture is actually like. The researcher studies the social dynamics of the employees and may even look at how these employees interact with clients and with each other outside of the office. The goal is to deliver a comprehensive report of the company’s culture and the social dynamics of its employees.
Case Studies
A case study is a type of in-depth analysis of a situation. Case studies can focus on an organization, belief system, event, person, or action. The goal of a case study is to understand the phenomenon and put it in a real-world context. Case studies are also commonly used in marketing and sales to highlight the benefits of a company’s products or services.
Example: A business performs a case study of its competitors’ strategies. This case study aims to show why the company should adopt a specific business strategy. The study looks at each competitor’s business structure, marketing campaigns, product offerings, and historical growth trends. Then, using this data on other businesses, the researcher can theorize how that strategy would benefit their company.
>>MORE: Learn how companies use case study interviews to assess candidates’ research and problem-solving skills.
Qualitative research methods are great for generating new ideas. The exploratory nature of qualitative research means uncovering unexpected information, which often leads to new theories and further research topics. Additionally, qualitative findings feel meaningful. These studies focus on people, emotions, and societies and may feel closer to their communities than quantitative research that relies on more mathematical and logical data.
However, qualitative research can be unreliable at times. It’s difficult to replicate qualitative studies since people’s opinions and emotions can change quickly. For example, a focus group has a lot of variables that can affect the outcome, and that same group, asked the same questions a year later, may have entirely different responses. The data collection can also be difficult and time-consuming with qualitative research. Ultimately, interviewing people, reviewing surveys, and understanding and explaining human emotions can be incredibly complex.
Find your career fit
See what career path is right for you with our free career quiz!
While qualitative research deals with data that isn’t easily manipulated by mathematics, quantitative research almost exclusively involves numbers and numerical data. Quantitative studies aim to find concrete details, like units of time, percentages, or statistics.
Besides the types of data used, a core difference between quantitative and qualitative research is the idea of control and replication.
“Qualitative is less subject to control (as in lab studies) and, therefore, less statistically measurable than quantitative approaches,” says King.
One person’s interview about a specific topic can have completely different responses than every other person’s interview since there are so many variables in qualitative research. On the other hand, quantitative studies can often be replicated. For instance, when testing the effects of a new medication, quantifiable data, like blood test results, can be repeated. Qualitative data, though, like how people feel about the medication, may differ from person to person and from moment to moment.
![qualitative research methods benefits J.P.Morgan bank corporation headquarters glass building concept. JP Morgan banking company symbol on front facade 3d illustration.](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/jpmorgan-internships-150x93.jpg)
JPMorgan Quantitative Research
Discover how bankers use quantitative methods to analyze businesses and industry trends with this free job simulation.
Avg. Time: 6 to 7 hours
Skills you’ll build: Programming, data analysis, Python, critical thinking, statistics, dynamic programming
You can show your experience with qualitative research on your resume in your skills or work experience sections and your cover letter .
- In your skills section , you can list types of qualitative research you are skilled at, like conducting interviews, performing grounded theory research, or crafting case studies.
- In your work or internship experience descriptions , you can highlight specific examples, like talking about a time you used action research to solve a complex issue at your last job.
- In your cover letter , you can discuss in-depth qualitative research projects you’ve completed. For instance, say you spent a summer conducting ethnographic research or a whole semester running focus groups to get feedback on a product. You can talk about these experiences in your cover letter and note how these skills make you a great fit for the job.
Grow your skills and explore your career options with Forage’s free job simulations .
Image credit: Canva
![qualitative research methods benefits McKayla Girardin](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/headshot-96x96.jpeg)
Related Posts
6 negotiation skills to level up your work life, how to build conflict resolution skills: case studies and examples, what is github uses and getting started, upskill with forage.
![qualitative research methods benefits Bloomberg logo through magnifying glass](https://www.theforage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/working-at-bloomberg.jpg)
Top companies are hiring now!
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 .
![Qualitative vs Quantitative Research Methods & Data Analysis 2 RESEARCH THEMATICANALYSISMETHOD](https://www.simplypsychology.org/wp-content/uploads/RESEARCH-THEMATICANALYSISMETHOD.jpg)
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
- Mixed methods research
- 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
![Qualitative vs Quantitative Research Methods & Data Analysis 5 Print Friendly, PDF & Email](https://www.simplypsychology.org/wp-content/uploads/three-icons-with-text-light-blue.jpg)
![qualitative research methods benefits U.S. flag](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/coreutils/uswds/img/favicons/favicon-57.png)
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
![qualitative research methods benefits Logo of springeropen](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/corehtml/pmc/pmcgifs/logo-springeropen.png)
What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research
Patrik aspers.
1 Department of Sociology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
2 Seminar for Sociology, Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
3 Department of Media and Social Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
What is qualitative research? If we look for a precise definition of qualitative research, and specifically for one that addresses its distinctive feature of being “qualitative,” the literature is meager. In this article we systematically search, identify and analyze a sample of 89 sources using or attempting to define the term “qualitative.” Then, drawing on ideas we find scattered across existing work, and based on Becker’s classic study of marijuana consumption, we formulate and illustrate a definition that tries to capture its core elements. We define qualitative research as an iterative process in which improved understanding to the scientific community is achieved by making new significant distinctions resulting from getting closer to the phenomenon studied. This formulation is developed as a tool to help improve research designs while stressing that a qualitative dimension is present in quantitative work as well. Additionally, it can facilitate teaching, communication between researchers, diminish the gap between qualitative and quantitative researchers, help to address critiques of qualitative methods, and be used as a standard of evaluation of qualitative research.
If we assume that there is something called qualitative research, what exactly is this qualitative feature? And how could we evaluate qualitative research as good or not? Is it fundamentally different from quantitative research? In practice, most active qualitative researchers working with empirical material intuitively know what is involved in doing qualitative research, yet perhaps surprisingly, a clear definition addressing its key feature is still missing.
To address the question of what is qualitative we turn to the accounts of “qualitative research” in textbooks and also in empirical work. In his classic, explorative, interview study of deviance Howard Becker ( 1963 ) asks ‘How does one become a marijuana user?’ In contrast to pre-dispositional and psychological-individualistic theories of deviant behavior, Becker’s inherently social explanation contends that becoming a user of this substance is the result of a three-phase sequential learning process. First, potential users need to learn how to smoke it properly to produce the “correct” effects. If not, they are likely to stop experimenting with it. Second, they need to discover the effects associated with it; in other words, to get “high,” individuals not only have to experience what the drug does, but also to become aware that those sensations are related to using it. Third, they require learning to savor the feelings related to its consumption – to develop an acquired taste. Becker, who played music himself, gets close to the phenomenon by observing, taking part, and by talking to people consuming the drug: “half of the fifty interviews were conducted with musicians, the other half covered a wide range of people, including laborers, machinists, and people in the professions” (Becker 1963 :56).
Another central aspect derived through the common-to-all-research interplay between induction and deduction (Becker 2017 ), is that during the course of his research Becker adds scientifically meaningful new distinctions in the form of three phases—distinctions, or findings if you will, that strongly affect the course of his research: its focus, the material that he collects, and which eventually impact his findings. Each phase typically unfolds through social interaction, and often with input from experienced users in “a sequence of social experiences during which the person acquires a conception of the meaning of the behavior, and perceptions and judgments of objects and situations, all of which make the activity possible and desirable” (Becker 1963 :235). In this study the increased understanding of smoking dope is a result of a combination of the meaning of the actors, and the conceptual distinctions that Becker introduces based on the views expressed by his respondents. Understanding is the result of research and is due to an iterative process in which data, concepts and evidence are connected with one another (Becker 2017 ).
Indeed, there are many definitions of qualitative research, but if we look for a definition that addresses its distinctive feature of being “qualitative,” the literature across the broad field of social science is meager. The main reason behind this article lies in the paradox, which, to put it bluntly, is that researchers act as if they know what it is, but they cannot formulate a coherent definition. Sociologists and others will of course continue to conduct good studies that show the relevance and value of qualitative research addressing scientific and practical problems in society. However, our paper is grounded in the idea that providing a clear definition will help us improve the work that we do. Among researchers who practice qualitative research there is clearly much knowledge. We suggest that a definition makes this knowledge more explicit. If the first rationale for writing this paper refers to the “internal” aim of improving qualitative research, the second refers to the increased “external” pressure that especially many qualitative researchers feel; pressure that comes both from society as well as from other scientific approaches. There is a strong core in qualitative research, and leading researchers tend to agree on what it is and how it is done. Our critique is not directed at the practice of qualitative research, but we do claim that the type of systematic work we do has not yet been done, and that it is useful to improve the field and its status in relation to quantitative research.
The literature on the “internal” aim of improving, or at least clarifying qualitative research is large, and we do not claim to be the first to notice the vagueness of the term “qualitative” (Strauss and Corbin 1998 ). Also, others have noted that there is no single definition of it (Long and Godfrey 2004 :182), that there are many different views on qualitative research (Denzin and Lincoln 2003 :11; Jovanović 2011 :3), and that more generally, we need to define its meaning (Best 2004 :54). Strauss and Corbin ( 1998 ), for example, as well as Nelson et al. (1992:2 cited in Denzin and Lincoln 2003 :11), and Flick ( 2007 :ix–x), have recognized that the term is problematic: “Actually, the term ‘qualitative research’ is confusing because it can mean different things to different people” (Strauss and Corbin 1998 :10–11). Hammersley has discussed the possibility of addressing the problem, but states that “the task of providing an account of the distinctive features of qualitative research is far from straightforward” ( 2013 :2). This confusion, as he has recently further argued (Hammersley 2018 ), is also salient in relation to ethnography where different philosophical and methodological approaches lead to a lack of agreement about what it means.
Others (e.g. Hammersley 2018 ; Fine and Hancock 2017 ) have also identified the treat to qualitative research that comes from external forces, seen from the point of view of “qualitative research.” This threat can be further divided into that which comes from inside academia, such as the critique voiced by “quantitative research” and outside of academia, including, for example, New Public Management. Hammersley ( 2018 ), zooming in on one type of qualitative research, ethnography, has argued that it is under treat. Similarly to Fine ( 2003 ), and before him Gans ( 1999 ), he writes that ethnography’ has acquired a range of meanings, and comes in many different versions, these often reflecting sharply divergent epistemological orientations. And already more than twenty years ago while reviewing Denzin and Lincoln’ s Handbook of Qualitative Methods Fine argued:
While this increasing centrality [of qualitative research] might lead one to believe that consensual standards have developed, this belief would be misleading. As the methodology becomes more widely accepted, querulous challengers have raised fundamental questions that collectively have undercut the traditional models of how qualitative research is to be fashioned and presented (1995:417).
According to Hammersley, there are today “serious treats to the practice of ethnographic work, on almost any definition” ( 2018 :1). He lists five external treats: (1) that social research must be accountable and able to show its impact on society; (2) the current emphasis on “big data” and the emphasis on quantitative data and evidence; (3) the labor market pressure in academia that leaves less time for fieldwork (see also Fine and Hancock 2017 ); (4) problems of access to fields; and (5) the increased ethical scrutiny of projects, to which ethnography is particularly exposed. Hammersley discusses some more or less insufficient existing definitions of ethnography.
The current situation, as Hammersley and others note—and in relation not only to ethnography but also qualitative research in general, and as our empirical study shows—is not just unsatisfactory, it may even be harmful for the entire field of qualitative research, and does not help social science at large. We suggest that the lack of clarity of qualitative research is a real problem that must be addressed.
Towards a Definition of Qualitative Research
Seen in an historical light, what is today called qualitative, or sometimes ethnographic, interpretative research – or a number of other terms – has more or less always existed. At the time the founders of sociology – Simmel, Weber, Durkheim and, before them, Marx – were writing, and during the era of the Methodenstreit (“dispute about methods”) in which the German historical school emphasized scientific methods (cf. Swedberg 1990 ), we can at least speak of qualitative forerunners.
Perhaps the most extended discussion of what later became known as qualitative methods in a classic work is Bronisław Malinowski’s ( 1922 ) Argonauts in the Western Pacific , although even this study does not explicitly address the meaning of “qualitative.” In Weber’s ([1921–-22] 1978) work we find a tension between scientific explanations that are based on observation and quantification and interpretative research (see also Lazarsfeld and Barton 1982 ).
If we look through major sociology journals like the American Sociological Review , American Journal of Sociology , or Social Forces we will not find the term qualitative sociology before the 1970s. And certainly before then much of what we consider qualitative classics in sociology, like Becker’ study ( 1963 ), had already been produced. Indeed, the Chicago School often combined qualitative and quantitative data within the same study (Fine 1995 ). Our point being that before a disciplinary self-awareness the term quantitative preceded qualitative, and the articulation of the former was a political move to claim scientific status (Denzin and Lincoln 2005 ). In the US the World War II seem to have sparked a critique of sociological work, including “qualitative work,” that did not follow the scientific canon (Rawls 2018 ), which was underpinned by a scientifically oriented and value free philosophy of science. As a result the attempts and practice of integrating qualitative and quantitative sociology at Chicago lost ground to sociology that was more oriented to surveys and quantitative work at Columbia under Merton-Lazarsfeld. The quantitative tradition was also able to present textbooks (Lundberg 1951 ) that facilitated the use this approach and its “methods.” The practices of the qualitative tradition, by and large, remained tacit or was part of the mentoring transferred from the renowned masters to their students.
