Marie C. Hoepfl
(1997) takes great care to explore the world of qualitative research and
provides us with a better appreciation for the benefits of this type of
research. A simple glance of the words used to describe the two methodologies
of study, qualitative and quantitative, shows the fourth letter of each, “l”
and “n”, are separated by the letter “m”, as in more. Hoepfl (1997) sites the
calls from others for more, to expand, to go beyond the primary method of research, which
is quantitative. Although there are many benefits to be gained by adopting this
style; many scholars are unaware of its processes. As Zuga (1994) notes, of the
220 reports, only sixteen investigate qualitative methodologies (as cited in
Hoepfl, 1997). It’s that age old adage, quality versus quantity, and which is
the better choice?
Qualitative research relies upon
a “naturalistic approach that seeks
to understand phenomena in context-specific settings” (Hoepfl, 1997). Whereas
quantitative research establishes a hypothesis, conducts controlled
experiments, records the findings, analyzes the numbers, and makes a conclusion
based on statistical information, qualitative research provides for the consideration
those interactions that occur in a social setting, and their effects. What happens when the human element is added?
To demonstrate the quantitative approach, imagine a scientist
wishes to test the effect of mountain water on human
skin. The scientist would develop a hypothesis, such as; the external
temperature of the skin will decrease when cold mountain water is applied. Random
sampling, in order to develop adequate representation of a larger population,
like college students, would be conducted. In a controlled setting, perhaps the
Biology lab on campus, participants would be advised of the experiment to be
conducted. The external temperature of each applicant’s skin would be recorded.
Let’s say for illustrative purposes, the test area is that of the right and
left forearm. Assistants would use an instrument to take the temperature of
each forearm and the results would be recorded. Cold water, with a degree of
coldness designed to represent mountain water, would then be applied to the
test area. Post-application heat levels would be recorded. Once all
experimentation had been completed, the results would then be analyzed using
statistical formulas. Comparison of the results would be made and from the
numerical data, a conclusion would be reached. Now, let’s apply qualitative
methods to the same topic.
Suppose the effects of cold, mountain water on the human skin
were to be tested by a qualitative researcher. Hoepfl (1997) identifies “maximum
variation sampling” as the method most helpful for this style. A group of
children and adults are selected for observational study. The setting, instead
of a lab, is an area of a mountain stream used as a swimming hole. So as to
avoid any “distortion of the natural scene”, the researcher, who is the
observer for the experiment, should either plan to be a part of the experiment,
or a passive observer (Hoepfl, 1997). This could be achieved with the placement
of hidden cameras, like the ones used by naturalists to capture animals in
their natural habitat. With cameras in place, the natural actions of the group
are recorded in order to see the effects of cold, mountain water on the human
skin as each member enters the water. First, how does each person get in the
water? Does one dip their toe first, to test the coldness, while another grabs
the end of a rope swing and yells “cowabunga” before letting go? In addition to
noting physiological changes, for example, goose bumps, blue lips, and the
chilling effect described by George Costanza of Seinfeld as shrinkage; the qualitative researcher would record
facial expressions and other gestures that occur as a result of the subject
being introduced to cold, mountain water. If the experiment takes place on a
hot, sunny day, the expressions and gestures may indicate the coldness is
welcomed. If the day is overcast, or possibly snowing, as is the situation when
the Polar Bear clubs take their annual plunge, shivers and chattering teeth may
be the overarching notes of the day.
So why use qualitative research? Rather than rely on
conclusions reached by using theories and numerical data, qualitative research provides
its audience with credibility, dependability, and confirmability, that
can not only be seen; but, can be imagined as the reader reads the researchers
recounts. Qualitative provides for that element of surprise as a result of
social interaction. Data may lead scholars to believe humans would likely avoid
exposure to water once it reaches forty degrees. Qualitative shows how wrong
this conclusion is. Imagine teaching the mathematical principle of fractions to
a child. What if the naturalistic approach were applied as opposed to the numbers
method? Without knowing, the qualitative approach provided me with the opportunity
to better explain fractions to my oldest son. I used cooking to demonstrate
fractions. Recipes often instruct its readers to use a quarter teaspoon of
this, or a three-quarter cup of this. In order to either reduce or increase a recipe,
fractions have to be understood. By showing how fractions are used in a social
setting, he understood the principle better. The qualitative experience
provided him with a deeper understanding of the issue. Today, he works as a
chef in St. Augustine. Numbers in a
table, more often than not, dampen my inner curiosity; however, when those
numbers are few, and the experiment comes to life, either through recorded
evidence or through imagery, I gain a much deeper and broader understanding of
and appreciation for the topic being presented.
No comments:
Post a Comment