T01C Qual Quan Differences 2022

Qualitative and
Quantitative Differences
Dr AZ
(Dr Ahmad Zamri Mansor)
1
4. How Does it Differ from
Quantitative Research?
Qualitative has differentassumptions,
techniques and strategies in research.
(Bogdan & Biklen, 1992: 42-49)
2
3
4
5
QUAL VS QUAN
QUALI QUANT
1 Depth VS Breadth Depth Breadth
2 Inductive VS Deductive Inductive Deductive
3 Purposive VS Random Purposive Random
4 Context VS Generalization Contextual Understanding Generalization
5 Sample Size Small Sample Large Sample
6 Asking ques How? Why? What? How Much?
7 Collecting data Interview, observe, etc Survey, experiment
8 Analyzing data Words (themes) Numbers (%, mean, etc)
9 Ensuring VR >>> >>>
Source 6
1. Depth (QUAL) VS Breadth (QUAN)
This is
QUALI!
7
2. Inductive VS Deductive
Source 8
Qualitative
9
Quantitative
10
Qualitative
Quantitative
11
Qualitative Quantitative
12
3. Purposive Vs Random
Source 13
3 Different Way of Sampling
QUALI QUANT
NON-RANDOM RANDOM
● Purposive ● Simple random
● Criteria ● Clustered
● Snowball ● Stratified
● etc ● Systematic
Source 14
Qualitative sampling is like fishing!
“Just as fishermen cast their line into

likely fishing holes, rather than randomly
select places to fish, so qualitative
deliberately
researchers
select participants for

Qualitative
their studies” (MR, 2002, p. 173)
15
Informants are like medical consultants!
“A medical consultant is consulted due to his
expertise. To solve a medical problem, we do not
need to seek the average opinions of physicians.
In qualitative study, interview is conducted to
gain insight from participants

who are resource-rich, he is
just like a medical consultant …” (Merriam, 1988,
Ch 3).
Qualitative
16
How does sampling differ in Qn/Ql?
Quantitative Qualitative
- aims for generalization - aims for indepth
- statistics understanding
- no of respondents - words (description)
depends on statistical - no of informants depends
rule on generalization on recurrence of themes
17
4. Contextual U/stdg VS Generalization
Source 18
5. Small VS Large Sample
QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE
Qualitative
19
Small N but big impact!
Qualitative
● Piaget- contribute our understanding of how children think. Observed

2 children (N=2) | Video | Website |
● Bandler and Grinder founded NLP by studying 3 renown therapists
(N=3) | NLP History |
● Peters and Waterman (1982) formulated 8 principles of organizational
excellence by studying 62 companies (N=62) |Wiki|
● Clair Clairborne Park (2001) studied her daughter’s autism for 40
years, every stage of her development (N=1) |Patton’s|
● Source: (Patton, 2000, p. 245)
20
Different Way of …...
QUALI QUANT
6 Asking ques How? Why? What? How Much?
7 Collecting data Interview, observe, etc Questionnaire,
experiment
8 Analyzing data Words (themes) Numbers (%, mean, etc)
9 Ensuring VR >>> >>>
Source 21
6 Different Way of Asking Questions
QUALI QUANT
How? What?
Why? How Much?
Source 22
QUAL VS quant
23
24
25
7 Different Way of Collecting Data
QUALI QUANT
● Interview ● Questionnaire
● Observation ● Survey
● Document ● Experiment
analysis ● etc
● etc
Source 26
27
28
8 Different Way of Analyzing Data
QUALI QUANT
● Themes from ● Numerical
descriptions comparison
● Quotations from ● Statistical
participants inferences
● %, mean, etc
Source 29
How to Analyze Your Data?
Qualitative
Steps in a Thematic Analysis
1. Familiarize yourself with your data.
2. Assign preliminary codes to your data in order to
describe the content.
3. Search for patterns or themes in your codes across the
different interviews.
4. Review themes.
5. Define and name themes.
6. Produce your report.
30
source
31
32
CODING
“Codes, at their simplest, are just labels” (p. 115).
Just to facilitate searching.
Characteristics: linking rather than labelling; a way of
fracturing data
e.g of coding: descriptive coding; topic coding; and
analytic coding.
(Morse and Richards, 2002, p. 115-119). 33
34
35
source
36
source
37
Coding
interview transcript interview transcript
Code 1
interview transcript interview transcript Code 2
38
Thematic Analysis
39
Category and themes
Code 1
Category 1
Code 2 Theme 1
Code 3 Category 2
Code 4
Code 5
Code 6 Category 3
Code 7 Theme 2
Code 8
Category 4
40
CATEGORIES, derived from CCM
-should reflect the purpose of the research
-should be exhaustive
-should be mutually exclusive
-should be sensitizing
-should be conceptually congruent
(Merriam, 1998, p. 184)
41
Saturation. What Is
Thematic/data saturation
● data should continue to be
collected until nothing new
is generated (Green and
Thorogood, 2004);
● the point at which there are
fewer surprises and there are
no more emergent patterns
in the data (Gaskell, 2000).
Source: O’Reilly and Parker 2012 42
Constant comparative method
Theme or
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8
Category
Theme 1 N R R R R R R _
Theme 2 N R R - R R R R
Theme 3 N R R R _ R R
New
Theme 4 theme
N R R - R
Theme 5 Recurring theme N R R R
Point of saturation- no new theme emerged 43

source
44
source
45
source
46
source
47
5. How to Analyze Your Data?
source
48
9 Different Way of Ensuring VR
“…qualitative research is based on different
assumptions regarding reality, thus demanding
different conceptualization of V&R” (M,p. 3).
“The notions of V&R need to be grounded in the

worldview of qualitative research” (Merriam,
JOLL, p.3)
Source 49
QUAN’s VALIDITY VS RELIABILITY
VALIDITY RELIABILITY
The extent to which an The extent to which a measuring
instrument measures what device is consistent in
it should be measuring. measuring whatever it
measures.
Not Reliable! ☹❌ Reliable! 😊✔

