Quantitative analysis differs from qualitative analysis substantially. It is deductive, as opposed to inductive in nature and is generally used to verify and test the theories generated from the observations in qualitative research. It seeks to find antithetical information to the driving thesis formed by the qualitative observations to synthesize a more accurate explanation of the nature of social phenomena. Quantitative research is closely associated with positivism, and is generally seen as being more scientific than qualitative research because of the general objectivity of its data measurement and analysis.
The main goal of quantitative research is to generate numerical data. The researcher can then use those numbers to determine the characteristics of groups that engage in certain behaviors or have certain opinions, the average or normal characteristics of these groups, and determine what behaviors, opinions, and characteristics are associated with other behaviors, opinions, and characteristics. It is less about the micro approach to understanding a social phenomenon as it is about the macro, aggregate approach.
1) What are the characteristics of quantitative analysis that lend itself to the perception that it is “more scientific” than qualitative research? To what extent do you agree with this perception? Why?
2) Many journals prefer publications that are mixed methods, rather than purely qualitative, calling on the researcher to verify any claims made through the collection and analysis of qualitative data with the numbers. There are many popular theories out there that, through quantitative scrutiny are demonstrably false, but they remain very popular political talking points. Are there any such talking points that you would want to “run the numbers” on to determine the extent to which they are actually true?
NOTES:
Attachments (PDF’s)
