There are various research methods to  conduct a research. In social sciences, the most used are the Descriptive and Analytical methodologies. Also, the Comparative, and sometimes the Exploratory researches are used.

There are various research methods to  conduct a research. In social sciences, the most used are the Descriptive and Analytical methodologies. Also, the Comparative, and sometimes the Exploratory researches are used.

Generally speaking, quantitative research is carried out objectively whereas qualitative research is done subjectively. In quantitative research, the researcher is like a physicist whose individual and psychological characteristics have no role in the findings of her/his research. But in qualitative research, there is no such clear-cut separation among the researchers, their attitudes, individual and psychological properties and the research process and its findings. The researcher in qualitative research has a right to let his/her feelings and emotions play a role in the process of research.

Technically, qualitative research primarily employs an inductive research strategy. That is, this type of research builds abstractions, concepts, hypotheses, or theories rather than tests existing theory. Since qualitative research concentrates on process, meaning, and understanding, thus the product of a qualitative research is richly descriptive. Words and pictures rather than numbers are used to convey what the researcher has learned about a phenomenon.   

Hi,

It depends on the objectives of the research study and the available data.I do not think that the researcher should limit his/her ways to reach a logic solution or  explanation to the problem under hand .

In my opinion, a quantitative research is more productive than qualitative research. Let the numbers or figures represent the social area under investigation. A qualitative description, will sometimes be combined with personal touch or bias, and so it will have significant margin of error. For example, a qualitative research may describe a "country" as rich while, in fact, there are rich individuals there but most of the people are needy & poor. Hence, for a social researcher in this topic one will say: give me please the number of the poor & the number of the rich after a basis defining the poverty line.

Why should quantitative research not be biased by individual biology?

Dear Pahlaj, 

I think you are interested in exploring those exceptional cases, where the researcher may use more than one type of research method. For example, why not combine both qualitative and quantitative? It is done but does not seem to happen very often. First, it would be much more work, using two or more methods. The author(s) would also need to justify why this is necessary and beneficial. For many conference and journal articles, with page or word limits, it may be not possible to cover two methods. But dissertations and theses are more likely places, where a student can investigate and use two types of methods. For this to happen, again the researcher would need to obtain approval from the supervisor. If you are looking for literature, some research methods books will address mixed or combined studies. Alan Bryman has published a lot on the mixed methods approach. Below you can find two links, where he discusses this issue. The third link below is an example of doctoral dissertation, where someone has used the quantitative method in phase 1, and then the qualitative method in phase 2 of the project. In a mixed method approach, you will also have different type of findings that you will need to integrate and explain how they support each other. In summary, it depends on the scope of the study and how much of a challenge you would like to take up as a researcher. 

Emre 

Dr. E 

http://psychologia.pl/mikk/4621%20METOD_COMM%20APS/lit/integrating%20quantitative%20and%20qualitative%20study.pdf

http://www.sagepub.com/bjohnsonstudy/articles/Bryman.pdf

http://www.sagepub.com/creswellstudy/Sample%20Student%20Proposals/Proposal-MM-Ivankova.pdf

Dear Dr. Emre, and all for your insightful contribution to my question.References provided by Dr Emre are useful. Let me clear the situation.

A student is advised to answer a sort of mixed research questions (how, why and what?) and to test few hypotheses that need both qualitative and quantitative methods to be applied. Student is suggesting to use qualitative method by conducting in-depth interview in the first phase to get answers of all "how" and "why" type of research questions? And in the second phase, using survey questionnaire to get data to answer "what" type of research questions as well as test various hypotheses for a thesis. But a member of the committee insists to find out single method to answer all research questions and hypotheses at a time. 

What are your comments, or advice.  Is there any such single method to use?

Although there are grounds for single method approach, there is also an option to mix the various methods. However, the mixing of the methods depend on the research questions, hypothesis and the calibre of the researcher as it requires justification and an approach to address any abnormalities. In my opinion, it is possible to use the method suggested by the student but what if the findings from the separate qualitative and quantitative findings differ? How are these issues addressed? Do you need to validate and triangulate the findings and if yes, how do you plan to do so? 

