What Are the Major Types of Social Research? W. Lawrence Neuman. 3. Theory and Research. W. Lawrence Neuman. 4. The Meanings of Methodology. one interested in but un:fumiliar with qualitative research methods. I continue to sonal bias Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches W. Lawrence Neuman Seventh Edition Pearson Education Limited Edinburgh Gate Harlow.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Portuguese|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Sign up for free]|
Request PDF on ResearchGate | On Jan 1, , Neuman W Lawrence and others published Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative. PDF | The book “Social Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches”, deals with the process, methods and significance of. Seventh Edition. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches by W. Lawrence Neuman. Chapter 6: Strategies of. Research Design.
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. This allows the respondent to talk in some depth, choosing their own words. 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.
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. Key Features Events can be understood adequately only if they are seen in context. 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 design of the study 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 exist only in reference to the observer. Theory is data driven, and emerges as part of the research process, evolving from the data as they are collected. Limitations 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 any confidence The time required for data collection, analysis and interpretation are lengthy. Analysis of qualitative data is difficult and expert knowledge of an area is necessary to try to interpret qualitative data, and great care must be taken when doing so, for example, if looking for symptoms of mental illness.
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 play the important role of suggesting possible relationships, causes, effects and dynamic processes. 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 in order to examine forms of knowledge that might otherwise be unavailable, thereby gaining new insight.
Quantitative Research Quantitative research gathers data in a numerical form which can be put into categories, or in rank order, or measured in units of measurement. This type of data can be used to construct graphs and tables of raw data. Research is used to test a theory and ultimately support or reject it.
Methods used to obtain quantitative data 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. Experimental methods limit the possible ways in which a research participant can react to and express appropriate social behavior.
Findings are therefore likely to be context-bound and simply a reflection of the assumptions which the researcher brings to the investigation. Data Analysis Statistics help us turn quantitative data into useful information to help with decision making.
We can use statistics to summarise our data, describing patterns, relationships, and connections. Statistics can be descriptive or inferential. Descriptive statistics help us to summarise our data whereas inferential statistics are used to identify statistically significant differences between groups of data such as intervention and control groups in a randomised control study.
Key Features Quantitative researchers try to control extraneous variables by conducting their studies in the lab. The research aims for objectivity i.
The design of the study is determined before it begins. For the quantitative researcher reality is objective and exist separately to the researcher, and is capable of being seen by anyone. Limitations 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 may have for those participants Carr, Researcher expertise: Poor knowledge of the application of statistical analysis may negatively affect analysis and subsequent interpretation Black, The authors report that the guidelines are based on a comprehensive review of the literature and we congratulate them on their meticulous compilation of evidence into a clinically useful document.
However, when we read the methodology section, we were baffled and disappointed to find that evidence from research using qualitative methods was not included in the formulation of the guidelines. Qualitative and quantitative research methods are often juxtaposed as representing two different world views. In quantitative circles, qualitative research is commonly viewed with suspicion and considered lightweight because it involves small samples which may not be representative of the broader population, it is seen as not objective, and the results are assessed as biased by the researchers' own experiences or opinions.
In qualitative circles, quantitative research can be dismissed as over-simplifying individual experience in the cause of generalisation, failing to acknowledge researcher biases and expectations in research design, and requiring guesswork to understand the human meaning of aggregate data.
As social scientists who investigate psychosocial aspects of human reproduction, we use qualitative and quantitative methods, separately or together, depending on the research question. The crucial part is to know when to use what method. The peer-review process is a pillar of scientific publishing. One of the important roles of reviewers is to assess the scientific rigour of the studies from which authors draw their conclusions.
If rigour is lacking, the paper should not be published. As with research using quantitative methods, research using qualitative methods is home to the good, the bad and the ugly. It is essential that reviewers know the difference. Rejection letters are hard to take but more often than not they are based on legitimate critique. However, from time to time it is obvious that the reviewer has little grasp of what constitutes rigour or quality in qualitative research.
The first author K. This comment reveals the reviewer's inappropriate application to qualitative research of criteria relevant only to quantitative research. In this commentary, we give illustrative examples of questions most appropriately answered using qualitative methods and provide general advice about how to appraise the scientific rigour of qualitative studies.
We hope this will help the journal's reviewers and readers appreciate the legitimate place of qualitative research and ensure we do not throw the baby out with the bath water by excluding or rejecting papers simply because they report the results of qualitative studies. Quantitative methods can reveal, for example, what percentage of the population supports assisted conception, their distribution by age, marital status, residential area and so on, as well as changes from one survey to the next Kovacs et al.
These data are usually not amenable to counting or measuring. Qualitative methods have been used to reveal, for example, potential problems in implementing a proposed trial of elective single embryo transfer, where small-group discussions enabled staff to explain their own resistance, leading to an amended approach Porter and Bhattacharya, Small-group discussions among assisted reproductive technology ART counsellors were used to investigate how the welfare principle is interpreted and practised by health professionals who must apply it in ART de Lacey et al.
When legislative change meant that gamete donors could seek identifying details of people conceived from their gametes, parents needed advice on how best to tell their children. Small-group discussions were convened to ask adolescents not known to be donor-conceived to reflect on how they would prefer to be told Kirkman et al. When a population cannot be identified, such as anonymous sperm donors from the s, a qualitative approach with wide publicity can reach people who do not usually volunteer for research and reveal for example their attitudes to proposed legislation to remove anonymity with retrospective effect Hammarberg et al.
When researchers invite people to talk about their reflections on experience, they can sometimes learn more than they set out to discover. In describing their responses to proposed legislative change, participants also talked about people conceived as a result of their donations, demonstrating various constructions and expectations of relationships Kirkman et al.
Interviews with parents in lesbian-parented families generated insight into the diverse meanings of the sperm donor in the creation and life of the family Wyverkens et al. Oral and written interviews also revealed the embarrassment and ambivalence surrounding sperm donors evident in participants in donor-assisted conception Kirkman, The way in which parents conceptualise unused embryos and why they discard rather than donate was explored and understood via in-depth interviews, showing how and why the meaning of those embryos changed with parenthood de Lacey, In-depth interviews were also used to establish the intricate understanding by embryo donors and recipients of the meaning of embryo donation and the families built as a result Goedeke et al.
It is possible to combine quantitative and qualitative methods, although great care should be taken to ensure that the theory behind each method is compatible and that the methods are being used for appropriate reasons.
It is important to note that free text in surveys represents qualitative data but does not constitute qualitative research. Qualitative and quantitative methods may be used together for corroboration hoping for similar outcomes from both methods , elaboration using qualitative data to explain or interpret quantitative data, or to demonstrate how the quantitative findings apply in particular cases , complementarity where the qualitative and quantitative results differ but generate complementary insights or contradiction where qualitative and quantitative data lead to different conclusions.
Each has its advantages and challenges Brannen, How to judge qualitative research Qualitative research is gaining increased momentum in the clinical setting and carries different criteria for evaluating its rigour or quality.
Quantitative studies generally involve the systematic collection of data about a phenomenon, using standardized measures and statistical analysis. In contrast, qualitative studies involve the systematic collection, organization, description and interpretation of textual, verbal or visual data. The particular approach taken determines to a certain extent the criteria used for judging the quality of the report. However, research using qualitative methods can be evaluated Dixon-Woods et al.
It is widely accepted that qualitative research should be ethical, important, intelligibly described, and use appropriate and rigorous methods Cohen and Crabtree, In research investigating data that can be counted or measured, replicability is essential.