This glimpse into history leads us back to the lack of a coherent account condensed in a definition of qualitative research. Many of the attempts to define the term do not meet the requirements of a proper definition: A definition should be clear, avoid tautology, demarcate its domain in relation to the environment, and ideally only use words in its definiens that themselves are not in need of definition (Hempel 1966 ). A definition can enhance precision and thus clarity by identifying the core of the phenomenon. Preferably, a definition should be short. The typical definition we have found, however, is an ostensive definition, which indicates what qualitative research is about without informing us about what it actually is :
Qualitative research is multimethod in focus, involving an interpretative, 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. Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical materials – case study, personal experience, introspective, life story, interview, observational, historical, interactional, and visual texts – that describe routine and problematic moments and meanings in individuals’ lives. (Denzin and Lincoln 2005 :2)
Flick claims that the label “qualitative research” is indeed used as an umbrella for a number of approaches ( 2007 :2–4; 2002 :6), and it is not difficult to identify research fitting this designation. Moreover, whatever it is, it has grown dramatically over the past five decades. In addition, courses have been developed, methods have flourished, arguments about its future have been advanced (for example, Denzin and Lincoln 1994) and criticized (for example, Snow and Morrill 1995 ), and dedicated journals and books have mushroomed. Most social scientists have a clear idea of research and how it differs from journalism, politics and other activities. But the question of what is qualitative in qualitative research is either eluded or eschewed.
We maintain that this lacuna hinders systematic knowledge production based on qualitative research. Paul Lazarsfeld noted the lack of “codification” as early as 1955 when he reviewed 100 qualitative studies in order to offer a codification of the practices (Lazarsfeld and Barton 1982 :239). Since then many texts on “qualitative research” and its methods have been published, including recent attempts (Goertz and Mahoney 2012 ) similar to Lazarsfeld’s. These studies have tried to extract what is qualitative by looking at the large number of empirical “qualitative” studies. Our novel strategy complements these endeavors by taking another approach and looking at the attempts to codify these practices in the form of a definition, as well as to a minor extent take Becker’s study as an exemplar of what qualitative researchers actually do, and what the characteristic of being ‘qualitative’ denotes and implies. We claim that qualitative researchers, if there is such a thing as “qualitative research,” should be able to codify their practices in a condensed, yet general way expressed in language.
Lingering problems of “generalizability” and “how many cases do I need” (Small 2009 ) are blocking advancement – in this line of work qualitative approaches are said to differ considerably from quantitative ones, while some of the former unsuccessfully mimic principles related to the latter (Small 2009 ). Additionally, quantitative researchers sometimes unfairly criticize the first based on their own quality criteria. Scholars like Goertz and Mahoney ( 2012 ) have successfully focused on the different norms and practices beyond what they argue are essentially two different cultures: those working with either qualitative or quantitative methods. Instead, similarly to Becker ( 2017 ) who has recently questioned the usefulness of the distinction between qualitative and quantitative research, we focus on similarities.
The current situation also impedes both students and researchers in focusing their studies and understanding each other’s work (Lazarsfeld and Barton 1982 :239). A third consequence is providing an opening for critiques by scholars operating within different traditions (Valsiner 2000 :101). A fourth issue is that the “implicit use of methods in qualitative research makes the field far less standardized than the quantitative paradigm” (Goertz and Mahoney 2012 :9). Relatedly, the National Science Foundation in the US organized two workshops in 2004 and 2005 to address the scientific foundations of qualitative research involving strategies to improve it and to develop standards of evaluation in qualitative research. However, a specific focus on its distinguishing feature of being “qualitative” while being implicitly acknowledged, was discussed only briefly (for example, Best 2004 ).
In 2014 a theme issue was published in this journal on “Methods, Materials, and Meanings: Designing Cultural Analysis,” discussing central issues in (cultural) qualitative research (Berezin 2014 ; Biernacki 2014 ; Glaeser 2014 ; Lamont and Swidler 2014 ; Spillman 2014). We agree with many of the arguments put forward, such as the risk of methodological tribalism, and that we should not waste energy on debating methods separated from research questions. Nonetheless, a clarification of the relation to what is called “quantitative research” is of outmost importance to avoid misunderstandings and misguided debates between “qualitative” and “quantitative” researchers. Our strategy means that researchers, “qualitative” or “quantitative” they may be, in their actual practice may combine qualitative work and quantitative work.
In this article we accomplish three tasks. First, we systematically survey the literature for meanings of qualitative research by looking at how researchers have defined it. Drawing upon existing knowledge we find that the different meanings and ideas of qualitative research are not yet coherently integrated into one satisfactory definition. Next, we advance our contribution by offering a definition of qualitative research and illustrate its meaning and use partially by expanding on the brief example introduced earlier related to Becker’s work ( 1963 ). We offer a systematic analysis of central themes of what researchers consider to be the core of “qualitative,” regardless of style of work. These themes – which we summarize in terms of four keywords: distinction, process, closeness, improved understanding – constitute part of our literature review, in which each one appears, sometimes with others, but never all in the same definition. They serve as the foundation of our contribution. Our categories are overlapping. Their use is primarily to organize the large amount of definitions we have identified and analyzed, and not necessarily to draw a clear distinction between them. Finally, we continue the elaboration discussed above on the advantages of a clear definition of qualitative research.
In a hermeneutic fashion we propose that there is something meaningful that deserves to be labelled “qualitative research” (Gadamer 1990 ). To approach the question “What is qualitative in qualitative research?” we have surveyed the literature. In conducting our survey we first traced the word’s etymology in dictionaries, encyclopedias, handbooks of the social sciences and of methods and textbooks, mainly in English, which is common to methodology courses. It should be noted that we have zoomed in on sociology and its literature. This discipline has been the site of the largest debate and development of methods that can be called “qualitative,” which suggests that this field should be examined in great detail.
In an ideal situation we should expect that one good definition, or at least some common ideas, would have emerged over the years. This common core of qualitative research should be so accepted that it would appear in at least some textbooks. Since this is not what we found, we decided to pursue an inductive approach to capture maximal variation in the field of qualitative research; we searched in a selection of handbooks, textbooks, book chapters, and books, to which we added the analysis of journal articles. Our sample comprises a total of 89 references.
In practice we focused on the discipline that has had a clear discussion of methods, namely sociology. We also conducted a broad search in the JSTOR database to identify scholarly sociology articles published between 1998 and 2017 in English with a focus on defining or explaining qualitative research. We specifically zoom in on this time frame because we would have expect that this more mature period would have produced clear discussions on the meaning of qualitative research. To find these articles we combined a number of keywords to search the content and/or the title: qualitative (which was always included), definition, empirical, research, methodology, studies, fieldwork, interview and observation .
As a second phase of our research we searched within nine major sociological journals ( American Journal of Sociology , Sociological Theory , American Sociological Review , Contemporary Sociology , Sociological Forum , Sociological Theory , Qualitative Research , Qualitative Sociology and Qualitative Sociology Review ) for articles also published during the past 19 years (1998–2017) that had the term “qualitative” in the title and attempted to define qualitative research.
Lastly we picked two additional journals, Qualitative Research and Qualitative Sociology , in which we could expect to find texts addressing the notion of “qualitative.” From Qualitative Research we chose Volume 14, Issue 6, December 2014, and from Qualitative Sociology we chose Volume 36, Issue 2, June 2017. Within each of these we selected the first article; then we picked the second article of three prior issues. Again we went back another three issues and investigated article number three. Finally we went back another three issues and perused article number four. This selection criteria was used to get a manageable sample for the analysis.
The coding process of the 89 references we gathered in our selected review began soon after the first round of material was gathered, and we reduced the complexity created by our maximum variation sampling (Snow and Anderson 1993 :22) to four different categories within which questions on the nature and properties of qualitative research were discussed. We call them: Qualitative and Quantitative Research, Qualitative Research, Fieldwork, and Grounded Theory. This – which may appear as an illogical grouping – merely reflects the “context” in which the matter of “qualitative” is discussed. If the selection process of the material – books and articles – was informed by pre-knowledge, we used an inductive strategy to code the material. When studying our material, we identified four central notions related to “qualitative” that appear in various combinations in the literature which indicate what is the core of qualitative research. We have labeled them: “distinctions”, “process,” “closeness,” and “improved understanding.” During the research process the categories and notions were improved, refined, changed, and reordered. The coding ended when a sense of saturation in the material arose. In the presentation below all quotations and references come from our empirical material of texts on qualitative research.
Analysis – What is Qualitative Research?
In this section we describe the four categories we identified in the coding, how they differently discuss qualitative research, as well as their overall content. Some salient quotations are selected to represent the type of text sorted under each of the four categories. What we present are examples from the literature.
Qualitative and Quantitative
This analytic category comprises quotations comparing qualitative and quantitative research, a distinction that is frequently used (Brown 2010 :231); in effect this is a conceptual pair that structures the discussion and that may be associated with opposing interests. While the general goal of quantitative and qualitative research is the same – to understand the world better – their methodologies and focus in certain respects differ substantially (Becker 1966 :55). Quantity refers to that property of something that can be determined by measurement. In a dictionary of Statistics and Methodology we find that “(a) When referring to *variables, ‘qualitative’ is another term for *categorical or *nominal. (b) When speaking of kinds of research, ‘qualitative’ refers to studies of subjects that are hard to quantify, such as art history. Qualitative research tends to be a residual category for almost any kind of non-quantitative research” (Stiles 1998:183). But it should be obvious that one could employ a quantitative approach when studying, for example, art history.
The same dictionary states that quantitative is “said of variables or research that can be handled numerically, usually (too sharply) contrasted with *qualitative variables and research” (Stiles 1998:184). From a qualitative perspective “quantitative research” is about numbers and counting, and from a quantitative perspective qualitative research is everything that is not about numbers. But this does not say much about what is “qualitative.” If we turn to encyclopedias we find that in the 1932 edition of the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences there is no mention of “qualitative.” In the Encyclopedia from 1968 we can read:
Qualitative Analysis. For methods of obtaining, analyzing, and describing data, see [the various entries:] CONTENT ANALYSIS; COUNTED DATA; EVALUATION RESEARCH, FIELD WORK; GRAPHIC PRESENTATION; HISTORIOGRAPHY, especially the article on THE RHETORIC OF HISTORY; INTERVIEWING; OBSERVATION; PERSONALITY MEASUREMENT; PROJECTIVE METHODS; PSYCHOANALYSIS, article on EXPERIMENTAL METHODS; SURVEY ANALYSIS, TABULAR PRESENTATION; TYPOLOGIES. (Vol. 13:225)
Some, like Alford, divide researchers into methodologists or, in his words, “quantitative and qualitative specialists” (Alford 1998 :12). Qualitative research uses a variety of methods, such as intensive interviews or in-depth analysis of historical materials, and it is concerned with a comprehensive account of some event or unit (King et al. 1994 :4). Like quantitative research it can be utilized to study a variety of issues, but it tends to focus on meanings and motivations that underlie cultural symbols, personal experiences, phenomena and detailed understanding of processes in the social world. In short, qualitative research centers on understanding processes, experiences, and the meanings people assign to things (Kalof et al. 2008 :79).
Others simply say that qualitative methods are inherently unscientific (Jovanović 2011 :19). Hood, for instance, argues that words are intrinsically less precise than numbers, and that they are therefore more prone to subjective analysis, leading to biased results (Hood 2006 :219). Qualitative methodologies have raised concerns over the limitations of quantitative templates (Brady et al. 2004 :4). Scholars such as King et al. ( 1994 ), for instance, argue that non-statistical research can produce more reliable results if researchers pay attention to the rules of scientific inference commonly stated in quantitative research. Also, researchers such as Becker ( 1966 :59; 1970 :42–43) have asserted that, if conducted properly, qualitative research and in particular ethnographic field methods, can lead to more accurate results than quantitative studies, in particular, survey research and laboratory experiments.
Some researchers, such as Kalof, Dan, and Dietz ( 2008 :79) claim that the boundaries between the two approaches are becoming blurred, and Small ( 2009 ) argues that currently much qualitative research (especially in North America) tries unsuccessfully and unnecessarily to emulate quantitative standards. For others, qualitative research tends to be more humanistic and discursive (King et al. 1994 :4). Ragin ( 1994 ), and similarly also Becker, ( 1996 :53), Marchel and Owens ( 2007 :303) think that the main distinction between the two styles is overstated and does not rest on the simple dichotomy of “numbers versus words” (Ragin 1994 :xii). Some claim that quantitative data can be utilized to discover associations, but in order to unveil cause and effect a complex research design involving the use of qualitative approaches needs to be devised (Gilbert 2009 :35). Consequently, qualitative data are useful for understanding the nuances lying beyond those processes as they unfold (Gilbert 2009 :35). Others contend that qualitative research is particularly well suited both to identify causality and to uncover fine descriptive distinctions (Fine and Hallett 2014 ; Lichterman and Isaac Reed 2014 ; Katz 2015 ).
