Talk:Qualitative research

message: (Note: this page was redirected to Talk:Qualitative psychological research for some reason not given.  Unfortunately, that page is affected by the block-compression problem, so can't be moved.  I've therefore moved the contents here by manual cut-and-paste, Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 11:44, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This section needs either improving, or two new pages.
Qualitative inorganic and organic analysis is totally different (chalk and cheese!).
Adding Silver Nitrate to a solution and seeing a white precipitate would rule out Sodium Nitrate, but it doesn't prove the prescence of Sodium Chloride.
I shall try to write something soon. Jeff Knaggs 22:36, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qualitative analysis (Chemistry) 

message: Non-social science meanings should probably be separated into other articles, since there's no content overlap. Not sure where the information might be merged; maybe those meanings could have their own articles - but they might resemble dicdefs. Rd232 15:00, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  non-social science meanings 

message: Any comments on pros and cons of creating the :Category:Qualitative method?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: I recently looked into this article to see if it was worth recommending to a friend who is not in the field of social sciences (whereas I am) to get at least a glimpse of what Qualitative Research is.
This article definitely needs some improvements, right now it does not explain much, and few major developments are simply left out (Grounded Theory is by no means a new invention...), and others are simply wrong (quantitative research does not prove hypotheses, it does try to prove them wrong, and notes the probability of having not found a way to prove the hypotheses wrong, basically speaking) or at least not helpful in understanding qual. research. 
Neither the English not the German language version should be left the way it is, and mayhaps they could get rewritten by a group of people who actually work with qualitative research methods and know why they do it? 
84.191.160.149 20:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  reworking of article desperately needed 

message: This article definitely needs some pictures to relieve the eye. Got any suggestions? 204.52.215.107 06:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: In today's usage, "qualitative research" generally applies to the social sciences.  All references to the hard sciences should be taken out of the article or delegated to a subsection near the end of the article.  Someone who is not familiar with the quantitative and qualitative research approaches might find references to the hard sciences too much to handle and become confused. Remember, sometimes (or oftentimes) people log on to Wikipedia to get the broad picture of a topic that interests them.
Qualitative researchers from the disciplines of Education, Recreation, Communications, Nursing, Sociology, and last but not least, Anthropology should be invited to take a look at this.
→I disagree with the premise.  As some of the other edits show, qualitative research is alive and well in many areas, not just social research. The difference is largely that for most scientists, with the exception of those physicists who follow Feynman's dictum of "shut up and calculate," the distinction between qualitative and quantitative is a minor issue and methods are chosen and mixed as required, rather than being seen as a huge epistemological and ontological divide. Mysteryrare (talk) 00:22, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emphasis Should be Placed on the Social Sciences 

message: The following is meant as a request for clarification only.
Point 4, in the list at the beginning, about qualitative research depending on communication and observation while quantitative relies on instruments could usefully be clarified. Certainly quantitative research uses communication and observation. If the point is that qualitative observation and communication are unstructured and quantitative structured, then that seems to be the same point as #5. 
As for qualitative methods first gaining attention in the 70s, I remember them being hot stuff in the 60s. Certainly participant observation was popular lmg before that. Perhaps some more detail could be added to clarify the statement. John FitzGerald 12:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Communication and observation; history 

message: The article starts out with stating that qualitative research is about the how and why of decision making, it ends with
"Quantitative data is measurable while Qualitative data can not be put into a context that can be graphed or displayed as a mathamatical term."
This does not make sense to me. Decision making can clearly be put into mathematical terms; mathematics concerns itself with a lot more than graphing, displaying and measuring.  Behaviour and reasoning can of course be put into mathematical terms; game theory is a good example.  
I do not have any  formal background in qualitative research, so I have not changed the article, but it's wrong the way it stands. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.191.125.90 (talk) 17:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inherently non-mathematical? 

