difference between the qualitative and quantitative researcher, variables, concept and construct

1. 1

2. 2
Qualitative Research in Education
Assumptions of Qualitative Research
Difference between Qualitative & Quantitative Research
By
Laraib
(15061701-005)
M.Phil 1st
Supervised by
Dr. Syed Shafqat Ali shah
Department of Education
UNIVERSITY OF GUJRAT
Session 2015-2017

3. 3
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
..................................................................................................................................... 4
2 Quantitative Researches
.................................................................................................................................... .4
3 Qualitative Researches
..................................................................................................................................... 5
4 Summaries of Differences
..................................................................................................................................... 6
5 Mixed Method Approach
......................................................................................................................................7
6. Differences between Qualitative and Quantitative Inquiry
…………………………………………………………………………………………8
7. Difference Between Qualitative & Quantitative Research
…………………………………………………………………………………………10
8. References
…………………………………………………………………………………………11

4. 4
Assumptions in Qualitative Research
By Laraib M.Phil Scholar
1. Introduction
The motivation of quantitative and qualitative research in two different paradigms – the
positivism and constructionist or post-positivism, accounts to a great extent for their
controversial discussion. Quantitative research can be described as a cause-effect relationship,
searching for standardization, reproducibility, and measurability. Qualitative research aims at
understanding and interpreting behaviors’, contexts, and interrelations. At first sight, these two
approaches to the understanding of science seem to be competing and even incompatible; there
are many publications contributing to the elaboration of their differences. However, lately there
have been considerations that quantitative and qualitative methods are two sides of one coin and
can complement each other in certain research situations. This summary gives a short overview
of these two methodologies, their strengths and weaknesses in the explanation of social realities,
and finally discusses a new approach to science, namely the combination of both.
2. Quantitative Researches:
There are many explanations to quantitative research, yet Aliaga & Gunderson (2002) describe it
as explaining a phenomenon by collecting quantitative (numerical) data that are analyzed using
mathematically based methods such as statistics. A common misconception is that quantitative
data does not require data that is naturally available in quantitative form. Non-quantitative data
(such as beliefs and/or attitudes) can be transformed into quantitative form by using
measurement instruments such as Likert scales. Despite its limitations, quantitative methods
have been more prominent in social sciences traditionally due to the fact that natural sciences
and their standard methods were seen as a model in this field (Flick, 2006). Yet, perhaps it was
the Chicago school that gave rise to widespread use of qualitative research in social sciences;
however, this did not last too long as Columbia school disrupted this convention and laid the
foundations of today, where the debate is still not fully resolved. Today, quantitative research is

5. 5
often placed in opposition to qualitative research, still a legacy of “clashes of schools”, dating
back to early 1900s (Hamel, Dufour & Fortin, 1993). The incompatible worldviews underlying
quantitative and qualitative methods gave birth to this ‘paradigm war’. It is often argued that the
quantitative research is more realistic and objective as compared to the qualitative research and
the researchers’ consensus is to use quantitative methods if there is a hypothesis to test, using
deductive reasoning.
The main strength of quantitative research is that it is neutral and easily generalizable; however,
it is challenging to gauge the theoretical constructs (e.g. innovation) in social sciences and
proxying them with several variables usually undermines establishing causality.
3. Qualitative Researches:
The qualitative turn in social research took place during the 70`s as a countermovement to
quantification, the landmark of natural sciences (Mayring 2002). This turn addressed the critique
of quantitative methods and research strategies, often judged as too standardized in order to
reflect the facets of social reality. Instead of testing, measuring, and experimenting, qualitative
research aims at understanding the subject of study (Mayring 2002). Creswell defines qualitative
research as the process of understanding a social or human phenomenon, based on
methodological research traditions. Researchers aim at generating a complex, holistic view, at
analyzing and describing the standpoint of the subjects within a natural context (Creswell 1998).
Hoffmann-Riem even advocates to let the theoretical structure of the object of research emerge
from the research subjects (1980, p.343). In the meanwhile qualitative social research has turned
into an interdisciplinary point of reference for new qualitative approaches (Mayring 2002).
Several lines of research can be seen as the roots of qualitative methods. Aristotle is regarded as
their prime father; for him historic and evolutionary developments as well as inductive
approaches belong to the understanding of science. Further precursor of qualitative thinking is
Gianbattista Vico who sees the practical and the truth as non-universal, but dependant on time
and space. Hermeneutics, as the effort to develop a foundation for scientific text interpretation, is
as well seen as one of the originators of qualitative approaches (Mayring 2002).
The main strength of qualitative research is its ability to create knowledge about new
phenomenon and complex interrelations that have not yet been researched thoroughly or at all
(Seipel & Rieker 2003). In such cases it is per definition a suitable approach for theory building,
elaboration, and testing, where theory implies a reference to context. Adequate methods for data