QUAN’s VALIDITY VS RELIABILITY
Was the research correctly The extent to which an item
done? in the instrument is
● Items in the instrument consistent in measuring the
valid? (Internal Validity) specified variable.
● Result can be
generalized? (External
Validity)
QUAL’s VALIDITY VS RELIABILITY
Was the research correctly The extent to which an
done? informant’s description is
● Did the researcher ask congruent with other sources.
valid questions? (Internal
Validity)
● Can result be applied to
other contexts?
(External Validity)
Two Qualitative Notions of VR
● Validity and Reliability (Merriam):
○ Internal Validity
○ External validity
○ Reliability
● Trustworthiness (Lincoln and Guba)
○ Credibility (Internal Validity)
○ Transferability (External Validity)
○ Dependability (Reliability)
○ Confirmability (Objectivity)
53
Comparing QUANT VS QUAL (M VS LG)
QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE QUALITATIVE
Merriam’s Lincoln & Guba
Internal Validity Internal Validity Credibility

External Validity External Validity Transferability
Reliability Reliability Dependability
c t ive, Confirmability
O b j e
s
not bia
54
How Qualitative Differs From Quant
Quantitative QUALITATIVE perspective
Internal Was the research We don’t use questionnaire or
validity (administration of experiment. Our main instrument is the
instrument, experiment, researcher. The research is valid if the
etc) done right? researcher does the research right
External Results can be Ours is NOT to generalise but to GAIN
Validity generalized? INSIGHT
Reliability Consistency of Ours is not on measurement but more
measurement on descriptions
55
VR From Qualitative Perspective
Quantitative QUALITATIVE
Internal Was the research Was the research (interview, analysis)
validity (administration of done right?
instrument, etc) done
right?
External Can results be Result can only be applied in settings
Validity generalized? with similar contexts - it is up to the
consumer of research to speculate
Reliability Consistency of Informants description is reliable if it is in
measurement congruent with other sources
56
Validity and Reliability Quant VS Merriam’s Qual
VR terms Quantitative’s Merriam’s strategies
Internal Validity ● Expert evaluation (content validity) ● Triangulation

● Pilot Study ● Member check
● SPSS (EFA, PCA) (construct ● Longterm observation
validity) ● Peer examination
● Researcher bias
External Sampling procedure ● Rich, thick description

● Random or nonrandom? ● Typicality
Validity ● If random: simple, systematic, ● Multisite design
stratified, clustered?
Reliability Ensure consistency of measurement ● Investigator’s position

using Cronbach Alpha (SPSS) ● Triangulation
● Audit trail
57
Validity and Reliability Quant VS Merriam’s Qual
VR terms Quantitative’s Merriam’s strategies
Internal ● Expert evaluation ● Triangulation Credibility

(content validity) ● Member check ● Prolonged engagement
Validity ● Pilot Study ● Longterm observation ● Peer debriefing
● SPSS (EFA, PCA) ● Peer examination ● Triangulation
(construct validity) ● Researcher bias ● Member checking
● Negative case analysisc
External Sampling procedure ● Rich, thick description Transferability

● Random or non? ● Typicality ● Provide thick description
Validity ● If random: simple, ● Multisite design ● Use the appropriate sampling
systematic, stratified,
clustered?
Reliability Ensure consistency of ● Investigator’s position Dependability

measurement using ● Triangulation ● Audit trail
Cronbach Alpha (SPSS) ● Audit trail ● Peer examination
Confirmability
● Reflexive journal
● Audit trail
58
Comparing Merriam’s against LG’s
Merriam’s Merriam’s strategies LG’s terms LG’s strategies
terms
Internal ● Triangulation Credi bility ● Prolonged engagement
Validity ● Member check ● Peer debriefing
● Longterm observation ● Triangulation
● Peer examination ● Member checking
● Researcher bias ● Negative case analysisc
External ● Rich, thick description Transferabili ● Provide thick description
Validity ● Typicality ty ● Use the appropriate sampling
● Multisite design
Reliability ● Investigator’s position Depend ● Audit trail
● Triangulation ability ● Peer examination
● Audit trail
Confirm ● Reflexive journal
ability ● Audit trail
b je c tive,
O
s
not bia 59

T01C Qual Quan Differences 2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

T01C Qual Quan Differences 2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qualitative and

“Just as fishermen cast their line into

select participants for

gain insight from participants

● Piaget- contribute our understanding of how children think. Observed

Theme 5 Recurring theme N R R R

Point of saturation- no new theme emerged 43

“The notions of V&R need to be grounded in the

Not Reliable! ☹❌ Reliable! 😊✔

Internal Validity Internal Validity Credibility

Internal Validity ● Expert evaluation (content validity) ● Triangulation

External Sampling procedure ● Rich, thick description

Reliability Ensure consistency of measurement ● Investigator’s position

Internal ● Expert evaluation ● Triangulation Credibility

External Sampling procedure ● Rich, thick description Transferability

Reliability Ensure consistency of ● Investigator’s position Dependability

You might also like