Abstract
The distinction between qualitative and quantitative research is abstract, very general and its value is usually taken for granted. In contrast, this article attempts to show that the distinction between qualitative and quantitative research is unclear, poor and therefore of limited value and that its popularity risks leading to unfortunate consequences. Various arguments are presented for this conclusion. For example, it is argued that the heterogeneity of different stand-points on important issues among qualitative researchers (for example with respect to the use of quantification and causal analysis) makes the distinction as such unstable. Moreover, the presence of substantial overlap between many features of qualitative and quantitative research often makes it difficult to separate qualitative and quantitative research. It is also shown that three obvious ways of making the distinction between qualitative and quantitative research are unsatisfactory. Use of the distinction may restrict creativity in the development of new research methods and create confusion and unnecessary work. In general, it may be preferable not to conceptualize research approaches at such abstract levels as done in the context of qualitative or quantitative approaches. Instead, it is suggested that it is more fruitful to discuss the pros and cons of specific research methods, preferably in the context of specific research problems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allwood C.M.: Vetenskapsfilosofi och psykologisk forskning, [Philosophy of science and psychological research]. In: Allwood, C.M., Erikson, M.G. (eds) Vetenskapsteori för psykologi och andra samhällsvetenskaper [Theory of science for psychology and other social sciences], pp. 444–472. Studentlitteratur, Lund (1999)
Allwood C.M.: On the nature of the qualitative research approach. In: Hallberg, L. (ed.) Qualitative methods in public health research, theoretical foundations and practical examples, pp. 201–223. Studentlitteratur, Lund (2002)
Alvesson M., Kärreman D.: Taking the linguistic turn in organizational research—challenges, responses, consequences. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 36, 136–158 (2000)
Bryman A.: The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: a question of method or epistemology?. Br. J. Sociol. 35, 75–92 (1984)
Bryman A.: Quantity and quality in social research. Routledge, London (1995)
Bryman A.: Social research methods. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)
Bullington J., Karlsson G.: Introduction to phenomenological research. Scand. J. Psychol. 25, 51–63 (1984)
Denzin N., Lincoln Y.S.: Introduction: entering the field of qualitative research. In: Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) Strategies of qualitative inquiry, pp. 1–34. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)
Flick U.: An introduction to qualitative research. Sage Publications, London (1998)
Gelo O., Braakmann D., Benetka G.: Quantitative and qualitative research: beyond the debate. Integr. Psychol. Behav. Sci. 42, 266–290 (2008)
Giorgi A.: An application of phenomenological method in psychology. In: Giorgi, A., Fischer, C., Murray, E. (eds) Duquesne studies in phenomenological psychology, pp. 82–103. Duquesne University Press, Pittsburgh (1975)
Glazer B., Strauss A.: Discovery of grounded theory. Aldine, Chicago (1967)
Guba E.G., Lincoln Y.S.: Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) The landscape of qualitative research, pp. 195–220. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)
Hamilton D.: Traditions, preferences, postures in applied qualitative research. In: Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) The landscape of qualitative research, pp. 111–129. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)
Hammersley M.: Deconstructing the qualitative–quantitative divide. In: Brannen, J. (ed.) Mixing methods: qualitative and quantitative research, pp. 39–55. Ashgate Publishing Company, Aldershot (1992)
Hammersley M.: The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism. In: Richardson, T.S. (ed.) Qualitative research methods in psychology and the social sciences, pp. 159–174. BPS Books, Leicester (1996)
Hoepfl, M.: Choosing qualitative research: a primer for technology education researchers. J. Technol. Educ. 9, 47–63 (1997). http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v9n1/pdf/hoepfl.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2009.
Ihde, D.: Expanding hermeneutics. http://ws.cc.stonybrook.edu/philosophy/faculty/dihde/articles/expanding_hermeneutics.html (2006). Accessed 25 July 2007.
Long R.G., White M.C., Friedman W.H., Brazeal D.V.: The “qualitative” versus “quantitative” research debate: a question of metaphorical assumptions?. Int. J. Value-Based Manag. 13, 189–197 (2000)
Mason J.: Qualitative researching. Sage Publishing, London (1996)
Masters C., Carlson D.S., Pfaldt E.: Winging it through research: an innovative approach to a basic understanding of research methodology. J. Emerg. Nurs. 32, 382–384 (2006)
Maxwell J.A.: Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educ. Res. 33(2), 3–11 (2004a)
Maxwell J.A.: Using qualitative methods for causal explanation. Field Methods 16, 243–264 (2004b)
Maxwell J.A.: Using numbers in qualitative research. Qual. Inq. 16(6), 475–482 (2010)
Mays N., Pope C.: Quality in qualitative health research. In: Pope, C., Mays, N. (eds) Qualitative research in health care, pp. 89–101. BMJ Books, London (1999)
Merriam S.B.: Case study research in education. Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers, San Francisco (1988)
Pope C., Mays N.: Qualitative methods in health research. In: Pope, C., Mays, N. (eds) Qualitative research in health care, pp. 1–10. BMJ Books, London (1999)
Rennie D.L., Watson K.D., Monteiro A.M.: The rise of qualitative research in psychology. Can. Psychol. 43, 179–189 (2002)
Sale J.E.M., Lohfeld L.H., Brazil K.: Revisiting the quantitative–qualitative debate: implications for mixed-methods research. Qual. Quant. 36, 43–53 (2002)
Sandelowski M., Voils C.I., Knafl G.: On quantitizing. J. Mix. Meth. Res. 3(3), 208–222 (2009)
Schwandt T.A.: Qualitative inquiry: a dictionary of terms. Sage Publications, Thousands Oaks (1997)
Shadish W.R., Cook T.D., Campbell D.T.: Experimental and quasi-experimental design for generalized causal inference. Hughton Mifflin Company, Boston (2002)
Starrin B.: Om distinktionen kvalitativ–kvantitativ i social forskning [On the qualitative–quantitative distinction in social research]. In: Starrin, B., Svensson, P.-G. (eds) Kvalitativ metod och vetenskapsteori [Qualitative method and theory of science], pp. 11–39. Studentlitteratur, Lund (1994)
Strauss A.L., Corbin J.: Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for develo** grounded theory. 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)
Tesch R.: Qualitative research analysis types & software tools. Falmer Press, New York (1990)
Thorne S.E.: The implications of disciplinary agenda on quality criteria for qualitative research. In: Morse, J.M., Swanson, J.M., Kuzel, A.J. (eds) The nature of qualitative evidence, pp. 141–159. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2001)
Vidich A.J., Lyman S.M.: Qualitative methods: their history in sociology and anthropology. In: Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) The landscape of qualitative research, pp. 41–110. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)
Wardekker W.L.: Criteria for the quality of inquiry. Mind Cult. Act. 7, 259–272 (2000)
Ziman J.: Real science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Allwood, C.M. The distinction between qualitative and quantitative research methods is problematic. Qual Quant 46, 1417–1429 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9455-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9455-8