6. 6
collection within a qualitatively-oriented research project are e.g. problem-centred or narrative
interviews, group discussions, semi-structured interviews, archival or content analysis. Most of
these are very time-consuming due to two reasons: 1) the emphasis of qualitative research
methods is on context and verbal access to data (Hoffmann-Riem 1980) and 2) the research
process is circular and interactive. An inevitable consequence is the rather small sampling when
compared to quantitative methods. The exploratory and explanatory character of qualitative
research becomes apparent through the flexibility of the approach, the personal involvement, and
the openness of the researcher to the research subjects and the research process. However,
according to Mayring (1990, p. 17) this does not imply that the research process is not controlled
and does not follow well-grounded rules. Very important to the process are the illustration of the
context, the intersubjective traceability of the interpretation, and the relevance of the results.
Qualitative research explicitly turns itself against reliability and validity, the quality criteria that
apply for quantitative research. It has been often critiqued to be lacking scholarly rigor (Gioia,
Corley & Hamilton 2012), which makes it necessary to clearly state what quality criteria apply
for this kind of research. However, up to now there is no unambiguous agreement in the
scientific community about a criteria “catalogue” for qualitative research.
4. Summaries of Differences:
A comparison of quantitative and qualitative research can be carried out on various levels, e.g.
application domain, prerequisites, research process, etc. The main differences between the two
approaches come from their underlying science models. These models differ in their
understanding of how phenomena should be studied. The aim for objective and precise
prediction characterizes the natural science model (quantitative), whereas thick descriptions of
incidents that advance the understanding of human behaviour distinguish the human science
model (qualitative).
This fundamental difference implies the remaining ones. Due to its precise and seeking for
objectivity nature, quantitative research focuses on the quantification of concepts and their
relationships via measurement. In contrast, qualitative research tries to understand qualities of
entities via text production and interpretation. Quantitative researchers study phenomena with a
distant and objective science stance from the outside; whereas qualitative researchers are
engaged in face-to-face interactions and role taking from the inside. The deductive nature of
quantitative research implies a rather selective approach, where a small number of key variables

7. 7
across many data points are researched. Qualitative research aims at a holistic view of
phenomena and more often deploys an inductive, exploratory approach.
The last two differences refer to the research process and its impact on the segment of social
reality that is studies. Due to a pre-structured and linear research process, quantitative methods
allow for a static image of that segment. Qualitative methods follow a more flexible, open-ended
and circular process, so they enable a dynamic view of the segment. Despite these fundamental
differences, both methodologies can be successfully combined into one research design.
5. Mixed Method Approach:
When comparing quantitative and qualitative research, Wilson (1982) argues for a balanced use
of both, considering the object or phenomenon of research and not relying upon philosophical
doctrines. The increasing popularity of mixed methods could be due to many factors, one of
them being the intention of utilizing the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative research.
Also, the interdisciplinary nature of mixed methods can address the increasing complexity of
social reality. Moreover, the insights gained from the combination of both qualitative and
quantitative research provide a better and expanded understanding of the research subject.
Finally, it could also be argued that mixed methods help to better understand, explain, or build
on the results from quantitative and qualitative approaches. Before discussing the different types
of mixed methods designs, it is helpful to discuss the several aspects that influence the design of
procedures for mixed methods study. These are timing, weighting, and mixing strategies
(Cresswell, 2002).Timing refers to the order of data collection. Data could be collected
sequentially or concurrently. Weighting refers to where the priority is given in collection of data,
either quantitative or qualitative. The strategy of deciding the weighting also depends on the
extent of treatment of one type of data and the use of primarily an inductive or deductive
approach. Mixing refers to either that the qualitative and quantitative data are actually merged. It
is possible to merge data at several stages such as during the collection or while doing the
analysis or finally during the interpretation stage. The primary aim here is to collect one form of
data and have the other form of data provide supportive information.

