advantages and limitations of research

Strengths and Limitations of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods

• September 2017
• 3(9):369-387

• Instituto Superior Politécnico Gaya
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Theoxaris Zagkas

• Imroatin Nuzula
• Zaki Nur Fahmawati

• Fikri Fuadi Azmy

• José Augusto Monteiro

• C.R.Kothari
• Hamza Alshenqeeti
• Looi Theam Choy
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Integrated Primary & Secondary Research

2 Pros and Cons of Research

Advantages and Disadvantages of Primary Research

If enough information cannot be found through internal or external secondary data to solve the NPO’s problem, the organization will then proceed to design a study wherein they will collect Primary Data ;  information collected for a particular research question or project.

Primary research often is richer and more directly useful, but it also has its downsides. The term primary research is widely used in Academic Research , Market Research, and Competitive Intelligence.  Primary research aids organizations with obtaining information directly from sources themselves, instead of relying on the research of others.

Displayed in the table below is a detailed pro and cons list on Primary Research. It lists several advantages and disadvantages and provides brief information on each component.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Secondary Research

Like primary research, secondary research offers pros and cons. Similar to the table provided above, lays a table below displaying detailed pros and cons list on Secondary Research. It lists several advantages and disadvantages and provides brief information on each component.

Attribution

This page contains material taken from:

Learning, L. (2020). Introduction to Sociology. Retrieved July 27, 2020, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/sociology/chapter/research-methods/

Primary Market Research. (2020). Retrieved July 23, 2020, from http://kolibri.teacherinabox.org.au/modules/enboundless/www.boundless.com/business/concepts/primary-market-research-0-8219/index.html

Sagepub (2006). Research in Nonprofit Organizations. Retrieved from https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/9066_WymerCh3.pdf

Types of Data. (2020). Retrieved July 23, 2020, from https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/advertising-campaigns-start-to-finish/s08-01-types-of-data.html

New information the organization gathers directly from respondents they interact with, surveys, or alternative research methods.

An Open Guide to Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) Copyright © 2023 by Andrea Niosi and KPU Marketing 4201 Class of Summer 2020 is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Qualitative vs Quantitative Research Methods & Data Analysis

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

What is the difference between quantitative and qualitative?

The main difference between quantitative and qualitative research is the type of data they collect and analyze.

Quantitative research collects numerical data and analyzes it using statistical methods. The aim is to produce objective, empirical data that can be measured and expressed in numerical terms. Quantitative research is often used to test hypotheses, identify patterns, and make predictions.

Qualitative research , on the other hand, collects non-numerical data such as words, images, and sounds. The focus is on exploring subjective experiences, opinions, and attitudes, often through observation and interviews.

Qualitative research aims to produce rich and detailed descriptions of the phenomenon being studied, and to uncover new insights and meanings.

Quantitative data is information about quantities, and therefore numbers, and qualitative data is descriptive, and regards phenomenon which can be observed but not measured, such as language.

What Is Qualitative Research?

Qualitative research is the process of collecting, analyzing, and interpreting non-numerical data, such as language. Qualitative research can be used to understand how an individual subjectively perceives and gives meaning to their social reality.

Qualitative data is non-numerical data, such as text, video, photographs, or audio recordings. This type of data can be collected using diary accounts or in-depth interviews and analyzed using grounded theory or thematic analysis.

Qualitative research is multimethod in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. Denzin and Lincoln (1994, p. 2)

Interest in qualitative data came about as the result of the dissatisfaction of some psychologists (e.g., Carl Rogers) with the scientific study of psychologists such as behaviorists (e.g., Skinner ).

Since psychologists study people, the traditional approach to science is not seen as an appropriate way of carrying out research since it fails to capture the totality of human experience and the essence of being human.  Exploring participants’ experiences is known as a phenomenological approach (re: Humanism ).

Qualitative research is primarily concerned with meaning, subjectivity, and lived experience. The goal is to understand the quality and texture of people’s experiences, how they make sense of them, and the implications for their lives.

Qualitative research aims to understand the social reality of individuals, groups, and cultures as nearly as possible as participants feel or live it. Thus, people and groups are studied in their natural setting.

Some examples of qualitative research questions are provided, such as what an experience feels like, how people talk about something, how they make sense of an experience, and how events unfold for people.

Research following a qualitative approach is exploratory and seeks to explain ‘how’ and ‘why’ a particular phenomenon, or behavior, operates as it does in a particular context. It can be used to generate hypotheses and theories from the data.

Qualitative Methods

There are different types of qualitative research methods, including diary accounts, in-depth interviews , documents, focus groups , case study research , and ethnography.

The results of qualitative methods provide a deep understanding of how people perceive their social realities and in consequence, how they act within the social world.

The researcher has several methods for collecting empirical materials, ranging from the interview to direct observation, to the analysis of artifacts, documents, and cultural records, to the use of visual materials or personal experience. Denzin and Lincoln (1994, p. 14)

Here are some examples of qualitative data:

Interview transcripts : Verbatim records of what participants said during an interview or focus group. They allow researchers to identify common themes and patterns, and draw conclusions based on the data. Interview transcripts can also be useful in providing direct quotes and examples to support research findings.

