Qualitative Research Notes:

1. Cite the differences between qualitative and

quantitative research in terms of Tabular difference of
Quantitative and Qualitative research.

Qualitative Quantitative

Number of samples

Purposeful
1. Simple random
Sampling: Also
sampling
Method of Sampling known as purposive
In a simple random
and selective
sample, every
sampling,
member of the
purposeful sampling
population has an
is a sampling
equal chance of
technique that
being selected. Your
qualitative
sampling frame
researchers use to
should include the
recruit participants
whole population.
who can provide in-
depth and detailed
To conduct this type
information about
of sampling, you can
the phenomenon
use tools like
under investigation.
random number
It is highly
generators or other
subjective and
techniques that are
determined by the
based entirely on
qualitative
researcher chance.
generating the
2. Systematic
qualifying criteria
sampling
each participant
must meet to be Systematic
considered for the sampling is similar to
research study. An simple random
example of this sampling, but it is
would be a student usually slightly
who seeks to look at easier to conduct.
current nurses’ Every member of the
perceptions of population is listed
leadership styles with a number, but
within a specific instead of randomly
hospital setting. generating numbers,
This one sentence individuals are
description alone chosen at regular
can already intervals.
generate two
selection criteria: (a)
must be an active 3. Stratified
nurse and (b) must sampling
work at a specific
Stratified
hospital setting.
sampling involves
Additional criteria
dividing the
such as number of
population into
years in the field or
subpopulations that
level of nursing
may differ in
education will
important ways. It
ensure participants
allows you draw
have a similar
more precise
foundation.
conclusions by
ensuring that every
Convenience subgroup is properly
Sampling: This is a represented in the
sampling technique sample.
that qualitative
To use this sampling
researchers use to
method, you divide
recruit participants
the population into
who are easily
subgroups (called
accessible and
strata) based on the
convenient to the
relevant
researchers.
characteristic (e.g.
Oftentimes this may
gender, age range,
include utilizing
income bracket, job
geographic location
role).
and resources that
make participant Based on the overall
recruitment proportions of the
convenient. An population, you
example of this calculate how many
would be a teacher people should be
who wanted to sampled from each
examine the subgroup. Then you
perceptions of use random
teachers about a or systematic
policy change and sampling to select a
decided to utilize a sample from each
school within the subgroup.
district he or she
worked in to recruit 4. Cluster
participants. sampling
Another example Cluster
would be a sampling also
professional who is involves dividing the
a member of a population into
professional subgroups, but each
organization and subgroup should
wanted to recruit have similar
participants through characteristics to the
contact information whole sample.
available to Instead of sampling
members of that individuals from
organization. Both each subgroup, you
examples would be randomly select
convenient to each entire subgroups.
researcher but
If it is practically
would also require
possible, you might
obtaining
include every
permissions to
individual from each
recruit participants
sampled cluster. If
(from the district
the clusters
and professional
themselves are
organization
large, you can also
respectively).
sample individuals
from within each
There are additional
cluster using one of
sampling
the techniques
techniques, such as
above.
snowball and quota
sampling, that
This method is good
qualitative
for dealing with large
researchers can
and dispersed
use, but the
populations, but
majority of
there is more risk of
qualitative
error in the sample,
researchers utilize
as there could be
one of the sampling
substantial
techniques
differences between
 described above. clusters. It’s difficult
to guarantee that
the sampled clusters
are really
representative of the
whole population.

Generalization

The term "research

tool" can simply be
Using appropriate another name for a
statistical tool research method, or
it can apply to
specific techniques
and materials that
researchers use in
the study.

Qualitative research
uses three main
methods of data
collection:
interviewing,
observation and
artifact analysis.
Main interview types
that qualitative
researchers use are
in-depth, one-on-
one interviews and
 focus-group
interviews. Artifact
analysis usually
means analysis of
written texts, but
sometimes objects,
such as art work,
undergo analysis.
Each of these
methods employs
specific tools that
facilitate and enrich
the data collection
process.

Qualitative vs. quantitative research

When collecting and analyzing data, quantitative research deals

with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with
words and meanings. Both are important for gaining different kinds
of knowledge.

Quantitative research Quantitative research is expressed in

numbers and graphs. It is used to test or confirm theories and
assumptions. This type of research can be used to
establish generalizable facts about a topic.
Common quantitative methods include experiments, observations
recorded as numbers, and surveys with closed-ended questions.
Qualitative researchQualitative research is expressed in words. It
is used to understand concepts, thoughts or experiences. This
type of research enables you to gather in-depth insights on topics
that are not well understood.
Common qualitative methods include interviews with open-ended
questions, observations described in words, and literature reviews
that explore concepts and theories.

