prof. kimberly goyetteired.edu.vn/vn/upload/files/lt.trang/researchmethods_ired.pdf · august 5,...

August 5, 2014

“Qualitative and Quantitative Research: A comparative view

Prof. Kimberly Goyette

Inductive vs. Deductive Approaches

Comparing Qualitative and Quantitative Research

Collecting and Analyzing Qualitative Data

Collecting and Analyzing Quantitative Data

Overview

From the top-down

Goes from the general to the specific

Theory to hypotheses to observation to confirmation

Is most typical of quantitative research, but can also be found in much qualitative research

Deductive Reasoning

To test an already existing theory

To see if a “hunch” or preconceived notion is indeed supported

When you have a clear, answerable question

Deductive Reasoning: When is it useful?

Named and “systematized” by Nathan Glaser and Anselm Strauss

Start with data/observations

Record everything

Code right away: Begin to group similar observations

From these groupings themes emerge

Once themes emerge, go back into the field and seek confirmation

Inductive Approach: Grounded Theory

Identify ‘critical instances’ -highlight key passages of transcripts.

‘Open coding’ - assign passages to categories (i.e. abstract conceptual labels). Work through all transcripts and collect numerous illustrative quotes to ‘saturate’ categories.

‘Axial coding’ - refine initial list of categories. Delete and amalgamate some. Make connections between the categories and define their properties e.g. context, pre-conditions. These are sub-categories.

‘Selective coding’ - identify a core category and themes from which theory will derive.

In Glazer and Strauss’ words…

When is this useful?

No one has approached this topic/phenomenon before

Old theories do not seem to explain the topic well

Lots of disconfirming cases

The Grounded Approach

The theory is not well formulated

You don’t know how to measure concepts well

Your question makes assumptions about the phenomenon

Problems when using the Deductive Approach

Practical problems

Literature review?

Observer “positioning”

Problems with Grounded Theory

The Goal: Different Approaches to Theory Building

Using the deductive method (often appropriate for quantitative approaches):

Assess previous literature

What have other researchers found?

What theories have their results supported or refuted?

Building on analysis of previous research and your own ideas:

How are the concepts of your research question related?

Theory Building

Using the inductive method (best approached qualitatively):

Observe phenomena with as open a mind as possible

Try to record everything

Come up with descriptions for reappearing observations

Look for how phenomena are related

Building concepts to build theory

The Process of Theory-Building: Conceptualization

What are the underlying concepts in your research question/observations? (Sometimes you can get clues about these if you ask yourself: Why did you ask this question? What are similar question you might ask? Why are they similar?)

List those concepts

Validity Does the measure reflect what we are truly

trying to capture?

Face validity: Does the measure reflect a common understanding of the concept? ◦ How do you measure a family?

Criterion validity: Predictive validity. ◦ If something is designed to measure a concept,

how well does it predict that concept?

◦ University examination scores

Inductive vs. Deductive

Inductive ◦ Build a concept using grounded theory ◦ “Conceptualilzation: arises from observations ◦ Reliability? ◦ Generalizability?

◦ Deductive Concepts are derived from previous theory

Reliability can be strong because measures have been used previously

Generalizability can be strong

Some Motivations for Qualitative Research

Exploratory projects that focus on:

– Describing

– Understanding

– Explaining

Small in scale, but in-depth studies

Questions ◦ What?

◦ Why? (But not to determine causality, more to determine meaning)

◦ How?

(not: How many? How frequently?)

Qualitative Methods Are Used To gain more in-depth information that my be

difficult to convey quantitatively

To better understand any phenomenon about which little is yet known or knowledge is incomplete

To gain new perspectives on things about which we might already know a lot

May be used to generate theories and hypotheses

Very good for exploring surprising/unexpected findings

Good for exploring complexity

Good for exploring the effects of context

Some Characteristics of Qualitative Research

Phenomenon of interest should be minimally disrupted.

Researcher subjectivity and participation is acknowledged.

Often inductive in theory-building.

Often emphasizes the voices/perspectives of participants.

Acknowledges that participants construct their own “realities” and “stories,” and that events and “facts” can have multiple interpretations.

Research is often “emergent.”