Observations : The researcher typically takes detailed notes on what they observe, including any contextual information, nonverbal cues, or other relevant details. The resulting observational data can be analyzed to gain insights into social phenomena, such as human behavior, social interactions, and cultural practices.

Unstructured interviews : generate qualitative data through the use of open questions.  This allows the respondent to talk in some depth, choosing their own words.  This helps the researcher develop a real sense of a person’s understanding of a situation.

Diaries or journals : Written accounts of personal experiences or reflections.

Notice that qualitative data could be much more than just words or text. Photographs, videos, sound recordings, and so on, can be considered qualitative data. Visual data can be used to understand behaviors, environments, and social interactions.

Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative research is endlessly creative and interpretive. The researcher does not just leave the field with mountains of empirical data and then easily write up his or her findings.

Qualitative interpretations are constructed, and various techniques can be used to make sense of the data, such as content analysis, grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), or discourse analysis .

For example, thematic analysis is a qualitative approach that involves identifying implicit or explicit ideas within the data. Themes will often emerge once the data has been coded .

Key Features

• Events can be understood adequately only if they are seen in context. Therefore, a qualitative researcher immerses her/himself in the field, in natural surroundings. The contexts of inquiry are not contrived; they are natural. Nothing is predefined or taken for granted.
• Qualitative researchers want those who are studied to speak for themselves, to provide their perspectives in words and other actions. Therefore, qualitative research is an interactive process in which the persons studied teach the researcher about their lives.
• The qualitative researcher is an integral part of the data; without the active participation of the researcher, no data exists.
• The study’s design evolves during the research and can be adjusted or changed as it progresses. For the qualitative researcher, there is no single reality. It is subjective and exists only in reference to the observer.
• The theory is data-driven and emerges as part of the research process, evolving from the data as they are collected.

Limitations of Qualitative Research

• Because of the time and costs involved, qualitative designs do not generally draw samples from large-scale data sets.
• The problem of adequate validity or reliability is a major criticism. Because of the subjective nature of qualitative data and its origin in single contexts, it is difficult to apply conventional standards of reliability and validity. For example, because of the central role played by the researcher in the generation of data, it is not possible to replicate qualitative studies.
• Also, contexts, situations, events, conditions, and interactions cannot be replicated to any extent, nor can generalizations be made to a wider context than the one studied with confidence.
• The time required for data collection, analysis, and interpretation is lengthy. Analysis of qualitative data is difficult, and expert knowledge of an area is necessary to interpret qualitative data. Great care must be taken when doing so, for example, looking for mental illness symptoms.

Advantages of Qualitative Research

• Because of close researcher involvement, the researcher gains an insider’s view of the field. This allows the researcher to find issues that are often missed (such as subtleties and complexities) by the scientific, more positivistic inquiries.
• Qualitative descriptions can be important in suggesting possible relationships, causes, effects, and dynamic processes.
• Qualitative analysis allows for ambiguities/contradictions in the data, which reflect social reality (Denscombe, 2010).
• Qualitative research uses a descriptive, narrative style; this research might be of particular benefit to the practitioner as she or he could turn to qualitative reports to examine forms of knowledge that might otherwise be unavailable, thereby gaining new insight.

What Is Quantitative Research?

Quantitative research involves the process of objectively collecting and analyzing numerical data to describe, predict, or control variables of interest.

The goals of quantitative research are to test causal relationships between variables , make predictions, and generalize results to wider populations.

Quantitative researchers aim to establish general laws of behavior and phenomenon across different settings/contexts. Research is used to test a theory and ultimately support or reject it.

Quantitative Methods

Experiments typically yield quantitative data, as they are concerned with measuring things.  However, other research methods, such as controlled observations and questionnaires , can produce both quantitative information.

For example, a rating scale or closed questions on a questionnaire would generate quantitative data as these produce either numerical data or data that can be put into categories (e.g., “yes,” “no” answers).

Experimental methods limit how research participants react to and express appropriate social behavior.

Findings are, therefore, likely to be context-bound and simply a reflection of the assumptions that the researcher brings to the investigation.

There are numerous examples of quantitative data in psychological research, including mental health. Here are a few examples:

Another example is the Experience in Close Relationships Scale (ECR), a self-report questionnaire widely used to assess adult attachment styles .

The ECR provides quantitative data that can be used to assess attachment styles and predict relationship outcomes.

Neuroimaging data : Neuroimaging techniques, such as MRI and fMRI, provide quantitative data on brain structure and function.

This data can be analyzed to identify brain regions involved in specific mental processes or disorders.

For example, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) is a clinician-administered questionnaire widely used to assess the severity of depressive symptoms in individuals.

The BDI consists of 21 questions, each scored on a scale of 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating more severe depressive symptoms. 

Quantitative Data Analysis

Statistics help us turn quantitative data into useful information to help with decision-making. We can use statistics to summarize our data, describing patterns, relationships, and connections. Statistics can be descriptive or inferential.

Descriptive statistics help us to summarize our data. In contrast, inferential statistics are used to identify statistically significant differences between groups of data (such as intervention and control groups in a randomized control study).