The differences between quantitative and qualitative

research

Quantitative and qualitative research use different research

methods to collect and analyze data, and they allow you to answer
different kinds of research questions.

Qualitative vs. quantitative research

Quantitative research Qualitative Research
Focuses on testing theories and Focuses on exploring ideas and
hypotheses formulating a theory or hypothesis
Analyzed through math and Analyzed by summarizing,
statistical analysis categorizing and interpreting
Mainly expressed in numbers, Mainly expressed in words
graphs and tables
Requires many respondents Requires few respondents
Closed (multiple choice) Open-ended questions
questions
Key terms: testing, Key terms: understanding, context,
measurement, objectivity, complexity, subjectivity
replicability
Data collection methods

Quantitative and qualitative data can be collected using various

methods. It is important to use a data collection method that will
help answer your research question(s).

Many data collection methods can be either qualitative or

quantitative. For example, in surveys, observations or case studies,
your data can be represented as numbers (e.g. using rating scales
or counting frequencies) or as words (e.g. with open-ended
questions or descriptions of what you observe).

However, some methods are more commonly used in one type or

the other.

Quantitative data collection methods

 Surveys: List of closed or multiple choice questions that is

distributed to a sample (online, in person, or over the phone).
 Experiments: Situation in which variables are controlled and
manipulated to establish cause-and-effect relationships.
 Observations: Observing subjects in a natural environment
where variables can’t be controlled.

Qualitative data collection methods

 Interviews: Asking open-ended questions verbally to

respondents.
 Focus groups: Discussion among a group of people about a
topic to gather opinions that can be used for further research.
 Ethnography: Participating in a community or organization
for an extended period of time to closely observe culture and
behavior.
 Literature review: Survey of published works by other
authors.
When to use qualitative vs. quantitative research

A rule of thumb for deciding whether to use qualitative or

quantitative data is:

 Use quantitative research if you want to confirm or test

something (a theory or hypothesis)
 Use qualitative research if you want to understand
something (concepts, thoughts, experiences)

For most research topics you can choose a qualitative, quantitative

or mixed methods approach. Which type you choose depends on,
among other things, whether you’re taking an inductive vs.
deductive research approach; your research question(s); whether
you’re doing experimental, correlational, or descriptive research;
and practical considerations such as time, money, availability of
data, and access to respondents.

Quantitative research approach

You survey 300 students at your university and ask them questions
such as: “on a scale from 1-5, how satisfied are your with your
professors?”

You can perform statistical analysis on the data and draw

conclusions such as: “on average students rated their professors
4.4”.

Qualitative research approach

You conduct in-depth interviews with 15 students and ask them

open-ended questions such as: “How satisfied are you with your
studies?”, “What is the most positive aspect of your study
program?” and “What can be done to improve the study program?”
Based on the answers you get you can ask follow-up questions to
clarify things. You transcribe all interviews using transcription
software and try to find commonalities and patterns.

Mixed methods approach

You conduct interviews to find out how satisfied students are with
their studies. Through open-ended questions you learn things you
never thought about before and gain new insights. Later, you use a
survey to test these insights on a larger scale.

It’s also possible to start with a survey to find out the overall trends,
followed by interviews to better understand the reasons behind the
trends.

How to analyze qualitative and quantitative data

Qualitative or quantitative data by itself can’t prove or demonstrate

anything, but has to be analyzed to show its meaning in relation to
the research questions. The method of analysis differs for each type
of data.

Analyzing quantitative data

Quantitative data is based on numbers. Simple math or more

advanced statistical analysis is used to discover commonalities or
patterns in the data. The results are often reported in graphs and
tables.

Applications such as Excel, SPSS, or R can be used to calculate

things like:

 Average scores
 The number of times a particular answer was given
 The correlation or causation between two or more variables
 The reliability and validity of the results

Analyzing qualitative data

Qualitative data is more difficult to analyze than quantitative data. It
consists of text, images or videos instead of numbers.

Some common approaches to analyzing qualitative data include:

 Qualitative content analysis: Tracking the occurrence, position

and meaning of words or phrases
 Thematic analysis: Closely examining the data to identify the
main themes and patterns
 Discourse analysis: Studying how communication works in
social contexts

2. What is the difference between pure experimental vs.

quasi-experimental?

True experimental research designs are always prospective in

nature. A true experiment can effectively argue a proven cause-and-
effect relationship. They are the most effective at demonstrating
efficacy of a new intervention or treatment. To bring a new
pharmaceutical product to market, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) will require compelling evidence of efficacy
shown in a true experimental research design study (ie, a
prospective, randomized, controlled, blinded clinical trial). On the
downside, these types of studies are the most demanding in terms
of time, cost, and other resources.

