MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

(STRUCTURES OPTION)

PUC 3102: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROPOSAL

DEVELOPMENT

ASSIGNMENT I
QUALITATIVE RESERCH IN CIVIL ENGINEERING AND
RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES

LECTURER: Prof C. Kanali

MICHAEL MWENDWA MWONGA

CE 301 – 0004/2019

Date: November 2020

1
1. Highlight and discuss examples of appropriate uses of qualitative research in your area
of expertise [e.g., civil engineering (structures)]
Qualitative research is a more subjective analysis of descriptions, theories, views or opinions.
It is characterized by the collection and analysis of textual data through surveys, focus groups,
interviews, observation, conversational analysis and lays emphasis on the context within which
the study occurs.
Research questions in this kind of research may include questions such as; What is occurring?
Why does it occur? How does one phenomenon affect another? (Borrego, Douglas & Amelink.,
2009)
There are two broad categories of qualitative research namely:
i. Exploratory research – used primarily to get a better understanding of a particular
subject. This type of research is useful in the diagnosis of a situation, considering
alternative ideas and identifying new ideas.
The common methods of exploratory research are interviews and questionnaires
(with open-ended questions).
ii. Attitudinal research – this is used to assess the views or opinions of individuals in
a subjective way. Interview questions may require the individual to express their
level of agreement with a statement.
Koro‐Ljungberg and Douglas (2008) conducted a research on the state of qualitative research
in engineering education to examine the recent articles published in the Journal of Engineering
Education. They wanted to find out the overall prevalence of qualitative articles in the journal.
They found out that there were very few qualitative articles published in the journal.
Research in civil engineering tends to be grounded firmly on the use of quantitative methods
and methodologies. Even where qualitative research methods are used, the analysis tends to
transform the data back into quantitative percentages and numbers. However, qualitative
research is gaining ground in the civil engineering filed.
Examples of appropriate uses of qualitative research
1. Post occupancy evaluation of buildings
Qualitative research has been used to find out if building users are satisfied with comfort levels
and the degree of control they have of energy use within a building. Qualitative methods have
been used to investigate the attitude, user behaviour and knowledge of users in the case where
the energy use in the building is higher than it should be. (Kelly & Bowe, 2011)
Kansara & Ridley (2012) carried out a qualitative research on the post occupancy evaluation
of buildings in a zero carbon city. This was to assess the resident’s satisfaction and the
performance of residential buildings of the Madstar Institute of Science and Technology
through surveys, interviews.
Quality analyses of Polish Universities.
Fross, Winnicka-Jasłowska, Gumińska, Masly and Sitek (2015) carried out a quality
assessment study of university buildings and campuses in Poland. The assessment was based
on the general efficiency assessed from the point of view of organizational and behavioural
needs of users. The Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) method of assessing quality criteria was
used.