• Quantitative researchers try to control extraneous variables by conducting their studies in the lab.
• The research aims for objectivity (i.e., without bias) and is separated from the data.
• The design of the study is determined before it begins.
• For the quantitative researcher, the reality is objective, exists separately from the researcher, and can be seen by anyone.
• Research is used to test a theory and ultimately support or reject it.

Limitations of Quantitative Research

• Context: Quantitative experiments do not take place in natural settings. In addition, they do not allow participants to explain their choices or the meaning of the questions they may have for those participants (Carr, 1994).
• Researcher expertise: Poor knowledge of the application of statistical analysis may negatively affect analysis and subsequent interpretation (Black, 1999).
• Variability of data quantity: Large sample sizes are needed for more accurate analysis. Small-scale quantitative studies may be less reliable because of the low quantity of data (Denscombe, 2010). This also affects the ability to generalize study findings to wider populations.
• Confirmation bias: The researcher might miss observing phenomena because of focus on theory or hypothesis testing rather than on the theory of hypothesis generation.

Advantages of Quantitative Research

• Scientific objectivity: Quantitative data can be interpreted with statistical analysis, and since statistics are based on the principles of mathematics, the quantitative approach is viewed as scientifically objective and rational (Carr, 1994; Denscombe, 2010).
• Useful for testing and validating already constructed theories.
• Rapid analysis: Sophisticated software removes much of the need for prolonged data analysis, especially with large volumes of data involved (Antonius, 2003).
• Replication: Quantitative data is based on measured values and can be checked by others because numerical data is less open to ambiguities of interpretation.
• Hypotheses can also be tested because of statistical analysis (Antonius, 2003).

Antonius, R. (2003). Interpreting quantitative data with SPSS . Sage.

Black, T. R. (1999). Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: An integrated approach to research design, measurement and statistics . Sage.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology . Qualitative Research in Psychology , 3, 77–101.

Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research : what method for nursing? Journal of advanced nursing, 20(4) , 716-721.

Denscombe, M. (2010). The Good Research Guide: for small-scale social research. McGraw Hill.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln. Y. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications Inc.

Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Nursing research, 17(4) , 364.

Minichiello, V. (1990). In-Depth Interviewing: Researching People. Longman Cheshire.

Punch, K. (1998). Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: Sage

Further Information

• Mixed methods research
• Designing qualitative research
• Methods of data collection and analysis
• Introduction to quantitative and qualitative research
• Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?
• Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data
• Qualitative data analysis: the framework approach
• Using the framework method for the analysis of
• Qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research
• Content Analysis
• Grounded Theory
• Thematic Analysis

• Voxco Online
• Voxco Panel Management
• Voxco Panel Portal
• Voxco Audience
• Voxco Mobile Offline
• Voxco Dialer Cloud
• Voxco Dialer On-premise
• Voxco TCPA Connect
• Voxco Analytics
• Voxco Text & Sentiment Analysis

• 40+ question types
• Drag-and-drop interface
• Skip logic and branching
• Multi-lingual survey
• Text piping
• Question library
• CSS customization
• White-label surveys
• Customizable ‘Thank You’ page
• Customizable survey theme
• Reminder send-outs
• Survey rewards
• Social media
• Website surveys
• Correlation analysis
• Cross-tabulation analysis
• Trend analysis
• Real-time dashboard
• Customizable report
• Email address validation
• Recaptcha validation
• SSL security

Take a peek at our powerful survey features to design surveys that scale discoveries.

Download feature sheet.

• Hospitality
• Academic Research
• Customer Experience
• Employee Experience
• Product Experience
• Market Research
• Social Research
• Data Analysis

Explore Voxco 

Need to map Voxco’s features & offerings? We can help!

Watch a Demo 

Download Brochures 

Get a Quote

• NPS Calculator
• CES Calculator
• A/B Testing Calculator
• Margin of Error Calculator
• Sample Size Calculator
• CX Strategy & Management Hub
• Market Research Hub
• Patient Experience Hub
• Employee Experience Hub
• NPS Knowledge Hub
• Market Research Guide
• Customer Experience Guide
• Survey Research Guides
• Survey Template Library
• Webinars and Events
• Feature Sheets
• Try a sample survey
• Professional Services

Get exclusive insights into research trends and best practices from top experts! Access Voxco’s ‘State of Research Report 2024 edition’ .

We’ve been avid users of the Voxco platform now for over 20 years. It gives us the flexibility to routinely enhance our survey toolkit and provides our clients with a more robust dataset and story to tell their clients.