message: The point is just that the data collected in qualitative research is text based, meaning that the data says something about the quality not quantity of a phenomenon. It's not that it can not be quantified but if it is quantified it is no longer a qualitative research method.
Falkoner 11:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The aims vary with the disciplinary background such as psychologist seeking to gather the reasons that govern a particular behavior. it examines the why, where, when, or who of a given study. Qualitative Research has a strong basis is fields of sociology, political science, social work,and special education. A popular method utilized in this of research is the case study. 58.69.55.191 (talk) 01:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qualitative data 

message: I removed this sentence because it doesn't really make any sense:
""Qualitative research methods also began at the margins of acceptable science. From Freud on, ... Carl Rogers (1942; 1951) ... Piaget ... Mary Ainsworth (1979)."[1]"
If anyone wants to put it back, it needs to be placed in context.
dr.alf 11:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Needing rewording

message: I think this article is a bit of a mess in terms of the references.  I tagged it with nofootnotes because I think it should be a priority to actually identify where (and if) the references are being used for WP:V.
That said, I think the article is at a point where the external links should be to reliable sources that aren't currently being used, or other articles that might not clearly meet WP:RS.  I'm always a bit confused as to how lists of professional associations, research institutes, etc are useful at this point.  If others are inclined to keep them, I think it would be useful to look to WP:LIST and come up with an inclusion criteria so we can manage what is included in the external links.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronz (talk • contribs) 21:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External links in light of state of article

message: hi all - i have a citation that could be added at the 1st [citation needed] tag in the 1st few lines of the article - re how & why vs who, what, where when.
i'm not game to play with the html - it isn't something i've done before, so can i submit a citation for a more experienced editor to add?
61.69.190.228 (talk) 01:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  adding citations 

message: Is there any reason to list Monotonic function as a related page ? OliAtlason (talk) 01:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I highly doubt it -- perhaps someone considered it relevant to some form of qualitative research discussed. I've omitted it, if to be included it should be clear why it's there. Cheers Holon (talk) 01:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monotonic function ? 

message: The following was added to Qualitative data by 90.44.39.221.  I think it belongs here instead.
=== The Assumptions of Qualitative Designs ===
1) Qualitative researchers are concerned primarily with process, rather than outcomes or products.
2) Qualitative researchers are interested in meaning, how people make sense of their lives, experiences, and their structures of the world.
3) The qualitative researcher is the primary instrument for data collection and analysis. Data are mediated through this human instrument, rather than through inventories, questionnaires, or machines.
4) Qualitative research involves fieldwork. The researcher physically goes to the people, setting, site, or institution to observe or record behavior in its natural setting.
5) Qualitative research is descriptive in that the researcher is interested in process, meaning, and understanding gained through words or pictures.
6) The process of qualitative research is inductive in that the researcher builds abstractions, concepts, hypotheses, and theories from details.
Taemyr (talk) 22:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Content from [[Qualitative data]]

message: 1) Qualitative researchers are concerned primarily with process, rather than outcomes or products.
2) Qualitative researchers are interested in meaning, how people make sense of their lives, experiences, and their structures of the world.
3) The qualitative researcher is the primary instrument for data collection and analysis. Data are mediated through this human instrument, rather than through inventories, questionnaires, or machines.
4) Qualitative research involves fieldwork. The researcher physically goes to the people, setting, site, or institution to observe or record behavior in its natural setting.
5) Qualitative research is descriptive in that the researcher is interested in process, meaning, and understanding gained through words or pictures.
6) The process of qualitative research is inductive in that the researcher builds abstractions, concepts, hypotheses, and theories from details.
Taemyr (talk) 22:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Assumptions of Qualitative Designs 

message: As a reader and a writer, I have to say that the meaning is occasionally lost in the verbiage.  
I still can't figure out what this means:
This is because in qualitative research the possibility of the researcher taking a 'neutral' or transcendental position is seen as more problematic in practical and/or philosophical terms. Hence qualitative researchers are often exhorted to reflect on their role in the research process and make this clear in the analysis.
Maybe it reads better in the original language?
If someone with more expertise would like to team up to clarify the article, I would be happy to help.  Please leave a message at my talk page.
Katharine908 (talk) 23:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: the prose is, er, dense

message: Philosophical Research is mentioned as a methodology but what are the sources about this methodology? I've never heard of it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.1.208.141 (talk) 02:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References? 

