"When you think of a researcher, what do you imagine? Someone in a lab coat peering into a microscope? A white-bearded professor taking notes in a silent library? That's what most people think. But you might also have pictured Oprah, Yahoo creator Jerry Yang, or the manager of every major league baseball, football, and basketball team in the worl. Like just about every successful person, the are not only experts in doing researchs, but in using the research of others. In fact, that's part of what makes them successful. " Those are the opening words in the prologue to The craft of Research ... These words suggest me... Qualitative research versus quantitative research?
Really, I want to do a reflection on the ¿preeminence? of certain types of investigations over others. And I would like to claim a vindication of all types of investigations; undoubtedly all of them are very necessary for the whole of science, for the whole life...
It depends what you mean by preeminence. Quantitative research is usually preferred to generate evidence because of its comparatively low levels of bias. However, it primarily addresses whether an intervention works rather than why it works. Qualitative research is important for studying unknown phenomena, helping develop quantitative research, and for explaining the results of quantitative research. It is just not so helpful in generating evidence. Both have strong roles in research. Someone described them as tools rather than philosophies, and I think this is a good way of looking at it.
Adrian
Great Adrian. Thanks for your words. I wish everybody thinks like you... but I think you know that it is the question: the generating of evidences... but really both of them are complementary aspects in life...
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Qualitative Research