2
Transport and traffic connections between the university and the region, technical conditions
of the buildings and infrastructure and the behavioural and aesthetics quality were analysed.
The analyses run in the university buildings and at the campus showed that a university must
be unified in terms of its buildings and sites.
2. Qualitative research on Implementation of problem – based learning in structural
engineering
Justo, Delgado, Vázquez-Boza and Brand (2016) conducted a qualitative research on the
implementation of Problem – Base Learning in a first year structures course. They focused on
the factors that may increase or hinder the effectiveness of the problem-based learning. Open
– ended surveys and focus groups were used for data collection, which was analysed using
qualitative data analysis techniques. The outcome of this study indicated that the main strengths
of this course were teamwork, self-directed learning, continuous assessment, practical
approach and faculty involvement. The main shortcoming identified were the disorientation
experienced by the students at the start of the problems and the uneven participation of group
members in the group tasks.
3. Interpersonal conflict in construction: Cost, Cause, and Consequence
Studies have shown that interpersonal conflicts on the job are identified as one of the top
occupational job stressors, strongly linked to a reduction in worker psychological and physical
health. These conflicts have also been identified to be determinants of work disability,
occupational accidents, reduced quality, restructuring inefficiencies and loss of skilled
employees
Brockman (2014) further carried out a study to investigate the triggers and consequences of
interpersonal conflict in construction sites and their effect on the overall costs of projects. Using
the critical – incident technique, a qualitative research method, interviews were carried out and
the data analysed. The findings of this study indicated that interpersonal conflicts lead to loss
of time, which translates to a significant amount of finances.
4. Management’s perception of key behavioural indicators for construction
Cox, Issa and Koblegard (2005) carried a qualitative study to identify inconsistencies in the
behaviour of motivated, satisfied, committed and loyal employees in the construction field.
These behavioural indicators would be used by the construction industry practitioners to better
address employee performance and enable managers assess the outcomes of their human
resource management decisions.
5. Sustainable potential of textile – reinforced concrete
Williams, Lundgren Wallbaum and Malaga (2015) did a comprehensive review of the
sustainable potential of textile – reinforced concrete in terms of its input-output and durability.
They carried out a qualitative assessment of the general mechanical, chemical properties
including corrosion, temperature resistance, bond quality, demand, and production cost.
Carbon textiels were observed to hold the optimal potential mechanical behaviour. It was also
revealed that basalt had the least cumulative energy demand whereas carbon had the least
environmental impact.
6. Application of BIM in Malaysian construction industry
Zahrizan, Haron, Marshall-Ponting, Abd (2013) carried out a research to develop a rich picture,
which provides details of the collaboration and implementation processes of Building

3
Information Modelling (BIM) technology among architecture, engineering and construction
industries in Malaysia. This study also critically reviewed and analysed the BIM maturity
levels, benefits, risks and challenges and softwares used by the Malaysian construction
industry.
The study was conducted through in-depth case study interviews with representatives of BIM
practitioners from all disciplines. The results revealed that the adoption of BIM was relatively
stagnant and low owing to the tendency of firms to outsource modelling jobs to service
providers. Reluctance in changing existing work practices, cost to implement BIM, hiring and
maintaining personnel with adequate BIM capacity, lack of government support and reluctance
from project stakeholders were discovered to be the key challenges faced by most of the
construction companies in Malaysia.
7. Qualitative analysis of crane safety incident causation in the Australian
construction industry
This research by Lingard, Cooke, Zelic, and Harley (2020) explored causal and contributing
factors to crane safety incidents in the Australian construction industry. Key informants were
purposefully selected because of their industry experience and knowledge of crane operations
in the Australian construction industry. Informants participated in focus groups or interviews,
in which the factors that cause or contribute to crane safety incidents in construction were
explored. Data was systematically analysed using the framework method of qualitative data
analysis.
The factors identified in the analysis were found to operate at multiple levels within the work
system relating to the use of cranes in the construction industry. The analysis also revealed that
these factors interact with each other in complex ways within and between levels in the work
system.
Understanding these interactions can inform the selection and implementation of ‘upstream’
prevention measures for crane safety incident in the construction industry.
8. A Qualitative Study to Assess the Learning Outcomes of a Civil Engineering
Service Learning Project in Bolivia
An exploratory study was carried out to assess the learning outcomes of a student-led project
involving the design and construction of a pedestrian bridge in a village in rural Bolivia. The
data suggests that the design experience stretched the students’ abilities to communicate
effectively across cultural and linguistic barriers and strengthened the students’ abilities to
work effectively as a team (Jeffers, 2014).
9. State of Research on Seismic Retrofit of RC Beam-Column Joints with Externally
Bonded FRP
A comprehensive review and synthesis of published experimental studies on the seismic
rehabilitation of RC frame beam-column joints with FRP was carried out in this study, and the
issues that need to be addressed for further research are discussed. A total of 54 tests carried
out worldwide were considered in the review, and a database of the published studies,
encompassing all relevant design parameters, was assembled. The reported test results
confirmed the structural effectiveness of the FRP strengthening technique for the seismic
retrofit of RC joints. However, the study identified some gaps, which needed to be addressed.
There was a lack of a rationale explanation of the resistance mechanisms involved in the beam-
column joints retrofitted with FRP (Bousselham, 2010).