VP Innovation & Strategic Partnerships, The Logit Group

• Client Stories
• Voxco Reviews
• Why Voxco Research?
• Careers at Voxco
• Vulnerabilities and Ethical Hacking

Explore Regional Offices

• Survey Software The world’s leading omnichannel survey software
• Online Survey Tools Create sophisticated surveys with ease.
• Mobile Offline Conduct efficient field surveys.
• Text Analysis
• Close The Loop
• Automated Translations
• NPS Dashboard
• CATI Manage high volume phone surveys efficiently
• Cloud/On-premise Dialer TCPA compliant Cloud on-premise dialer
• IVR Survey Software Boost productivity with automated call workflows.
• Analytics Analyze survey data with visual dashboards
• Panel Manager Nurture a loyal community of respondents.
• Survey Portal Best-in-class user friendly survey portal.
• Voxco Audience Conduct targeted sample research in hours.
• Predictive Analytics
• Customer 360
• Customer Loyalty
• Fraud & Risk Management
• AI/ML Enablement Services
• Credit Underwriting

Find the best survey software for you! (Along with a checklist to compare platforms)

Get Buyer’s Guide

• 100+ question types
• SMS surveys
• Financial Services
• Banking & Financial Services
• Retail Solution
• Risk Management
• Customer Lifecycle Solutions
• Net Promoter Score
• Customer Behaviour Analytics
• Customer Segmentation
• Data Unification

Explore Voxco 

Watch a Demo 

Download Brochures 

• CX Strategy & Management Hub
• The Voxco Guide to Customer Experience
• Professional services
• Blogs & White papers
• Case Studies

Find the best customer experience platform

Uncover customer pain points, analyze feedback and run successful CX programs with the best CX platform for your team.

Get the Guide Now

VP Innovation & Strategic Partnerships, The Logit Group

• Why Voxco Intelligence?
• Our clients
• Client stories
• Featuresheets

An overview of Research Methods: Types, Advantages, & Disadvantages of Research.

• August 31, 2021

Transform your insight generation process

Use our in-depth online survey guide to create an actionable feedback collection survey process.

SHARE THE ARTICLE ON

Research methods are nothing but the way in which you carry out your research and collect information. Your research method must be peculiar to the kind of information you are going to collect and the end result you wish to achieve with it. Choosing the right research collection mechanism, tool, and analysis method lie at the core of your research.

In this blog, we will focus on the advantages and disadvantages of research. We will look through different types of methods used and the pros and cons of each. 

What are the types of research methods?

When planning your research you need to make two decisions – 

• How you will collect your data?
• How will you analyze the data?

These two questions will help you map out your entire research plan. 

There are three ways research methods are divided. Each of these ways serves a certain purpose. These three ways depend on how you want to collect the data. 

•  Do you want to collect numerical or textual data? – Quantitative Vs. Qualitative Method.  
• Do you want to perform experiments or gather data as it is? – Experimental Vs Descriptive Method.
• Do you want to collect your own data or want to use existing data? – Primary Vs. Secondary Method.

Now that we have established the three different approaches, let’s dive deeper into the advantages and disadvantages of research. 

Advantages and Disadvantages of Research Methods

We will look at the pros and cons as we explain each form of the data collection method. We will explain all six types of methods in this section. 

1. Qualitative vs Quantitative

On the basis of the data you want to collect, your research methodology can be bifurcated into these two types of approaches. 

Qualitative method

Qualitative data includes textual information that presents insights and explanations in the respondents’ own words. Unstructured questions which allow the respondents to elaborate their opinions without any restrictions are included under this sub-type.

Now let’s look at the advantages and disadvantages of research type. 

• Comprehensive : A respondent has the liberty to dive deep into explanations and follow-ups that allow researchers to identify positives and fallouts.
• Flexible and genuine: Given that the onus of answering lies completely with the respondent as there are no fixed answer choices, the number of respondents does not matter as long as the ones included in the research are representative of the target group’s sentiment and sampling bias can be avoided.

Disadvantages

• Difficult to analyze: Analysing qualitative information is a meticulous activity that requires careful attention to detail while listing key takeaways from individual responses
•   Highly subjective: Qualitative responses vary in terms of length and type of responses. Listing one standard summary that provides an umbrella to each response is tedious, particularly when there is a large sample involved.

[Related read: Quantitative Vs Qualitative Research ]

Quantitative method

This includes pre-planned questions which provide numeric answers to questions. This method usually explains the “what” in research. 

The quantitative method helps discover trends and patterns in customer feedback. It also helps establish the initial groundwork needed to conduct in-depth research. 

Let’s see the advantages and disadvantages of research collecting quantitative data. 

•   Easily summarized : Numerical data is easy to analyze using statistical analysis tools that provide a holistic summary of respondent answers.
• Objective in nature: The questions in this method have limited answer options making it easy to establish standardized answers that have low room for variability.

Disadvantage

• Lacks insights: Quantitative method does not allow the respondent to elaborate on the reasoning behind the choice of their answers. The restrictive nature of such a study makes it necessary for the researcher to complement their study using open-ended comments that give a peek into the respondent’s mindset.
• Requires expertise: Although there are available tools to put quantitative data into perspective, the leg work of choosing and applying those specific tools requires a certain level of skill so that the analysis can be properly executed.

2. Descriptive vs Experimental

Based on how you want to conduct the research we can categorize them into the following two research methods. 

Descriptive method

The descriptive method is based on gathering data without indulging or intervening. This type of way is usually used to describe characteristics or phenomena based on the viewpoints provided by a target set of people.

Let’s explore the advantages and disadvantages of research conducted without intervention.

