1. Discuss the difference between quantitative rearch and qualitative rearch.
Though the process is broadly the same in qualitative rearch and quantitative rearch (Ranjit, 2011), there are some differences between them. First, the approach to enquiry of quantitative rearch is structured, rigid and predetermined methodology, while the qualitative rearch us unstructured, flexible and open methodology. Second, the main aim of quantitative rearch is to classify features, count them and construct statistical models in an attempt to explain what is obrved, but doing qualitative rearch is to completely describe the variation. Third, quantitative rearch is recommended during latter phas of rearch projects, and rearcher knows clearly in advance what he is looking for; by comparison, qualitative rearch is recommended during earlier phas of rearch projects, and the rearcher may only know roughly in advance what he is looking for. Fourth, data of quantitative rearch, which is the form of numbers and statistics, is more efficient, able to test hypothes, but may miss contextual details, and rearcher us questionnaires or equipment to collect numerical data; in comparing data of qualitative rearch, which is in the form of words, pictures or objects, is rich, time
consuming, and less able to be generalize. In addition, rearcher is the data gathering instrument. Fifth, the quantitative rearcher, who often us surveys or questionnaires, tends to remain objectively parated from the subject matter. But the qualitative rearcher, who always us participant obrvation and in-depth interview, tends to become subjectively immerd in subject matter.
2. Highlight the weakness of both approaches.
Although quantitative rearch and qualitative rearch are applied widely, both of them have weakness. In term of quantitative rearch, first, lager samples are required, as a result, it is easy to make statistical error and undermine the accuracy or validity of a quantitative. Second, the rearcher might miss phenomena occurring and contextual details becau of the focus on the theory or hypothesis testing rather than on theory or hypothesis generation. Third, the data is just in the form of numbers and statistics. As Fred said, there is no such thing as quantitative data. Everything is either 1 or 0 (Miles & Huberman, 1994). On the other hand, in term to qualitative rearch, first, it is difficult to
make quantitative predictions; as a result, it is difficult to test hypothes and theories with large participant pools. Second, it might have lower credibility with studying fewer caus. Besides the reliability of qualitative rearch is weakened by that fact that the process is under-standardized and relies on the insights and the abilities of the obrver (Duffy, 1985). Third, it generally takes more time to analyze the data when compared to quantitative rearch. Fourth, the results are more easily influenced by the rearch’s personal bias, becau the analysis is subjective and small sample size is dealt with.
3. Provide suggestions to overcome tho weakness.
Doing mixed rearch combining the quantitative rearch and qualitative rearch can overcome tho weakness when using one’s strengths to overcome the other weakness. For instance, words and pictures can be ud to add meaning to numbers, and numbers can be ud to add precision to words and pictures. As a result, the data would be more efficient, able to test hypothes, involve contextual details and able to be generalized, which makes contribution to obtain higher credibility. As both approach have
strengths and weakness, “neither one is markedly superior to the other in all respects” (Ackroyd & Hughes, 1992). In many studies, combining both quantitative and qualitative approaches is needed.
