Translate

Monday, February 20, 2012

Discuss the following statement: “Quantitative research is more important than qualitative research because it results in statistical information and conclusive findings.”



Discuss the following statement: “Quantitative research is more important than qualitative research because it results in statistical information and conclusive findings.” 

“Quantitative research is more important than qualitative research because it results in statistical information and conclusive findings” stated that the functions of quantitative research are more important than qualitative research. However, this statement is not that suitable and reliable nowadays. Quantitative research, as well as qualitative research, plays a significant role in today marketing research area. They enable researchers to analyze and evaluate people's behaviours and thinking for a particular topic. Most companies use this research methodology to get reliable and primary data. "The distinction between qualitative and quantitative research are closely parallels the distinction between exploratory and conclusive research (Belliveau, Abbie and Somermeyer 2002)."  

Qualitative data are gathered primarily in the form of spoken or written language rather than in the form of numbers. This type of research is to identify the social meaning and individuals' interaction in terms of gathering people feelings, views, attitudes, interests, motivations and beliefs (Donald E 2005).In other words, the researchers are more likely to get the results by understanding how people perform their human actions in society. For this reason, qualitative research is not only a useful tool for the identification of population study, but also more accurate than quantitative research (McDaniel and Gates 1988). In other words, qualitative research yields insight rather than compute, to investigate rather than pin down. For instance, focus group, which is one type of qualitative research, can produces insight into complex issues such as customer preferences (Hanson and Grimmer 2007).
There are several strengths of qualitative research. First is its ability to provide complex expressive descriptions and to find out the underlying reasons and motivation from the interviewee. Secondly, it is also more flexible as the format is less structured than quantitative research. Third, the information gathered is more as it is of an open-ended questions interview, which makes the information harder to replicate (Wolstenholme 1999) .

At the same time the extremely strengths and contributions of qualitative methods can conversely be weaknesses if they are used badly for superficial analysis. First, the sample size for conducting a qualitative research is smaller when compared to quantitative research, which means it may be not as representative as quantitative research, as they are not selected on a probability basis (L. T 1994). Second, the interpretation from the findings may be subject to considerable interpreter bias, as it is up to the interpreter to judge and conclude on the findings (Zikmund et al. 2009, 79).  Third, the volume of the data collected is not as much as quantitative methods, which thus may not be as credible (Rubin and Earl R 2009) .

All in all, exploratory research by using qualitative methods does not mean that it lacks value, it simply means that such research cannot convey what is does not promise.

Based on the data collected from various qualitative tests, a precise series of informational requirements were developed for a quantitative test. Quantitative research, unlike qualitative research, uses a more standardised format of questioning and predetermined answer options in questionnaires. These questionnaires use various scale types, namely nominal, ordinal and interval, to reflect the various categories represented. On the other hand, when used cautiously along with quantitative research, qualitative methods help to interpret and better understand the complex reality of a given topic and the implications of quantitative data (Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide. n.d.), qualitative research can benefit quantitative research and vice versa. When designing questionnaires, it is essential to determine what information is needed and how individual questions should be framed, while considering whether the target respondents are able and willing to answer the questions (Grover and Vriens 2006).

The favourable of implementing quantitative research methodology is such that they can provide wide coverage range of circumstances; they can be cost-effective and fast; where statistics are generated from large samples, they may be of considerable relevance to policy decisions; comparison and replication are permissible; independence of the observer from the subject observed; subject under analysis is measured through objective methods rather than being inferred subjectively through sensation, reflection or intuition; reliability and validity may be determined more impartially than qualitative methods; and the last factor is that quantitative research methodology emphasises on the need to formulate hypothesis for subsequent verification (Johnson and Christensen 2010).

However, comparing with qualitative research, quantitative research is rather inflexible and artificial; they are not very effective in understanding processes or the implication that people attach to actions; they are not very useful to generate theories and lastly, as they focus on what is, or what has been recently, they make it hard for policy makers to infer what changes and measures should take place in the future (Johnson and Christensen 2010) .

Both methods are found strengths and weaknesses to examine the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative system dynamics and to relate these to their respective tool sets. Therefore, qualitative and quantitative research methods can complement each other (Matsuo 2005). There is three areas can be identified in which mixed methods appear to be superior to single method approaches: they can answer research questions that the other methodologies cannot; they provide stronger inferences and provide the opportunity for presenting a greater diversity of divergent views (Todd D. 1979). For example, Volvo was concerned that the U.S. automotive market was undergoing vast changes that could affect its market share. So that Volvo decided to do a major research study involved both a quantitative and qualitative phase (McDaniel and Gates 1988). Both are more insightful and less expensive due to a shorter questionnaire. The Volvo example shows how qualitative research can be used subsequent to quantitative research. If the situation possible to use the two methodologies, it will effect a better final research product.

In summary, using mixed methods can assist company to resolve the difficulty that whether wants to use either qualitative or quantitative method in their marketing research. They can simply use the mixed methods to support the company to target their market successfully as well as increase their profit. 

Reference


Donald E, Polkinghorne. 2005. "Language and Meaning: Data Collection in Qualitative Research." Journal of Counseling Psychology 52, no. 2: 137-145.

Hanson, Dallas, and Martin Grimmer. 2007. "The mix of qualitative and quantitative research in major marketing journals, 1993-2002." European Journal of Marketing 41, no. 2: 58-70.

Johnson, Burke, and Larry Christensen. 2010. Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches. califonia: Sage.

L. T, Carr. 1994. "The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research: what method for nursing?" Journal of Advanced Nursing 80, no. 3: 154-156.

Selling in the world's largest consumer market. 2007. http://www.chinasuccessstories.com/2007/09/19/selling-in-the-worlds-largest-consumer-market/ (accessed April 12, 2010).

Todd D, Jick. 1979. "Administrative Science Quarterly ." Qualitative Methodology 24, no. 4: 174.

Wolstenholme, E. F. 1999. "System Dynamics for Policy, Strategy and Management Education." The Journal of the Operational Research Society 50, no. 4: 50-62.







No comments:

Post a Comment

ShareThis