Qualitative and quantitative studies denote major research methodologies. Researchers adopt the above designs in attempts to conclude on their study agendas. However, adoption of these differing designs depends on the nature of research and the scholar’s objectives in undertaking the studies. This write-up seeks to illustrate the countless disparities that exist among the above designs.
The analysis of the disparity will revolve around certain characteristics that are distinct to both research designs. The analysis of the disparity between the two methodologies will analyze various perspectives of qualitative and quantitative research. These perspectives include data generated, method of amassing statistics and the structure of information that emerge on undertaking relevant studies.
Initially, it is imperative to acknowledge the disparity in the data that each design endeavors to unearth. Qualitative design seeks to reveal data that elaborate reasons about a certain situation thus the data primarily answers the question why. This design fundamentally seeks to understand human behavioral aspects by evaluation of reasoning.
Conversely, the quantitative design seeks to make precise assessment by gathering numerical data pertaining to the matter under evaluation. Furthermore, qualitative research generates unstructured data while the alternative design yields structured data. This owes to the variation in the basic objectives of the two designs.
The qualitative methodology aims at understanding behavioral traits and subsequently evaluates human thinking by asking the question why. Evidently, such a study avails unstructured data. Moreover, it will differ among the diverse subjects involved in the study. Ultimately, such a study generates unstructured data that requires later analysis to make apt inferences.
Conversely, quantitative research yields structured data. This data emanates from this design since it seeks to make precise measurement of the research phenomena. Consequently, the methodology generates structured data that principally contains numerals.
The qualitative design endeavors to avail a compressive coverage of the research topic. Consequently, it adopts a subjective perspective towards the relevant studies. As such, it embraces the disparities in the responses from the subjects. This approached integrates the researcher into the studies. In contrast, the quantitative design adopts a subjective approach.
Consequently, the researcher is an observer and only amasses data. This enables the study to maintain objectivity in making precise measurements relating to the research phenomena. Overall, the researcher influences the results in the qualitative design. Nonetheless, the researcher does not influence the findings of the alternative design. Another fundamental disparity is the nature of data that emanates from the two designs.
Qualitative studies make findings relating to behavioral tendencies. Consequently, the resulting data contains numerous explanations in words. Conversely, the latter design endeavors to make accurate measurements. Certainly, quantitative designs will generate numerical data.
Additionally, the data from a qualitative research will require subsequent examination to make apt conclusion. Equally, arithmetic data from a quantitative research requires minimal analysis to inference.
Other disparities exist and pertain to the means utilized to amass data. Qualitative research assembles unstructured statistics. Thus, methods that can amass such details primarily entail verbal interaction. Additionally, this guarantees flexibility in amassing data allowing the researcher to institute amendments to the means utilized to suit the study and avails apposite details.
The methods to amass data under this design include comprehensive interviews, action gathering, prearranged and unstructured interviews. In contrast, the quantitative design generates structured data. As such, it adopts rigid methods to amass data.
This is the core undoing of the methods utilized by this latter design. The means include questionnaires and surveys. There are other minor differences between these two designs. Nonetheless, the above details have addressed the core disparities that exist.
Despite the evident disparities among the two research methodologies, most scholars are indifferent on the method to adopt. Additionally, findings reveal that the choice of design does not rely on the differences, but on the positioning and traditions that research institutions seek to uphold. Although countless disparities exist between the two methodologies, there also exist some similarities.
Both qualitative plus quantitative designs require formulation of theories that the methodologies will evaluate. Theories are general assertions pertaining to the target population. The theories provide guidance on the data to amass. After analysis of data, the researcher draws conclusions by comparing the statistics emanating from the evaluation and set parameters.
This is a procedure undertaken in both designs. Formulation of a theory is a vital aspect of any research irrespective of the methodology adopted. Moreover, research emanates from a certain question. The research queries are a critical constituent of any study.
These queries assist in the realization of the research objectives as they guide the scholar on the form of data to seek. Both research designs contrasted above require questions that assist in the amassing of relevant data.
Despite the qualitative research opting for flexible methods in amassing data while the alternative methodology has opted for rigid methods, it is imperative to acknowledge that both methods at times utilize same data collection methodologies. Conclusively, there are distinct disparities between the two designs.
However, the application of each design is predominantly dependent on the studies that one seeks to undertake. Choosing on either design is challenging to individuals with no prior information.