A Comparative Analysis of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods and a Justification for Adopting Mixed Methods in Social Research.
KeywordQualitative research methods; Quantitative research methods; Mixed methods research; Social research paradigms
Rights© 2014 The Author. Reproduced by permission from the copyright holder.
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractThe aim of this review is to create awareness about uses of available social research methods and to provide a guideline in adopting appropriate methods specifically in qualitative and mixed methods research genre. Based on the review of contemporary social research methods I believe that mixed methods research produces more accurate results than relying on either qualitative or quantitative methods alone in explaining complex social issues. This paper contributes to the methodological literature in two areas. First, create awareness among social researchers and students about the available research methods in order to help them to adopt suitable research designs in addressing their particular research questions. Second, encourage scholars from all disciplines to theorize further, especially in the field of mixed methods, and engage in a dialogue in order to improve methodological appropriateness for future research in social sciences.
Versionfinal draft paper
CitationHaq M (2014) A comparative analysis of qualitative and quantitative research methods and a justification for use of mixed methods in social research. Annual PhD Conference, University of Bradford School of Management. June 2014.
NotesPlease Note: The "Publication Date" of 2005 is the date added to the Bradford Scholars Repository. The paper was presented at the Annual PhD Conference, University of Bradford School of Management in June 2014.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Patients as qualitative data analysts: Developing a method for a process evaluation of the ‘Improving the Safety and Continuity of Medicines management at care Transitions’ (ISCOMAT) cluster randomised control trialPowell, Catherine; Ismail, Hanif; Cleverley, R.; Taylor, A.; Breen, Liz; Fylan, Beth; Alderson, S.L.; Alldred, David P. (2021-08)Background: How to meaningfully partner with patients as data analysts remains obscure. A process evaluation of the ‘Improving the Safety and Continuity Of Medicines management at care Transitions’ (ISCOMAT) cluster randomised control trial of an intervention for improving medicines use for people living with heart failure is being conducted. The intervention includes patient held information on heart medicines and care, enhanced communication between hospital and community pharmacists, and increased engagement of community pharmacists with patient care post-hospital discharge. ISCOMAT patients living with heart failure were interviewed about experiences with the intervention. We sought to gain insights from patients on data collected to enhance our understanding of experiences with the intervention. Objective: To develop a method for involving patients as analysts of qualitative data in a process evaluation. Design: Patients and researchers co-analysed qualitative data. A framework method was applied involving; familiarisation, coding, developing an analytical framework and interpretation. The process was facilitated through home working and a workshop with a training component. Results: The co-designed framework enabled researchers to map all further patient interview data. Patients' specialist knowledge enhanced understanding of how the ISCOMAT intervention can be best implemented. Conclusions: Patients’ unique experiences can enhance validity and rigour in data analysis through sharing their interpretations of qualitative data. The involvement process is crucial in elucidating knowledge and avoiding tokenism. As analysts, patients gain an appreciation of research processes, building trust between researchers and patients. Group dynamics and involving patients throughout the whole research process are important considerations.
Organisation, practice and experiences of mouth hygiene in stroke unit care: a mixed methods study.Horne, Maria; McCracken, G.; Walls, A.; Tyrrell, P.J.; Smith, C.J. (2015-03)Aims and objectives To (1) investigate the organisation, provision and practice of oral care in typical UK stroke units; (2) explore stroke survivors', carers' and healthcare professionals' experiences and perceptions about the barriers and facilitators to receiving and undertaking oral care in stroke units. Background Cerebrovascular disease and oral health are major global health concerns. Little is known about the provision, challenges and practice of oral care in the stroke unit setting, and there are currently no evidence-based practice guidelines. Design Cross-sectional survey of 11 stroke units across Greater Manchester and descriptive qualitative study using focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Methods A self-report questionnaire was used to survey 11 stroke units in Greater Manchester. Data were then collected through two focus groups (n = 10) with healthcare professionals and five semi-structured interviews with stroke survivors and carers. Focus group and interview data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using framework approach. Results Eleven stroke units in Greater Manchester responded to the survey. Stroke survivors and carers identified a lack of oral care practice and enablement by healthcare professionals. Healthcare professionals identified a lack of formal training to conduct oral care for stroke patients, inconsistency in the delivery of oral care and no set protocols or use of formal oral assessment tools. Conclusion Oral care post-stroke could be improved by increasing healthcare professionals' awareness, understanding and knowledge of the potential health benefits of oral care post-stroke. Further research is required to develop and evaluate the provision of oral care in stroke care to inform evidence-based education and practice.
Introducing Research Methods and Skills in a Workshop Environment.Sheriff, Ray E. (Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre., 2007-09)`Research Seminar Series¿ is a 10-credit, Level M module offered to MSc/MEng students undertaking programmes in the areas of Electrical and Electronic Engineering at the University of Bradford. The module¿s aims are twofold: i) to disseminate stateoftheart information that could form the basis for future research programmes¿ and ii) to introduce the stages involved in the preparation and presentation of a research paper.