There are other ways to separate these two traditions, including normative statements about what qualitative research should be (that is, better or worse than quantitative approaches, concerned with scientific approaches to societal change or vice versa; Snow and Morrill 1995 ; Denzin and Lincoln 2005 ), or whether it should develop falsifiable statements; Best 2004 ).
We propose that quantitative research is largely concerned with pre-determined variables (Small 2008 ); the analysis concerns the relations between variables. These categories are primarily not questioned in the study, only their frequency or degree, or the correlations between them (cf. Franzosi 2016 ). If a researcher studies wage differences between women and men, he or she works with given categories: x number of men are compared with y number of women, with a certain wage attributed to each person. The idea is not to move beyond the given categories of wage, men and women; they are the starting point as well as the end point, and undergo no “qualitative change.” Qualitative research, in contrast, investigates relations between categories that are themselves subject to change in the research process. Returning to Becker’s study ( 1963 ), we see that he questioned pre-dispositional theories of deviant behavior working with pre-determined variables such as an individual’s combination of personal qualities or emotional problems. His take, in contrast, was to understand marijuana consumption by developing “variables” as part of the investigation. Thereby he presented new variables, or as we would say today, theoretical concepts, but which are grounded in the empirical material.
Qualitative Research
This category contains quotations that refer to descriptions of qualitative research without making comparisons with quantitative research. Researchers such as Denzin and Lincoln, who have written a series of influential handbooks on qualitative methods (1994; Denzin and Lincoln 2003 ; 2005 ), citing Nelson et al. (1992:4), argue that because qualitative research is “interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and sometimes counterdisciplinary” it is difficult to derive one single definition of it (Jovanović 2011 :3). According to them, in fact, “the field” is “many things at the same time,” involving contradictions, tensions over its focus, methods, and how to derive interpretations and findings ( 2003 : 11). Similarly, others, such as Flick ( 2007 :ix–x) contend that agreeing on an accepted definition has increasingly become problematic, and that qualitative research has possibly matured different identities. However, Best holds that “the proliferation of many sorts of activities under the label of qualitative sociology threatens to confuse our discussions” ( 2004 :54). Atkinson’s position is more definite: “the current state of qualitative research and research methods is confused” ( 2005 :3–4).
Qualitative research is about interpretation (Blumer 1969 ; Strauss and Corbin 1998 ; Denzin and Lincoln 2003 ), or Verstehen [understanding] (Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1996 ). It is “multi-method,” involving the collection and use of a variety of empirical materials (Denzin and Lincoln 1998; Silverman 2013 ) and approaches (Silverman 2005 ; Flick 2007 ). It focuses not only on the objective nature of behavior but also on its subjective meanings: individuals’ own accounts of their attitudes, motivations, behavior (McIntyre 2005 :127; Creswell 2009 ), events and situations (Bryman 1989) – what people say and do in specific places and institutions (Goodwin and Horowitz 2002 :35–36) in social and temporal contexts (Morrill and Fine 1997). For this reason, following Weber ([1921-22] 1978), it can be described as an interpretative science (McIntyre 2005 :127). But could quantitative research also be concerned with these questions? Also, as pointed out below, does all qualitative research focus on subjective meaning, as some scholars suggest?
Others also distinguish qualitative research by claiming that it collects data using a naturalistic approach (Denzin and Lincoln 2005 :2; Creswell 2009 ), focusing on the meaning actors ascribe to their actions. But again, does all qualitative research need to be collected in situ? And does qualitative research have to be inherently concerned with meaning? Flick ( 2007 ), referring to Denzin and Lincoln ( 2005 ), mentions conversation analysis as an example of qualitative research that is not concerned with the meanings people bring to a situation, but rather with the formal organization of talk. Still others, such as Ragin ( 1994 :85), note that qualitative research is often (especially early on in the project, we would add) less structured than other kinds of social research – a characteristic connected to its flexibility and that can lead both to potentially better, but also worse results. But is this not a feature of this type of research, rather than a defining description of its essence? Wouldn’t this comment also apply, albeit to varying degrees, to quantitative research?
In addition, Strauss ( 2003 ), along with others, such as Alvesson and Kärreman ( 2011 :10–76), argue that qualitative researchers struggle to capture and represent complex phenomena partially because they tend to collect a large amount of data. While his analysis is correct at some points – “It is necessary to do detailed, intensive, microscopic examination of the data in order to bring out the amazing complexity of what lies in, behind, and beyond those data” (Strauss 2003 :10) – much of his analysis concerns the supposed focus of qualitative research and its challenges, rather than exactly what it is about. But even in this instance we would make a weak case arguing that these are strictly the defining features of qualitative research. Some researchers seem to focus on the approach or the methods used, or even on the way material is analyzed. Several researchers stress the naturalistic assumption of investigating the world, suggesting that meaning and interpretation appear to be a core matter of qualitative research.
We can also see that in this category there is no consensus about specific qualitative methods nor about qualitative data. Many emphasize interpretation, but quantitative research, too, involves interpretation; the results of a regression analysis, for example, certainly have to be interpreted, and the form of meta-analysis that factor analysis provides indeed requires interpretation However, there is no interpretation of quantitative raw data, i.e., numbers in tables. One common thread is that qualitative researchers have to get to grips with their data in order to understand what is being studied in great detail, irrespective of the type of empirical material that is being analyzed. This observation is connected to the fact that qualitative researchers routinely make several adjustments of focus and research design as their studies progress, in many cases until the very end of the project (Kalof et al. 2008 ). If you, like Becker, do not start out with a detailed theory, adjustments such as the emergence and refinement of research questions will occur during the research process. We have thus found a number of useful reflections about qualitative research scattered across different sources, but none of them effectively describe the defining characteristics of this approach.
Although qualitative research does not appear to be defined in terms of a specific method, it is certainly common that fieldwork, i.e., research that entails that the researcher spends considerable time in the field that is studied and use the knowledge gained as data, is seen as emblematic of or even identical to qualitative research. But because we understand that fieldwork tends to focus primarily on the collection and analysis of qualitative data, we expected to find within it discussions on the meaning of “qualitative.” But, again, this was not the case.
Instead, we found material on the history of this approach (for example, Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1996 ; Atkinson et al. 2001), including how it has changed; for example, by adopting a more self-reflexive practice (Heyl 2001), as well as the different nomenclature that has been adopted, such as fieldwork, ethnography, qualitative research, naturalistic research, participant observation and so on (for example, Lofland et al. 2006 ; Gans 1999 ).
We retrieved definitions of ethnography, such as “the study of people acting in the natural courses of their daily lives,” involving a “resocialization of the researcher” (Emerson 1988 :1) through intense immersion in others’ social worlds (see also examples in Hammersley 2018 ). This may be accomplished by direct observation and also participation (Neuman 2007 :276), although others, such as Denzin ( 1970 :185), have long recognized other types of observation, including non-participant (“fly on the wall”). In this category we have also isolated claims and opposing views, arguing that this type of research is distinguished primarily by where it is conducted (natural settings) (Hughes 1971:496), and how it is carried out (a variety of methods are applied) or, for some most importantly, by involving an active, empathetic immersion in those being studied (Emerson 1988 :2). We also retrieved descriptions of the goals it attends in relation to how it is taught (understanding subjective meanings of the people studied, primarily develop theory, or contribute to social change) (see for example, Corte and Irwin 2017 ; Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1996 :281; Trier-Bieniek 2012 :639) by collecting the richest possible data (Lofland et al. 2006 ) to derive “thick descriptions” (Geertz 1973 ), and/or to aim at theoretical statements of general scope and applicability (for example, Emerson 1988 ; Fine 2003 ). We have identified guidelines on how to evaluate it (for example Becker 1996 ; Lamont 2004 ) and have retrieved instructions on how it should be conducted (for example, Lofland et al. 2006 ). For instance, analysis should take place while the data gathering unfolds (Emerson 1988 ; Hammersley and Atkinson 2007 ; Lofland et al. 2006 ), observations should be of long duration (Becker 1970 :54; Goffman 1989 ), and data should be of high quantity (Becker 1970 :52–53), as well as other questionable distinctions between fieldwork and other methods:
Field studies differ from other methods of research in that the researcher performs the task of selecting topics, decides what questions to ask, and forges interest in the course of the research itself . This is in sharp contrast to many ‘theory-driven’ and ‘hypothesis-testing’ methods. (Lofland and Lofland 1995 :5)
But could not, for example, a strictly interview-based study be carried out with the same amount of flexibility, such as sequential interviewing (for example, Small 2009 )? Once again, are quantitative approaches really as inflexible as some qualitative researchers think? Moreover, this category stresses the role of the actors’ meaning, which requires knowledge and close interaction with people, their practices and their lifeworld.
It is clear that field studies – which are seen by some as the “gold standard” of qualitative research – are nonetheless only one way of doing qualitative research. There are other methods, but it is not clear why some are more qualitative than others, or why they are better or worse. Fieldwork is characterized by interaction with the field (the material) and understanding of the phenomenon that is being studied. In Becker’s case, he had general experience from fields in which marihuana was used, based on which he did interviews with actual users in several fields.
Grounded Theory
Another major category we identified in our sample is Grounded Theory. We found descriptions of it most clearly in Glaser and Strauss’ ([1967] 2010 ) original articulation, Strauss and Corbin ( 1998 ) and Charmaz ( 2006 ), as well as many other accounts of what it is for: generating and testing theory (Strauss 2003 :xi). We identified explanations of how this task can be accomplished – such as through two main procedures: constant comparison and theoretical sampling (Emerson 1998:96), and how using it has helped researchers to “think differently” (for example, Strauss and Corbin 1998 :1). We also read descriptions of its main traits, what it entails and fosters – for instance, an exceptional flexibility, an inductive approach (Strauss and Corbin 1998 :31–33; 1990; Esterberg 2002 :7), an ability to step back and critically analyze situations, recognize tendencies towards bias, think abstractly and be open to criticism, enhance sensitivity towards the words and actions of respondents, and develop a sense of absorption and devotion to the research process (Strauss and Corbin 1998 :5–6). Accordingly, we identified discussions of the value of triangulating different methods (both using and not using grounded theory), including quantitative ones, and theories to achieve theoretical development (most comprehensively in Denzin 1970 ; Strauss and Corbin 1998 ; Timmermans and Tavory 2012 ). We have also located arguments about how its practice helps to systematize data collection, analysis and presentation of results (Glaser and Strauss [1967] 2010 :16).
Grounded theory offers a systematic approach which requires researchers to get close to the field; closeness is a requirement of identifying questions and developing new concepts or making further distinctions with regard to old concepts. In contrast to other qualitative approaches, grounded theory emphasizes the detailed coding process, and the numerous fine-tuned distinctions that the researcher makes during the process. Within this category, too, we could not find a satisfying discussion of the meaning of qualitative research.
Defining Qualitative Research
In sum, our analysis shows that some notions reappear in the discussion of qualitative research, such as understanding, interpretation, “getting close” and making distinctions. These notions capture aspects of what we think is “qualitative.” However, a comprehensive definition that is useful and that can further develop the field is lacking, and not even a clear picture of its essential elements appears. In other words no definition emerges from our data, and in our research process we have moved back and forth between our empirical data and the attempt to present a definition. Our concrete strategy, as stated above, is to relate qualitative and quantitative research, or more specifically, qualitative and quantitative work. We use an ideal-typical notion of quantitative research which relies on taken for granted and numbered variables. This means that the data consists of variables on different scales, such as ordinal, but frequently ratio and absolute scales, and the representation of the numbers to the variables, i.e. the justification of the assignment of numbers to object or phenomenon, are not questioned, though the validity may be questioned. In this section we return to the notion of quality and try to clarify it while presenting our contribution.
Broadly, research refers to the activity performed by people trained to obtain knowledge through systematic procedures. Notions such as “objectivity” and “reflexivity,” “systematic,” “theory,” “evidence” and “openness” are here taken for granted in any type of research. Next, building on our empirical analysis we explain the four notions that we have identified as central to qualitative work: distinctions, process, closeness, and improved understanding. In discussing them, ultimately in relation to one another, we make their meaning even more precise. Our idea, in short, is that only when these ideas that we present separately for analytic purposes are brought together can we speak of qualitative research.