By their nature, true experimental designs tend to be tightly

focused, and each study generally can look only at a narrow, highly
specific research question. As such, they are not appropriate when a
field of investigation is immature and the research questions still
broad in nature. They are not appropriate designs for broad
questions. They should be used to answer focused questions
supported by prior work. Otherwise, a great deal of resources can be
spent barking up the wrong tree. Before using a true experimental
design, preliminary work should already have been performed,
using less rigorous designs that support asking the focused research
question.

Quasi-experimental designs lack one or two of the study elements.

They often have manipulation of the independent variable or control
of the study setting, but rarely have randomization. Although the
degree of scientific validity is not as high as in true experimental
designs, for some research questions these are the best and most
valid designs available. Quasi-experimental designs can help to
validate treatment methods or establish potential associations.
However, because they usually lack random patient assignment to
study groups, there is an increased potential for bias, or
confounding, and study validity is compromised. As such, these
designs can sometimes be used as a stepping stone to establish the
rationale for subsequent, focused, true experimental designs in the
same field.

Quasi-experimental designs are generally less expensive than true

experimental designs and are sometimes the best or only realistic
option for ethical or other reasons. The most common quasi-
experimental designs are listed and outlined in Table 3. The group
sequential design is sometimes also called a “single group time
series.” A single population of subjects is selected and used as its
own controls as it goes through a series of observations and
interventions, all in the same order. The advantages of the design
are two: First, the design controls for potential extraneous variables
by using each patient as his or her own control, much as the
crossover design did. Second, the design requires fewer subjects
and therefore has an application in settings in which the number of
potential study candidates is limited. The trade-off is that scientific
validity is lower because randomization is absent. All subjects
undergo the interventions (experience the independent variable) in
the same order, so blinding is not possible. In addition, particularly
in the acute-care setting, it can be very difficult to track study
subjects for lengthy periods and put them through a series of
sequential interventions. It is more relevant to scheduled laboratory-
type experiments than to actual patient clinical research.

3. What are the several ways of evaluation?

Evaluation is a methodological area that is closely related to, but

distinguishable from more traditional social research. Evaluation
utilizes many of the same methodologies used in traditional social
research, but because evaluation takes place within a political and
organizational context, it requires group skills, management ability,
political dexterity, sensitivity to multiple stakeholders and other
skills that social research in general does not rely on as much. Here
we introduce the idea of evaluation and some of the major terms
and issues in the field.

The Goals of Evaluation

The generic goal of most evaluations is to provide “useful feedback”

to a variety of audiences including sponsors, donors, client-groups,
administrators, staff, and other relevant constituencies. Most often,
feedback is perceived as “useful” if it aids in decision-making. But
the relationship between an evaluation and its impact is not a
simple one – studies that seem critical sometimes fail to influence
short-term decisions, and studies that initially seem to have no
influence can have a delayed impact when more congenial
conditions arise. Despite this, there is broad consensus that the
major goal of evaluation should be to influence decision-making or
policy formulation through the provision of empirically-driven
feedback.

Types of Evaluation

There are many different types of evaluations depending on the

object being evaluated and the purpose of the evaluation. Perhaps
the most important basic distinction in evaluation types is that
between formative and summative evaluation. Formative
evaluations strengthen or improve the object being evaluated – they
help form it by examining the delivery of the program or technology,
the quality of its implementation, and the assessment of the
organizational context, personnel, procedures, inputs, and so on.
Summative evaluations, in contrast, examine the effects or
outcomes of some object – they summarize it by describing what
happens subsequent to delivery of the program or technology;
assessing whether the object can be said to have caused the
outcome; determining the overall impact of the causal factor
beyond only the immediate target outcomes; and, estimating the
relative costs associated with the object.

Formative evaluation includes several evaluation types:

 needs assessment determines who needs the program, how

great the need is, and what might work to meet the need
 evaluability assessment determines whether an evaluation is
feasible and how stakeholders can help shape its usefulness
 structured conceptualization helps stakeholders define the
program or technology, the target population, and the
possible outcomes
 implementation evaluation monitors the fidelity of the
program or technology delivery
  process evaluation investigates the process of delivering the
program or technology, including alternative delivery
procedures

Summative evaluation can also be subdivided:

 outcome evaluations investigate whether the program or

technology caused demonstrable effects on specifically
defined target outcomes
 impact evaluation is broader and assesses the overall or net
effects – intended or unintended – of the program or
technology as a whole
 cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis address questions
of efficiency by standardizing outcomes in terms of their dollar
costs and values
 secondary analysis reexamines existing data to address new
questions or use methods not previously employed
 meta-analysis integrates the outcome estimates from multiple
studies to arrive at an overall or summary judgement on an
evaluation question