'Qualitative' and 'quantitative' methods and approaches across subject fields: implications for research values, assumptions, and practices

12Citations
Citations of this article
302Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

There is considerable literature showing the complexity, connectivity and blurring of 'qualitative' and 'quantitative' methods in research. Yet these concepts are often represented in a binary way as independent dichotomous categories. This is evident in many key textbooks which are used in research methods courses to guide students and newer researchers in their research training. This paper analyses such textbook representations of 'qualitative' and 'quantitative' in 25 key resources published in English (supported by an outline survey of 23 textbooks written in German, Spanish and French). We then compare these with the perceptions, gathered through semi-structured interviews, of university researchers (n = 31) who work in a wide range of arts and science disciplines. The analysis of what the textbooks say compared to what the participants report they do in their practice shows some common features, as might be assumed, but there are significant contrasts and contradictions. The differences tend to align with some other recent literature to underline the complexity and connectivity associated with the terms. We suggest ways in which future research methods courses and newer researchers could question and positively deconstruct such binary representations in order to free up directions for research in practice, so that investigations can use both quantitative or qualitative approaches in more nuanced practices that are appropriate to the specific field and given context of investigations.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pilcher, N., & Cortazzi, M. (2024). “Qualitative” and “quantitative” methods and approaches across subject fields: implications for research values, assumptions, and practices. Quality and Quantity, 58(3), 2357–2387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01734-4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free