Counts the beans provides information as to which beans are worth counting in general, qualitative research generates rich, detailed and valid process data that contribute to in depth understanding of the context. Quantitative research generates reliable population based and gereralizable data and is well suited to establishing cause and effect relationships. The decision of whether to choose a quantitative or a qualitative design is a philosophical question. Which methods to choose will depend on the nature of the project, the type of information needed the context of the study and the availability of recourses time, money, and human. It is important to keep in mind that these are two different philosophers, not necessarily polar opposites. Combining of qualitative and quantitative research is becoming more and more common.

Every method is different line of sight directed toward the same point, observing social and symbolic reality. Paper presented at the european conference on educational research, edinburgh, 20 23 september 20 tallinn pedagogical university narva mnt 25, tallinn, 10120, estonia introduction last year in lahti i gave a paper concerning the debates sometimes called as paradigm wars about differences and similarities between quantitative and qualitative research. I also presented the results of my small scale investigation, which showed that there were studies, which combined qualitative and quantitative approaches in different ways.

In this paper i want to look further and address some problems concerning the use and integration of multiple methods in a social scientific study. In a long run there are three different widely advocated positions towards the possibility and usefulness to use quantitative and qualitative approaches in complimentary, combined or mixed ways: the advocates of the first position, which i would call strong paradigmatic view. Declare that only one of those approaches is good/appropriate/scientific enough for the inquiry about the social life. They say that quantitative and qualitative research methodologies are tightly bound to different mutually exclusive epistemological positions. From here follows that there is no point even to talk about the possibility of combining or mixing of those approaches.

3Rd Year English Papers

The advocates of the third position regard quantitative and qualitative approaches both as useful and proper ways of going to study the social world. Although they see some major differences between quantitative and qualitative research they also see some important similarities between them and advocate the integrated use of different methodologies if this can advance our understanding about the phenomenon under the investigation. All of these three positions bring up some skeptical questions and problems one needs to address and solve.

In this paper i will take the pragmatist position, which means that i will not question the feasibility of combining quantitative and qualitative ways of doing research in general. I rather try to look more closely on problems, which we have to be aware of in the process of doing so. Thus, i will not discuss problems, which paradigmatic view brings with it as this subject has been the focus of many previous papers including mine from the last conference in lahti.

Process Analysis Essay Topics College

Although the calls for the use of multiple methods in the framework of one study are maybe even older than the quantitative qualitative debate, the area of 'how, when and why different methods might be combined' has got much less attention than the philosophical aspects of paradigmatic view bryman 1988, 155. One can not say that there is a complete lack of literature concerning different aspects of combining divergent methodologies. Still most of the literature, which classifies under the broad area of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, are arguments why this integration is possible and needed. On the other hand there is a considerable number of papers either describing authors' own experiences on integrating some aspects of quantitative and qualitative methodologies or following so called 'case law' approach where a number of different experiences are assembled together and called upon as exemplars one could follow see for example brannen 1992, brown et al.

Approximately as early donald campbell and his co authors published several papers where they advocated the use of multitrait multimethod matrixes and triangulation of measurement for validation, proposed 'transition experiments' and quasi experimental designs see campbell 1957, campbell amp fiske 1959, campbell amp stanley 1963, webb et al. Although remaining in the framework of quantitative tradition we can see in these early works the attempt to advocate the use of multiple methods as well as the possibility to mix some aspects of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. triangulation drawing on these ideas denzin 1978 developed the concept of triangulation the term that is probably most widely used to denote any attempt to combine or mix different methods in a research study. As it often happens, the most widely used terms tend to be the most overused and abused terms as well, and 'triangulation' is not an exception here i think. One could draw obvious parallels in how the term's 'paradigm' and 'triangulation' have lost their initial quite narrow and well defined meaning and became to denote something general and indefinite. However, by denzin triangulation means more than using multiple measurements of the same phenomenon in addition to the use of diverse data, it involves combining different methods and theories, as well as perspectives of different investigators.

Denzin 1978 has clearly identified four different types of triangulation: data triangulation the use of variety of data sources and data sets in a study. Data may be both qualitative and quantitative, gathered by different methods or by the same method from different sources or at different times. Here the importance of partnership and teamwork is underlined as the way of bringing in different perspectives. Theory triangulation the use of different theoretical viewpoints for determining competing hypotheses as well as for interpreting the single set of data. Methodological triangulation the use of multiple methods to study a single problem or phenomenon. It may also include the use of the same method on different occasions and situations. We can see that the concept of triangulation is based on the assumption that by using several data sources, methods and investigators one can neutralize bias inherent in one particular data source, investigator or method jick 1979.

It is often stressed out that different methods have different weaknesses and strengths and therefore the main effect triangulation can offer is to overcome the weaknesses of any single method. Thus, if we use several different methods for investigation of the phenomenon of our interest and the results provide mutual confirmation we can be more sure that our results are valid. Within this context, quantitative and qualitative approaches are usually seen as different ways of studying the same phenomenon and able to answer the same research questions bryman 1988. Although the perspective of triangulation seems to be very promising several authors have warned us about the hidden problems that the combined use of qualitative and quantitative methods for the purposes of triangulation can bring with it. First, as quantitative and qualitative research have different preoccupations it is highly questionable whether they are tapping the same things even when they are examining apparently similar issues. Second, if quantitative and qualitative findings do not confirm each other how should the researcher respond. And third, if the conflict in results is present what it actually means and comprises.

Thus, in the context of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches the concept of triangulation is not as unproblematic as it may appear. On the other hand in the wider framework of integrated use of qualitative and quantitative approaches the triangulation is offering quite limited possibilities. As in the case of triangulation the results of different methods are supposed to validate each other it means that different methods have to be highly independent throughout the study. This approach excludes the possibility to mix quantitative and qualitative aspects on different levels of investigation. For example one of the few books devoted entirely to the problems of combining quantitative and qualitative approaches multimethod research. A synthesis of styles by brewer and hunter 1989 is largely constrained by the framework of triangulation although the authors mention the other possibilities for integration as well. They classify studies into three categories: a monomethod studies, b composite method studies, which combine some elements of the basic monomethod styles and c multimethod studies, which combine the basic styles of research.

The authors give their clear preference to the multimethod designs because according to them composite methods 'comprise some of the basic methods' sources of sterngth' and they 'fail to provide the opportunity for triangulated measurement and hypothesis testing, and the protection against monomethod bias, that the multimethod strategy provides' brewer and hunter 1989, 81. other rationales for combining quantitative and qualitative research regardless of this extensive critique of composite method designs several studies have indicated that we can find considerable number of studies which actually combine some elements of quantitative and qualitative approaches on the various stages of the study see for example bryman 1988, datta 1994, greene et al. Maybe the most interesting although definitely not the most systematic of theses studies is datta's analysis of several papers given to her as examples of good qualitative and quantitative research by the proponents of monomethod approach.

Conclusion In a Research Paper

Her conclusion was that 'the best examples of both paradigms seem actually to be mixed models' datta 1994: 67. As a result of the extensive literature review and a small scale empirical analysis of published research papers i have suggested that quantitative and qualitative approaches have been combined in various ways and various levels of the inquiry. Different possibilities for mixing quantitative and qualitative research can be illustrated by the figure 1 niglas 19. Thus, we can see that in the practice researchers mix and combine qualitative and quantitative methodologies, but the question remains if this kind of action has to be approved and what is the rationale for doing so.