• Large scale and quick: Descriptive data can be gathered from a large number of respondents using the right mechanism that maximizes reach along with increasing promptness in distribution and collection.
• Cohesive mechanism: This method of research collects both qualitative and quantitative data and can be used as a stand-alone data collection method.
• Cause and effect relationship cannot be established: It is difficult to highlight cause and effect relationships using correlational studies.
• Restrictive : Case studies, which are a type of descriptive study may limit participants to peculiar individuals which are a good fit for that case.

Experimental method

This method is focused on using variables to study relationships in a controlled environment. Independent variables are manipulated to study their impact on the dependent variable.

Let’s take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of research conducted by experiment . 

• Explains cause and effect relationship : It is a meticulous study that explains the correlation between the dependent and independent variables in an accurate manner.
• Specific results: The outcomes of the study are measured exactly with respect to what the research organization is looking for and the variables can be influenced accordingly.
• Research bias: The sway over the research can lead to window dressing and the researcher to skew the results in a certain direction.
• Time-consuming: Creating an environment that facilitates the precise study of variables, in itself, is an elongated process. Added to that many studies cannot be carried out in an artificial environment due to their unrealistic nature.

3. Primary vs Secondary

Do you want to run surveys using an online survey tool ? Conduct interviews in person? Or, do you want to use data from previous research conducted by other researchers? 

Depending on the channels you use to collect the data, the research method can be divided into primary or secondary types. 

Primary method

This method collects first-hand data directly from the respondents or the target group. Interviews focus groups and surveys are just some of the methods suitable for this mechanism.

Now let’s look at the advantages and disadvantages of research conducted by gathering first-hand data. 

• Updated information: Data collected using primary methods is based on updated market information and helps in tackling dynamic conditions.
•   Better control and customization : Primary data collection is tailor-made to suit the specific needs of the organization that is conducting it. Identifying pain points and gaining additional information becomes easier when the respondent is administered on a real-time basis.
• Costly : Primary data collection requires the organization to invest in each and every aspect of the research and so, is relatively expensive.
• Cannot be performed by everyone: The various types of primary methods cannot be executed by untrained people. Professionals who specialize in advanced data collection and analytics can only be relied upon to deliver on the end objectives.

Secondary method

Secondary data uses existing information collected by other researchers to answer research questions. The nature of the documents that the organization uses for gathering information depends on the research topic.

Let’s see what are the advantages and disadvantages of research when you use existing data. 

• Saves time and money: Companies need not invest in surveying data that has already been collected and documented by other platforms.
• Expanded source: Accessibility to data points from multiple locations and time periods makes comparison and trend analysis feasible, which improves the quality of decisions.
• Data doesn’t cater to researchers’ needs: When you use data collected by other researchers it is often not present in the way you need for your research goal. For e.g., say you want to collect data on the mobile usage of senior citizens. You may consider the age 70 and above for your research, but the data available may be based on ages 50 and above. 
• Not real-time: The data may be outdated since they have been collected in the past. When you are conducting market research, secondary data can risk your goal since market trends change frequently. 

[Related read: Primary Vs Secondary Research ]

Now that we have looked at the advantages and disadvantages of research in all its forms and approaches, let’s go to the second step in the research – data analysis. 

Analysis techniques used in research

Methodologies are also distinguished in terms of how a company evaluates the data that has been collected by it. It’s not the data that you collect but how you choose to use it that makes a difference.

These analysis methods prevent data overload by categorizing and summarizing it in ways that facilitate deeper understanding. Based on the nature of the data, there are two categories of analysis: Quantitative and Qualitative analysis. 

It is important to understand how these two types of analysis are performed because they also contribute to the advantages and disadvantages of research. 

Qualitative analysis

Qualitative analysis is used to extract meaning and highlight central ideas in textual data. It reflects upon the key sentiments projected in an open-ended comment, idea, feedback, or any other unrestricted information. 

The qualitative analysis deals with inexact information which can be difficult to compute and is highly variable. This necessitates a meticulous understanding of each response for grasping the crux of the respondent’s point of view.

Quantitative analysis

In this method, the data collected is subjected to specialized statistical analysis tools that are implemented by trained experts to ensure accuracy. The data analysis method opted for, depends on the needs of the organization and is meant for increased and simple comprehension by stakeholders. 

These analyses produce substantive results that can be used to back up decisions. Close-ended, structured, and experimental questions can be evaluated using this method. The summary so obtained can be easily exported in relevant formats for easy usability.

Explore all the survey question types possible on Voxco

Wrapping up;.

This sums up the advantages and disadvantages of research and how each type of approach contributes to the research goal.

When you plan your research use these three divisions to decide the best way to get the most out of it. Use the questions mentioned at the top to determine the best way to conduct your research and gather reliable and accurate data. 

Explore Voxco Survey Software

+ Omnichannel Survey Software 

+ Online Survey Software 

+ CATI Survey Software 

+ IVR Survey Software 

+ Market Research Tool

+ Customer Experience Tool 

+ Product Experience Software 

+ Enterprise Survey Software 

Measure Customer Emotions

How to Measure Customer Emotions SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Table of Contents As consumers, emotions drive us to pursue a large number of our choices.