Let us wait and see if we will get more answers here, perhaps from someone with decades of thesis supervision experience. To me, in the scenario described in Professor Moolio's second message, the mixed method might still be best. A less ideal solution might be, for example, not to do the qualitative phase, and then rely on literature review and reasonable assumptions to address the how or why questions, and explain these to the reader as the limitations of your research. Then use a quantitative model to try to answer the what questions. Another solution might be to carry out the qualitative phase, and then make subjective conclusions instead of completing the quantitative phase. Or one could use a quantitative questionnaire instead of the qualitative in-depth interview but this would involve the researcher allowing only predefined choices of responses rather giving the respondents open-ended questions and interaction. The answer here probably depends on the actual research questions... Anyway I will continue to follow this interesting question to see if anyone else has been in a similar situation before... 

Hello, Pahlaj - thanks for adding more information as it clarifies your specific situation. At my university mixed method studies are discouraged for dissertations (and I have heard from other students are now not allowed). Our professors strongly advised against them for theses and dissertations because they have been deemed to be highly complex and beyond the skill and capabilities of most students. They generally suggest that for those of us who are interested in mixes methods, that we conduct such research post graduation. Perhaps your professor feels the same way. I have seen this sentiment expressed in textbooks also.

My suggestion to you is to focus on one method, and in the Recommendations section of your paper, suggest mixed methods for deeper understanding and insight. Then, after graduation, you can follow up with your mixed methodology. From a practical point of view, why not concentrate on completing your program as fast as possible - qualitative studies generally take much longer than quantitative studies and thus prolong the process. Qualitative methods are not as simple as they may seem initially;  they are very complex and entails several iterations that prolong the study. I would advise you to follow your professor's advice, and would further suggest that you focus on a quantitative study. All the best!

Very soon to be "Dr. Ruth" :)

The "easy" answer to your question is that what the student is proposing is a widely accepted design within the field of Mixed Methods Research, and that the idea that researchers should use one and only one method would be considered "out of date" -- of course, how you convey that last message to a colleague is quite tricky.

The most useful source on this general area of research would be: A. Tashakkorie & C. Teddlie, Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (2nd edition), SAGE, 2010.

Two introductory textbooks in this area are:

D. Morgan, Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, SAGE, 2013.

J. Creswell & V. Plano-Clark Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nd ed.) 2010, SAGE

A quick look at the Web of Science shows that over 1,000 article a year are now appearing that include the topic of "mixed methods," so I would strongly urge the student to pursue the proposed research design.

FYI there is a "Mixed Methods" Q & A section here on ResearchGate that might also be of some help to you.

There are many research designs. the choice between them depends on the objectives, time & resources. For new researchers it is better to consult epidemiologist with experience in research design/methods.

In social sciences qualitative research is often used e.g focus group discussion, in depth interview. However in medical specialty quantitative research is the most frequently used.

There is no single template suitable for all research.  

My answer is NO. There are many ways, unless you refuse to learn other ways and believing that one way is the cure all. 

I agree with Ned, the research methodology depends on the question you aim to answer. It also depends on the type of knowledge you want to generate, and what you aim to achieve with said knowledge. Each methodological approach has its own advantages and disadvantages, and as Biesta (2010, Pragmatism and the Philosophical Foundations of Mixed Methods Research) suggests, when taking a pragmatic approach to research, it sometimes helpful to think of it in terms of choosing the right tool for the right job. 

It can also be helpful to think about how your own beliefs about research, knowledge, and the political implications of both be accommodated within a particular approach. For further insight into this topic, I suggest you read: Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A., & Guba, E. G. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 97-128). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

I think it is often problematic to think of anyone research approach as 'superior' in the social sciences. As, David L Morgan has suggested above, a mixed methods approach can often be one way to capitalise on the strengths of different approaches, and I also recommend the Creswell & Plano Clark (2010) text, as well as Bergman, M. M. (2010). On Concepts and Paradigms in Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(3), 171-175. 

If you decide a subjective or qualitative approach may be useful, to think about what it is that you are trying to achieve with your research, I suggest you also start by reading literature such as Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.

As an aside, the idea of researcher bias in any of the many non-postivist methodologies or paradigms need not be thought of as compromising the legitimacy of data or research. Subjective theorists have addressed this issue quite comprehensively through concepts such as reflexivity and transparency, where the recognition and communication of one's history, motivations and beliefs can be seen to strengthen results (see Finlay, L. (2002). ''Outing'' the Researcher: The Provenance, Process, and Practice of Reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12(4), 531-545. & Stige, B., Malterud, K., & Midtgarden, T. (2009). Toward an Agenda for Evaluation of Qualitative Research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(10), 1504–1516. 

