Philosophical Assumptions Underlying Qualitative As Opposed To Quantitative Research
Philosophical Assumptions Underlying Qualitative As Opposed To Quantitative Research
Philosophical Assumptions Underlying Qualitative As Opposed To Quantitative Research
Differences between quantitative and qualitative researchers are often discussed in terms
of differing paradigms, or worldviews that is, differences in the basic set of beliefs or
assumptions that guide the way they approach their investigations. These assumptions are related
to the views they hold concerning the nature of reality, the relationship of the researcher to that
which he or she is studying, the role of values in a study, and the process of research itself.
Qualitative researchers posit that ones worldview infl uences the theoretical framework, or
theoretical approach, that is used to structure a research study.
The quantitative approach is associated with the philosophy of positivism , which
emerged in the nineteenth century. Perhaps the person most responsible for the development and
spread of this philosophy was Auguste Comte (17981857). In 1824 he wrote, I believe that I
shall succeed in having it recognized . . . that there are laws as well-defined for the development
of the human species as for the fall of a stone. 9 Comte argued that the positive stage of
human knowledge is reached when people begin to rely on empirical data, reason, and the
development of scientific laws to explain phenomena. The scientifi c method, positivists believe,
is the surest way to produce effective knowledge.
Although positivism has changed somewhat over the years, a basic premise is that there
exists a reality out there, independent of us, waiting to be discovered, that is driven by stable
natural laws. The task of science is to discover the nature of this reality and how it works. A
related emphasis is on breaking complex phenomena down into manageable pieces for study and
eventual reassembly into the whole. The researchers role is that of a disinterested scientist,
standing apart from that which is being studied, with his or her biases and values excluded
through experimental design and control.
Challenges to the philosophy of positivism have come from many directions and continue
to be debated. In general, qualitative researchers are sympathetic to the issues raised by critical
researchers that we described in Chapter 1, and they present their methods as an alternative to the
quantitative approach. Many of them advocate a more artistic, as opposed to a scientifi c,
approach to research. Further, their goals are often different; this is illustrated by the preference
of some for fostering multiple interpretations of events, depending on how they are perceived by
the individuals involved. This complicated perspective is the opposite of what almost all physical
scientists (and most social scientists) advocate. Table 18.3 reveals the basic differences between
the two approaches with regard to these philosophic assumptions.
TABLE 18.2 Major Characteristics of Qualitative Research
1. Naturalistic inquiry Studying real-world situations as they unfold naturally;
nonmanipulative, unobtrusive, and noncontrolling; openness to whatever emergeslack
of predetermined constraints on outcomes.
2. Inductive analysis Immersion in the details and specifics of the data to discover
important categories, dimensions, and interrelationships; begin by exploring genuinely
open questions rather than testing theoretically derived (deductive) hypotheses.
3. Holistic perspective The whole phenomenon under study is understood as a complex
system that is more than the sum of its parts; focus is on complex interdependencies not
meaningfully reduced to a few discrete variables and linear, cause-effect relationships.
4. Qualitative data Detailed, thick description; inquiry in depth; direct quotations capturing
peoples personal perspectives and experiences.
5. Personal contact and insight The researcher has direct contact with and gets close to the
people, situation, and phenomenon under study; researchers personal experiences and
insights are an important part of the inquiry and critical to understanding the
phenomenon.
6. Dynamic systems Attention to process; assumes change is constant and ongoing whether
the focus is on an individual or an entire culture.
7. Unique case orientation Assumes each case is special and unique; the fi rst level of
inquiry is being true to, respecting, and capturing the details of the individual cases being
studied; cross-case analysis follows from and depends on the quality of individual case
studies.
8. Context sensitivity Places fi ndings in a social, historical, and temporal context; dubious
of the possibility or meaningfulness of generalizations across time and space.
9. Empathic neutrality Complete objectivity is impossible; pure subjectivity undermines
credibility; the researchers passion is understanding the world in all its complexitynot
proving something, not advocating, not advancing personal agendas, but understanding;
the researcher includes personal experience and empathic insight as part of the relevant
data, while taking a neutral nonjudgmental stance toward whatever content may emerge.
10. Design flexibility Open to adapting inquiry as understanding deepens and/or situations
change; avoids getting locked into rigid designs that eliminate responsiveness; pursues
new paths of discovery as they emerge.