8. 8
6. Differences betweenQualitative and Quantitative Inquiry
Qualitative Examples from the
tools tests
Quantitative Examples from the
tools tests
Lower number of
respondents
Hondurasand Mali,
approximately12
clientsperindividual
tool and 6 focusgroups
Higher number of
respondents
In Hondurasand Mali
between72and 96
respondentswere
includedinthe Impact
Survey.
Open-ended questions
and probing yield
detailed information
that illuminates
nuances and highlights
diversity
Loan Use Strategies
OverTime tool
demonstratesthe
diversityandcomplexity
of howclientsvarytheir
loanactivitiesovertime
Specific questions
obtain predetermined
responsesto
standardized questions
Impact surveyresults
reportedthe percentof
clientswhobelieved
theirenterprise income
had increasedinthe last
yearand whether
significantlymore
clientsthannon-clients
reportedincreases
Data collection
techniques vary
Focusgroup discussions
and in-depthindividual
interviews
Relies on surveys as
the main method of
data collection
Impact Surveyand
ClientExitSurvey
Control group not
required
In Hondurasand Mali,
onlyparticipants'views
obtained
Control or comparison
groups required to
determine program
impact
Comparisongroups
were composedof
incomingclientswho
had notyet received
program services
More focused
geographically (limited
use ofvehicles)
Specificlocations
identifiedforspecial
characteristics;for
example,urbanvs.
rural,vendorsvs.
manufacturers
More dispersed
geographically (more
use ofvehicles)
In Mali,three
categoriesof
communities(towns,
large villages,small
villages)withthree
categoriesof clients
(one-year,two-year,
and incoming)
More varied
techniques in data
analysis
Simple contentanalysis
isappliedwiththe Loan
Use Strategies Over
Time and Client
Empowermenttools,
witha focus
on grouping
Relies on standardized
data analysis.
Use of Epi Infosoftware
to reportdescriptive
statistics(prevalence
and means) andto test
for statistically
significantdifferences
betweensamplegroups
More suitable when
time and resources are
limited
Interviewstookone to
twohours to conduct,
but fewerwere done
Relies on more
extensive interviewing
Impact Surveytakes45-
60 minuteswitheach
clientanddone with

9. 9
large number;Client
ExitSurveytakes25
minutes
Empowering and
participatory
Asksfor participants'
reflectionontheir
experience
Not empowering Areasof inquiryare
predetermined
Sampling depends on
what needs to be
learned
Clientsselectedbykey
variables;forexample,
gender,time in
program,type of loan
obtained
Sampling focus is on
probability and
"representativeness"
whatneedsto be
learned
Clientsselectedbykey
Considerableeffortto
randomlyselectclients
withinstratified
samplestoensure
“representativeness”of
resultsand
comparabilityof sample
groups
Provides information
on the application of
the program in a
specific context to a
specific population
In Honduras,the Loan
Use StrategiesOver
Time tool highlighted
differencesbetween
individualandvillage
bankclients
More likely provides
information on the
broad application of
the program
In Mali,stratified
samplesclarified
differencesbetween
rural andurban areas,
but responsesalso
pooledforgeneral
comparisonto
nonclientgroup
Explores causality Generateshypotheses Suggests causality Testshypotheses
(Patton, 1990;Gosling and Edwards, 1995; CarvalhoandWhite,1997)
7. Differences betweenQualitative & Quantitative Research

