I do both types of research, I enjoy the variation. I enjoy statistics (quantitative), and I enjoy analysing interview data (qualitative). You tend to find that the two approaches compliment each other.
I do both too. Although to be honest I’m not the best at the quant stuff – especially compared to some of the people I work with (maths was never really my thing at school or uni…). I use both because they each answer questions that the other can’t. The quant stuff is good to give you more ‘definite’ answers, whereas the qual stuff allows you to find new things, so they’re both useful.
My background is in quantitative, but in recent years I have become more interested in qualitative. My last role and current role are qualitative.
Quantitative – relying on numbers – can tell you, for example, how many people have cancer, how severe their symptoms are. But it cannot tell you what it is like for the person living with cancer. Qualitative then – relying on words, images, sounds – can provide a more detailed account of that person’s life, by asking them directly what it is like.
I expect that qualitative research will become more important in the years to come given how much data we share online – we are constantly communicating who we are to the world using text and images on Facebook, YouTube, etc. The British Psychological Society, who I often look to for advice on ethical ways of conducting research, recently published new guidelines on using data collected online. It will definitely become more common – and I hope to get in on it!
Quantitation (statistical analysis) of qualitative data is extremely important in validating lab experimental results. Yes, we use combination of both in our research regularly.
Comments
Sanjib commented on :
Quantitation (statistical analysis) of qualitative data is extremely important in validating lab experimental results. Yes, we use combination of both in our research regularly.