Quantitative research is what they know. It's what they've been trained to do.

Qualitative researchers are still the underdogs, yes.

I think it's connected to the general need for certainties. Knowledge is not enough. It needs to produce certainty. And certainty is more easily offered by numbers rather than verbal content.

Thanks Robert, that 'underdog' label seems to be the bane of Qual-researchers and will continue to be... perhaps for decades to come...

I can empathise with that answer, Estella. At the same time, there is also a need to deal with 'uncertainties' when dealing with the world around us. Don't you agree?

Oh well, someone needs to do the DIRTY job of Qual-research, eh? Kind regards to you both :-)

Of course, my answer was clearly ironic. Knowledge contributes to uncertainty, luckily.

Quantitative research is also seen as yielding results faster. Given the emphasis on increasing numbers of publications, the lead time required for a publication, and the length of the tenure clock a preference for quantitative work is understandable.

Once one becomes a senior faculty member and the pressure is off quantitative work is all one knows how to do.