The quantitative / qualitative debate
The most effective research method
Historically researchers using different methods debated the quality and rationale for using a particular research method. In many disciplines, debates have arisen over the quality, usefulness, and legitimacy of what has been broadly categorized as qualitative versus quantitative research. Increasingly informed researchers are considering what different methods offer more carefully, and recognizing the value of combining methods to better understanding various phenomena that are the focus of faculty research. Some methods are best suited to a particular discipline, others best suited to a particular question within the discipline, still others best suited to the research style of the researcher. As new faculty members your task is to select the best method to accomplish your research goals and further your developing research agenda. Speak with esteemed colleagues in your field, on your campus, and in your department to determine the expectations for method use in your particular situation.
An open mind may be the most effective
This section is designed to pique your interest, whether you place yourself in the quantitative or qualitative researcher categories, for learning about what other research methods have to offer to your research agenda. An open mind, and some flexibility, along with a desire to more deeply understand issues in the area of your research will go a long way toward bolstering your progress on your research agenda.
Elements of the Debate
Qualitative versus Quantitative Research: Key Points in a Classic Debate
Neill, J. (updated February, 2007)
This website is a collection of features of research design, main points about the debate, and recommended links.
Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods: Considering the Possibilities for Enhancing the Study of Chronic Diseases
Casebeer. A. & Verhoef, M.J. (updated 2002, original publication 1997). Chronic Diseases in Canada, Vol. 18, No. 3
This paper discusses some of the underlying reasons why health researchers historically have difficulties working collaboratively across qualitative and quantitative research paradigms, and argues why it is imperative that researchers move beyond traditional adherence to particular methods of inquiry.
Challenges of Mixing Methods
A Sequential Mixed Model Research Design: Design, Analytical and Display Issues
Cameron, R. (2008). International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3/2, p. 140-152
This article provides a brief overview of a new era in research methods that is rising from the ashes of the paradigm wars to become the third methodological movement.
A Typology of Mixed Methods Research Designs
Leech, N.& Onwuegbuzie, A. (2009). Quality and Quantity, Vol. 43, No. 2, March, Springer Netherlands
This paper presents a three-dimensional typology of mixed methods designs, with examples.
Dialogues on Mixed-Methods and Mental Health Services Research: Anticipating Challenges, Building Solutions
Robins, C.S. & Ware, N.C., Departments of Psychiatry and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School; dosReis, S., Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, et.al. (July , 2008). Psychiatric Services, Vol. 59, p. 727-731
Increasingly contemporary mental health services research projects aim to combine qualitative and quantitative components, yet researchers often lack theoretical and practical guidance for undertaking such studies. This paper summarizes discussions between the authors to share their experiences in mixed-methods research, critically consider problems they encountered and solutions, and to develop guiding principles for others conducting similar research.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Internet Research Surveys: Evidence from the Literature
Fricker, R. & Schonlau, M. (2002). Field Methods, Vol. 14, No. 4, p. 347-367
This paper addresses criticism about limitations and capabilities of email and World Wide Web surveys by examining what is known and not known about the use of the Internet for surveying.
Psychosocial Wellness of Refugees: Issues in Qualitative and Quantitative Research
Ahern, F.L. (2000). New York: Berghahn Books; as described on “the loop,”
an awareness tool on the Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute website
This book addresses the way research approaches can be carefully applied to help clarify program outcomes and inform discussions of policy, planning, and funding. The strengths and limitations of various approaches are examined. It is briefly described on this website.
Focus Groups: A Qualitative Method for Complementing Quantitative Research for Studying Culturally Diverse Groups
Calderon, J.L., Baker, R.S. & Wolf, K.E. (2000). Education for Health, Vol. 13, No.1, p. 91-95
This article by two physicians and a researcher suggests that the use of focus groups is an important component of studying health care. The strategy enables information to be gathered on the perceptions, beliefs, and values of a group’s participants, and is well suited to addressing cultural characteristics that impact a population’s health status.
Making Sense of Qualitative and Quantitative Findings in Mixed Research Synthesis Studies
Voils, C., Duke University Medical Center; Sandelowski, M., University of North Carolina Chapel Hill School of Nursing, et.al. (2008). Field Methods, Vol. 20, No. 1, p. 3-25
This article asserts that many of the conceptual and methodological issues mixed methods raises have yet to be fully understood and resolved. This paper describes how several issues that arose when synthesizing findings in 42 reports of studies of antiretroviral adherence in HIV positive women were resolved.