10. 10
Qualitative Methods Quantitative Methods
Methods include focus groups, in-depth
interviews, and reviews of documents for
types of themes
Surveys, structured interviews &
observations, and reviews of records or
documents for numeric information
Primarily inductive process used to
formulate theory or hypotheses
Primarily deductive process used to test pre-
specified concepts, constructs, and
hypotheses that make up a theory
More subjective: describes a problem or
condition from the point of view of those
experiencing it
More objective: provides observed effects
(interpreted by researchers) of a program on
a problem or condition
Text-based Number-based
More in-depth information on a few cases Less in-depth but more breadth of
information across a large number of cases
Unstructured or semi-structured response
options
Fixed response options
No statistical tests Statistical tests are used for analysis
Can be valid and reliable: largely depends
on skill and rigor of the researcher
Can be valid and reliable: largely depends
on the measurement device or instrument
used
Time expenditure lighter on the planning
end and heavier during the analysis phase
Time expenditure heavier on the planning
phase and lighter on the analysis phase
Less generalizable More generalizable

11. 11
8. References:
 Aliaga, M. & Gunderson, B. (2002). Interactive statistics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
 Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage..
 Creswell, J.W. (2002), Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method
approaches. Chapter 11: Mixed methods procedures, pp. 208-227
 Flick, U. (2006), An introduction to qualitative research (3 ed.). Chapter 3: Qualitative
and quantitative research, pp 32-43, London: Sage.
 Gioia, D. A., Corley, K.G., Hamilton, A.L. (2012), Seeking Qualitative Rigor in
Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods,
vol. 16 (1), p.15-Hamel, J., Dufour, S. & Fortin, D. (1993), Case Study Methods. Sage
Publication, Newbury Park, California.
 Hoffmann-Riem, C. (1980), Die Sozialforschung in einer interpretativen Soziologie - Der
Datengewinn. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, vol. 32, p.339-
372.
 Mayring, Ph. (2002), Einführung in die Qualitative Sozialforschung. Eine Anleitung zum
qualitativen Denken (5. ed.), p. 9-18, München: Psychologie-Verlags-Union.
 The book is well-suited for prospective researchers and introduces the background,
developments, and methods of qualitative social research.
 Seipel, Ch. & Rieker, P. (2003), Integrative Sozialforschung. Konzepte und Methoden
der qualitativen und quantitativen empirischen Forschung. Weinheim/München: Juventa.
 Wilson, T. P. (1982). Qualitative oder quantitative Methoden in der Sozialforschung.
Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, vol. 34, p. 487-508.

12. 12
Table of Contents
1 Concept
..................................................................................................................................... 11
2 Construct
.................................................................................................................................... .11
3 Constant
..................................................................................................................................... 11
4 Themes
..................................................................................................................................... 12
5 Variables
......................................................................................................................................12
6 Types of variables
…………………………………………………………………………………………13
7 References
…………………………………………………………………………………………18

13. 13
Variables in Qualitative Research
By Isma Baig M.Phil Scholar
1 Concept:
What is Concept?
Expresses an abstraction formed by generalization from particulars.” (Kerlinger)
Examples:
 Scientific: weight, mass, energy, force, etc.
 Emotions: happiness, sadness, fear, anxiety, etc.
2 Constructs:
What is a construct?
“It has the added meaning, however, of having been deliberately and consciously invented or
adopted for a special scientific purpose.” (Kerlinger)
Examples:
 Intelligence
 Concept: used theoretically
 Construct: “defined and specified [so] that it can be measured and observed” (Kerlinger)
3 Constant:
What is Constant?
The value of a constant remains the same (fixed) during the study.
Examples:
 Numerical Value, Grade, etc.

14. 14
4 Themes:
What is Theme?
Theme is underlying meaning of the story.It is a universal Truth.
Example:
 Significant Statements, Valuable Lesson, Central idea etc.
5 Variables:
•What is a variable?
“A variable is a symbol to which numerals or values are assigned.” (Kerlinger)
Variable: any characteristic that can vary across individuals, groups, or objects.
For Example:
 Height / Weight
 Profession
 Grade-point average (GPA) OR Percentage
 Level of interest
 test score, etc

15. 15
6. Types of Variables:
 Quantitative Variables:
A variable that can be measured numerically is called a Quantitative Variable. Quantitative
variables have further two types of variables that are given below:
 Discrete Variable:
A variable whose values are countable is called a Discrete Variable. For Example: Number of
children, Family Size, Number of books, School Enrollment etc.
 Continuous Variable:
A variable that can take on any of a continuously ordered set of values within some specified
range is called a Continuous Variable. For Example: Age, Experience, Motivation, and
Achievement