message: Please see Talk:Qualitative_analysis#Primary_use. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 17:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambig or redirect at [[Qualitative analysis]]?

message: This article needs an adequate definition. The few sentences in the first paragraph do not adequately distinguish it from quantitative research (I'm sure quantitative researchers are looking for hows and whys, for example, and examining things in depth). And how does it differ from journalism, say?
John FitzGerald (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, the definition must better distinguish qualitative vs quantitative by going beyond goals and briefly indicate differences in methods and also discussing the limitations of qualitative research. (Such as the inability of qualitative to make causal inferences.) I also suggest that the intro should indicate how qualitative research can work with quantitative by suggesting lines of investigation. Robotczar (talk) 15:33, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: This article needs to discuss the limitations of qualitative research, most importantly the inability to make causal inferences from qualitative "data". The subjective nature of the evaluation is also an issue. The article needs to point out that qualitative research lacks several key steps or processes of scientific method and, from a scientific perspective, is simply a first observational and speculative step in applying scientific method. It seems important to point our that there is some conflict between practitioners of humanities-oriented research, which sees qualitative research as sufficient; and scientific researchers who see qualitative research as preliminary.Robotczar (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limitations 

message: There is a false dichotomy appropriated by some to assume that qualitative research is somehow deficient as it doesn't result in a scientific deduction. We would all be worse for wear if we accepted what hard empiricists (positivists) wanted us to believe that the only good knowledge out there is defined purely by objective reasoning.  Unfortunately this discussion has gone on ever since Plato deduced that we could solve all of the worlds problems with mathematical knowledge, more recently Locke, Kant, Comte, et. al have all been drawn into this debate. 
I will reiterate this with one simple phrase. The dichotomy is false, the allegiance between us and them is completely unnecessary and in the end it is detrimental to the development of Wikipedia as a well reasoned source of encyclopedic information. The positivists need to naff off and start their bun fight elsewhere. Without the subjectivity of life we would be completely unable to operate as human beings, end of story. There are plenty of things that cannot be answered with an quantitative answer and it doesn't mean that the information gathered is any less valid. --121.222.14.129 (talk) 09:47, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  There are no limitations 

message: This article is overly dense, confusing and disjointed. It goes into too much detail in not enough places and isn't really clear to a lay reader. Here are some thoughts on how to restructure: 
* a better lede paragraph that summarizes what qual research is and what it is used for, in basic terms 
* a section that describes the type of problems & fields qual research is used on 
* splitting data collection methods and data analysis methods into two sections 
* adding a "relationship with quantitative research" section 
* general prose and reference cleanup; this reads like an undergrad paper rather than an encyclopedia article. 
-- phoebe / (talk to me) 15:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Qualitative research. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080527231135/http://ddl.uwinnipeg.ca/res_des/files/readings/cwmills-intel_craft.pdf to http://ddl.uwinnipeg.ca/res_des/files/readings/cwmills-intel_craft.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:22, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Qualitative research. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130326175632/http://answers.mheducation.com:80/marketing/marketing-research/analyzing-and-reporting-qualitative-market-research to http://answers.mheducation.com/marketing/marketing-research/analyzing-and-reporting-qualitative-market-research
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I am working on a major overhaul of the entire article.  I dragged it into my sandbox and am working on it there.  If you have suggestions, please share.  Thanks.  QRfrag (talk) 18:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi QRfrag,  I'm happy to see this. I would be interested in helping with the rewrite. If you like, can you share a link to your rewrite and maybe describe what you want to tackle? Thanks. --Simulo (talk) 20:50, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

text: Yes. Let's work to make this happen. AnaSoc (talk) 22:27, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major overhaul of the entire article 

message: *Lead article sentence could begin with; (today) The field of qualitative research is toward the reality of observation while the field of empirical research (including quantitative research) is toward the reality of experience...
**In philosophy this idea is meant to suggest, the independence of observation with causal thinking, as necessary for formulative thought...A priori and a posteriori.Arnlodg (talk) 15:39, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the current opening paragraph. I don't see the problem with it. Bondegezou (talk) 19:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't have much to do with what is generally meant by qualitative research in the social sciences. Bondegezou (talk) 08:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Observation Qualia Quanta 

