Quantitative Research & a Mixed Method Approach

Having previously blogged about qualitative data, this blog will demonstrate the method of quantitative data and I will also explain why a mixed method is preferred by many researchers.

Quantitative Data

Quantitative research involves ‘research strategies that gather data which can be expressed in numbers’ (McIntyre 2005: 300), these numbers are used to test hypothesis and to form a cause and effect relationship between what is being studied. Researchers use quantitative methods as it can show trends and these trends can be used to find thesis on the changes taking place in society. ‘The quantitative approach is used when one begins with a theory (or hypothesis) and tests for confirmation or disconfirmation of that hypothesis’ (Newman 1998: 3).

Quantitative data arises from closed questions in questionnaires and from this the answers are then collated and percentages may be formed and trends concluded form the data.

Quantitative data is quick and easy to collate. Unlike qualitative data which takes up time. The reason for this is the use if numbers and so statistical data are easy to analyse. A disadvantage with quantitative data is that there is no meaning behind the trends found. Qualitative data allows for opinion and in depth analysis into why actions are carried out, quantitative data will just demonstrate the changes in society not the reasons behind them.

Quantitative data is more standardised and so the studies can be easily replicated making the studies high in reliability. Quantitative data is easy to analyse and only has one meaning, suggesting that there is no room for interpretation form researchers and so this causes high validity too due to lack of researcher bias being present in the conclusions.

Mixed Method Approach

A mixed method approach refers to using both qualitative and quantitative methods in a study. Many researchers take this approach in their research as it allows for ‘better understanding’ (Greene et al. 2011: 260). Most importantly by using a mixed method approach, it allows for many disadvantages to be diminished. For example a disadvantage with just using quantitative data is that there is no meaning behind why the trends have been found. However by mixing the methods and using qualitative data researchers are able to find out why these trends occur and so improving the validity of their research; ‘combining approaches ensures the validity of data’ (Brannen 1992: 13).

The most common example of a mixed method approach is triangulation; ‘triangulation seeks convergence, corroboration, or correspondence of results from different methods, thereby enhancing validity and credibility of inferences’ (Greene et al. 2011: 260). Triangulation uses more than one method and so develops both qualitative and quantitative research. ‘Different data sets may be derived through the same application of different methods’ (Brannen 1992: 12).

However combining methods is not always easy. ‘The decision to combine qualitative and quantitative methods is subject to a variety of considerations concerning the funding context and the available financial resources, the skills of the researchers, the social organisation and political orientations of the research team’ (Brannen 1992: 17).
Money is a factor researchers must take into consideration, as by using more than one method means more money is used, following on from this, more time will be consumed. Using a mixed method approach means having two sets of data to collate which will inevitably take up more time.
Most researchers are suited to one method or the other and so by gaining both methods they have to be skilled in order to collate the results together from both the qualitative and quantitative data analysis of the study. Furthermore they are still left with the disadvantage of researcher bias, as qualitative methods are open to interpretation and so the researcher may use the data to fit the theories found by the quantitative research ignoring the rest.

However as we have established by using more than one method it allows for more sets of data, ‘quantitative methods are seen as having some kind of one-to-one correspondence with positivist epistemology, while qualitative methods are associated with an interpretative epistemology directed towards the uncovering of meaning’ (Brannen 1992: 15). By gaining both sets of data allows for meaning to be found and validity of the study to be high and so if a researcher has the applicable skills, time, money and knowledge to mix methods available to him then there is no reason to not mix methods.

A mixed method approach also relates to data in the form of using secondary and primary data. My next blog will express the notions of secondary data and how this has been applied in our group project. (Watch this space)

References
Brannen, J. (2002) Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research: Ashgate

Greene et al. (2011), in Theory and Methods in Social Research edited by Somekh and Lewin. 2^nd Edition: Sage Publications

McIntyre, L,J. (2005) Need to Know, Social Research Methods. McGraw Hill: International Edition
Newman, I. (1998) Qualitative-quantitative Research Methodology: Exploring the Interactive continuum. Southern Illinois University