Social professionals are tasked with assessing various aspects as changeable, distinctive, and independent as human understanding and refining their conclusions in a systematic and unbiased approach. The nursing sciences are dominated by two varied and contradicting investigative strategies commonly defined as quantitative and qualitative evaluation. Both approaches differ in their conception of social reality, how insight is acquired, and the study (Grove et al., 2012).
The qualitative research appreciated subjectivity and depends on case analysis, focuses on groups, and structured interviews. On the contrary, the quantitative examination employs pre-meditated comparison methods and attempts to understand what and why events occur (Grove et al., 2012). Therefore, this paper aims to explore the characteristics of qualitative and quantitative research techniques and their application in the nursing practice setting.
The field of nursing psychology has been designed by controversies on how best physicians can realize their duties using the quantitative and qualitative research approaches in an evidence-based setting. The two approaches of examination are usually viewed as competing relating to their application in the field of evidence-centered management. For instance, the core philosophy of qualitative technique is that a physician or psychologist should not anticipate the reaction of their patients before gathering information from them and that the provider’s viewpoint and background generally bias every analysis (Grove et al., 2012).
According to the idea, the nurse should not avoid obscuring their responses and impressions, and consumers. Instead, the medical practitioner should record the reactions and focus on understanding them (Grove et al., 2012). Therefore, in qualitative research, the psychologist consents and appreciates subjectivity, thus allowing the patients’ feedback to guide the treatment process and explore care techniques and systems that they have not initially anticipated as relevant for their clients.
In contrast, quantitative research measures a person’s encounters in numerical ways. The quantitative examiners trust that the appropriate way to circumvent a treatment error in a nursing setting is to aim for objective, solid controlling, and reporting information techniques. Numerous quantitative psychologists further believe that any personal patient experience can be evaluated numerically, exemplified by the opinions of social psychologist Dr. Shi, who asserts that if an encounter cannot be measured, it does not exist (Bonner et al., 2010).
Therefore, using pre-indomitable systems of assessment comprising tests and close-ended research, a quantitative physician gathers numerical information on clients’ feelings, behaviors, and perceptions. The data can then be assessed statistically, enabling the provider to compare different groups of consumers, evaluate general trends, and discover linear and non-linear connections among the documented variables.
The contrast between qualitative and quantitative approaches to psychological treatment is an incorrect analogy. Several scholars recommend applying both methods in a mixed-method technique, hence quantitatively gathering information and asking the participants follow-up queries that are open-ended and qualitative (Fletcher et al., 2009). Social psychologists can also combine a quantitative structure, such as an analysis or a survey, with qualitative methods that include the focus group and interviews to triangulate conclusions (Lavoie-Tremblay et al., 2010).
Therefore, a mixed-method technique will enable the practitioners to record factual data while offering the patients the space to define their subjective encounters. Despite the method being time-consuming relating to the collection and analysis of both sets of information, it will allow the researchers to connect the benefits of both approaches.
In conclusion, the clinical field’s qualitative and quantitative research methods play a significant role in determining the treatment methods and practices that will satisfy the patients’ needs. In social psychology, both techniques will enable the practitioners and scholars to understand the patients’ experiences that resulted in their prevailing mental conditions. Furthermore, understanding both techniques and inclusively applying them in clinical practices will lead to improved results in the medical field. Therefore, qualitative and quantitative research techniques should be investigated further to appreciate their influence in the medical and social settings of patients and physicians.
References
Bonner, L. M., Simons, C. E., Parker, L. E., Yano, E. M., & Kirchner, J. E. (2010). “To take care of the patients”: Qualitative analysis of Veterans Health Administration personnel experiences with a clinical informatics system. Implementation Science, 5(1), 1–8. Web.
Fletcher, A., Cooper, J. R., Helms, P., Northington, L., & Winters, K. (2009). Stemming the tide of childhood obesity in an underserved urban African American population: A pilot study. ABNF Journal, 20(2), 44.
Grove, S. K., Burns, N., & Gray, J. (2012). The practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Lavoie-Tremblay, M., Paquet, M., Duchesne, M.-A., Santo, A., Gavrancic, A., Courcy, F., & Gagnon, S. (2010). Retaining nurses and other hospital workers: An intergenerational perspective of the work climate. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 42(4), 414–422. Web.