Approaches to Research Methods

Research Methodology Assignment submitted byShoeb Ahmed

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

“Approaches to Research Methods”

Shoeb Ahmed / Shoeb Ahmed IlyasEmail: [email protected]

1 | P a g e

mailto:[email protected]


IntroductionResearch is a systematic investigation to find answers to a problem. Sociological research is a systematic, careful, and controlled process of collecting information and answering questions. The different approaches we follow in Research Methodology are

1. Quantitative approach

2. Qualitative approach.

3. Pragmatic approach (mixed methods)

Quantitative ApproachIn the scientific method, quantitative research methods are employed in an attempt to establish general laws or principles. Such a scientific approach is often termed nomothetic

and assumes social reality is objective and external to the individual. Quantitative research is empirical research where the data are in the form of numbers. Measures are systematically created before data collection and are standardized as far as possible. Procedures are standard, and replication is assumed.

Deductive approach tests the validity of assumptions (or theories/hypotheses) that need to be confirmed or rejected during the research process.

In the quantitative approach the generation of data is in quantitative form which can be

subjected to meticulous quantitative analysis in a formal and rigid fashion. This approach can

be further sub-classified into inferential, experimental and simulation approaches to research.

It is often assumed that quantitative approaches draw on positivist ontologies. Quantitative

approaches are strongly associated with objectivity. For Example, the interviews may be

structured and analyzed in a quantitative manner. Numeric data is collected or when non-

numeric answers are categorized and coded in numeric form. Numerical data obtained

through quantitative data approach facilitates comparisons between subjects or groups, as

well as allow the determination of the extent of agreement or disagreement between

2 | P a g e

http://research-methodology.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Research-approach.png


respondentsi. Similarly, surveys may allow for open-ended responses and lead to the in-depth

study of individual cases.

Strengths of Quantitative Research The quantitative as survey approach has significant advantages like it can be

administered and evaluated quickly. Responses can be tabulated within a short

timeframe. Quantitative data, which is collected rigorously, using the appropriate

methods and analysed critically shows more reliabilityii.

Quantitative research design is an excellent way of finalizing results and proving or

disproving a hypothesis.

After statistical analysis of the results, a comprehensive answer is reached, and the

results can be legitimately discussed and published. Quantitative experiments also

filter out external factors, if properly designed, and so the results gained can be seen

as real and unbiased.

Quantitative experiments are useful for testing the results gained by a series of

qualitative experiments, leading to a final answer, and a narrowing down of possible

directions for follow up research to take.

Research findings can be well generalized if the sample selection process is well-

designed and sample is representative of study population.

Relatively easy to analyze and data can be very consistent, precise and reliable

Collection of large amount of data using structured tools and techniques is relatively

speedy and easier in this approach.

Study findings can be generalized to the population about which information is

required.

Clear documentation can be provided regarding the content and application of the

survey instruments so that other researchers can assess the validity of the findings.

Data analysis is relatively less time consuming through use of statistical software

Standardized approaches permit the study to be replicated in different areas or over

time with the production of comparable findings.

Weaknesses of Quantitative Research Quantitative research has drawbacks to take account of people's unique ability to

interpret their experiences, construct their own meanings and act on these.

Quantitative experiments can be difficult and expensive and require a lot of time to

3 | P a g e


perform. They must be carefully planned to ensure that there is complete

randomization and correct designation of control groups

Quantitative studies usually require extensive statistical analysis, which can be

difficult, due to most scientists not being statisticians. The field of statistical study is a

whole scientific discipline and can be difficult for non-mathematicians.

In addition, the requirements for the successful statistical confirmation of results are

very stringent, with very few experiments comprehensively proving a hypothesis;

there is usually some ambiguity, which requires retesting and refinement to the

design. This means another investment of time and resources must be committed to

fine-tune the results.

Quantitative research design also tends to generate only proved or unproven results,

with there being very little room for grey areas and uncertainty. For the social

sciences, education, anthropology and psychology, human nature is a lot more

complex than just a simple yes or no response.

The research studying the perceptions and beliefs cannot be meaningfully reduced to

numbers.iii

Quantitative research is weak in understanding the context or setting in which people

behave, something that qualitative research makes up for.

2. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Qualitative, observational studies refer to traditions that base their research upon qualitative

data (as opposed to quantitative research) and do not actively and purposely manipulate the

phenomenon under investigation. Grounded theory studies and ethnographic methods are

examples of this mode of research.

Qualitative Research is primarily exploratory research and it has the aim of understanding

experience as nearly as possible as its study subjects feel it. It is used to gain an

understanding of underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations of subjects. It provides

insights into the problem or helps to develop ideas or hypotheses for potential quantitative

research.