Comparing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods

Quantitative

– Objectivity valued

– Social facts

– Reduction, control, and

Prediction

--Focus on causality

– Concepts are

measurable/quantifiable

– Report statistical analyses

– Researcher separate

-- Context is not the focus

Qualitative

– Subjectivity valued

– Multiple realities

– Discovery, description,

and

Understanding

-- Focus on interpretation

– Report rich narrative

– Researcher part of the

process

– Context dependent

Qualitative Research Choosing Who To “Research” -- Sampling

Purposive sampling: choosing respondents/groups to get the most complete understanding of a phenomenon

Quota:

“Enough” people from all salient categories

Snowball:

Friends of friends

Deviant cases:

What can we learn from those that do not conform to our expectations?

Balancing general with range of possible

Ethnography

Participant/Non-participant Observation

Interviews

Focus Groups

Content Analysis

Archival Research

Types of Qualitative Research

Describe everything

Pay attention to environment

Participants

As much detail as possible

Write reactions

Write as soon as possible

Draw maps

Note emotions

Memo to self at the end

Field Notes

Observing: What do you look for?

The short answer: everything

Initial impressions ◦ details about the physical setting including size,

space, noise, colors, equipment and movement, about people in the setting, such as number, gender and race, appearance, dress, movement, comportment, feeling and tone.

Interactional detail

Key events

The routine and mundane

Looking for categories: beginning to code

Beginning to build concepts:

Labeling observations

Grouping into categories

Naming categories (try not to borrow others’, at least not to start)

Finding properties of categories

e.g.

Frequency

Duration

Intensity

Open Coding can proceed

Line-by-line

By paragraph

By document

Axial Coding

Moving back from the data

Seeing how categories and sub-categories relate to each other

Create outlines, pictures, maps, etc. of the categories and sub-categories

(You may be going back and forth from data to analysis at this point)

Selective Coding

Recognizing a main theme you want focus on

Organizing data according to the categories and sub-categories of that theme

Building a narrative/story/theory from that theme

Sequential analysis suggest that you return to the data to check that interpretation and modify as necessary

Consideration of disconfirming cases

Enough is enough?

When do you know or feel you are done? When can/should you stop collecting data?

Test of congruence/verifiability Could you explain the rules, patterns, norms

of a setting to an outsider? Does what seemed strange at first seem natural or normal now from the perspective of a group member? Can you take the position of understanding the world form your group members’ eyes?

Sometimes you can show coding and analysis to a member of the group to see if they concur with your interpretation.

Process

Start with codes

Put codes into categories

How do categories relate to each other?

This is the theme.

Build to a theory, comparing categories under a theme.

Illustrate the categories using direct quotes from your field notes.

Collect own data from surveys, experiments

Use secondary data

Assuming you have ◦ Asked a research question

◦ Checked relevant literature

◦ Built theory

◦ Operationalized concepts

◦ Measured concepts validly and reliably

Quantitative Analyses

Descriptive Statistics

You want to tell me what that picture says using some summary numbers (statistics).

What characteristics do you want to capture? What will help me make a picture?

How to Summarize Data: Looking at a Distribution/Shape

Where is the center? ◦ What does the average or typical case look like?

How spread out is the distribution? ◦ How much variation is there among cases? (next

week)

Frequency and Relative Frequency Tables

Show the numbers or count in each category.

Measures of Center for Categorical Variables Mode: The single value (or values) that

appear most often.

Bar Chart of Marital Status

Show the percentage in each category.

Pie Chart of Marital Status

Bivariate Relationships: What do we want to know?

Sample:

Describe the association (pattern/direction)

Population:

Is this relationship likely to exist in the population to which we want to generalize?

(Hypothesis testing)

Bivariate Relationship with Two Categorical Variables

Describe: Crosstabulation Tables or Crosstabs, Side by Side bar charts, pie charts

Hypothesis testing: Chi-square

Crosstabs

Describe the association

Side-by-Side Bar Chart

Hypothesis testing The Problem: Are married people happier (in the

population)?

Step 1: Specify the H0 and HA.

H0: Happiness is independent of marital status.

HA: Happiness is not independent of marital status.

Questions?