message: Regarding the lead, the opening sentence is a clear and concise definition with a citation. The second sentence includes quotation marks (Is this a direct quote or intended for emphasis?) without a citation. The third sentence resorts to a too simplistic comparison (as if "how often" is the only other option to "why" and "how" questions -- maybe it just needs a "For example" at the start...) The lead section gets into a discussion on some qualitative methods (but not a comprehensive overview of methods) which should probably be a section in itself that comes later. The block quote seems unnecessary as it just affirms what has already been stated (a citation would accomplish the same). The lead is too detailed. It gets too technical in terminology and includes a lot of information that would be better suited to come later.
A good start would be to move the methods discussion to a new "Methods" section, and writers can add methods not yet covered.
The section called "Data collection, analysis and field research design" requires work. (There is a whole section on data analysis and should not also be included here.) There could be a section on "Data collection" that describes data collection practices for qualitative research and even link to QR data collection practices like interviews, focus group, visual data, documents, etc. Krm107 (talk) 04:43, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restructuring Needed  

message: Hi! I did an edit not long ago on the introduction. I've noticed it has been changed, with the outline that the intro I gave (below) needed "More editing for a briefer, less technical lead". I can completely empathise with this, and agree it needs further work to relay into straightforward English. 
However, I believe the new edit:
* Reduces the reader's knowledge by not engaging with key issues below such as inductive reasoning, the connection with philosophical roots, etc.
* Makes limited distinction on primary data methods, such as interviewing, and secondary research methods that are also employed e.g. data archivial work, discourse analysis, etc. (this also comes from my edit, so critiquing myself) 
* I also think that 'non-numerical' data is too simple, as Hammarberg and de Lacey outline: 
** "...qualitative studies involve the systematic collection, organization, description and interpretation of textual, verbal or visual data."
I think that, yes simplicity is needed, but there needs to be a compromise with loss of knowledge. 
I would be grateful to hear anyones thoughouts on this and, looking at the quantitative definition, I am sure that this introduction can be expanded upon a lot more than it is right now. 
Previous edit, 31 October 2020: 
Qualitative research is a research strategy that focuses importance on the collection of words in obtaining and understanding data through an inductive approach that seeks primarily to generate theory.
Qualitative work stems from interpretivist epistemology which critiques empiricist and positivist standpoints that there are objective truths in world, rather they emphasis individuals' interpretations of the world as the key source of data and understanding. Instead the world is a social reality, where meaning and reality are an ever changing product of an individual's construction.
 
This relies on unstructured and non-numerical data. Data obtained by the researcher from first-hand observation, interviews, questionnaires, focus groups, participant-observation, recordings made in natural settings, documents, and artifacts. Qualitative methods include ethnography, grounded theory, discourse analysis, and interpretative phenomenological analysis.
Current edit, 31 October 2020:
Qualitative research relies on data obtained by the researcher from first-hand observation, interviews, questionnaires, focus groups, participant-observation, recordings made in natural settings, documents, and artifacts. The data are generally nonnumerical. Qualitative methods include ethnography, grounded theory, discourse analysis, and interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative research methods have been used in sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, social work, and educational research. Qualitative researchers study individuals' understanding of their social reality.
:I prefer the current edit, but maybe it could be expanded with some material from the previous edit?
:Problems with the previous edit: "focuses importance on the collection of words" - usually, but qual research is done on images and other materials that are not words. "Qualitative work stems from interpretivist epistemology" - often, but there is qual research done within a positivist frame or that otherwise doesn't adopt an interpretivist epistemology. Bondegezou (talk) 12:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with User:Bondegezou. I like the current edit of the lead. It could be expanded a little to mention images. Perhaps someone could cite a text on qualitative research that underlines the application of qualitative research to images. Iss246 (talk) 18:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro definition edit  

message: The aims vary with the disciplinary background such as psychologist seeking to gather the reasons that govern a particular behavior. it examines the why, where, when, or who of a given study. Qualitative Research has a strong basis is fields of sociology, political science, social work,and special education. A popular method utilized in this of research is the case study. 58.69.55.191 (talk) 00:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Practical research