Qualitative Research or Quantitative Research Essay

Both soft and numerical search collections have their specialized qualities which present them useful to a detective, however in the course of this victimize essay I depart pardon wherefore, for some(prenominal) reasons, soft query is divulge. As some(prenominal) method actings channelise within different assumptions, it is distinguished to base of operations criticism for for each hotshot methods respective theoretical base in order to adequately judge them. In the course of this essay I willing postgraduatelight each methods theoretical assumptions and then I will assess each method by pointing divulge their authoritative and negative circumstanceors.The vestigial assumption behind qualitative enquiry is that the stallion put forward subscribe tos to be examined in order to understand the phenowork forceon. numerical look however, places importance in ingathering and analyzing info from parts of a inclination and in so doing, enkindle young lad y important aspects which could lead to a make out understanding of the whole phenomenon.Theres no such thing as qualitative information. Everything is either 1 or 0(Fred Kerlinger 1999)Unlike three-figure research, there is no everywherearching framework for how qualitative research should be conducted rather each type of qualitative research is guided by the crabbed philosophical stances that are taken in relation by the research to each phenomenon (Miles & Huberman 1994, p. 40) This enables qualitative research to be much involved with the candid at move on whereas quantifiable research has the analogous rules which it applies to some(prenominal) subject weigh, then make it easier to fell important evidence.As the detective use qualitative methods becomes entirely immersed in the data collection phase of the project, he himself very becoming the data collection neb as opposed to the gesturenaires and equipment used by valued researchers, it allows him to gai n a reform understanding of the subject matter as a whole and observe the subject in its own surround benignant behaviour is significantly influenced by the screen background in which it occurs thus single mustiness contract that behaviour in situations. The sensual setting e.g., schedules, space, pay, and rewards and the internalized notions of norms, traditions, roles, and values are of the essence(p) contextual variables. enquiry must be conducted in the setting where allthe contextual variables are operating. (Marshall & Rossman 1980)Quantitative research disregards these valuable contextual variables as most of the work is through in a laboratory with the researcher using the principles of impartiality and an objective characterisation of the subject.In conclusion, qualitative research is better than quantifiable research because it places emphasis upon the subject itself by studying it in an in-depth focal point of life and becoming involved with it on a personal le vel. Quantitative research keeps a level of impartiality with the subject matter thus making it neglect important contextual factors crucial to the research itself.1.Using British Election Study data for physical exertion, why is it problematic to do three-figure research on ethnical minorities?It is problematic to do quantitative research on ethnic minorities because the standard deviation is so small, thus the observations are spread out all over a very small try out which would not blamelessly represent the entire ethnic mathematical group. There is such a small valid percent that subjects would need to be targeted as they are tall(a) to be caught during random sampling.2.Providing either supposed(a) and/or published illustrations, how accurate is it to mark off meat compend as a quantitative method?It is quite accurate to label content depth psychology as a quantitative method for several reasons. The comparisons of their theoretical patterns are numerous and where fore it has much in common with quantitative than qualitative methods. In the course of this short essay I will rationalise why it is accurate to label content analysis as a quantitative method by using an example of research employing content analysis and pointing out the similarities between the two. satiate analysis has been expound asAny technique for making inferences by objectively and systematically describeing condition characteristics of messages (Holsti 1969 p. 14)Compare this with a definition of quantitative researchThe aim is to classify features, count them, and work up statistical models in an attempt to explain what is observed. It is objective seeks precise measurement & analysis of target concepts. (Miles& Huberman 1994, p. 40)Both of these definitions contain the term objective, which shows that both(prenominal) of the methods administer the core aspect of non-interference with subjectsContent analysis is often referred to as an obscure method(Bryman 200 8, p. 289)This key concept lies at the core group of both content analysis and quantitative research methods, it is an obvious similarity.In Shephards study of the dynamics between the party, candidates and constituencies he used content analysis on party leaflets to spot recurring trends. His method (content analysis) bears a striking resemblance to quantitative research, for example both methods begin with hypotheses and theories, Shephard choosing to involve whether emphasis in leaflets matches the profile of the constituents. He then made two hypotheses stating that -the high the unemployment rate the higher the emphasis on jobs and job creation and the higher the dental plate ownership, the higher the emphasis on by-line rates and mortgages. Quantitative research methods alike start off with hypotheses and theories therefore it is micturate to see that content analysis could be labelled quantitative due to this fact.Further much, both methods of research have a high leve l of transparentness because they are both highly structured and systematic in their approach. Shephard stated that to conduct his analysis objectively and systematically (two quantitative features) that he had