Distinctions
We believe that the possibility of making new distinctions is one the defining characteristics of qualitative research. It clearly sets it apart from quantitative analysis which works with taken-for-granted variables, albeit as mentioned, meta-analyses, for example, factor analysis may result in new variables. “Quality” refers essentially to distinctions, as already pointed out by Aristotle. He discusses the term “qualitative” commenting: “By a quality I mean that in virtue of which things are said to be qualified somehow” (Aristotle 1984:14). Quality is about what something is or has, which means that the distinction from its environment is crucial. We see qualitative research as a process in which significant new distinctions are made to the scholarly community; to make distinctions is a key aspect of obtaining new knowledge; a point, as we will see, that also has implications for “quantitative research.” The notion of being “significant” is paramount. New distinctions by themselves are not enough; just adding concepts only increases complexity without furthering our knowledge. The significance of new distinctions is judged against the communal knowledge of the research community. To enable this discussion and judgements central elements of rational discussion are required (cf. Habermas [1981] 1987 ; Davidsson [ 1988 ] 2001) to identify what is new and relevant scientific knowledge. Relatedly, Ragin alludes to the idea of new and useful knowledge at a more concrete level: “Qualitative methods are appropriate for in-depth examination of cases because they aid the identification of key features of cases. Most qualitative methods enhance data” (1994:79). When Becker ( 1963 ) studied deviant behavior and investigated how people became marihuana smokers, he made distinctions between the ways in which people learned how to smoke. This is a classic example of how the strategy of “getting close” to the material, for example the text, people or pictures that are subject to analysis, may enable researchers to obtain deeper insight and new knowledge by making distinctions – in this instance on the initial notion of learning how to smoke. Others have stressed the making of distinctions in relation to coding or theorizing. Emerson et al. ( 1995 ), for example, hold that “qualitative coding is a way of opening up avenues of inquiry,” meaning that the researcher identifies and develops concepts and analytic insights through close examination of and reflection on data (Emerson et al. 1995 :151). Goodwin and Horowitz highlight making distinctions in relation to theory-building writing: “Close engagement with their cases typically requires qualitative researchers to adapt existing theories or to make new conceptual distinctions or theoretical arguments to accommodate new data” ( 2002 : 37). In the ideal-typical quantitative research only existing and so to speak, given, variables would be used. If this is the case no new distinction are made. But, would not also many “quantitative” researchers make new distinctions?
Process does not merely suggest that research takes time. It mainly implies that qualitative new knowledge results from a process that involves several phases, and above all iteration. Qualitative research is about oscillation between theory and evidence, analysis and generating material, between first- and second -order constructs (Schütz 1962 :59), between getting in contact with something, finding sources, becoming deeply familiar with a topic, and then distilling and communicating some of its essential features. The main point is that the categories that the researcher uses, and perhaps takes for granted at the beginning of the research process, usually undergo qualitative changes resulting from what is found. Becker describes how he tested hypotheses and let the jargon of the users develop into theoretical concepts. This happens over time while the study is being conducted, exemplifying what we mean by process.
In the research process, a pilot-study may be used to get a first glance of, for example, the field, how to approach it, and what methods can be used, after which the method and theory are chosen or refined before the main study begins. Thus, the empirical material is often central from the start of the project and frequently leads to adjustments by the researcher. Likewise, during the main study categories are not fixed; the empirical material is seen in light of the theory used, but it is also given the opportunity to kick back, thereby resisting attempts to apply theoretical straightjackets (Becker 1970 :43). In this process, coding and analysis are interwoven, and thus are often important steps for getting closer to the phenomenon and deciding what to focus on next. Becker began his research by interviewing musicians close to him, then asking them to refer him to other musicians, and later on doubling his original sample of about 25 to include individuals in other professions (Becker 1973:46). Additionally, he made use of some participant observation, documents, and interviews with opiate users made available to him by colleagues. As his inductive theory of deviance evolved, Becker expanded his sample in order to fine tune it, and test the accuracy and generality of his hypotheses. In addition, he introduced a negative case and discussed the null hypothesis ( 1963 :44). His phasic career model is thus based on a research design that embraces processual work. Typically, process means to move between “theory” and “material” but also to deal with negative cases, and Becker ( 1998 ) describes how discovering these negative cases impacted his research design and ultimately its findings.
Obviously, all research is process-oriented to some degree. The point is that the ideal-typical quantitative process does not imply change of the data, and iteration between data, evidence, hypotheses, empirical work, and theory. The data, quantified variables, are, in most cases fixed. Merging of data, which of course can be done in a quantitative research process, does not mean new data. New hypotheses are frequently tested, but the “raw data is often the “the same.” Obviously, over time new datasets are made available and put into use.
Another characteristic that is emphasized in our sample is that qualitative researchers – and in particular ethnographers – can, or as Goffman put it, ought to ( 1989 ), get closer to the phenomenon being studied and their data than quantitative researchers (for example, Silverman 2009 :85). Put differently, essentially because of their methods qualitative researchers get into direct close contact with those being investigated and/or the material, such as texts, being analyzed. Becker started out his interview study, as we noted, by talking to those he knew in the field of music to get closer to the phenomenon he was studying. By conducting interviews he got even closer. Had he done more observations, he would undoubtedly have got even closer to the field.
Additionally, ethnographers’ design enables researchers to follow the field over time, and the research they do is almost by definition longitudinal, though the time in the field is studied obviously differs between studies. The general characteristic of closeness over time maximizes the chances of unexpected events, new data (related, for example, to archival research as additional sources, and for ethnography for situations not necessarily previously thought of as instrumental – what Mannay and Morgan ( 2015 ) term the “waiting field”), serendipity (Merton and Barber 2004 ; Åkerström 2013 ), and possibly reactivity, as well as the opportunity to observe disrupted patterns that translate into exemplars of negative cases. Two classic examples of this are Becker’s finding of what medical students call “crocks” (Becker et al. 1961 :317), and Geertz’s ( 1973 ) study of “deep play” in Balinese society.
By getting and staying so close to their data – be it pictures, text or humans interacting (Becker was himself a musician) – for a long time, as the research progressively focuses, qualitative researchers are prompted to continually test their hunches, presuppositions and hypotheses. They test them against a reality that often (but certainly not always), and practically, as well as metaphorically, talks back, whether by validating them, or disqualifying their premises – correctly, as well as incorrectly (Fine 2003 ; Becker 1970 ). This testing nonetheless often leads to new directions for the research. Becker, for example, says that he was initially reading psychological theories, but when facing the data he develops a theory that looks at, you may say, everything but psychological dispositions to explain the use of marihuana. Especially researchers involved with ethnographic methods have a fairly unique opportunity to dig up and then test (in a circular, continuous and temporal way) new research questions and findings as the research progresses, and thereby to derive previously unimagined and uncharted distinctions by getting closer to the phenomenon under study.
Let us stress that getting close is by no means restricted to ethnography. The notion of hermeneutic circle and hermeneutics as a general way of understanding implies that we must get close to the details in order to get the big picture. This also means that qualitative researchers can literally also make use of details of pictures as evidence (cf. Harper 2002). Thus, researchers may get closer both when generating the material or when analyzing it.
Quantitative research, we maintain, in the ideal-typical representation cannot get closer to the data. The data is essentially numbers in tables making up the variables (Franzosi 2016 :138). The data may originally have been “qualitative,” but once reduced to numbers there can only be a type of “hermeneutics” about what the number may stand for. The numbers themselves, however, are non-ambiguous. Thus, in quantitative research, interpretation, if done, is not about the data itself—the numbers—but what the numbers stand for. It follows that the interpretation is essentially done in a more “speculative” mode without direct empirical evidence (cf. Becker 2017 ).
Improved Understanding
While distinction, process and getting closer refer to the qualitative work of the researcher, improved understanding refers to its conditions and outcome of this work. Understanding cuts deeper than explanation, which to some may mean a causally verified correlation between variables. The notion of explanation presupposes the notion of understanding since explanation does not include an idea of how knowledge is gained (Manicas 2006 : 15). Understanding, we argue, is the core concept of what we call the outcome of the process when research has made use of all the other elements that were integrated in the research. Understanding, then, has a special status in qualitative research since it refers both to the conditions of knowledge and the outcome of the process. Understanding can to some extent be seen as the condition of explanation and occurs in a process of interpretation, which naturally refers to meaning (Gadamer 1990 ). It is fundamentally connected to knowing, and to the knowing of how to do things (Heidegger [1927] 2001 ). Conceptually the term hermeneutics is used to account for this process. Heidegger ties hermeneutics to human being and not possible to separate from the understanding of being ( 1988 ). Here we use it in a broader sense, and more connected to method in general (cf. Seiffert 1992 ). The abovementioned aspects – for example, “objectivity” and “reflexivity” – of the approach are conditions of scientific understanding. Understanding is the result of a circular process and means that the parts are understood in light of the whole, and vice versa. Understanding presupposes pre-understanding, or in other words, some knowledge of the phenomenon studied. The pre-understanding, even in the form of prejudices, are in qualitative research process, which we see as iterative, questioned, which gradually or suddenly change due to the iteration of data, evidence and concepts. However, qualitative research generates understanding in the iterative process when the researcher gets closer to the data, e.g., by going back and forth between field and analysis in a process that generates new data that changes the evidence, and, ultimately, the findings. Questioning, to ask questions, and put what one assumes—prejudices and presumption—in question, is central to understand something (Heidegger [1927] 2001 ; Gadamer 1990 :368–384). We propose that this iterative process in which the process of understanding occurs is characteristic of qualitative research.
Improved understanding means that we obtain scientific knowledge of something that we as a scholarly community did not know before, or that we get to know something better. It means that we understand more about how parts are related to one another, and to other things we already understand (see also Fine and Hallett 2014 ). Understanding is an important condition for qualitative research. It is not enough to identify correlations, make distinctions, and work in a process in which one gets close to the field or phenomena. Understanding is accomplished when the elements are integrated in an iterative process.
It is, moreover, possible to understand many things, and researchers, just like children, may come to understand new things every day as they engage with the world. This subjective condition of understanding – namely, that a person gains a better understanding of something –is easily met. To be qualified as “scientific,” the understanding must be general and useful to many; it must be public. But even this generally accessible understanding is not enough in order to speak of “scientific understanding.” Though we as a collective can increase understanding of everything in virtually all potential directions as a result also of qualitative work, we refrain from this “objective” way of understanding, which has no means of discriminating between what we gain in understanding. Scientific understanding means that it is deemed relevant from the scientific horizon (compare Schütz 1962 : 35–38, 46, 63), and that it rests on the pre-understanding that the scientists have and must have in order to understand. In other words, the understanding gained must be deemed useful by other researchers, so that they can build on it. We thus see understanding from a pragmatic, rather than a subjective or objective perspective. Improved understanding is related to the question(s) at hand. Understanding, in order to represent an improvement, must be an improvement in relation to the existing body of knowledge of the scientific community (James [ 1907 ] 1955). Scientific understanding is, by definition, collective, as expressed in Weber’s famous note on objectivity, namely that scientific work aims at truths “which … can claim, even for a Chinese, the validity appropriate to an empirical analysis” ([1904] 1949 :59). By qualifying “improved understanding” we argue that it is a general defining characteristic of qualitative research. Becker‘s ( 1966 ) study and other research of deviant behavior increased our understanding of the social learning processes of how individuals start a behavior. And it also added new knowledge about the labeling of deviant behavior as a social process. Few studies, of course, make the same large contribution as Becker’s, but are nonetheless qualitative research.
Understanding in the phenomenological sense, which is a hallmark of qualitative research, we argue, requires meaning and this meaning is derived from the context, and above all the data being analyzed. The ideal-typical quantitative research operates with given variables with different numbers. This type of material is not enough to establish meaning at the level that truly justifies understanding. In other words, many social science explanations offer ideas about correlations or even causal relations, but this does not mean that the meaning at the level of the data analyzed, is understood. This leads us to say that there are indeed many explanations that meet the criteria of understanding, for example the explanation of how one becomes a marihuana smoker presented by Becker. However, we may also understand a phenomenon without explaining it, and we may have potential explanations, or better correlations, that are not really understood.
We may speak more generally of quantitative research and its data to clarify what we see as an important distinction. The “raw data” that quantitative research—as an idealtypical activity, refers to is not available for further analysis; the numbers, once created, are not to be questioned (Franzosi 2016 : 138). If the researcher is to do “more” or “change” something, this will be done by conjectures based on theoretical knowledge or based on the researcher’s lifeworld. Both qualitative and quantitative research is based on the lifeworld, and all researchers use prejudices and pre-understanding in the research process. This idea is present in the works of Heidegger ( 2001 ) and Heisenberg (cited in Franzosi 2010 :619). Qualitative research, as we argued, involves the interaction and questioning of concepts (theory), data, and evidence.
Ragin ( 2004 :22) points out that “a good definition of qualitative research should be inclusive and should emphasize its key strengths and features, not what it lacks (for example, the use of sophisticated quantitative techniques).” We define qualitative research as an iterative process in which improved understanding to the scientific community is achieved by making new significant distinctions resulting from getting closer to the phenomenon studied. Qualitative research, as defined here, is consequently a combination of two criteria: (i) how to do things –namely, generating and analyzing empirical material, in an iterative process in which one gets closer by making distinctions, and (ii) the outcome –improved understanding novel to the scholarly community. Is our definition applicable to our own study? In this study we have closely read the empirical material that we generated, and the novel distinction of the notion “qualitative research” is the outcome of an iterative process in which both deduction and induction were involved, in which we identified the categories that we analyzed. We thus claim to meet the first criteria, “how to do things.” The second criteria cannot be judged but in a partial way by us, namely that the “outcome” —in concrete form the definition-improves our understanding to others in the scientific community.
