Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research

Discussion board post for NURS603 Facilitating Inquiry, posted on October 31, 2022. Post is in response to thread about comparing quantitative and qualitative research, as quantitative research is typically viewed as the gold standard.

"Quantitative methods examine the effects of specified circumstances (independent variable) on an outcome of interest (dependent variable) in ways that can be expressed numerically. In these settings, causal inferences are drawn either from direct observation, as in true experiments, or from associations established through statistical analysis. They are most effective when the content is so constrained or controlled that the study events are free of any undefined influence. Under those circumstances, reproducibility is high and the results are likely to predict, reliably, the outcome of the same event in future" (Lakshman et al., 2000, p. 369).

This quotation from a comparative review of quantitative and qualitative research explains the foundational argument for, and simultaneously against, quantitative research. Based on this explanation, what can be inferred is that quantitative research is beneficial for devising laws in the form of "in x conditions, y will happen". This is because the conditions under which most traditional quantitative research is done, randomized controlled trials for example, are idealistic or designed in a way where they can be controlled and manipulated. Or they are designed in a standardized way, such as surveys that provide limited options and operate within specific definitions. This kind of data is generally well-regarded for its generalizability and reproducibility, inspiring confidence in the results.

However, the fact remains that the world does not operate like a laboratory and is not so limited in perspectives, contexts, and external factors as quantitative research reduces it to. As such, qualitative research is necessary to complement the quantitative data, give it life, and highlight the exceptions that exist. "Qualitative methods are most revealing when contextual forces are ill-defined, uncontrolled or situational" (Lakshman et al., 2000, p. 371).

I believe both types of research have merit, and possibly the best research is a mixed method variety that can try to apply statistical analysis of some data, while simultaneously providing the rich context of the information gathered. I think with the emergence of cultural considerations, particularly in healthcare, and the social justice component that is becoming more prevalent in our healthcare/nursing education and patient care, these mixed method approaches will likely continue to gain more popularity as qualitative research is better able to provide insight into social factors. However, quantitative research still feels like it has more authority in the scientific community, which is probably due to its being historically the predominant form of research.

References

Lakshman, M., Sinha, L., Biswas, M., Charles, M., & Arora, N. K. (2000). Quantitative vs qualitative research methods. Indian Journal of Pediatrics 67(5): 369-377. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/79793978/bf0282069020220128-8784-4ev52f-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1667223926&Signature=IBC-IS9vm6PZXqVUVSyf5pun108tG4-7-MTi~ryEBgHuxNneblrxI-hKOlvuc2qtmv6Y3u97mlq5nTOX5feo-l8XE-uBfE718UIhHM~JnpwhTQzE3sNF0b7PnR9K1~gHP7MrrUCb~hiEt2fkMfHNRaYLXONwq1iZuplMwueg6tR36~sz1uY2NVuikeXZFljhm0cJ8Qu4sGzVD9YDI1UR3jvIJRNUIJItTAsT1w4T9Pj1yDUg2HChxzEcm02GFzHgTtKDD7bK3kRb4jKpvg39Ohb82n6GX9LSqVmaAOWquK7K96ujMuvlyMD-qotHTfpnTAn-sqJhtK29rJu8sul4YA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA