Quantitative paradigm

Paradigm wars

Quantitative research was the generally accepted research paradigm in educational

research until the early 1980s, when the “paradigm wars” between advocates of

quantitative and qualitative research reached a new peak.

During the 1980s, many quantitative and qualitative researchers argued that their

approach was superior. Some of these researchers were “purists,” in the sense that

they argued that the two approaches could not be used together because of

differences in the world views associated with the two approaches. (Guba, 1990;

Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998)

What is paradigm?

According to Kuhn "the term paradigm refers to a research culture with a set

Of beliefs, values, and assumptions that a community of researchers has in

common regarding the nature and conduct of research. A paradigm is a

“worldview” or a set of assumptions about how things work."(Kuhn, 1977)

Guba and Lincoln (1998), definition of research paradigm

"A research paradigm is intrinsically associated with the concepts of

ontology (i.e., the way the investigator defines the truth and reality),

epistemology(i.e., the process in which the investigator comes to know the

truth and reality) and

methodology(i.e., the method used in conducting the investigation."

Quantitative research:

According to Creswell (2013), "Quantitative research attempts to quantify,

collect and analyze numerical data, and focus on the links among a smaller

number of attributes across many cases. Post positivist worldview, experimental

design, and pretest and posttest measures of attitudes In this scenario, the

researcher tests a theory by specifying narrow hypotheses and the collection of

data to support or refute the hypotheses.

Zoltan Dornyei view point:

As Dornyei mentioned in his book "Quantitative social research was

originally inspired by the spectacular progress of the natural sciences in the

nineteenth century and therefore early social researchers set out to adopt

what was called the 'scientific method' in their investigations.“(2005, p.17)

According to Dörnyei (2007), the main characteristic of quantitative researches are:

Using numbers: The single most important feature of quantitative

research is, naturally, that it is centered around numbers.

A priori categorization Because the use of numbers already dominates

the data collection phase, the work required to specify the categories and

values needs to be done prior to the actual study.

Variables rather than cases: quantitative researchers are less interested

in individuals than in the common features of groups of people. QUAN

research is centered around the study of variables that capture common

features and which are quantified by counting, scaling, or by assigning

values to categorical data.Statistics and the language of statistics This is undoubtedly the most

salient QUAN feature. statistical analyses can range from calculating the

average (or as it is referred to in statistics, the 'mean') of several figures on a

pocket calculator to running complex multivariate analyses on a computer.

Standardized procedures to assess objective reality :Quantitative

methodology due to its objective reality, has indeed gone a long way towards

standardizing research procedures to ensure that they remain stable across

investigators and subjects.

Quest for generalizability and universal laws Numbers, variables,

standardized procedures, statistics, and scientific reasoning are all part of the

ultimate QUAN quest for facts that are generalizable beyond the particular

and add up to wide-ranging, ideally universal, laws.

Features of Quantitative Research:

It involves experiments, surveys, testing, and structured content analysis, interviews.

Pre-determined

Instrument based questions

Objective

Performance data, attitude data, observational ad census dataStatistical analysisStatistical interpretationDeductiveHigh degree of structureSome manipulation of subjectsMay take little time to conductMuch social distance between researcher and subject

According to Bryman (1988), QUAN proponents usually

emphasize that at its best the quantitative inquiry is systematic ,

rigorous, focused, and tightly controlled, involving precise

measurement and producing reliable and replicable data that is

generalizable to other contexts:

·Precision - through quantitative and reliable measurement

·Control - through sampling and design

Advantages:Provides estimates of populations at large. Indicates the extensiveness of attitudes held by people. Provides results which can be condensed to statistics. Allows for statistical comparison between various groups. Has precision, is definitive and standardized. Measures level of occurrence, actions, trends, etc. Can answer such questions as "How many?" and "How often?"

Disadvantages:

o They average out responses across the whole observed group of

participantso Similar scores can result from quite different underlying processes o Quantitative methods are generally- not very sensitive in uncovering the

reasons for particular observationso Reductionist view: the general exploratory capacity of quantitative

research is rather limited.

Burns(2000) Key characteristics of Quantitative Research:

• CONTROL: This is the most important element because it enables the

scientist to identify the causes of his or her observations. Experiments are

conducted in an attempt to answer certain questions. Control is necessary in

order to provide unambiguous answers to such questions.

• OPERATIONAL DEFINITION: This means that terms must be defined

by the steps or operations used to measure them. Such a procedure is

necessary to eliminate any confusion in meaning and communication.

• REPLICATION: To be replicable, the data obtained in an experiment

must be reliable; that is, the same result must be found if the study is

repeated. If observations are not repeatable, our descriptions and

explanations are thought to be unreliable.

• HYPOTHESIS TESTING: The systematic creation of a hypothesis and subjecting it to an empirical test.(p.p6-7)

conclusion:

Quantitative research is often placed in opposition to qualitative research.

This is often turned into a `paradigm war' which is seen to result from

apparently incompatible worldviews underlying the methods. When you

look closely at researchers' actual beliefs, it appears that the so-called

subjectivist (qualitative) versus realist (quantitative) divide is not that

Clear-cut.

• References:Bryman, A (1988) Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London, RoutledgeCohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, L. (2000), “Research Methods in Education”.

(5thed.). London: Routledge Falmer.Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among

five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Dörnyei, Z. 2007. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. New York: OUP.Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. (1985), “Naturalistic Inquiry”. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Kumar, R., Research Methodology, London: SAGE Publications, 1996.

QuantitativeResearch. Retrieved from http://www.activelivingbydesign.org/index.pdfQuantitative Research. Retrieved from http://dstraub.cis.gsu.edu:88/quant/

Leedy, P. & Ormrod, J. (2001). Practical research: Planning and design (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (2000), “Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging influences”. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rossman, G., & Rallis, S. (2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cr by: Zahra Bayani