We have defined qualitative research, or qualitative scientific work, in relation to quantitative scientific work. Given this definition, qualitative research is about questioning the pre-given (taken for granted) variables, but it is thus also about making new distinctions of any type of phenomenon, for example, by coining new concepts, including the identification of new variables. This process, as we have discussed, is carried out in relation to empirical material, previous research, and thus in relation to theory. Theory and previous research cannot be escaped or bracketed. According to hermeneutic principles all scientific work is grounded in the lifeworld, and as social scientists we can thus never fully bracket our pre-understanding.
We have proposed that quantitative research, as an idealtype, is concerned with pre-determined variables (Small 2008 ). Variables are epistemically fixed, but can vary in terms of dimensions, such as frequency or number. Age is an example; as a variable it can take on different numbers. In relation to quantitative research, qualitative research does not reduce its material to number and variables. If this is done the process of comes to a halt, the researcher gets more distanced from her data, and it makes it no longer possible to make new distinctions that increase our understanding. We have above discussed the components of our definition in relation to quantitative research. Our conclusion is that in the research that is called quantitative there are frequent and necessary qualitative elements.
Further, comparative empirical research on researchers primarily working with ”quantitative” approaches and those working with ”qualitative” approaches, we propose, would perhaps show that there are many similarities in practices of these two approaches. This is not to deny dissimilarities, or the different epistemic and ontic presuppositions that may be more or less strongly associated with the two different strands (see Goertz and Mahoney 2012 ). Our point is nonetheless that prejudices and preconceptions about researchers are unproductive, and that as other researchers have argued, differences may be exaggerated (e.g., Becker 1996 : 53, 2017 ; Marchel and Owens 2007 :303; Ragin 1994 ), and that a qualitative dimension is present in both kinds of work.
Several things follow from our findings. The most important result is the relation to quantitative research. In our analysis we have separated qualitative research from quantitative research. The point is not to label individual researchers, methods, projects, or works as either “quantitative” or “qualitative.” By analyzing, i.e., taking apart, the notions of quantitative and qualitative, we hope to have shown the elements of qualitative research. Our definition captures the elements, and how they, when combined in practice, generate understanding. As many of the quotations we have used suggest, one conclusion of our study holds that qualitative approaches are not inherently connected with a specific method. Put differently, none of the methods that are frequently labelled “qualitative,” such as interviews or participant observation, are inherently “qualitative.” What matters, given our definition, is whether one works qualitatively or quantitatively in the research process, until the results are produced. Consequently, our analysis also suggests that those researchers working with what in the literature and in jargon is often called “quantitative research” are almost bound to make use of what we have identified as qualitative elements in any research project. Our findings also suggest that many” quantitative” researchers, at least to some extent, are engaged with qualitative work, such as when research questions are developed, variables are constructed and combined, and hypotheses are formulated. Furthermore, a research project may hover between “qualitative” and “quantitative” or start out as “qualitative” and later move into a “quantitative” (a distinct strategy that is not similar to “mixed methods” or just simply combining induction and deduction). More generally speaking, the categories of “qualitative” and “quantitative,” unfortunately, often cover up practices, and it may lead to “camps” of researchers opposing one another. For example, regardless of the researcher is primarily oriented to “quantitative” or “qualitative” research, the role of theory is neglected (cf. Swedberg 2017 ). Our results open up for an interaction not characterized by differences, but by different emphasis, and similarities.
Let us take two examples to briefly indicate how qualitative elements can fruitfully be combined with quantitative. Franzosi ( 2010 ) has discussed the relations between quantitative and qualitative approaches, and more specifically the relation between words and numbers. He analyzes texts and argues that scientific meaning cannot be reduced to numbers. Put differently, the meaning of the numbers is to be understood by what is taken for granted, and what is part of the lifeworld (Schütz 1962 ). Franzosi shows how one can go about using qualitative and quantitative methods and data to address scientific questions analyzing violence in Italy at the time when fascism was rising (1919–1922). Aspers ( 2006 ) studied the meaning of fashion photographers. He uses an empirical phenomenological approach, and establishes meaning at the level of actors. In a second step this meaning, and the different ideal-typical photographers constructed as a result of participant observation and interviews, are tested using quantitative data from a database; in the first phase to verify the different ideal-types, in the second phase to use these types to establish new knowledge about the types. In both of these cases—and more examples can be found—authors move from qualitative data and try to keep the meaning established when using the quantitative data.
A second main result of our study is that a definition, and we provided one, offers a way for research to clarify, and even evaluate, what is done. Hence, our definition can guide researchers and students, informing them on how to think about concrete research problems they face, and to show what it means to get closer in a process in which new distinctions are made. The definition can also be used to evaluate the results, given that it is a standard of evaluation (cf. Hammersley 2007 ), to see whether new distinctions are made and whether this improves our understanding of what is researched, in addition to the evaluation of how the research was conducted. By making what is qualitative research explicit it becomes easier to communicate findings, and it is thereby much harder to fly under the radar with substandard research since there are standards of evaluation which make it easier to separate “good” from “not so good” qualitative research.
To conclude, our analysis, which ends with a definition of qualitative research can thus both address the “internal” issues of what is qualitative research, and the “external” critiques that make it harder to do qualitative research, to which both pressure from quantitative methods and general changes in society contribute.
Acknowledgements
Financial Support for this research is given by the European Research Council, CEV (263699). The authors are grateful to Susann Krieglsteiner for assistance in collecting the data. The paper has benefitted from the many useful comments by the three reviewers and the editor, comments by members of the Uppsala Laboratory of Economic Sociology, as well as Jukka Gronow, Sebastian Kohl, Marcin Serafin, Richard Swedberg, Anders Vassenden and Turid Rødne.
Biographies
is professor of sociology at the Department of Sociology, Uppsala University and Universität St. Gallen. His main focus is economic sociology, and in particular, markets. He has published numerous articles and books, including Orderly Fashion (Princeton University Press 2010), Markets (Polity Press 2011) and Re-Imagining Economic Sociology (edited with N. Dodd, Oxford University Press 2015). His book Ethnographic Methods (in Swedish) has already gone through several editions.
is associate professor of sociology at the Department of Media and Social Sciences, University of Stavanger. His research has been published in journals such as Social Psychology Quarterly, Sociological Theory, Teaching Sociology, and Music and Arts in Action. As an ethnographer he is working on a book on he social world of big-wave surfing.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Contributor Information
Patrik Aspers, Email: [email protected] .
Ugo Corte, Email: [email protected] .
- Åkerström M. Curiosity and serendipity in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology Review. 2013; 9 (2):10–18. [ Google Scholar ]
- Alford, Robert R. 1998. The craft of inquiry. Theories, methods, evidence . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Alvesson M, Kärreman D. Qualitative research and theory development . Mystery as method . London: SAGE Publications; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
- Aspers, Patrik. 2006. Markets in Fashion, A Phenomenological Approach. London Routledge.
- Atkinson P. Qualitative research. Unity and diversity. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 2005; 6 (3):1–15. [ Google Scholar ]
- Becker HS. Outsiders. Studies in the sociology of deviance . New York: The Free Press; 1963. [ Google Scholar ]
- Becker HS. Whose side are we on? Social Problems. 1966; 14 (3):239–247. [ Google Scholar ]
- Becker HS. Sociological work. Method and substance. New Brunswick: Transaction Books; 1970. [ Google Scholar ]
- Becker HS. The epistemology of qualitative research. In: Richard J, Anne C, Shweder RA, editors. Ethnography and human development. Context and meaning in social inquiry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1996. pp. 53–71. [ Google Scholar ]
- Becker HS. Tricks of the trade. How to think about your research while you're doing it. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
- Becker, Howard S. 2017. Evidence . Chigaco: University of Chicago Press.
- Becker H, Geer B, Hughes E, Strauss A. Boys in White, student culture in medical school. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers; 1961. [ Google Scholar ]
- Berezin M. How do we know what we mean? Epistemological dilemmas in cultural sociology. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 (2):141–151. [ Google Scholar ]
- Best, Joel. 2004. Defining qualitative research. In Workshop on Scientific Foundations of Qualitative Research , eds . Charles, Ragin, Joanne, Nagel, and Patricia White, 53-54. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04219/nsf04219.pdf .
- Biernacki R. Humanist interpretation versus coding text samples. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 (2):173–188. [ Google Scholar ]
- Blumer H. Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1969. [ Google Scholar ]
- Brady H, Collier D, Seawright J. Refocusing the discussion of methodology. In: Henry B, David C, editors. Rethinking social inquiry. Diverse tools, shared standards. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield; 2004. pp. 3–22. [ Google Scholar ]
- Brown AP. Qualitative method and compromise in applied social research. Qualitative Research. 2010; 10 (2):229–248. [ Google Scholar ]
- Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory. London: Sage; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
- Corte, Ugo, and Katherine Irwin. 2017. “The Form and Flow of Teaching Ethnographic Knowledge: Hands-on Approaches for Learning Epistemology” Teaching Sociology 45(3): 209-219.
- Creswell JW. Research design. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. 3. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
- Davidsson D. The myth of the subjective. In: Davidsson D, editor. Subjective, intersubjective, objective. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1988. pp. 39–52. [ Google Scholar ]
- Denzin NK. The research act: A theoretical introduction to Ssociological methods. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company Publishers; 1970. [ Google Scholar ]
- Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Introduction. The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2003. pp. 1–45. [ Google Scholar ]
- Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Introduction. The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2005. pp. 1–32. [ Google Scholar ]
- Emerson RM, editor. Contemporary field research. A collection of readings. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press; 1988. [ Google Scholar ]
- Emerson RM, Fretz RI, Shaw LL. Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
- Esterberg KG. Qualitative methods in social research. Boston: McGraw-Hill; 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
- Fine, Gary Alan. 1995. Review of “handbook of qualitative research.” Contemporary Sociology 24 (3): 416–418.
- Fine, Gary Alan. 2003. “ Toward a Peopled Ethnography: Developing Theory from Group Life.” Ethnography . 4(1):41-60.
- Fine GA, Hancock BH. The new ethnographer at work. Qualitative Research. 2017; 17 (2):260–268. [ Google Scholar ]
- Fine GA, Hallett T. Stranger and stranger: Creating theory through ethnographic distance and authority. Journal of Organizational Ethnography. 2014; 3 (2):188–203. [ Google Scholar ]
- Flick U. Qualitative research. State of the art. Social Science Information. 2002; 41 (1):5–24. [ Google Scholar ]
- Flick U. Designing qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
- Frankfort-Nachmias C, Nachmias D. Research methods in the social sciences. 5. London: Edward Arnold; 1996. [ Google Scholar ]
- Franzosi R. Sociology, narrative, and the quality versus quantity debate (Goethe versus Newton): Can computer-assisted story grammars help us understand the rise of Italian fascism (1919- 1922)? Theory and Society. 2010; 39 (6):593–629. [ Google Scholar ]
- Franzosi R. From method and measurement to narrative and number. International journal of social research methodology. 2016; 19 (1):137–141. [ Google Scholar ]
- Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1990. Wahrheit und Methode, Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik . Band 1, Hermeneutik. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
- Gans H. Participant Observation in an Age of “Ethnography” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 1999; 28 (5):540–548. [ Google Scholar ]
- Geertz C. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books; 1973. [ Google Scholar ]
- Gilbert N. Researching social life. 3. London: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
- Glaeser A. Hermeneutic institutionalism: Towards a new synthesis. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 :207–241. [ Google Scholar ]
- Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm L. Strauss. [1967] 2010. The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne: Aldine.
- Goertz G, Mahoney J. A tale of two cultures: Qualitative and quantitative research in the social sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
- Goffman E. On fieldwork. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 1989; 18 (2):123–132. [ Google Scholar ]
- Goodwin J, Horowitz R. Introduction. The methodological strengths and dilemmas of qualitative sociology. Qualitative Sociology. 2002; 25 (1):33–47. [ Google Scholar ]
- Habermas, Jürgen. [1981] 1987. The theory of communicative action . Oxford: Polity Press.
- Hammersley M. The issue of quality in qualitative research. International Journal of Research & Method in Education. 2007; 30 (3):287–305. [ Google Scholar ]
- Hammersley, Martyn. 2013. What is qualitative research? Bloomsbury Publishing.
