Quantitative vs Qualitative Research

Good afternoon.

This is Albert Einstein here
at the Louvre Museum in Paris

with queen Elizabeth
II of Great Britain.

Good afternoon.

It is a pleasure I am sure.

Our purpose here today is
to compare and contrast

qualitative versus
quantitative research.

As a leader and reader
of people for 60 years,

we will speak for
the qualitative side.

And as the ultimate
scientist and rationalist,

I will be the quintessential
quantitativitist

if that's even a word.

As a gentleman, I will
allow Queen Elizabeth

to start the debate.

Thank you, Professor Einstein.

And thank you for
letting us choose

the location for our discussion
surrounded by works of art

in this wonderful museum
in the heart of Paris.

This setting illustrates two
of the fundamental features

of qualitative research, first,
that the research involves

looking at qualities that
cannot be easily quantified

and, second, that the researcher
herself becomes immersed

in the situation being studied.

Your majesty, that is
certainly different

from my quantitative approach.

I like my variables to be
measurable in some commonly

accepted fashion.

And the quantitative
methodology stresses

that the observer should be
dispassionate, objective,

and neutral.

A quantitative
researcher strives

not to allow himself to
influence or be influenced

by whatever he is researching.

You see, your grace, in
quantitative research,

we clearly set out our
premises and hypotheses

before we start and determine
exactly what measurements we

will make and exactly
how we will make them.

Oh my, Albert, you
quantitative researchers

are so decisive and
sure of yourselves.

In qualitative research, one
does not assume nearly so much

before one starts.

One certainly has a
plan for gathering data,

but one is free to make
personal observations

and interpretations.

And study participants are asked
about their experience, not

simply poked and
prodded and measured

with standardized and calibrated
scientific instruments.

One then uses
inductive reasoning

to look for themes and
patterns in one's observations

relevant to the
research problem.

Only after identifying
such themes and patterns

does one begin using
deductive tools and reasoning

to further analyze the data.

Pardon me, Elizabeth,
but that is absurd.

With all due respect,
quantitative research

involves using
inductive reasoning only

before the start of the
project to formulate theories

and postulate hypotheses.

Once the research starts,
it is all about gathering

predetermined data and using
deductive reasoning and logic

to support or refute the
hypothesis under scrutiny.

Your qualitative approach
sounds like a recipe for chaos.

I thought you were a
monarchist, not an anarchist.

Relax, Al, and try not to
get your knickers in a twist.

Qualitative research may seem a
wee bit uncontrolled and loosey

goosey to you.

But you must admit that
quantitative research can

sometimes feel
like being strapped

in a straitjacket
locked in a rubber room.

Not that one would know
what that feels like,

but you get one's point.

Reality is
complicated and messy,

and research methodology needs
to take that into account.

Liz, baby, you make
some very strong points.

You've got a good head on your
shoulders under that crown.

I propose that we
meet halfway and agree

that there is a role for both
quantitative and qualitative

research methodologies,
perhaps even in the same study.

By synergistically combining
both approaches in a mixed

method design, the results
of the whole research project

might very well be greater
than the sum of its parts.

Shall we dance?

Oh, Al, one thought
you would never ask.

Say Al, do you think one is
ready for the follies best

share?