9699 · 2.1
Types of data, methods and research design — FAQ
Frequently asked questions for 9699 Types of data, methods and research design. Direct answers first, then deeper explanation — then practise with marking.
Is quantitative data always better and more 'scientific' than qualitative data?
Not necessarily. The 'best' type of data depends entirely on the research aim. Quantitative data, favoured by Positivists, is excellent for identifying broad patterns and correlations in large populations, offering high reliability. However, qualitative data, favoured by Interpretivists, is superior for understanding the complex meanings, motivations, and social processes behind those patterns, offering high validity. One is not inherently better; they simply answer different kinds of questions.
Does using secondary data automatically mean the research is of a lower quality?
No, this is a common misconception. While secondary data might not be a perfect fit for the research question, high-quality sources like the UK Census or the Crime Survey for England and Wales offer data on a scale and level of representativeness that a lone sociologist could never achieve. The key is for the sociologist to be aware of who collected the data and for what purpose, and to critically evaluate it for any potential bias or shortcomings before using it.
Can an Interpretivist sociologist ever use a quantitative method like a survey?
Yes. While Interpretivists favour qualitative methods to achieve 'Verstehen', they are not rigidly bound. A sociologist's choice of method is pragmatic. An Interpretivist might use a survey with open-ended questions to gather rich qualitative responses from a wider group. Alternatively, they might use a small-scale structured survey as a preliminary tool to identify key themes or individuals to select for more in-depth qualitative follow-up, such as unstructured interviews. The method is a tool, not a theoretical straitjacket.