Compare Qualitative and Quantitative Approach in the Study of Language

Authors Avatar

Compare Qualitative and Quantitative Approach in the Study of Language

Qualitative research is a systematic method of inquiry which follows a scientific in depth method of problem solving deviating in certain directions (Thomas & Nelson, 2001). Quantitative research can be visualized as it uses numerical forms of representation which then can be presented in forms of graphs and tables (Denscombe, 2003). The approaches included in both these two types of research are incredibly diverse, complex and nuanced. This essay will specifically introduce the existing research on language which employed both qualitative and quantitative methodologies, critically evaluate their strengths and weaknesses in terms of data gathering and data analysis. The author concludes that qualitative and quantitative research methodologies are best suited to different kinds of research questions. The most important thing is that, firstly, the theoretical framework and methods match what the researcher wants to investigate; and secondly, researchers should be explicit about any challenging theoretical and ideological problems encountered in their research.  

The types of research questions which qualitative research methodologies address are often open-ended and exploratory, aiming to generate hypotheses rather than to test them. Therefore, the hypothesis is often not given at the beginning of the research studies and develops as the data unfolds. The fundamental qualitative data is collected from language based activities such as daily conversion and interview. The analysis of the spoken interaction (i.e., discourse data) between the interviewer and the interviewee is known as discourse analysis. The object of data collection in qualitative research is ‘to create a comprehensive record of participants’ words and actions’ (Willig, 2001, p.16). In qualitative research, data analysis often takes place alongside data collection and analysis allows the researcher to go back and refine questions, develop hypotheses and pursue emerging avenues of inquiry (Pope et al., 2000). The data analysis process of this discourse analysis involves: 1). The transcription of spoken language and the selection of fragments of the text that have a bearing on the research question. Relevant themes can often be identified by reading the text closely and using a grounded approach; 2). The examination of the test in relation to how language is used to ‘construct’ ideas or information; 3). The search for variability, which is reflected in the inconsistencies in the meaning in the constructions and the assumptions they reveal; and 4). The examination of the implications of a particular account and hence what discourse achieves. Discourse analysts often engage other researchers to scrutinize the text and their analysis for neutral agreement. This offers a way to judge the persuasiveness of the analysis.

The transcription of the spoken interaction is problematic, which in turn is damaging to the whole analysis of discourses. The only way to transcribe the spoken interaction between a researcher and participant is to play back the recordings the patterns and sequences of actual talk, and the activities which surrounded them. The transcription has to be ‘fixed’ through writing down the words and other features of the interaction. The way researchers transcribe this interaction is inevitably biased towards writing. One needs to be aware that the same piece of data can be transcribed and so interpreted in different ways depending on the particular theoretical stance of the researcher. In another word, transcription procedure is responsive to biases (Ochs, 1979). Noting the spoken interaction down is a hectic job. The paper looks crowded by the time the transcriber notes down both words, prosodic and paralinguistic features such as intonation, voice quality, rhythm and so on. Furthermore, could it be possible to transcribe nonverbal phenomenon such as coughs, sighs, turn taking and other features of context which are relevant? By the time the transcriber achieves all these, the speakers will get lost in a forest of symbols! It seems impossible to produce a complete transcription and yet an ‘objective’ one. One would therefore question and reliability and validity to the whole notion of discourse analysis as transcription is the vital starting point.

Join now!

In terms of data gathering, qualitative research is valued for investigating social phenomena in natural (rather than experimental) settings. This data collection procedure gives emphasis to the meanings, experiences, and views of all the participants (Pope and Mays 1995). The researcher is able to gain an insight into another person’s views, opinions, feelings and beliefs all within natural settings (Hicks 1999).  However, qualitative research has a very low reliability in that it is extremely difficult to replicate a piece of qualitative research due to the fact that it does not have a structured design or a standardised procedure. In ...

This is a preview of the whole essay