Some may well argue that all research (whether positivist or subjective) is impacted in someway by researcher bias - a methodology or approach that enables us to recognise, accommodate or critically engage with such bias can allow for some of the most powerful contributions to knowledge in the social sciences.

Good luck!

Steps in research study in social sciences or business developments  :

Basics of Empirical Research:

• Research Design

• Measurement of Constructs

• Scale Reliability and Validity

• Sampling

Data Collection :

• Survey Research

• Experimental Research

• Case Research

• Interpretive Research

Data Analysis :

• Qualitative Analysis

• Quantitative Analysis: Descriptive Statistics

• Quantitative Analysis: Inferential Statistics

Nothing wrong in Using Mixed Methods. However, the  selection of methods and designs are driven by objectives of the study. 

You might also be interested to know that there is a specialist journal--the Journal of Mixed Methods Research--published by Sage.

http://mmr.sagepub.com/

“‘Methodology’ refers to the general study of methods and involves discussions about which methods are appropriate; the correct heading for this section in a research project should probably be ‘method(s)’ or ‘research’ design, rather than ‘methodology’, as is often the case, unless methodological considerations are explicitly addressed”.

I have intended to justify my research methodology from ontological, epistemological and methodological tenets of the research project as found analogy with many international researchers in their proposition, where they mentioned that a research project goes well beyond impressing examiner and fellow researchers with the uses of complex terms: it justifies the choice of methodology and research methods that underpin subsequent analysis and interpretation of data. It is envisaged that research methodology not only should reveal research problem, research design, methods of observation, measurement and types of analysis put together, but also reflects ontological and epistemological position of the researcher. Researchers should take care not to describe the body of knowledge about the theory of method per se, but to provide justification of why a particular methodology is preferred over a wide array of other available alternatives.

According to typology of my doctoral thesis, I shall follow the qualitative study in which various types of methods of primary and secondary data analysis techniques are engaged including case studies. But, however you may use one, or mixed method type, depends on your research topic and literature review, whether you need single method or mixed to get your answer of the Research Questions (RQs).

How many methods/techniques be used in research is contingent on research objectives and hypotheses. Researcher has to take decision about the research method(s) to bring out the accurate results satisfying the objectives and hypotheses.

it depends on the research question. if its an innovative new topic and there is few or insignificant research, then mixed method can be interesting. but for established topic, single method can be OK.

Beyond the debate on quantitative vs. Qualitative, social science research is heading towards mixed method...

Yes, as everyone has said, the method depends on the research question and purpose of the research.  Also, if little or nothing is known about the subject under study, you usually want to conduct an exploratory study.  Here you can use qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods

It is important here to distinguish between TYPES of study and Research METHODS, as it is possible to use certain methods with various types of studies.  Some types of study can only be conduced using specific methods. For e.g., if your research question(s) are of the cause-effect or why type, you would use quantitative methods in an explanatory study. For a descriptive or exploratory study, you could use qualitative or quantitative methods.  In a experimental study , you would not use qualitative methods.

Here you go, a reference and an explanation all in one:

McGRATH, JOSEPH E., Dilemmatics: "The Study of Research Choices and Dilemmas" , American Behavioral Scientist, 25:2 (1981:Nov./Dec.) p.179

• various research methods Or mixed methods can be used in research study in social sciences or business developments.  read " A Typology of research methods within social sciences" by Gabriele Beissel-Durrant  at: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/115/1/NCRMResearchMethodsTypology.pdf                  (pages 10:14)

Always research starts with exploratory and end in experimental via descriptive research.

 But most of the researcher go with descriptive

Dear Jawahar Rani.  Intuitively, I would say that I do not agree that research always starts with exploratory, but would rather ask kindly that you elaborate on what you mean by that. On the second, I would  disagree, because research never ends.  Since that which we research, be it social science, medicine, hard science, or any other topic,  is constantly changing, than we have to continually conduct new research on those changes and thus research never ends.  Descriptive is a very specific type of study for a very specific purpose, thus, only those researchers for whom it is appropriate would use it.  Despite what the name might imply,  "descriptive" does not simply "describe." 

Dear @Mary-Helen Castanuela,

Thank you so much for clarifying the comments.

Pahlaj Moolio You are welcome.  By the way, descriptive studies are quite common in social science and especially in epidemiology.