- Hammersley M. What is ethnography? Can it survive should it? Ethnography and Education. 2018; 13 (1):1–17. [ Google Scholar ]
- Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Ethnography . Principles in practice . London: Tavistock Publications; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
- Heidegger M. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
- Heidegger, Martin. 1988. 1923. Ontologie. Hermeneutik der Faktizität, Gesamtausgabe II. Abteilung: Vorlesungen 1919-1944, Band 63, Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
- Hempel CG. Philosophy of the natural sciences. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 1966. [ Google Scholar ]
- Hood JC. Teaching against the text. The case of qualitative methods. Teaching Sociology. 2006; 34 (3):207–223. [ Google Scholar ]
- James W. Pragmatism. New York: Meredian Books; 1907. [ Google Scholar ]
- Jovanović G. Toward a social history of qualitative research. History of the Human Sciences. 2011; 24 (2):1–27. [ Google Scholar ]
- Kalof L, Dan A, Dietz T. Essentials of social research. London: Open University Press; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
- Katz J. Situational evidence: Strategies for causal reasoning from observational field notes. Sociological Methods & Research. 2015; 44 (1):108–144. [ Google Scholar ]
- King G, Keohane RO, Sidney S, Verba S. Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1994. Designing social inquiry. [ Google Scholar ]
- Lamont M. Evaluating qualitative research: Some empirical findings and an agenda. In: Lamont M, White P, editors. Report from workshop on interdisciplinary standards for systematic qualitative research. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation; 2004. pp. 91–95. [ Google Scholar ]
- Lamont M, Swidler A. Methodological pluralism and the possibilities and limits of interviewing. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 (2):153–171. [ Google Scholar ]
- Lazarsfeld P, Barton A. Some functions of qualitative analysis in social research. In: Kendall P, editor. The varied sociology of Paul Lazarsfeld. New York: Columbia University Press; 1982. pp. 239–285. [ Google Scholar ]
- Lichterman, Paul, and Isaac Reed I (2014), Theory and Contrastive Explanation in Ethnography. Sociological methods and research. Prepublished 27 October 2014; 10.1177/0049124114554458.
- Lofland J, Lofland L. Analyzing social settings. A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. 3. Belmont: Wadsworth; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
- Lofland J, Snow DA, Anderson L, Lofland LH. Analyzing social settings. A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. 4. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
- Long AF, Godfrey M. An evaluation tool to assess the quality of qualitative research studies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2004; 7 (2):181–196. [ Google Scholar ]
- Lundberg G. Social research: A study in methods of gathering data. New York: Longmans, Green and Co.; 1951. [ Google Scholar ]
- Malinowski B. Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account of native Enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. London: Routledge; 1922. [ Google Scholar ]
- Manicas P. A realist philosophy of science: Explanation and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
- Marchel C, Owens S. Qualitative research in psychology. Could William James get a job? History of Psychology. 2007; 10 (4):301–324. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
- McIntyre LJ. Need to know. Social science research methods. Boston: McGraw-Hill; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
- Merton RK, Barber E. The travels and adventures of serendipity . A Study in Sociological Semantics and the Sociology of Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
- Mannay D, Morgan M. Doing ethnography or applying a qualitative technique? Reflections from the ‘waiting field‘ Qualitative Research. 2015; 15 (2):166–182. [ Google Scholar ]
- Neuman LW. Basics of social research. Qualitative and quantitative approaches. 2. Boston: Pearson Education; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
- Ragin CC. Constructing social research. The unity and diversity of method. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press; 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
- Ragin, Charles C. 2004. Introduction to session 1: Defining qualitative research. In Workshop on Scientific Foundations of Qualitative Research , 22, ed. Charles C. Ragin, Joane Nagel, Patricia White. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04219/nsf04219.pdf
- Rawls, Anne. 2018. The Wartime narrative in US sociology, 1940–7: Stigmatizing qualitative sociology in the name of ‘science,’ European Journal of Social Theory (Online first).
- Schütz A. Collected papers I: The problem of social reality. The Hague: Nijhoff; 1962. [ Google Scholar ]
- Seiffert H. Einführung in die Hermeneutik. Tübingen: Franke; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
- Silverman D. Doing qualitative research. A practical handbook. 2. London: SAGE Publications; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
- Silverman D. A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
- Silverman D. What counts as qualitative research? Some cautionary comments. Qualitative Sociology Review. 2013; 9 (2):48–55. [ Google Scholar ]
- Small ML. “How many cases do I need?” on science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography. 2009; 10 (1):5–38. [ Google Scholar ]
- Small, Mario L 2008. Lost in translation: How not to make qualitative research more scientific. In Workshop on interdisciplinary standards for systematic qualitative research, ed in Michelle Lamont, and Patricia White, 165–171. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
- Snow DA, Anderson L. Down on their luck: A study of homeless street people. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
- Snow DA, Morrill C. New ethnographies: Review symposium: A revolutionary handbook or a handbook for revolution? Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 1995; 24 (3):341–349. [ Google Scholar ]
- Strauss AL. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. 14. Chicago: Cambridge University Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
- Strauss AL, Corbin JM. Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
- Swedberg, Richard. 2017. Theorizing in sociological research: A new perspective, a new departure? Annual Review of Sociology 43: 189–206.
- Swedberg R. The new 'Battle of Methods'. Challenge January–February. 1990; 3 (1):33–38. [ Google Scholar ]
- Timmermans S, Tavory I. Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory. 2012; 30 (3):167–186. [ Google Scholar ]
- Trier-Bieniek A. Framing the telephone interview as a participant-centred tool for qualitative research. A methodological discussion. Qualitative Research. 2012; 12 (6):630–644. [ Google Scholar ]
- Valsiner J. Data as representations. Contextualizing qualitative and quantitative research strategies. Social Science Information. 2000; 39 (1):99–113. [ Google Scholar ]
- Weber, Max. 1904. 1949. Objectivity’ in social Science and social policy. Ed. Edward A. Shils and Henry A. Finch, 49–112. New York: The Free Press.
How to use qualitative and quantitative research to your advantage
![qualitative research methods benefits mm](https://blog.gwi.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/profilepic_Jason-Mander-192x240.png)
- Share on Facebook
- Share on Twitter
- Share on LinkedIn
![qualitative research methods benefits Want consumer insights that are smokin’ hot? Get On the dot](https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/304927/c5a6e2f2-bdc0-46e1-9efe-2ca1881f5465.png)
Qualitative and quantitative research are market research methods that are widely used by market research companies and consumer research platforms . They act as powerful sources of insight for marketers, storytellers, journalists, psychologists, economists, brand managers, social scientists – the list goes on.
What is quantitative research?
Quantitative research is a numbers thing. It gives you an idea of how many people think, feel, or behave in a certain way. You tend to be dealing with a large sample here – one that more accurately represents a wider group.
Quantitative research calls on surveys or analytics to quantify consumer behaviors, perceptions, attitudes, and interests, giving you the hard numbers you need to back your ideas .
Here’s an example: Logging into TikTok every day has increased by 54% outside China since the end of 2020.
What is qualitative research?
Generally speaking, qualitative research explores what people think, feel, and do. It’s non-numerical, which means your insights will consist of words and stories, like people talking about their experiences and sharing their opinions.
You tend to be dealing with a small sample here. Qualitative research is usually gathered from sources such as one-on-one interviews, focus groups, and discussion forums.
This is great for generating first-hand insight, like uncovering a customer’s perception of your value proposition, or how their attitudes are changing.
Here’s an example: Consumers feel that treating themselves and indulging has become more important.
If quantitative research is the outline of a picture, qualitative research colors it in.
Qualitative research vs. quantitative research: how do they fare?
Both research methods have pros and cons, and depending on what type of data you’re after, one will be better suited.
The benefits of qualitative research
- Get depth and detail: A qualitative research method helps you analyze thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. In doing so, it lets you explore the ‘why’ behind things. This is immensely valuable when it comes to understanding what motivates consumers – and in turn, what drives their behavior.
- You can encourage discussion: The joy of qualitative data is that it allows people to expand on the ins and outs of how they’re feeling. Often, these discussions can introduce new topic areas you didn’t originally think of, providing deeper insight.
- You can stay flexible: On the back of the above point, using a qualitative method lets you adapt your questions in real-time, depending on the information you’re gathering. If you’ve scratched the surface of something interesting, you can dig a little deeper. And if it’s not hitting the mark, you can shift the focus of the question.
The drawbacks of qualitative research
- You’re dealing with small sample sizes: Qualitative analysis tends to be more in-depth, which is great, but it’s more time-consuming as a result. And because it’s resource-intensive, the number of people you can actually speak to is limited. Chances are, you won’t survey as many people as you’d like to.
- It’s harder to generalize the results: With any qualitative study, because you’re dealing with a small pool of opinions, you can’t accurately say the views you gathered represent the views of a wider population.
- You need a skilled qualitative researcher: There are so many ways to accidentally influence the responses you get from a qualitative survey – your tone of voice, your rapport with the people you’re speaking to, and even the order in which you ask the questions. Unfortunately, the quality of the responses you get is largely based on how well the researchers conduct the interviews or focus groups.
- There’s no anonymity: Let’s face it, not everybody is comfortable talking about everything to everyone all the time. There are some topics that people will shy away from – especially in a one-on-one session or a discussion group full of strangers. If so, they’re likely to conceal their full answers if they’re feeling shy or judged, which will skew the results of your study. Some people might only be willing to do an anonymous quantitative study.
The benefits of quantitative research
- You get your hands on a larger sample: With a quantitative survey, a much broader study can be done – one which involves more people. Naturally, you’ll be able to more accurately generalize your results across an even wider group of people.
- You get objectivity and accuracy: There are far fewer variables involved with quantitative research. The data you’re collecting is often ‘close-ended’, which means people are choosing clear-cut multiple choice answers, such as yes/no, or Instagram/Facebook/TikTok. And when it comes to diving into the results, there’s no room for debate. A certain number of people do one thing, and a certain number of people do another.
- It’s faster and easier: With quantitative data collection, you can step into the world of automation. You don’t need a physical researcher to help – you simply opt for digital or mobile surveys. These can conduct thousands of interviews at the same time across multiple countries.
- You can save money: Because they’re quicker to run, quantitative methods are famously cost-effective. That’s why the cost of someone participating in a quantitative survey is typically far less than the price of a focus group. And you just need skilled researchers to write the survey, rather than conduct it.
The drawbacks of quantitative research:
- You get a less detailed picture: With this research method, results are based on numerical responses and, as a result, you get slightly less insight into the thoughts, motivations, and drivers of your group. You’re lacking a key component: context. To get around this, you can include ‘open-end’ answers, which allow a participant to write down more detailed responses rather than just ticking a box. But doing so relies on respondents having the time and truly understanding the question.
- It’s somewhat artificial: Quantitative research needs to be carried out in an unnatural environment so that it can be controlled. And while this is important, it means the results you gather might differ from ‘real world’ findings.
- You’re faced with limitations: A quantitative method needs to have pre-set answers, and sometimes, how a participant thinks, feels, or behaves might not be featured in the list. Their true answer is masked behind your lack of options, and it might push them to pick one that doesn’t really reflect how they feel.
Get the best of both worlds
Both approaches have strengths and weaknesses. By combining the two together (which is often referred to as mixed method research), you can seriously boost the quality and accuracy of your findings, adding both breadth and depth.
The advantages of mixed method research
- Enrich your story: You can use qualitative data to color the insights that were revealed in your quantitative survey.
- Examine your narrative: You can generate hypotheses from the opinions uncovered in qualitative research, then cross-reference these against a wider sample with a quantitative approach.
- Explain the surprises: You can use qualitative data to better understand any unexpected results from quantitative data.
How a combined approach can generate a results-driven campaign
Combining both data methods in a way that yields awesome results requires planning.
Like any successful data analysis, finding the right answers relies on asking the right questions.
And in order to ask the right questions, you need to identify your key goals – mapping out exactly what you want to achieve.
For example, companies looking to drive campaigns focused on ROI can use quantitative tracking tools like Google Analytics, Data Studio, or Power BI. If set up correctly, you can quickly uncover key performance indicators like website visits, time on page, traffic from social media, number of leads, and even revenue.
Pairing this with some qualitative information on how your customers feel about your brand – through questionnaires, reviews, case studies, or customer interviews will give you a detailed picture of what you need to know.
This kind of intelligence enables brands to gain a deep understanding of how well their campaigns are working and, critically, why.
Using qualitative analysis to streamline the user journey
Research can answer strategic business questions – but to do that well, you need to interrogate the information and gather the most actionable insight.
Qualitative analytics can give your brand answers around why a customer bought a certain product or service and what their end-to-end experience was like.
These findings provide clear data that can be actioned, enabling brands to do more of what’s working and address any kinks in the user journey.
Plus, qualitative proof like custome r reviews can help you drive more conversions. In fact:
99.9% of consumers read reviews, and 98% consider them an essential step on the consumer path to purchase.
So not only can qualitative research help you configure things behind the scenes, but it can also help you make more money. (As long as people are saying nice things about your brand.)
Using quantitative analysis to fix what’s broken
Quantitative analytics, on the other hand, can provide specific answers relating to how the purchase journey looks, enabling brands to spot any areas that are causing issues on touchpoints that matter.
For example, if a high percentage of buyers are dropping off on a certain page, or abandoning their basket at the same spot, marketers can address this pretty quickly, either by redesigning the page or making the transaction process faster.
Combining qualitative and quantitative research to make the magic happen
While quantitative data might flag issues around basket abandonment, ecommerce brands may still be unsure as to why consumers are dropping off.
Is the page a bit sluggish? Are the payment options confusing? Or is poor page design making the CTA hard to find?
Combining the hard numbers with the ‘why’ gives brands a clear idea of where the problems lie and how best to fix them.
Deeper insight gives a competitive edge
Combined research can be used in numerous ways depending on a brand’s business objectives.