Generally, the techniques of focus group interviews, projective techniques and depth

interviews are used. Data from qualitative studies describes the qualities or characteristics of

something. Qualitative research studies can provide the details about human behavior,

emotion and personality characteristics that quantitative studies cannot match. Qualitative

4 | P a g e


data includes information about user behaviors, needs, desires, routines and a variety of other

information that is essential in designing a product that will actually fit into a user’s life.

Qualitative data are usually gathered by observation, interviews or focus groups, projective

techniques, but may also be gathered from written documents and through case studies. In

qualitative research there is more emphasis on describes the qualities or characteristics of

human behavior, emotion, personality characteristics, user behaviors, needs, desires, and

routines. Participants in qualitative studies often involve smaller numbers of tools include

and utilizes open-ended questionnaires interview guides. This type of research is best used to

answer how and why questions and is not well suited to generalisable what, when and who

questions.

Qualitative approach objective is to discover and encapsulate meanings once the researcher

becomes immersed in the data. Concepts tend to be in the form of themes, motifs,

generalizations, and taxonomies. However, the objective is still to generate concepts.

Measures are more specific and may be specific to the individual setting or researcher. Data

are in the form of words from documents, observations, and transcripts. However,

quantification is still used in qualitative research. Theory can be causal or non-causal and is

often inductive. Research procedures are particular, and replication is difficult. Analysis

proceeds by extracting themes or generalizations from evidence and organizing data to

present a coherent, consistent picture. These generalizations can then be used to generate

hypotheses.

Observation

It is the systematic observation, recording, description, analysis and interpretation of people’s

behavior. This method can be loosely structured or tightly structured with precise coding

methods of behavior patterns. Traditional time and method study of worker behavior

involved precise coding and timing of work patterns.

In participant observation, the researcher participates to some degree in the lives and

activities of the people being observed.

Strengths WeaknessesGood at explaining ‘what is going on’ in Can be very time consuming.

5 | P a g e


particular social situations.

Heightens the researcher’s awareness of

significant social processes.

Can create difficult ethical dilemmas for the

researcher. E.g. the problems of

confidentiality and ‘openness’ – does the

researcher tell people they are being

observed?

Particularly useful for researchers working

within their own organizations.

Can be high levels of role conflict for the

researcher (e.g. ‘colleague’ versus

researcher)

Can afford the researcher the opportunity to

experience ‘for real’ the emotions of those

who are being researched.

Virtually all data collected can be useful.

Interviewing Data can be collected by using unstructured and semi-structured interviews or by using

structured interviews. When using semi-structured interviews, the researcher may encourage

and formal conversation covering certain themes and questions. These questions may vary

from one interview to the next, and the order in which questions are asked may vary also.

Semi-structured interviews are primarily used in explanatory research to understand the

relationships between variables. Semi-structured interviews are used in exploratory studies to

provide further information about the research area. Unstructured interviews, sometimes

called in-depth or non-directive interviews, are designed to explore in depth a general area of

research interest. Interviewees are encouraged to talk freely about events, behavior and

beliefs in relation to the research area. Such interviews are used in exploratory research to

find out more about a particular event and seek new insights.

Focus groupsFocus groups are forms of group ‘interviews’ and a focus group usually consist of 6-15

6 | P a g e


people. The researcher acts as a facilitator rather than an interviewer. The facilitator starts

with a clear theme communicated to the participants and a set agenda of items. The group

then works through the items, but the facilitator should also be prepared to pursue novel

issues as they arise. Focus groups should be taped (audio) or videoed. Videoing can be more

difficult and intrusive but is often worthwhile. Permission of the participants should always

be sought for taping/ videoing. It is vital to make sure that everybody talks.

Strengths WeaknessA dynamic focus group will generate many

ideas, helping to explain or explore concepts.

They will help to tell you why the

organization is as it is.

High level of skill of group leader/researcher

is required to facilitate and manage the

discussion. Otherwise the discussion

degenerates into ‘waffle’.

Bottom-up generation of concerns and issues,

which can help to establish survey variables.

Where focus groups are conducted within an

organization, participants may be concerned

about confidentiality.

Can offer credibility to research where issues

of bias are associated with interviews.

Some participants may be inhibited because

of the group.

Relatively quick and easy to organize. Cheap

on time compared to participant observation,

etc

Dominance by one, or some, participant(s) of

the discussion.

A snowballing effect can occur as

participants develop ideas triggered by other

participants.

Problem of ‘groupthink’ – tendency to

express view that satisfy others in the group,

but which may not be valid outside the

context.

Case Studies MethodYin (1984:23) defines the case study research method “as an empirical inquiry that

investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries

between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of

7 | P a g e


evidence are used.”

Case study method enables a researcher to closely examine the data within a specific context.

