 |
| Examples of Differences in Qualitative Research and Quantitative Research |
Qualitative Research and Quantitative Research
For quantitative research used scientific paradigm (scientific paradigm), while qualitative research is called naturalistic inquiry or inquiry natural. what is the difference between qualitative research and quantitative research, the difference includes:1. Techniques used
Basically, both quantitive and qualitative techniques can be used together. However, the emphasis is placed on certain techniques. The scientific paradigm gives pressure on quantitative techniques, while the natural paradigm gives pressure on the use of qualitative techniques.2. Qualitative criteria
In determining the "good" research, the scientific paradigm strongly believes in Rigor criteria, i.e. external and internal validity, reliability, and objectivity. Basically, according to Guba and Lincoln (1981:66), the emphasis on the criteria is bright carrying experiments on the preparation of good design, but often narrow scope.It is sourced in the fact that most experiments incorporate less-known, artificial, and short-term situations, and that makes the background-unusual to be difficultly generalized in other settings.
In contrast, the natural paradigm uses relevance criteria. The relevance here is the significance of the person to the real environment. The effort to find certainty and authenticity is important in natural research.
3. Source theory
Most of the knowledge of social behavior is directed at the hypothesis verification derived from the prior theory. Most of the theories laid out, in fact, are deductive and logical in the knowledge of social behavior.The process of drafting the theory swirling the deduction process that can be verified from the real world on the basis of a priori assumption.
Another more useful way is to find theory by pulling it from the beginning of nature, which is from real-world data. The method used is the method of discovering by analyzing the data obtained systematically.
His theoretical formulation starts from the ground. Such theory will be suitable for empirical situations and it is important to predict, explain, interpret, and apply. Thus, this theory satisfies two criteria, namely predicting, explaining, and interpreting.
4. Questions about the Kuasality
Research is usually faced with the determination of the causal relationship of answers to the question of important causation relationships for the purpose of predicting, control on one party, and Verstehen (interpretive sense of human being) on the other. Both the scientific and natural paradigms use these questions but in different ways.5. Type of knowledge used
There are two kinds or types of knowledge; I.e:· Propositional and
· The enrichment the known together known and agreed upon by the subject.
Both types of knowledge can be explained the difference in proportional knowledge is the knowledge that can be expressed in the form of language. Knowledge-A-known-shared (tacit knowledge) is an instuisi, understanding, or feeling that cannot be expressed with words that in certain matters are known to the subject.
The scientific paradigm limits itself to such knowledge is the essence of the method to explicitly declare the proportions in the form of hypotheses tested to determine their validity. Theories consist of collecting such hypotheses.
Preferably, the natural paradigm permits and encourages knowledge that is known together to be presented for the purpose of assisting the formation of theories from the foundation as well as to improve communication back to the source of information by means of the terminology Their.
6. The Establishment
A scientific paradigm with a reductionist establishment. In this case, they narrowed the research on a relatively small focus by the way of imposing constraints on both the antecedent conditions of the Inquisition (for control purposes) and in the outputs.So searchers-know-scientific has an expansionist establishment. They look for perspectives that will lead to the description and understanding of the phenomenon as a whole or finally with the path of finding something that reflects the complexity of those symptoms.
They enter the field, build up and see its ground without any direction of its entry point. Each inquisition step is based on a number of knowledge gathered little by little based on the previous steps. So searchers-know-scientifically take the stance of structure, directional, and singular, while searchers-know-natural are open-ended, explore, and complex.
7. Intent
The scientific paradigm has the intention of finding knowledge through the hypothesized hypothesis of the verification. Seeker-know-scientific, on the other hand. The efforts to find the elements of knowledge that do not exist in the theory prevail.8. The instrument
To collect data, the scientific paradigm utilizes written tests (paper-pencils) or questionnaires or using other physical tools such as polygraphs, etc. Seekers-know-scientific in collecting more data depends on itself as a data collection tool.It may be due to the fact that it specializes precisely in what is to be researched. In addition, person-as-instrument has a "can-decide" weapon, which can be flexible to use. He can always assess circumstances and be able to make decisions.
9. Time to collect Data and analysis rules
Know scientific searchers can set all data collection and analysis rules beforehand. They already know the hypothesis that will be tested and can develop instruments that match the variables. The instrument is pre-defined about the size of the known feature, allowing time to perform analyses.The other natural paradigm, not introduced in a priori formulate. The data is collected and categorized in rough form and is unencrypted by researchers. In addition, searchers-know-scientific is less guided by the rules compared to the scientific paradigm.
Of course, certain measures need to be taken to ensure that there is an unambiguous (doubtful) rule and is set systematically and uniformly. The technique is thus beneficial in terms of being able to build on the basis of emerging knowledge.
For the natural paradigm, design can be pre-compiled. When it is already in use, the design is started to be completed and perfected. It can always be changed by adjusting what is obtained and adjusted with new knowledge found.
10. Background
Seeker-know-scientific rests in a laboratory setting for the purposes of conducting control, managing interventions, and so on. In contrast, searchers-know-natural tends to hold a study in a natural setting. Each scientific notion can be seen as the remainder of a paradigm, par lifting or an explicit and implicit assumption, which gives it style and direction.11. Treatment
For the scientific paradigm, the concept of treatment is crucial. In each experiment, the treatment should be stable and not varied. If not so, then Sekar determines the influence associated with a particular cause.For the natural paradigm, the concept of such treatment is foreign because the treatment includes several ways of manipulation or intervention. If it happens with a natural occurrence of symptoms, then the "treatment" is a desirable cause for some observed influence.
Of course, they do not expect stability due to continuous change is actually the essence of the real situation. It may be beneficial for natural researchers to stabilize as many situations as the Inquisition is occurring. So, for natural researchers, it takes more flexibility.
An experimental approach in scientific methods is an activity of scientists who give ideas to their workers in a more profound development effort. This activity not only refers to specific techniques in data collection and analysis such as experiments but more broadly on the activity of scientists to his ideas by using data collection that is deemed appropriate.
12. Unit of study
A unit of study for the scientific paradigm is variable and all the relationships expressed between variables. On the contrary, paradigma naturally established that the unit of study is simpler. In addition, they emphasize the purity of the pattern system being observed naturally.13. Contextual Elements
Natural researchers always try to control all of the disturbing elements that can obscure those elements from the phenomenon that becomes the center of attention or that refers to the influence of the phenomenon.Natural researchers are not just not interested in the controls, but instead inviting their meddling so that they can better understand the events and in the real world and feel the patterns in them. The concept of "contain-mix" is very important for natural researchers.
Usually, they do not want to know how completeness that has worked very well in the whole world is likely, but in the worst circumstances though. (Photo: Pixabay)