For example, data might reveal that over-70s with disposable income and an interest in technology would buy more devices if the product designs accounted for failing eyesight and inhibited manual dexterity.
These sorts of insights could open up a whole new audience – and product category – giving brands more of a competitive edge.
Meeting the personalized future
Qualitative and quantitative research methods have different roles to play. Using the two together can be a powerful move, especially as consumer demand for personalization continues to rise.
To meet this demand, more and more brands and marketers are turning to audience profiling data , analyzing audience behaviors and perceptions on a massive scale, to tailor their activity to their consumers.
By combining qualitative personas with quantitative data, you can identify and define your audiences in as much detail as possible, understanding how, where, and when to reach them for maximum impact.
![qualitative research methods benefits Demo Fancy a look round? Book now](https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/304927/cf5a52c9-6c5a-41e7-9bca-5a3c5fe75ffb.png)
Never miss a post
By subscribing you confirm you’re happy for us to send you our latest articles.
Related articles
16 market research tools and resources to help you think like your consumers, how consumers find new brands and research products in 2023, 6 ways brands are driving roi with in-house audience research, how kids are transforming tomorrow’s status quo, you’ve read our blog, now see our platform.
Every business has questions about its audiences, GWI has answers. Powered by consistent, global research, our platform is an on-demand window into their world.
![qualitative research methods benefits laptop](https://blog.gwi.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/blog-image.png)
![qualitative research methods benefits Pictogram collage with clouds, pie chart and graphs](https://www.ibm.com/content/dam/connectedassets-adobe-cms/worldwide-content/creative-assets/s-migr/ul/g/64/ea/content-hub-analytic-page-leadspace-short.component.xl.ts=1721683979412.png/content/adobe-cms/us/en/think/topics/forecasting/_jcr_content/root/leadspace)
Published: 22 July 2024 Contributors: Rina Caballar, Cole Stryker
Forecasting is a method of predicting a future event or condition by analyzing patterns and uncovering trends in previous and current data. It employs mathematical approaches and applies statistical models to generate predictions.
Business forecasting aims to estimate customer demand for products or services, project sales or estimate growth and expansion. It can facilitate the allocation of budgets, capital, human resources and more. In short, business forecasting helps inform the decision-making process.
Forecasting is often associated with big data analytics and predictive analytics . Today, many forecasting techniques draw on artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning methods to more quickly and accurately build forecasts. According to research by management consulting firm McKinsey, AI-powered tools can reduce forecasting errors by up to 50%, resulting in a drop in inventory shortages and lost sales by up to 65%. 1
Forecasts are predictions, which means they often won’t be 100% accurate. And the time horizon for a forecast matters—near-term predictions might be more precise compared to long-range ones. It might also help to aggregate data or combine techniques for greater accuracy, and think of forecasting as a guide and not the ultimate determinant for decisions.
Learn how business analytics for forecasting can transform insights into action.
Register for the guide on AI governance
The forecasting process might look different for each organization, but it generally involves these steps:
Define what to predict: Companies identify a specific business case or metric they want to predict and factor in any relevant assumptions and applicable variables.
Gather data: This step includes collecting the necessary data. If historical data already exists, it’s then a matter of determining the most appropriate datasets.
Select a forecasting method: Choose a forecasting technique that best suits not only the business case or metric but also the associated variables, assumptions and datasets.
Generate a forecast: Data is analyzed by using the chosen method, and a forecast is built from this analysis.
Verify the forecast: Check the predictions and see whether any optimizations can be made to create a more accurate forecast.
Present the forecast: Data visualization can be used to represent the forecast in a more visual format that stakeholders can better understand and employ in the decision-making process.
Forecasting can be done in various ways, but each approach is typically categorized into one of two primary techniques: qualitative forecasting and quantitative forecasting.
Qualitative forecasting is based on human judgment, such as consumer opinions, expert insights and the views of high-level executives. This forecasting method applies a rating mechanism as a systematic means of converting qualitative information into quantitative data.
Here are a few frequently used qualitative forecasting approaches:
Delphi method
In the Delphi method, several experts are invited to answer a series of questionnaires seeking their perspectives on the business case or metric to be forecasted. Responses are anonymous, allowing viewpoints to be considered equally. Replies from the previous questionnaire are used to craft the next questionnaire, and this process continues until a consensus is reached on a forecast.
Market research
Enterprises enlist the help of market research firms to conduct customer surveys and ask their opinions about products or services. Data collected from these surveys is then used to inform sales forecasts and product or service improvement initiatives.
Benefits and limitations of qualitative forecasting
Qualitative forecasting has the following advantages:
- It can be used when data is limited, such as when evaluating the market acceptance rate or market penetration rate of new products or technologies.
- It integrates information from experts and people highly knowledgeable about the enterprise and its offerings, which quantitative data might be unlikely to capture.
- It can often consider one-off incidents or atypical scenarios, like a crisis or disaster. This means that qualitative forecasting might be a good fit for situations where conditions are constantly evolving.
But this type of forecasting also has its drawbacks:
- Because it relies on human judgment, qualitative forecasting can be subjective, incorporating bias that leads to either overemphasized or overlooked factors and assumptions.
- Qualitative information might at times consider only the most recent events or first-hand experiences, so long-term trends or patterns from past data might be missed.
Quantitative forecasting is based on numerical data, employing mathematical models and statistical methods to arrive at a prediction. Many quantitative forecasting techniques harness data science , AI and machine learning to power the process.
Here are some common quantitative forecasting strategies:
Time series forecasting
This quantitative method uses historical data modeled as a time series to project future outcomes. A time series is a series of data points plotted in chronological order.
Time series forecasting models can help reveal predictable trends in the data influenced by cycles, irregular fluctuations, seasonality and other variations.
Time series analysis is frequently mentioned alongside time series forecasting. While time series analysis entails understanding time series data to glean insights from it, time series forecasting moves beyond analysis to predict future values.
Time series forecasting encompasses a number of methods:
The naive method uses the data point from the previous period as the forecast for the next period. This makes it the simplest time series forecasting method and is often considered a preliminary benchmark.
Simple moving average
The simple moving average technique calculates the average of the data points from the last T periods. That average then serves as the forecast for the next period.
Weighted moving average
This method is based on the simple moving average technique, but with a weight applied to each data point of the last T periods.
Exponential smoothing
Exponential smoothing works by applying an exponentially weighted average to time series data. Weights diminish exponentially as data becomes older—the more recent the data, the more weight it has.
A smoothing coefficient (also called a smoothing factor or smoothing parameter) controls the weights assigned to past and current data. Using these weights, the weighted moving average is then computed and serves as the forecast. This forecast becomes a smoothed version of a time series, eliminating fluctuations, noise, outliers and random variations from the data.
Exponential smoothing doesn’t normally require a huge dataset, which makes it a good forecasting method for short-term projections. And because it gives more weight to current data, exponential smoothing can quickly adapt to new or changing trends.
Seasonal index
A seasonal index can be valuable for businesses whose production or demand of goods or services is dependent on the seasons.
To compute the seasonal index, take the average demand for a particular season and divide it by the average demand across all seasons. These averages are usually calculated using a moving average technique, but exponential smoothing can also be applied using time series data only for that season. A resulting seasonal index less than 1 signifies a lower than average demand, while a value greater than 1 denotes a higher than average demand.
To estimate the forecast for the next season, that season’s projected demand will be multiplied by the corresponding seasonal index.
Causal models
Causal models are a mathematical expression of causal relationships in data. These forecasting models can be suitable for forecasts with a longer time horizon.
Regression models
Regression-based models analyze the relationship between a forecast or dependent variable and one or more predictor or independent variables. An example of a regression model is linear regression , which represents a linear relationship between a forecast variable and a predictor variable.
Econometric models
Econometric models are similar to regression models, but with a focus on economic variables, such as interest rates and inflation, and economic relationships, such as market conditions and asset prices.
Benefits and limitations of quantitative forecasting
Quantitative forecasting offers these advantages:
It’s grounded on numbers and math, which can result in more objective predictions.
It provides consistent, replicable and structured outputs that help streamline analysis across specific time frames.
But this forecasting approach also has some pitfalls:
It’s difficult to merge expert insights, insider information and other qualitative data into quantitative forecasts.
It needs sufficient historical data to produce reliable predictions.
AI forecasting employs AI and machine learning algorithms for quantitative forecasting methods like time series forecasting and regression models. AI forecasting can handle huge volumes of data, execute swift calculations, tackle complex predictions and unveil correlations rapidly.
Here are some common machine learning models and techniques used in AI forecasting:
- Decision trees
- Deep learning
- Ensemble learning , which combines multiple learners to improve predictive performance
- KNN (k-nearest neighbors) algorithm
- Neural networks
When using AI forecasting, it’s important to evaluate a model’s alignment with an enterprise’s forecasting objectives. Monitor the model’s performance regularly to determine whether the model needs to be retrained on new data or fine-tuned to optimize its performance. Also consider whether a model is explainable , so all stakeholders can understand how predictions were made and how to interpret those predictions.
Forecasting can be implemented in various business areas:
Organizations can use forecasting to project costs, revenue and other future financial outcomes to help inform budgeting and investment decisions. In financial planning, forecasting considers not only the current state of a business but also external factors such as economic conditions.
A bank in Argentina , for instance, was able to reduce the time to develop spreadsheet-based “what if” financial scenarios from days to seconds through AI forecasting.
Forecasting can help enterprises better plan for production. For example, a lumber producer uses forecasting software to regularly update their forecasts with product, delivery and inventory data. Mill supervisors can even generate daily forecasts to better prioritize schedules and balance workloads. The firm gained 25% in time savings in forecasting and reporting efforts across its finance department.
Both qualitative and quantitative techniques can be applied to project future sales, the growth rate of sales and other sales figures. A regression model, for example, can be used to analyze the correlation between economic conditions or marketing expense on sales.
Forecasting methods can be used to help manage the supply chain so the correct products reach their intended destinations when they’re expected. Supply chain forecasting helps companies stay on top of inventory, meet customer demand and enhance customer experience.
However, a few elements can make supply chain forecasting challenging, including changing regulations, evolving consumer demand, manufacturer or supplier lead times and seasonality.
Forecasting software provides advanced features, such as integrating data from different sources and analyzing interactions among multiple variables. These can help enterprises develop reliable forecasts and update and manage forecasting models and simulations efficiently. Other forecasting tools also have built-in AI capabilities to automate workflows, improve accuracy and speed up the process.
Enhance the speed and accuracy of forecasts with built-in advanced AI capabilities and multivariate forecasting.
Experience advanced capabilities that enable both novice and experienced users to develop reliable forecasts by using time-series data.
Take advantage of this single analytics solution across your entire organization to confidently monitor, explore and share insights from data.
Be guided toward the most impactful decisions as your AI-powered business analyst and advisor answer your business questions in seconds.
Discover how AI transformers can improve forecasting to predict what lies ahead.
Learn how advanced AI time series algorithms that use multiple variables allow for faster, more accurate forecasts.
Maximize a set of technological processes for collecting, managing and analyzing organizational data to yield insights that inform business strategies and operations.
Find out how generative AI can empower the forecasting process.
Uncover how AI can enhance demand forecasting and inventory management.
Learn how generative AI is transforming supply chain management—from sustainability and route optimization to risk management and demand forecast.
Predict outcomes with flexible AI-infused forecasting and analyze what-if scenarios in real-time. IBM Planning Analytics is an integrated business planning solution that turns raw data into actionable insights. Deploy as you need, on-premises or on cloud.
1 AI-driven operations forecasting in data-light environments (link resides outside ibm.com), McKinsey, 15 February 2022.
Pardon Our Interruption
As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:
- You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
- You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
- You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
- A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .
To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.
![qualitative research methods benefits Compilatio](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/logo/2020/10/6391-header-logo.png)
Understanding Quantitative Research: Definition, Collection methods, Design, Analysis and Reporting
![qualitative research methods benefits quantitative research](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/blog_main/2024/07/1069-etudes-quantitatives.png)
Quantitative studies play an essential role in scientific and academic research. By enabling numerical data to be measured and analyzed with precision, quantitative surveys provide objective and generalizable results , often unattainable by qualitative methods . A student who undertakes a quantitative survey as part of his or her dissertation or thesis acquires crucial skills such as analytical rigor, mastery of statistical techniques and the ability to interpret numerical data. In this way, they can make a significant contribution to their field of research.
Contents What is a quantitative study? What are the data collection methods for a quantitative study? How to design and plan a quantitative study? How can quantitative data be successfully analyzed and reported?
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/adv_content_block_boxed/2024/07/9348-qu-est-ce-qu-une-etude-quantitative.png)
What is quantitative research?
Definition, objectives and benefits of quantitative research .
“Quantitative research is a methodology that provides support when you need to draw general conclusions from your research and predict outcomes. These methods are designed to collect numerical data that can be used to measure variables. ” Survey Monkey, Qualitative vs. quantitative research: What's the difference?
The advantages of this method include :
- the possibility of obtaining objective, reliable data,
- the application of rigorous statistical models
- the ability to make comparisons on a large scale and over time,
- the ability to reveal causal relationships between variables, thus providing a basis for decision-making.