In most cases, a case study method selects a small geographical area or a very limited number

of individuals as the subjects of study. Case studies, in their true essence, explore and

investigate contemporary real-life phenomenon through detailed contextual analysis of a

limited number of events or conditions, and their relationships. Careful design of a case study

is therefore very important. This is because case study method, through interviews or journal

entries, must be able to prove that:

i. it is the only viable method to elicit implicit and explicit data from the subjects.

ii. It is appropriate to the research question.

iii. It follows the set of procedures with proper application.

iv. The scientific conventions used in social sciences are strictly followed.

v. a ‘chain of evidence’, either quantitatively or qualitatively, are systematically recorded and

archived particularly when interviews and direct observation by the researcher are the main

sources of data.

vi. The case study is linked to a theoretical framework.

Strengths WeaknessHolistic depth of analysis realistic attention

to context extensive range of variables

Researcher Bias observation bias

interpretation bias cannot see everything

going on researcher presence may change

case acceptance by subjects

Longitudinal develop history of case details

of process causation and interactions

situation as it happens

Historical organizational and economic

change may make case out of date and

irrelevant; e.g. a study of a “best practice”

firm that is now bankrupt and closed down.

8 | P a g e


High Internal Validity more complete

understanding direct observation of situation

multiple sources of data triangulation of data

meaningful to subjects

Low External Validity low generality little

control over phenomenon comparative

analysis difficult representativeness of case

difficult to replicate

Adaptive questions can be changed as case

develops methods can be changed data

sources can be changed

Costly research time volume of data analysis

of data problems of access

Triangulation involves asking whether the data from the various sources leads to the same

conclusions. If it does, then we will have much more confidence in our argument.

STRENGTHS OF QUALITATIVE APPROACH Qualitative techniques are extremely useful when a subject is too complex be

answered by a simple yes or no hypothesis. These types of designs are much easier to

plan and carry out cultural assessment i.e., ability to probe for underlying values,

beliefs, and assumptions.

The broader scope covered by these designs ensures that some useful data is always

generated, whereas an unproved hypothesis in a quantitative experiment can mean

that a lot of time has been wasted. Qualitative research methods are not as dependent

upon sample sizes as quantitative methods; a case study, for example, can generate

meaningful results with a small sample group. Qualitative data is particularly useful when it comes to defining feelings and attitudes.

They are also useful when budgetary decisions have to be taken into account.

WEAKNESS OF QUALITATIVE APPROACH Qualitative methods require a lot of careful thought and planning, to ensure that the

results obtained are as accurate as possible.

Qualitative data cannot be mathematically analyzed in the same comprehensive way

as quantitative results, so can only give a guide to general trends. It is a lot more open

to personal opinion and judgment, and so can only ever give observations rather than

results.

9 | P a g e


Any qualitative research design is usually unique and cannot be exactly recreated,

meaning that they do lack the ability to be replicated.

Because of the subjective nature of qualitative data and its origin in single contexts, it

is difficult to apply conventional standards of reliability and validity.

As qualitative inquiry is generally open-ended, the participants have more control

over the content of the data collected1.

Personal experience and knowledge of subjects influence the observations and

conclusions of the study. Particular issue could go unnoticed.

Issues on confidentiality and anonymity can pose problems during presentation of

findings. Findings can be time consuming and difficult to present in visual ways.

Qualitative research is seen as deficient because of the potential for biased

interpretations made by the researcher and the difficulty in generalizing findings to a

large group.

Pragmatic approach (Mixed Methods)The core assumption of this form of inquiry is that the combination of qualitative and

quantitative approaches provides a more complete understanding of a research problem than

either approach alone. Researcher can use any of the methods, techniques and procedures

typically associated with quantitative or qualitative research but researcher should be aware

that every research method has its limitations and that the different approaches can be

complementary.

Researcher can use different methods at the same time or one after the other. For

example, Researcher can start his research work based on empirical evidence with qualitative

research like focus group discussion and then use the findings to construct a questionnaire to

measure attitudes in a large scale sample with the aim of carrying out statistical analysis.

Depending on which measures have been used, the data collected is analyzed in the

appropriate manner. Mixing different approaches has the advantages of enabling

triangulation, which is a common feature of mixed research methods studies. Mixed methods

may use different researchers (investigator triangulation), variety of data sources (data

triangulation); use of multiple perspectives to interpret the results (theory triangulation); the

use of multiple methods to study a research problem (methodological triangulation).

10 | P a g e


Strengths Provides strengths that counterbalance the weaknesses of both quantitative and

qualitative research. By using both types of research, the strengths of each

approach can make up for the weaknesses of the other.

Provides a more complete and comprehensive understanding of the research

problem by combining both quantitative and qualitative approaches.

Weakness The research design can be very complex.

Takes much more time and resources to plan and implement this type of research.

