Chapter 6: Conclusion and Recommendations
3.4 Qualitative and Quantitative Research: Differences in Depth and Orientation
Cluster
Double (sequential or
multiphase)
The population is divided into internally
heterogeneous subgroups.
Some of them are randomly selected for further study.
The process includes collecting data from a sample by utilising a previously defined method.
Based on the findings, a sub sample is selected for further study.
Provides an unbiased estimate of the
population parameters if done properly.
Economically more efficient than simple random.
Cost is lower per sample, especially in geographic clusters.
Easy to perform without a population list.
Costs may be reduced if the first stage results in adequate data to stratify or cluster the
population.
Often lower
statistical efficiency because of
subgroups being homogenous rather than heterogeneous.
Increased costs if indiscriminately utilised.
Source: Cooper and Schindler (2003), page 199 (Adapted)
A purposive sample of fifty individuals was utilised for the study. The richness of knowledge in the field of pulp and paper that these individuals boast made them exceptional participants for the study. Purposive sampling was utilised as the participants were chosen on the basis of their expert knowledge in the field of the paper industry.
The word qualitative emphasises processes and meanings that are not comprehensively examined or quantified in terms of quantity, amount, intensity or frequency. Qualitative research involves the socially constructed nature of reality, the intimate relationship between the researcher and what is being studied and the situational constraints that profile the inquiry. Qualitative research entails questioning social experiences as well as how this experience is given meaning. In contrast, quantitative research entails the measurement and analysis of causal relationships between variables; not processes (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).
When quantitative research is being conducted, the focal point of the research is on control of all the parts in the behaviour and illustration of those participating. The parts of the phenomenon (variables) will be controlled and the research will be directed with a finely tuned focus on the manner in which the variables are associated.
This control is designed by the qualitative researcher in the manner that the research and its instruments are designed. Participants are usually not permitted to communicate information that cannot be captured by the preset instruments (Henning, Van Rensburg and Smit, 2004).
Crabtree and Miller (1992) explain that qualitative methods are typically utilised for identification, description and explanation, while quantitative methods are frequently used for explanation-testing and control. Qualitative field research, the documentary- historical style and philosophical inquiry are ideal for the purpose of identification.
According to Crabtree and Miller (1992), three types of description are identifiable;
qualitative, quantitative and normative. Qualitative description, utilising qualitative methods, looks at the impact, differences, and perceptual experiences of occurrence.
Quantitative description, found in descriptive statistics, refers to the distribution, frequency, prevalence, incidence and size of one or more phenomena. Normative description attempts to identify the norm and value of phenomena. The option of choosing quantitative or qualitative methods is dependent on whether the norms of interest are numerical or textual (Crabtree and Miller, 1992).
Green and Thorogood (2004) argue that although qualitative research has a propensity to make use of language data (written or verbal) and quantitative research is more inclined towards numerical data (as an example), this analogy is not always true.
Several qualitative studies also use numerical data and language data is also used in quantitative research. Qualitative research usually has smaller sample sizes; however, it doesn't necessarily mean that any study that has a small sample is qualitative research.
Qualitative research differs from quantitative research in five considerable ways:
• Uses of positivism
Qualitative and quantitative points of view are created by the positivist and post positivist behaviour in the physical and social sciences. Positivists believe that there is reality that can be studied, captured and understood, while post positivists state that reality cannot be totally captured, it can only be approximated (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).
Post positivism places reliance on a range of methods as a manner of obtaining as much of reality as possible. Simultaneously, emphasis is directed towards the discovery and authentication of theories. Traditional methods of evaluation such as internal and external validity are stressed as is the utilisation of qualitative procedures that align themselves with structured analysis (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).
Acceptance of post-modern sensibilities
Qualitative researchers who are aligned to post-structural and post-modern ideologies have discarded the utilisation of quantitative, positivist methods and assumptions. The researchers that are of this opinion maintain that positivist methods are but one way of reciting a story about society or the social world.
They argue that positivist methods are no superior or inferior to any other method; it is just a different result that is generated (Denzin and Lincoln,
1994).
This view, is however, not accepted by every person. Several individuals of the critical theory, constructivist, post structural and post-modern schools of thought fail to acknowledge positivist and post positivist principles when assessing their own study. These individuals regard the principles as unrelated to their study. They are of the opinion that these principles project only a certain type of science, a science which silences too many voices (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).
These researchers therefore search for other methods to assess their study.
These methods include verisimilitude, emotionality, personal responsibility, an ethic of caring, political praxis, multivoiced texts and dialogues with subjects.
Positivists and post positivists response to this is that the study conducted by them is superior science, without individual bias and subjectivity. They regard postmodernism as aggression towards reason and truth (Denzin and Lincoln,
1994).
Capturing the individual's point of view
The participant's viewpoint is of paramount importance to both the quantitative and qualitative researcher. The qualitative researcher, however, believes that he can obtain much more value by conducting intensive interviews and observation. Qualitative researchers consider quantitative researchers as relying on inferential empirical materials and can therefore not obtain the participants point of view. On the contrary, quantitative researchers regard the empirical materials created by interpretive methods as being untrustworthy, vague and biased (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).
Challenges facing the global paper industry
• Examining the constraints of everyday life
Qualitative researchers are inclined to align their studies to the social features of the environment. On the contrary, quantitative researchers abstract themselves from the environment and very infrequently do they study it. They base their studies on probabilities drawn from the study of large numbers of randomly selected cases. Qualitative researchers focus on case-based situations which direct their interests to the particulars of the cases (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).
Securing rich descriptions
Qualitative researchers argue that rich descriptions of the social world are important. On the contrary, quantitative researchers are less interested in this information. They would rather focus on nomothetic commitments (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).