Strengths and weaknesses of qualitative research in social science studies

Kelvin Mwita

doi:10.20525/ijrbs.v11i6.1920

Authors

Kelvin Mwita Department of Public Services and Human Resource Management, Mzumbe University, P. O Box 1, Mzumbe - Tanzania https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1833-6990

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i6.1920

Keywords:

qualitative research, constructivists, positivist paradigm, critical paradigm, interpretative paradigm

Abstract

This study aimed at examining the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative research in social science studies. The study conducted a systematic literature review of 22 published journal articles to achieve the objective. The review revealed that the qualitative approach was flexible, offered in-depth and detailed information, allowed the use of multiple data collection methods and minimised the chance of having missing data. Moreover, the approach was found to integrate human touch, was cost-effective and was indeed the only option in some cases of research problems. On the other hand, the approach is prone to researchers’ subjectivity, involves complex data analysis, makes anonymity difficult and has limited scope in its generalizability. Similarly, the approach makes replication of findings challenging, and the findings may be influenced by the researcher’s bias. It is concluded, therefore, that researchers should take necessary precautions when using the approach to ensure that weaknesses of qualitative research do not bar them from achieving research objectives.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Allen, M. (2017). The sage encyclopedia of communication research methods.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Bailey, L. F. (2015). The Origin and Success of Qualitative Research.International Journal of Market Research, 56(2), 167-184.

Barrett, D. & Twycross, A. (2018). Data collection in qualitative research.Evidence-Based Nursing, 21(3), 63-64.

Borgstede, M. &Scholz, M. (2021). Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Generalisation and Replication–A Representationalist View. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021(12), 1-9.

Budig, M.J., Lim, M. & Hodges, M.J. (2021). Racial and Gender Disparities: The Role of Education. Social Science Research, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2021.102580.

Benuyenah, V. & Tran, P.B. (2021). Postpartum psychological pressure on single mothers: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, 3(3), 199-216. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-12-2019-0089

Busetto, L., Wick, W. & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research & Practice, 2(14),1-10.

Co?kun, K. (2020). A New Explanation for the Conflict between Constructivist and Objectivist Grounded Theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920938280.

Dalglish, S. L, Khalid, H. & McMahon, S. A. (2020). Document analysis in health policy research: the READ approach. Health Policy and Planning, 35(10), 1424–1431.

Daniel, E. (2016).The Usefulness of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Researching Problem-Solving Ability in Science Education Curriculum. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(15), 91-100.

Dawadi, S., Shrestha, S., & Giri, R. A. (2021). Mixed-Methods Research: A Discussion on its Types, Challenges, and Criticisms. Journal of Practical Studies in Education, 2(2), 25-36.

Eberle, T.S. & Elberle, V. R. (2019). Finding Self, Sense, and Sense Making after a Cerebral Hemorrhage.Journal of Applied Social Science, 1-15.

Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(2), 34-35.

Filomeno, F. A. (2019). Expanding Hearts and Minds? Evaluation of an Ecumenical Educational Program on Immigration. Journal of Applied Social Science, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1936724419846197.

Hammargerg, K., Kirkman, M. & Lacey, S. (2016). Qualitative research methods: when to use them and how to judge them. Human Reproduction, 31(3), 498-501.

Hern, L., McKay, R. & Brown, S. (2019).We Need Community: Assessing the Impact of Faculty, Advising, Campus Social Life, and Racial Formation on the Transfer Student Experience at a Diverse Island Campus. Journal of Applied Social Science, 13(2).115 138

Kang, D., & Evans, J. (2020). Against method: Exploding the boundary between qualitative and quantitative studies of science. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(3), 930–944.https://doi.org/10.1162/ qss_a_00056.

Kim, H., Sefcik, J.S. & Bradway, C. (2017). Characteristics of Qualitative Descriptive Studies: A Systematic Review. Research in Nursing & Health, 40(1),23-42

Kivunja, C. & Kuyuni, B. (2017). Understanding and Applying Research Paradigms in Educational Contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26-41.

Kumar, R. (2011). Research Methodology: A Step by Step Guide for Beginners. Third edition. London: SAGE publications LTD.

Mehrad, A. & Zangeneh, M.H.T. (2019). Comparison between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Approaches: Social Sciences. International Journal for Research and Educational Studies, 5(7), 1-7.

Mohajan, H. (2018). Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7(1), 23-48.

Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a Qualitative Document Analysis.The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64-77.

Mwita, K. M. (2022). Factors influencing data saturation in qualitative studies. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 11(4), 414-420.DOI: https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i4.1776

Mwita, K. M. (2022). Factors to consider when choosing data collection methods. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 11(5), 532-538.DOI: https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i5.1842

Ndi, H.N., Ndi, R.A., Bang, H. N., Mbah. M. F. & Ndzo, J. A. (2021). Health and economic imperatives for households in the context of the anti-Covid-19 strategy in Cameroon. The case of Yaounde. Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, 3(5), 356-375.

Noble, H. &Smith, J. (2015). Issues of validity and reliability in Qualitative Research.

Park, Y., Konge, L., & Artino, A. R. (2020). The Positivism Paradigm of Research. Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 95 (5),690-694.http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ ACM.0000000000003093.

Punch, K. F. (2013). Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. SAGE Publications.

Rehman, A. A. & Alharthi, K.A. (2016). An Introduction to Research Paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(8),51-59.

Roopa, S. & Rani, M.S. (2012). Questionnaire Designing for a Survey. J IndOrthod Soc 46(4), 273-277.

Ryan, Gemma (2018). Introduction to Positivism, Interpretivism and Critical Theory. Nurse Researcher, 25(4), 41–49.

Smit, B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2018). Observations in Qualitative Inquiry: When What You See Is Not What You See. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17, 1-3

Thomas, R. (2014). Teaching and Learning Focus Group Facilitation: An Encounter with Experiential Learning in a Graduate Sociology Classroom. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 7(1), 1-15.

Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J. B., Thorpe, S. &Young, T. (2018). Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period.BMC Medical Research Methodology.18(48), 1-18.