4
 References
Borrego, M., Douglas, E. P., & Amelink, C. T. (2009). Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed
research methods in engineering education. Journal of Engineering education, 98(1),
53-66.
Bousselham, A. (2010). State of research on seismic retrofit of RC beam-column joints with
externally bonded FRP. Journal of Composites for Construction, 14(1), 49-61.
Brockman, J. L. (2014). Interpersonal conflict in construction: Cost, cause, and
consequence. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(2),
04013050.
Cox, R. F., Issa, R. R., & Koblegard, K. (2005). Management’s perception of key behavioral
indicators for construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 131(3), 368-376.
Fross, K., Winnicka-Jasłowska, D., Gumińska, A., Masły, D., & Sitek, M. (2015). Use of
qualitative research in architectural design and evaluation of the built
environment. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 1625-1632.
Jeffers, A. E. (2014). A Qualitative Study to Assess the Learning Outcomes of a Civil
Engineering Service Learning Project in Bolivia. age, 24, 1.
Justo, E., Delgado, A., Vazquez-Boza, M., & Branda, L. A. (2016). Implementation of
Problem-Based Learning in structural engineering: A case study. International Journal
of Engineering Education, 32(6), 2556-2568.
Kansara, T., & Ridley, I. (2012). Post occupancy evaluation of buildings in a zero carbon
city. Sustainable Cities and Society, 5, 23-25.
Kelly, K., & Bowe, B. (2011, June), Qualitative Research Methods in Engineering Paper
presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC.
10.18260/1-2--18752
Koro‐Ljungberg, M., & Douglas, E. P. (2008). State of qualitative research in engineering
education: Meta‐analysis of JEE articles, 2005–2006. Journal of Engineering
Education, 97(2), 163-175.
Lingard, H., Cooke, T., Zelic, G., & Harley, J. (2020) A qualitative analysis of crane safety
incident causation in the Australian construction industry. Safety Science, 133, 105028.
Williams Portal, N., Lundgren, K., Wallbaum, H., & Malaga, K. (2015). Sustainable potential
of textile-reinforced concrete. Journal of materials in civil engineering, 27(7),
04014207.
Zahrizan, Z., Ali, N. M., Haron, A. T., Marshall-Ponting, A., & Abd, Z. (2013). Exploring the
adoption of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the Malaysian construction
industry: A qualitative approach. International Journal of Research in Engineering and
Technology, 2(8), 384-395.

5
2. Outline and discuss several key distinctions between qualitative and quantitative
research in terms of;
i. The relationship between theory and data
ii. Epistemological considerations; and
iii. Ontological considerations.
Relationship between theory and data
Quantitative research can be defined as a research based on the measurement of quantity or
amount. It explains phenomena by use of numerical data analysed by mathematical methods
like statistics. It can be defined as a type of empirical research into a human problem or a social
phenomenon from a broader perspective, testing theories consisting variables, which are
measured with numbers and analysed with statistics to determine whether the theory predicts
or explains the phenomena of interest (Yilmaz 2013).
Qualitative research on the other hand focuses on understanding the way in which humans view
their social world. It produces findings not arrived at by statistical procedures or other means
of quantification (Yilmaz 2013). This kind of research has further been defined as a situated
activity that locates the observer in the world.it consists of a set of interpretive, material
practices that make the world visible. It studies things in their natural settings, attempting to
make sense of or to interpret phenomena in terms of meanings people bring to them (Mayer,
2015).
Quantitative data is usually about quantities and therefore numbers are involved while on the
other hand qualitative data is descriptive and regards phenomenon, which can be observed but
not measured.
Table 1: Difference between Quantitative and Qualitative Data
Qualitative Data Quantitative Data
Conceptual  Concerned with  Concerned with discovering facts
understanding human about social phenomena
behaviour from the
informant’s perspective
 Assumes a dynamic and  Assumes a fixed and measurable
negotiated reality reality
Methodological  Data is qualitative (non-  Data is quantitative (numerical)
numerical such as words and
pictures)
 Data are collected through  Data are collected through
participant observation and measuring things
interviews
 Data are analysed by themes  Data are analysed through
from descriptions by numerical comparisons and
informants statistical inferences
 Data are reported in the  Data are reported through
language of the informant statistical analyses.