Differences between qualitative and quantitative research
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/original/2024/07/2854-differences-between-qualitative-and-quantitative-research.png)
Which data collection methods for a quantitative study?
Primary collection using surveys/questionnaires .
Primary data collection means that the researcher collects data directly from the sample, without relying on data collected in previous quantitative surveys. Questionnaires are the most common method used in quantitative research. They can be administered online, by telephone or in person to large population samples. Standardized questionnaires guarantee uniform data collection, delivering statistically significant results.
Primary data collection in longitudinal studies
Longitudinal studies follow the same participants over a long period, offering insights into evolutions and trends over time. They are particularly useful for studying changes in behavior, attitudes or conditions over different phases.
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/adv_content_block_boxed/2024/07/9263-collecte-primaire-par-recherche-experimentale.png)
Primary collection by experimental research
Primary collection by experimental research involves the deliberate creation and manipulation of variables in a controlled environment to observe their direct effects on other variables . This method enables researchers to test specific hypotheses and establish cause-and-effect relationships with great precision.
“In this method, the theory being studied has not yet been proven; it is merely speculation. Thus, an experiment is carried out to prove or disprove the theory.” Voxco, Quantitative research: Definition, methods and examples
This approach is particularly useful for studies where internal validity and methodological rigor are crucial.
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/adv_content_block_boxed/2024/07/2110-analyses-secondaires-de-donnees-quantitatives.png)
Secondary analysis of quantitative data
Secondary data analysis uses existing databases to re-analyze information and answer new research questions. This method is effective in fully exploiting available data, and can reveal additional insights without the need for new data collection.
How do you design and plan a quantitative study?
Defining research objectives.
The first step in designing a quantitative study is to clarify the research objectives . This involves determining what the quanti study seeks to achieve and the specific questions it aims to answer. These objectives will guide the entire research process.
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/adv_content_block_boxed/2024/07/7107-choisir-la-methode-de-collecte-de-donnees.png)
Choosing the data collection method
Depending on your research objectives, choose the most appropriate data collection method . This is what we developed in the previous section.
Select the sample
The representativeness of the results will depend on the selection of the sample. Determine the necessary size and the sampling method (random, stratified, etc.) to ensure that the sample accurately reflects the target population.
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/adv_content_block_boxed/2024/07/6321-concevoir-les-instruments-de-mesure.png)
Design measurement instruments
Design measurement instruments, such as questionnaires or experimental protocols, t hat are clear, precise and adapted to the study objective. Questions should be formulated in such a way as to minimize bias (mostly closed-ended questions ) and easily yield usable figures.
Planning data analysis
Before collecting data, plan how it will be analyzed. This includes selecting appropriate statistical techniques and using data analysis software. Advance planning ensures that the data collected will answer the research questions validly and reliably.
Studium Newsletter
Receive tips on writing and citations and don't miss our promotional offers by subscribing to the Studium newsletter.
By clicking "Subscribe", I agree that Compilatio processes the data provided in this form for the following purpose: "Information on the topic of plagiarism". Learn more about how we manage your data and your rights.
How to successfully analyze and report quantitative data?
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/adv_content_block_boxed/2024/07/3000-verification-et-nettoyage-des-donnees-quantitatives.png)
Checking and cleaning quantitative data
Before starting analysis, it's important to ensure that data is complete and error-free. Identify and manage missing data, correct anomalies and eliminate duplicates, while guaranteeing the integrity of the information.
Initial exploration of quantitative data
Perform initial data exploration. Analyze measures of central tendency (mean, median) and dispersion (standard deviation, variance). Use visualizations such as histograms, whisker boxes and scatter plots to detect trends, distributions and possible anomalies.
![qualitative research methods benefits qualitative research methods benefits](https://www.compilatio.net/media/cache/adv_content_block_boxed/2024/07/3629-choix-des-methodes-statistiques.png)
Selecting statistical methods
Select the appropriate statistical methods according to your research objectives and the nature of the data.
- For comparisons between groups, use tests such as the T-test or ANOVA .
- To analyze relationships between variables, consider regression techniques .
Analysis and interpretation of results
Interpret the results in the context of your study. Relate the findings to the original hypotheses and discuss their relevance to the research question. Consider the practical and theoretical implications of the results, as well as their limitations and potential implications for future research.
Clear, visual presentation of quantitative results
Use tables and graphs to illustrate your quantitative results in a concise and accessible way. Make sure visualizations are well-labeled, understandable and directly linked to key findings. The visual aspect helps to communicate results effectively and convincingly.
It's also vital to document each stage of the analysis in detail in a quantitative survey report. Include :
- a methodological description
- analysis results
- visualizations
- your interpretations .
A well-structured report validates the rigor of your analysis and makes it easier for other researchers to understand and reproduce your results.
Quantitative studies represent a fundamental pillar in the world of research, offering powerful tools for the collection and analysis of objective data. Using rigorous methods and advanced statistical techniques, they deliver reliable, generalizable results that are invaluable for decision-making. Whether designing surveys, analyzing data or presenting results, a well-planned and executed quantitative approach can not only strengthen the validity of findings, but also enrich the overall understanding of the research field. By mastering these skills, researchers and students make a significant contribution to the advancement of scientific knowledge.
Discover other practical guides to conducting effective quantitative research:
Types of quantitative research , Lyssna Quantitative Research Methods, Nova Southeastern University A Guide To Conducting Great Quantitative Research, EngageSpark
Information: This informative article was written in part with the help of ChatGPT. The content generated by AI has been reworked to check the veracity of the information, the relevance of the instructions and to add clarifications.
What are the quantitative studies?
What's the difference between qualitative and quantitative research?
Why conduct a quantitative study?
![Compilatio Studium, the plagiarism checker for students Compilatio Studium, the plagiarism checker for students](https://content.compilatio.net/documents/vitrine/img/studium/encart-promotion-studium.jpg)
Write your student work with peace of mind
With Compilatio Studium, make sure to cite all your sources and submit quality assignments, compliant with academic requirements . This way, you can easily avoid plagiarism penalties and prove the integrity of your work .
![](http://charunivedita.online/777/templates/cheerup2/res/banner1.gif)
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
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.
Research conducted using qualitative methods is normally done with an intent to preserve the inherent complexities of human behaviour as opposed to assuming a reductive view of the subject in order to count and measure the occurrence of phenomena. Qualitative research normally takes an inductive approach, moving from observation to hypothesis ...
This guide explains the focus, rigor, and relevance of qualitative research, highlighting its role in dissecting complex social phenomena and providing in-depth, human-centered insights. The guide also examines the rationale for employing qualitative methods, underscoring their critical importance.
Qualitative Research. Qualitative research is a type of research methodology that focuses on exploring and understanding people's beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, and experiences through the collection and analysis of non-numerical data. It seeks to answer research questions through the examination of subjective data, such as interviews, focus ...
While many books and articles guide various qualitative research methods and analyses, there is currently no concise resource that explains and differentiates among the most common qualitative approaches. We believe novice qualitative researchers, students planning the design of a qualitative study or taking an introductory qualitative research course, and faculty teaching such courses can ...
Qualitative research methods. Each of the research approaches involve using one or more data collection methods.These are some of the most common qualitative methods: Observations: recording what you have seen, heard, or encountered in detailed field notes. Interviews: personally asking people questions in one-on-one conversations. Focus groups: asking questions and generating discussion among ...
Qualitative Research: Goals, Methods & Benefits. By Jim Frost 5 Comments. Qualitative research aims to understand ideas, experiences, and opinions using non-numeric data, such as text, audio, and visual recordings. The focus is on language, behaviors, and social structures. Qualitative researchers want to present personal experiences and ...
Organizations can use a variety of quantitative data-gathering methods to track productivity. In turn, this can help: To rank employees and work units. To award raises or promotions. To measure and justify termination or disciplining of staff. To measure productivity. To measure group/individual targets.
Abstract. This paper aims to provide an overview of the use and assessment of qualitative research methods in the health sciences. Qualitative research can be defined as the study of the nature of phenomena and is especially appropriate for answering questions of why something is (not) observed, assessing complex multi-component interventions ...
Qualitative research methods. Each of the research approaches involve using one or more data collection methods.These are some of the most common qualitative methods: Observations: recording what you have seen, heard, or encountered in detailed field notes. Interviews: personally asking people questions in one-on-one conversations. Focus groups: asking questions and generating discussion among ...
Significance of Qualitative Research. The qualitative method of inquiry examines the 'how' and 'why' of decision making, rather than the 'when,' 'what,' and 'where.'[] Unlike quantitative methods, the objective of qualitative inquiry is to explore, narrate, and explain the phenomena and make sense of the complex reality.Health interventions, explanatory health models, and medical-social ...
Qualitative research methods focus on the thoughts, feelings, reasons, motivations, and values of a participant, ... Advantages of qualitative research. Useful for complex situations: Qualitative research on its own is great when dealing with complex issues, however, providing background context using quantitative facts can give a richer and ...
Using a single data source and data collection method could cause data collection to be skewed by researcher bias; therefore, using multiple data sources and data collection methods is ideal. In qualitative research, the following data types are commonly used: (1) interview data obtained through one-on-one in-depth interviews and focus group ...
Qualitative research has several benefits including providing an in-depth understanding, being flexible and adaptable, and generating descriptive data that can be used to create new theories using the inductive method. ... Through qualitative research methods like interviews and focus groups, researchers can delve into the students' lived ...
It is a way for researchers to understand the context of what happens in society instead of only looking at the outcomes. 9. Qualitative research requires a smaller sample size. Qualitative research studies wrap up faster that other methods because a smaller sample size is possible for data collection with this method.
As qualitative research has evolved, researchers in the field have struggled with a persistent tension between a need for both methodological flexibility and structure (Holloway & Todres, 2003).In the development of qualitative research, three major methodologies are discussed most frequently and are often viewed as foundational: phenomenology, ethnography, and grounded theory (Holloway ...
Abstract. This paper aims to provide an overview of the use and assessment of qualitative research methods in the health sciences. Qualitative research can be defined as the study of the nature of phenomena and is especially appropriate for answering questions of why something is (not) observed, assessing complex multi-component interventions ...
Qualitative research offers several advantages that make it a valuable tool for researchers: Exploration: Qualitative research allows researchers to explore a topic in-depth, providing rich insights into people's experiences, perceptions, and behaviors. Flexibility: Unlike quantitative research, qualitative research methods offer flexibility ...
Flexibility: Qualitative research is flexible and adaptable, allowing researchers to change their research focus, questions, or methods based on emerging insights during the study. Exploratory Nature: It is well-suited for generating hypotheses and theories by exploring new or under-researched topics. Researchers can uncover unexpected findings.
Qualitative research seeks to understand people's experiences and perspectives by studying social organizations and human behavior. Data in qualitative studies focuses on people's beliefs and emotional responses. Qualitative data is especially helpful when a company wants to know how customers feel about a product or service, such as in ...
There are different types of qualitative research methods, including diary accounts, in-depth interviews, documents, focus groups, ... 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 ...
3.1 Advantages There are some benefits of using qualitative research approaches and methods. Firstly, qualitative research approach produces the thick (detailed) description of participants' feelings, opinions, and experiences; and interprets the meanings of their actions (Denzin, 1989).
Data Collection Methods Qualitative research may use a combination of data collection methods to examine issues in depth, ... or complement quantitative data. Table 1 describes the advantages and disadvantages of common qualitative data collection methods. For example, interviews might elicit meaningful responses, but they are time-consuming ...
A fourth issue is that the "implicit use of methods in qualitative research makes the field far less standardized than the quantitative paradigm" (Goertz and Mahoney 2012:9). Relatedly, the National Science Foundation in the US organized two workshops in 2004 and 2005 to address the scientific foundations of qualitative research involving ...
The benefits of qualitative research. Get depth and detail: A qualitative research method helps you analyze thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. In doing so, it lets you explore the 'why' behind things. This is immensely valuable when it comes to understanding what motivates consumers - and in turn, what drives their behavior ...
What is qualitative research? Definition, Objectives and Benefits of qualitative research. Qualitative research is a research method focused on gathering precise data to understand facts, behaviors and phenomena.Unlike quantitative studies, it focuses on the quality (rather than the quantity) of data obtained through field observations, text or image analysis, individual interviews or focus ...
Market research Enterprises enlist the help of market research firms to conduct customer surveys and ask their opinions about products or services. Data collected from these surveys is then used to inform sales forecasts and product or service improvement initiatives. Benefits and limitations of qualitative forecasting
Class, During this week's lesson we explored the use of mixed-methods research and how it can be used to analyze a research question more in depth. Previously we saw how qualitative and quantitative each have their own benefits in the research process. A qualitative approach can offer specific data and deemed more relevant to a research topic. . Meanwhile, a quantitative approach can be used ...
Quantitative studies play an essential role in scientific and academic research.By enabling numerical data to be measured and analyzed with precision, quantitative surveys provide objective and generalizable results, often unattainable by qualitative methods.A student who undertakes a quantitative survey as part of his or her dissertation or thesis acquires crucial skills such as analytical ...