Quantitative Versus Qualitative Research: An Attempt to Clarify the Issue
Abstract
This paper will describe points of disagreement between quant i ta-tive research and qualitative, or in te rpre t ive, research. After a brief historical overview, the dis-cussion will focus on how each per-spective responds to three major and closely r e l a t e d ques t ions: (1) What is the relationship of the investigator to what is investigat-ed? (2) What is the relationship between facts and values in the process of i nves t iga t ion? and (3) What is the goal of investiga-tion? Educational researchers have r ecen t ly devoted i n c r e a s i n g amounts of time and energy to the issue of one method versus the other. Unfortunately, much of the discussion has tended to obfuscate rather than clarify. There has been a tendency to engage in polemics and, at times, name calling. We have all heard, if not seen in print as frequently or as bluntly, one side refer to the other as "bank-rup t, " "number-c runcher s, " or "storytellers. " There has also been a tendency to see t he two ap-proaches, if not as interchange-able, certainly as complementary. The implication is that research-ers may variously mix the two ap-proaches for any par t icular re-
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The different assumptions of the quantitative and qualitative paradigms originated in the positivism-idealism debate of the late 19th century.
“The different assumptions of the quantitative and qualitative paradigms originated in the positivism-idealism debate of the late 19th century (Smith, 1983).”
From Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research (2002) · cites this paper as Smith, 1983
In the qualitative paradigm, there is no access to reality independent of our minds, no external referent by which to compare claims of truth.
“On an epistemological level, there is no access to reality independent of our minds, no external referent by which to compare claims of truth (Smith, 1983).”
From Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research (2002) · cites this paper as Smith, 1983
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014 · Cited by 11,170 · see citing works
Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737011003255 · Cited by 5,687 · see citing works
Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature.
Murphy, Dingwall, Greatbatch, Parker, & Watson (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2160 · Cited by 1,107 · see citing works
Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research
Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. (2002) · Quality and Quantity · doi:10.1023/a:1014301607592 · Cited by 1,082 · see citing works
Giacomini, M. K., Cook, D. J., & for the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.284.3.357 · Cited by 931 · see citing works
Validity in Qualitative Research: A Processual Approach
Hayashi, P., Abib, G., & Hoppen, N. (2019) · The Qualitative Report · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2019.3443 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
How to assess rigour... or not in qualitative papers
Sale, J. E. M. (2008) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01093.x · Cited by 18 · see citing works
- Authors
- Smith, J. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Northern Iowa (US)
- Corresponding author
- Smith, John K.
- Venue
- Educational Researcher
- Published
- 1983-03
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 6-13
- ISSN
- 0013-189X (ISSN-L)
- 1935-102X
- OpenAlex
- W2002015682
- Cited by
- 608
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 33
- FWCI
- 71.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational Researcher (publishedVersion)
- UNI ScholarWorks (University of Northern Iowa) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational theories and practices
- Keywords
- quantitative research, qualitative research, interpretive research, research methodology debate, facts and values, history of research methods, educational research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review