How to do predictive analytics

Predictive Analytics SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Table of Contents Many good business courses extol the virtues of foresight and strategy. In today’s competitive world, reacting

Reliability vs Validity : Meaning , Measurement methods, Ways to improve

Distinguishing Between Reliability and Validity in Research Outcomes Transform your insight generation process Use our in-depth online survey guide to create an actionable feedback collection

Customer Engagement Platform

Customer Engagement Platform SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on linkedin Table of Contents Did you have any idea that

Customer appreciation: Definition and ways to achieve it

Customer appreciation: Definition and ways to achieve it SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on linkedin Table of Contents What

Conceptual Research

Conceptual Research Try a free Voxco Online sample survey! Unlock your Sample Survey SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Table of Contents What is Conceptual Research Conceptual

We use cookies in our website to give you the best browsing experience and to tailor advertising. By continuing to use our website, you give us consent to the use of cookies. Read More

13 Pros and Cons of Quantitative Research Methods

Quantitative research utilizes mathematical, statistical, and computational tools to derive results. This structure creates a conclusiveness to the purposes being studied as it quantifies problems to understand how prevalent they are.

It is through this process that the research creates a projectable result which applies to the larger general population.

Instead of providing a subjective overview like qualitative research offers, quantitative research identifies structured cause-and-effect relationships. Once the problem is identified by those involved in the study, the factors associated with the issue become possible to identify as well. Experiments and surveys are the primary tools of this research method to create specific results, even when independent or interdependent factors are present.

These are the quantitative research pros and cons to consider.

List of the Pros of Quantitative Research

1. Data collection occurs rapidly with quantitative research. Because the data points of quantitative research involve surveys, experiments, and real-time gathering, there are few delays in the collection of materials to examine. That means the information under study can be analyzed very quickly when compared to other research methods. The need to separate systems or identify variables is not as prevalent with this option either.

2. The samples of quantitative research are randomized. Quantitative research uses a randomized process to collect information, preventing bias from entering into the data. This randomness creates an additional advantage in the fact that the information supplied through this research can then be statistically applied to the rest of the population group which is under study. Although there is the possibility that some demographics could be left out despite randomization to create errors when the research is applied to all, the results of this research type make it possible to glean relevant data in a fraction of the time that other methods require.

3. It offers reliable and repeatable information. Quantitative research validates itself by offering consistent results when the same data points are examined under randomized conditions. Although you may receive different percentages or slight variances in other results, repetitive information creates the foundation for certainty in future planning processes. Businesses can tailor their messages or programs based on these results to meet specific needs in their community. The statistics become a reliable resource which offer confidence to the decision-making process.

4. You can generalize your findings with quantitative research. The issue with other research types is that there is no generalization effect possible with the data points they gather. Quantitative information may offer an overview instead of specificity when looking at target groups, but that also makes it possible to identify core subjects, needs, or wants. Every finding developed through this method can go beyond the participant group to the overall demographic being looked at with this work. That makes it possible to identify trouble areas before difficulties have a chance to start.

5. The research is anonymous. Researchers often use quantitative data when looking at sensitive topics because of the anonymity involved. People are not required to identify themselves with specificity in the data collected. Even if surveys or interviews are distributed to each individual, their personal information does not make it to the form. This setup reduces the risk of false results because some research participants are ashamed or disturbed about the subject discussions which involve them.

6. You can perform the research remotely. Quantitative research does not require the participants to report to a specific location to collect the data. You can speak with individuals on the phone, conduct surveys online, or use other remote methods that allow for information to move from one party to the other. Although the number of questions you ask or their difficulty can influence how many people choose to participate, the only real cost factor to the participants involves their time. That can make this option a lot cheaper than other methods.

7. Information from a larger sample is used with quantitative research. Qualitative research must use small sample sizes because it requires in-depth data points to be collected by the researchers. This creates a time-consuming resource, reducing the number of people involved. The structure of quantitative research allows for broader studies to take place, which enables better accuracy when attempting to create generalizations about the subject matter involved. There are fewer variables which can skew the results too because you’re dealing with close-ended information instead of open-ended questions.

List of the Cons of Quantitative Research

1. You cannot follow-up on any answers in quantitative research. Quantitative research offers an important limit: you cannot go back to participants after they’ve filled out a survey if there are more questions to ask. There is a limited chance to probe the answers offered in the research, which creates fewer data points to examine when compared to other methods. There is still the advantage of anonymity, but if a survey offers inconclusive or questionable results, there is no way to verify the validity of the data. If enough participants turn in similar answers, it could skew the data in a way that does not apply to the general population.

2. The characteristics of the participants may not apply to the general population. There is always a risk that the research collected using the quantitative method may not apply to the general population. It is easy to draw false correlations because the information seems to come from random sources. Despite the efforts to prevent bias, the characteristics of any randomized sample are not guaranteed to apply to everyone. That means the only certainty offered using this method is that the data applies to those who choose to participate.

3. You cannot determine if answers are true or not. Researchers using the quantitative method must operate on the assumption that all the answers provided to them through surveys, testing, and experimentation are based on a foundation of truth. There are no face-to-face contacts with this method, which means interviewers or researchers are unable to gauge the truthfulness or authenticity of each result.