16. 16
 Qualitative or/ Categorical Variable:
A variable that cannot assume a numerical value but can be classified into two or more
nonnumeric categories is called a Qualitative or/ Categorical Variable.
TYPES OF VARIABLES By Method
VARIABLES
Independent Dependent Confounding
Control Moderator
Intervening
Extraneous
Organismic
 The independent variable:
It is the factor that is measured, manipulated or selected by the experimenter to determine its
relationship to an observed phenomenon. It is a stimulus variable or input operates within a
person or within his environment to effect behavior. Independent variable may be called factor
and its variation is called levels.
 The dependent variable:
The dependent variable is a response variable or output. The dependent variable is the factor that
is observed and measured to determine the effect of the independent variable; it is the factor that
appears, disappears, or varies as the researcher introduces, removes, or varies the independent
variables.

17. 17
 Moderate variable:
It is the factor that is measured, manipulated or selected by the experimenter to discover whether
it modifies the relationship of the independent variable to an observed phenomenon. The term
moderate variable describes a special type of independent variable, a secondary independent
variable selected to determine if it affects the relationship between the study’s primary
independent variable and its dependent variable.
 Control variable:
Control variables are factors controlled by the experimenter to cancel out or neutralized any
effect they might otherwise on the observed phenomena. A single study can not examine all of
the variables in a situation (situational variable) or in a person (dispositional variable); some
must be neutralized to guarantee that they will not exert differential or moderating effects on the
relationship between the independent variables and dependent variables.
 Intervening variable:
An intervening variable is the factor that theoretically effects observed phenomena but can not be
seen, measured, or manipulated; its effects must be inferred from the effects of the independent
and moderate variable on the observed phenomena.
 Consider the hypothesis:
Among students of the same age and intelligence, skill performance is directly related to the
number of practice trials, the relationship being particularly strong among boys, but also holding,
though less directly, among girls’. this hypothesis that indicates that practice increases learning,
involve several variables.
Independent variable: ………..number of practice trail
Dependent variable:…………...skill performance
Control variable:……………… age, intelligence

18. 18
Moderate variable:…………….gender
Intervening variable:………….. learning
Causes relationship effects
Independent
Variables
Moderate
variables
Control
variables
Intervening
variables
Dependent
variables

19. 19
References:
 Aliaga, M. & Gunderson, B. (2002). Interactive statistics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
 Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage..
 Creswell, J.W. (2002), Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method
approaches. Chapter 11: Mixed methods procedures, pp. 208-227
 Flick, U. (2006), An introduction to qualitative research (3 ed.). Chapter 3: Qualitative and
quantitative research, pp 32-43, London: Sage.
 Gioia, D. A., Corley, K.G., Hamilton, A.L. (2012), Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive
Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods, vol. 16 (1),
p.15-Hamel, J., Dufour, S. & Fortin, D. (1993), Case Study Methods. Sage Publication,
Newbury Park, California.
 Hoffmann-Riem, C. (1980), Die Sozialforschung in einer interpretativen Soziologie - Der
Datengewinn. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, vol. 32, p.339-372.
 Mayring, Ph. (2002), Einführung in die Qualitative Sozialforschung. Eine Anleitung zum
qualitativen Denken (5. ed.), p. 9-18, München: Psychologie-Verlags-Union.
 The book is well-suited for prospective researchers and introduces the background,
developments, and methods of qualitative social research.
 Seipel, Ch. & Rieker, P. (2003), Integrative Sozialforschung. Konzepte und Methoden der
qualitativen und quantitativen empirischen Forschung. Weinheim/München: Juventa.
 Wilson, T. P. (1982). Qualitative oder quantitative Methoden in der Sozialforschung. Kölner
Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, vol. 34, p. 487-508.
 http://www.zeepedia.com/read.php%3Fvariables_and_types_of_variables_moderating_varia
bles_research_methods%26b%3D71%26c%3D6
 http://kevnull.com/presentations/iasummit2006/Communicating%20Concepts%20Through%
20Comics.pdf
 http://Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud .com.pk