6
Quantitative research follows the confirmatory scientific method based on hypothesis testing
and theory testing. it is of primary importance to state one’s hypothesis and the test those
hypotheses with empirical data to see if they are supported.
Qualitative research on the other hand follows the exploratory scientific method. It describes
what is seen locally and sometimes to come up with or generate new hypotheses and theories.
Qualitative research is most applicable when little is known about a topic or phenomenon and
when one wants to discover or learn more about it. It is commonly used to understand people’s
experiences and to express their perspectives.
Epistemological considerations
The term epistemology comes from the Greek word epistêmê, which means knowledge. It is
the philosophy of knowledge or how we come to know (Krauss, 2005).
Antwi and Hamza (2015) define epistemology as the nature of the relationship between the
researcher (the knower) and that it denotes “the nature of human knowledge and understanding
that can possibly be acquired through different types of inquiry and alternative methods of
investigation" (Hirschheim, Klein, and Lyytinen, 1995, as cited in Antwi et al., 2015).
Epistemology poses the following questions: What is the relationship between the knower and
what is known? How do we know what we know? What counts as knowledge?
There are two broad epistemological positions
i. Positivism
ii. Interpretivism – constructivism/naturalism
Positivists evolved largely from a nineteenth-century philosophical approach that the purpose
of research is scientific explanation (Antwi et al., 2015). According to Krauss (2005), in the
positive paradigm, the object of study is independent of researchers; knowledge is discovered
and verified through direct observations or measurements of phenomena; facts are established
by taking apart a phenomenon to examine its component parts.
On the other hand, interpretivism or constructivism/naturalism, knowledge is established
through the meanings attached to the phenomena studied. Researchers interact with the subjects
of study to obtain data; inquiry changes both researcher and subject; and knowledge is context
and time dependent. (Coll & Chapman, 2000; Cousins, 2002 as cited in Krauss, 2005).
Researchers within the interpretivist paradigm are naturalistic since they apply to real-world
situations as they unfold naturally, more specifically; they tend to be non-manipulative,
unobtrusive, and non-controlling (Antwi et al., 2015).
Under epistemological considerations, many qualitative researchers believe that the best way
to understand any phenomenon is to view it in its context. They see all quantification as limited
in nature, looking only at one small portion of a reality that cannot be split or unitized without
losing the importance of the whole phenomenon.
For many qualitative researchers, the best way to understand what is going on is to become
Steven Eric Krauss, immersed in it and to move into the culture or organization being studied
and experience what it is like to be a part of it. Rather than approaching measurement with the
idea of constructing a fixed instrument or set of questions, qualitative researchers choose to
allow the questions to emerge and change as one becomes familiar with the study content.

7
Ontological considerations
The term ontology comes from two greek words (onto, which means ‘being’ and logia, which
means ‘science, study or theory’). It refers to a branch of philosophy concerned with
articulating the nature and structure of the world. (Wand and Weber, 1993, p. 220, as cited in
Antwi et al., 2015). Ontology specifies the form and nature of reality and what can be known
about it
There are two broad contrasting positions; objectivism and constructionism:
Objectivism holds that there is an independent reality while constructionism assumes that
reality is the product of social processes (Neuman, 2003, as cited in Antwi et al., 2015).
According to the French Philosopher August Comte, observation and reason are the best means
of understanding human behaviour; true knowledge is based on experience of senses and can
be obtained by observation and experiment.
Positivists assume that reality is objectively given and is measurable using properties, which
are independent of the researcher, and instruments; in other words, knowledge is objective and
quantifiable. Positivistic thinkers adopt scientific methods and systematize the knowledge
generation process with the help of quantification to enhance precision in the description of
parameters and the relationship among them. Positivism is concerned with uncovering truth
and presenting it by empirical means. (Henning, Van Rensburg and Smit, 2004 as cited in
Antwi et al., 2015).
Constructivists believe that reality consists of people’s subjective experiences of the external
world; thus, reality is socially constructed – it is a human construct (Mutch, 2005 as cited in
Antwi et al., 2015). They attempt to derive their constructs from the field by an in-depth
examination of the phenomenon of interest. This paradigm is underpinned by observation and
interpretation and therefore to observe is to collect information about events, while to interpret
is to make meaning of that information by drawing inferences or by judging the match between
the information and some abstract pattern (Antwi et al., 2015).
In general, qualitative research is based on a relativistic, constructivist ontology that posits that
there is no objective reality. Rather, there are multiple realities constructed by human beings
who experience a phenomenon of interest.
Many qualitative researchers do not assume that there is a single unitary reality apart from our
perceptions. Since each of us experiences from our own point of view, each of us experiences
a different reality. As such, the phenomenon of “multiple realities” exists.
Quantitative research on the other hand is dominated by positivism and makes the assumption
that science quantitatively measures independent facts about a single apprehensible reality
(Healy & Perry, 2000 as cited in Antwi et al., 2015)
Realism as a philosophical paradigm has elements of both positivism and constructivism. It is
value cognizant, conscious of the values of human systems and of researchers and that there
are differences between reality and people’s perceptions of reality.