A 2011 study published by Psychology Today looked at how often people lie in their daily lives. Participants were asked to talk about the number of lies they told in the past 24 hours. 40% of the sample group reported telling a lie, with the median being 1.65 lies told per day. Over 22% of the lies were told by just 1% of the sample. What would happen if the random sampling came from this 1% group?

4. There is a cost factor to consider with quantitative research. All research involves cost. There’s no getting around this fact. When looking at the price of experiments and research within the quantitative method, a single result mist cost more than $100,000. Even conducting a focus group is costly, with just four groups of government or business participants requiring up to $60,000 for the work to be done. Most of the cost involves the target audiences you want to survey, what the objects happen to be, and if you can do the work online or over the phone.

5. You do not gain access to specific feedback details. Let’s say that you wanted to conduct quantitative research on a new toothpaste that you want to take to the market. This method allows you to explore a specific hypothesis (i.e., this toothpaste does a better job of cleaning teeth than this other product). You can use the statistics to create generalizations (i.e., 70% of people say this toothpaste cleans better, which means that is your potential customer base). What you don’t receive are specific feedback details that can help you refine the product. If no one likes the toothpaste because it tastes like how a skunk smells, that 70% who say it cleans better still won’t purchase the product.

6. It creates the potential for an unnatural environment. When carrying out quantitative research, the efforts are sometimes carried out in environments which are unnatural to the group. When this disadvantage occurs, the results will often differ when compared to what would be discovered with real-world examples. That means researchers can still manipulate the results, even with randomized participants, because of the work within an environment which is conducive to the answers which they want to receive through this method.

These quantitative research pros and cons take a look at the value of the information collected vs. its authenticity and cost to collect. It is cheaper than other research methods, but with its limitations, this option is not always the best choice to make when looking for specific data points before making a critical decision.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Limitations in Research

Limitations in research refer to the factors that may affect the results, conclusions , and generalizability of a study. These limitations can arise from various sources, such as the design of the study, the sampling methods used, the measurement tools employed, and the limitations of the data analysis techniques.

Types of Limitations in Research

Types of Limitations in Research are as follows:

Sample Size Limitations

This refers to the size of the group of people or subjects that are being studied. If the sample size is too small, then the results may not be representative of the population being studied. This can lead to a lack of generalizability of the results.

Time Limitations

Time limitations can be a constraint on the research process . This could mean that the study is unable to be conducted for a long enough period of time to observe the long-term effects of an intervention, or to collect enough data to draw accurate conclusions.

Selection Bias

This refers to a type of bias that can occur when the selection of participants in a study is not random. This can lead to a biased sample that is not representative of the population being studied.

Confounding Variables

Confounding variables are factors that can influence the outcome of a study, but are not being measured or controlled for. These can lead to inaccurate conclusions or a lack of clarity in the results.

Measurement Error

This refers to inaccuracies in the measurement of variables, such as using a faulty instrument or scale. This can lead to inaccurate results or a lack of validity in the study.

Ethical Limitations

Ethical limitations refer to the ethical constraints placed on research studies. For example, certain studies may not be allowed to be conducted due to ethical concerns, such as studies that involve harm to participants.

Examples of Limitations in Research

Some Examples of Limitations in Research are as follows:

Research Title: “The Effectiveness of Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Customer Behavior”

Limitations:

• The study only considered a limited number of machine learning algorithms and did not explore the effectiveness of other algorithms.
• The study used a specific dataset, which may not be representative of all customer behaviors or demographics.
• The study did not consider the potential ethical implications of using machine learning algorithms in predicting customer behavior.

Research Title: “The Impact of Online Learning on Student Performance in Computer Science Courses”

• The study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have affected the results due to the unique circumstances of remote learning.
• The study only included students from a single university, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other institutions.
• The study did not consider the impact of individual differences, such as prior knowledge or motivation, on student performance in online learning environments.

Research Title: “The Effect of Gamification on User Engagement in Mobile Health Applications”

• The study only tested a specific gamification strategy and did not explore the effectiveness of other gamification techniques.
• The study relied on self-reported measures of user engagement, which may be subject to social desirability bias or measurement errors.
• The study only included a specific demographic group (e.g., young adults) and may not be generalizable to other populations with different preferences or needs.

How to Write Limitations in Research

When writing about the limitations of a research study, it is important to be honest and clear about the potential weaknesses of your work. Here are some tips for writing about limitations in research:

• Identify the limitations: Start by identifying the potential limitations of your research. These may include sample size, selection bias, measurement error, or other issues that could affect the validity and reliability of your findings.
• Be honest and objective: When describing the limitations of your research, be honest and objective. Do not try to minimize or downplay the limitations, but also do not exaggerate them. Be clear and concise in your description of the limitations.
• Provide context: It is important to provide context for the limitations of your research. For example, if your sample size was small, explain why this was the case and how it may have affected your results. Providing context can help readers understand the limitations in a broader context.
• Discuss implications : Discuss the implications of the limitations for your research findings. For example, if there was a selection bias in your sample, explain how this may have affected the generalizability of your findings. This can help readers understand the limitations in terms of their impact on the overall validity of your research.
• Provide suggestions for future research : Finally, provide suggestions for future research that can address the limitations of your study. This can help readers understand how your research fits into the broader field and can provide a roadmap for future studies.