It may be difficult to plan and implement one method by drawing on the findings

of another.

It may be unclear how to resolve discrepancies that arise in the interpretation of

the findings.

Participatory action research It refers to a set of approaches to research on social systems in which the researcher actively

engage in the process under investigation (the actors of the social system being studied can be

considered as co-researchers). The work of van Meel (ibid.) exemplifies this approach to

research: First, an initial case study is performed for identification of problems, followed by

theory development and implementation of a prototype information system. Finally, the

prototype is employed in another full-scale project where the researcher participates and

reflects upon the use of the prototype with the actors that are studied.

Participatory approaches are often rooted not just in an epistemological critique of positivism,

but also in an ethical critique of the relationships generated by traditional scientific practice.

From this perspective, one consequence of striving for an objective and neutral scientific

method, as positivist researchers do, is a consolidation of knowledge within small elite, and

an unhealthy separation of scientists from the wider society. Following on from this,

researchers from participatory traditions see research as ideally a cooperative enterprise,

involving working with communities as co-investigators.

Peter Reason (1998) has identified three strands in participatory inquiry, which he labels

cooperative inquiry, participatory action research and action inquiry. Cooperative inquiry

11 | P a g e


assumes first that all actors are self-determining in any research project; all involved are both

researchers and subjects, cooperating by reflexively drawing upon their own experiences.

Participatory action research is explicit about the relationship between knowledge and power,

seeing the role of the researcher as liberating communities through research activities that

shift the balance of knowledge. The aims are thus to produce understanding that is useful for

the group that is being worked with, and to empower those people, rather than to do research

‘on’ them. Action inquiry is primarily orientated towards change, but involves a conscious

approach to action, in which an organization or community develops a collaborative and

reflexive awareness. The three approaches, he argues, share an epistemological focus on

experiential knowledge and an orientation towards change (in both understanding and social

reality). They differ in the relative emphasis they place on psychological or small group

processes relative to macro-structural factors.

PR is considered a new paradigm, which Chambers describes as 'a coherent and mutually

supportive pattern of concepts, values, methods and action amenable to wide application'. PR

is based on the principles of “participation” and “self-development”. It treats people as

“research participants” rather than “research subjects”. It is people-centered in the sense that

the process of critical inquiry is informed by and responds to the experiences and needs of

people involved. The fundamental principle of participatory research is that it is research with

rather than on people. It emphasizes “knowledge for action” and a “bottom up approach” in

contrast to conventional research, which is more “top-down”.

Strengths of Participatory Research The participatory research approach has many advantages, which makes it very useful

for any kind of research, but especially, when it is: applied, exploratory and learning,

target-group or action-oriented and when local commitment is needed to make a

process sustainable.

PR allows understanding social reality from ordinary people’s perspectives

PR is a type of applied social research, which helps to address problems and find

practical solutions:

PR is based on flexible methodologies to support communication of the findings for

the desirable change.

PR allows understanding the complexity of social settings.

PR is aimed at people’s empowerment.

12 | P a g e


PR enables to influence policy.

Promoting culture of social dialogue.

Changing attitudes.

Establishing new institutional arrangements.

The quality of information.

Participation Research Weaknesses: Participatory research can be very effective in some, but not all, situations. It is important

to recognise when participatory approaches are appropriate to avoid participation

becoming the end in itself and devaluate the very meaning of ‘participation’ or

‘participatory’. We should take also into account that there are different modes of

participation, which can produce different outcomes.

Second, participation is not just about involving people. It is complex and long term

process. It is about establishing partnership and collaboration between stakeholders at

different levels of society, because development requires early and substantive

involvement of all stakeholders in the design of activities that will affect them. That is

why it is very important to involve all stakeholders from the very beginning of the PR, so

that everybody has the same understanding of the process. It is crucial also to pay

attention to local power structures.

PR that is trying to change a social situation can’t be very efficient without involvement

of central and local governments, who have power and resources to improve the situation,

but also to thwart the whole participatory process.

Blackburn and Holland point out that ‘participation would not make sense as long as

power-holders do not allow others to participate in processes of setting priorities, making

decisions, managing and controlling resources’. Low level of democracy and

decentralization is a big limitation. Mistrust of the society and participation fatigue.

Raising expectations of local people.

References

13 | P a g e

i Yauch, C. A. and Steudel, H. J. (2003) Complementary use of Qualitative and Quantitative

Cultural Assessment Methods, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 465-481.

ii ACAPS (2012) Qualitative and Quantitative Research Techniques for Humanitarian Needs Assessment

iii Dudwick, N., Kuehnast, K., Jones, V. N., and Woolcock, M. (2006) Analyzing Social Capital in

Context: A Guide to Using Qualitative Methods and Data, World Bank Institute, Washington.

Education

Approaches to Research Methods