8
Table 2: Summary of the differences between Quantitative and Qualitative Research
Approaches
Orientation Quantitative Approach Qualitative Approach
Paradigm/Worldview Positivism/Realism Interpretivism/Idealism
(assumption about world)
Research Purpose (rationale) Numerical description Subjective description
Causal explanation Emphatic understanding
Prediction Exploration
Ontology (nature of reality)
Epistemology (theory of Dualist/Objectivist Subjectivist
knowledge)
Methodology (aims of Experimenta/Manipulative Hermeneutical/Dilectical
scientific investigation)
Research Methods Empirical examination Ethnographies Case studies
(techniques and tools) Measurement Hypothesis Narrative research
testing Randomization Interviews Focus group
Blinding Structured discussion Observations
protocols Questionnaires Field notes Recordings &
Filmings
Scientific Method (role of Deductive approach, testing Inductive approach,
theory) of theory generation of theory
Nature of Data Instruments Variables Structured and Words, images, categories
Validated-data collection In-depth interviews,
instruments participant observation, field
notes, and openended
questions
Data Analysis Identify statistical Use descriptive data, search
relationships among for patterns, themes ad
variables holistic features and
appreciate variations
Results Generalizable findings Particularistic findings;
provision of insider
viewpoint

Source: European Journal of Business and Management (Antwi et al., 2015)

9
 References
Antwi, S. K., & Hamza, K. (2015). Qualitative and quantitative research paradigms in business
research: A philosophical reflection. European journal of business and management, 7(3),
217-225.
Coll, R. K., & Chapman, R. (2000). Choices of methodology for cooperative education researchers.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 1, 1-8. Retrieved April 23, 2003, from
http://www.apjce.org/volume_1/volume_1_1_pp_1_8.pdf
Cousins, C. (2002). Getting to the “truth”: Issues in contemporary qualitative research. Australian
Journal of Adult Learning, 42, 192-204.
Healy, M., & Perry, C. (2000). Comprehensive criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative
research within the realism paradigm. Qualitative market research: An international journal.
Henning, E., van Rensburg, W. and Smit, B. (2004). Finding your way in Qualitative Research: A
beginner's guide. Pretoria: van Schaik Publishers.
Hirschheim, R A, Klein, H K & Lyytinen, K 1995, Information systems development and data
modeling: conceptual and philosophical foundations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
CB2 1RP.
Krauss, S. E. (2005). Research paradigms and meaning making: A primer. The qualitative
report, 10(4), 758-770.
Mayer, I. (2015). Qualitative research with a focus on qualitative data analysis. International Journal
of Sales, Retailing & Marketing, 4(9), 53-67.
Mutch, C. (2005), “Doing Educational Research: A Practitioner’s Guide to Getting Started”.
Wellington: NZCER Press.
Neuman, W.L. (2003), “Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches” (5th ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Wand Y, Weber R (1993) On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and
design grammars. J Inform Systems 3:217–237
Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: Epistemological,
theoretical, and methodological differences. European journal of education, 48(2), 311-325.

10