to identify his sample, sample period, text/images and what words and images to count. This shows that both content analysis and quantitative research share epistemologically grounded beliefs near what constitutes acceptable cognition (Bryman 2008, p. 155)In conclusion, it is accurate to label content analysis as a quantitative method due to the fact that it shares umteen features in common with quantitative research. These include, maintaining objectivity during the study, transparency and a systematic approach to research. These features exhibit that content analysis is grounded in the same theoretical processes and philosophy as quantitative research.3.Providing examples of localise group research from the literature, demonstrate the advantages and single outs of s tress groups. focus groups are a highly useful method of data collection but they have m both advantages and disadvantages. I will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of focal point groups in this essay and in like manner tip over real-life examples of focus group research to adorn this.Focus groups can provide an acumen into the way in which people channelize and interpret knowledge as well up as how people construe information. This is curiously useful in the study of sense of hearing reception- how audiences receive different kinds of television and radio set platforms, etc. Such a study was conducted by Morley in 1980 into how Nationwide, a favorite television programme at the time, was authorized by specific groups of people. He notice that different groups had different interpretations of the programmes which they had watched, which indicated that the meaning of the programme was based in the way it was watched and see not in the programme itself. (Bryman 2 008, 475) This provides more information that a simple wonder because the interviewee has the choice to respond to fellow participants and struggle with them, leading the researcher to gain a greater insight into why they fight such beliefs and how heartyly they feel active them.Another advantage of focus groups is that they can provide a more yield environment to respond to scruples by the way in which they are selected prior to the event. For example, Kitzinger notes in her research on HIV that any attempts at discussions about risks for gay men were blocked out by strong homophobic clamouring amongst homophobic men. (Kitzinger 1994b in Bloor, et al 2001, p. 20) Therefore focus groups consisting of specific groups such as male prostitutes, hideaway club members, etc, provided a more relaxed environment in which views could be openly discussed without venerate of being criticised for ones beliefs. In addition to this, organising groups consisting of only HIV positive peopl e meant that disclosure of a potentially stigmatising status could be overcome. (Bloor 2001 p. 23)However focus groups also have their disadvantages, the most prominent one being the role of the researcher within the discussion- the way in which the focus group is designed, the participants selected to take part, where the meeting takes place, how the questions are worded and delivered and who the inciter is may affect the responses which are obtained.This raisesthe question over the validity of the results as the researcher has less control over a focus group than he would over a one on one interview with respondents possibly talking amongst themselves on irrelevant issues, or the simple fact that they may get bored or have personality issues with other members of the group. (Walvis 2003 p. 405)Another disadvantage of focus groups is the tendency of researchers to (either consciously or subconsciously) pick groups so that they align with pre-determined beliefs about a subject. One famous example of this was when Coca-Cola launched New speed of light in 1985 patronage the fact that the focus groups had made it overt that they would not like to see the handed-down blow removed from the shelves. (Pendergast 1993 and Greising 1998)The taste-tests however had prove positive, but they had not been asked the vital question about how they would feel if traditional coke was removed from the shelves, this positive response was more in line with how the CEO of Coca-Cola matte about the product and it was launched based on the back of poorly conducted focus groups. The resultant product was a massive misadventure and lost Coca-Cola a large share of the market it was obvious that Coca-Cola had spent also much time and money on the plan to dismiss it on the results from focus group research at the exist minute.One final disadvantage of focus groups is their limited spread of views Morgan (1998) suggests that the average surface of a group should be or so six to ten people. This clearly cannot be representative of the population as a whole- Stephen Fisher and Robert Andersen (2005) state that in order to have a representative sample for one million people you would need, with a margin of error of 5%, 384 participants.BibliographyBloor, M. et al. (2001) Focus Groups in loving Research (London Sage).Bryman, A. (2008) Social Research Methods (2nd Ed.) (Oxford Oxford University Press).Greising, D. (1998) Id equal the World to Buy a Coke The Life and Leadership of Robert Goizueta (New York Wiley)Holsti, O.R (1969) Content synopsis for the Social Sciences and Humanities (Reading, Mass. Addison-Wesley)Kerlinger, F. Foundations of Behavioural Research (Nova York Holt, Rinehart and Winston 1965)Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1980). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA Sage.Miles & Huberman (1994, p. 40). soft Data AnalysisPendergast, M. (1993) For God, Country and Coca-Cola The unlicensed history of the Worlds some Popular Soft Drink (London Weidenfeld & Nicholson)Shephard, M. (2007) six-fold Audiences, Multiple Messages? An Exploration of the Dynamics between the Party, the Candidates and the Various Constituencies, Journal of Elections, Public aspect and PartiesWalvis, T.H (2003), Avoiding advertising research disaster announce and the uncertainty principle, Journal of disfigurement Management, Vol. 10, No. 6