Purpose of Limitations in Research

There are several purposes of limitations in research. Here are some of the most important ones:

• To acknowledge the boundaries of the study : Limitations help to define the scope of the research project and set realistic expectations for the findings. They can help to clarify what the study is not intended to address.
• To identify potential sources of bias: Limitations can help researchers identify potential sources of bias in their research design, data collection, or analysis. This can help to improve the validity and reliability of the findings.
• To provide opportunities for future research: Limitations can highlight areas for future research and suggest avenues for further exploration. This can help to advance knowledge in a particular field.
• To demonstrate transparency and accountability: By acknowledging the limitations of their research, researchers can demonstrate transparency and accountability to their readers, peers, and funders. This can help to build trust and credibility in the research community.
• To encourage critical thinking: Limitations can encourage readers to critically evaluate the study’s findings and consider alternative explanations or interpretations. This can help to promote a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the topic under investigation.

When to Write Limitations in Research

Limitations should be included in research when they help to provide a more complete understanding of the study’s results and implications. A limitation is any factor that could potentially impact the accuracy, reliability, or generalizability of the study’s findings.

It is important to identify and discuss limitations in research because doing so helps to ensure that the results are interpreted appropriately and that any conclusions drawn are supported by the available evidence. Limitations can also suggest areas for future research, highlight potential biases or confounding factors that may have affected the results, and provide context for the study’s findings.

Generally, limitations should be discussed in the conclusion section of a research paper or thesis, although they may also be mentioned in other sections, such as the introduction or methods. The specific limitations that are discussed will depend on the nature of the study, the research question being investigated, and the data that was collected.

Examples of limitations that might be discussed in research include sample size limitations, data collection methods, the validity and reliability of measures used, and potential biases or confounding factors that could have affected the results. It is important to note that limitations should not be used as a justification for poor research design or methodology, but rather as a way to enhance the understanding and interpretation of the study’s findings.

Importance of Limitations in Research

Here are some reasons why limitations are important in research:

• Enhances the credibility of research: Limitations highlight the potential weaknesses and threats to validity, which helps readers to understand the scope and boundaries of the study. This improves the credibility of research by acknowledging its limitations and providing a clear picture of what can and cannot be concluded from the study.
• Facilitates replication: By highlighting the limitations, researchers can provide detailed information about the study’s methodology, data collection, and analysis. This information helps other researchers to replicate the study and test the validity of the findings, which enhances the reliability of research.
• Guides future research : Limitations provide insights into areas for future research by identifying gaps or areas that require further investigation. This can help researchers to design more comprehensive and effective studies that build on existing knowledge.
• Provides a balanced view: Limitations help to provide a balanced view of the research by highlighting both strengths and weaknesses. This ensures that readers have a clear understanding of the study’s limitations and can make informed decisions about the generalizability and applicability of the findings.

Advantages of Limitations in Research

Here are some potential advantages of limitations in research:

• Focus : Limitations can help researchers focus their study on a specific area or population, which can make the research more relevant and useful.
• Realism : Limitations can make a study more realistic by reflecting the practical constraints and challenges of conducting research in the real world.
• Innovation : Limitations can spur researchers to be more innovative and creative in their research design and methodology, as they search for ways to work around the limitations.
• Rigor : Limitations can actually increase the rigor and credibility of a study, as researchers are forced to carefully consider the potential sources of bias and error, and address them to the best of their abilities.
• Generalizability : Limitations can actually improve the generalizability of a study by ensuring that it is not overly focused on a specific sample or situation, and that the results can be applied more broadly.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Future Research – Thesis Guide

Data Analysis – Process, Methods and Types

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing...

Problem Statement – Writing Guide, Examples and...

References in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Outline – Types, Example, Template

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Primary Research | Definition, Types, & Examples

Primary Research | Definition, Types, & Examples

Published on January 14, 2023 by Tegan George . Revised on January 12, 2024.

Primary research is a research method that relies on direct data collection , rather than relying on data that’s already been collected by someone else. In other words, primary research is any type of research that you undertake yourself, firsthand, while using data that has already been collected is called secondary research .

Primary research is often used in qualitative research , particularly in survey methodology, questionnaires, focus groups, and various types of interviews . While quantitative primary research does exist, it’s not as common.

Table of contents

When to use primary research, types of primary research, examples of primary research, advantages and disadvantages of primary research, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions.

Primary research is any research that you conduct yourself. It can be as simple as a 2-question survey, or as in-depth as a years-long longitudinal study . The only key is that data must be collected firsthand by you.

Primary research is often used to supplement or strengthen existing secondary research. It is usually exploratory in nature, concerned with examining a research question where no preexisting knowledge exists. It is also sometimes called original research for this reason.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Primary research can take many forms, but the most common types are:

• Surveys and questionnaires
• Observational studies
• Interviews and focus groups

Surveys and questionnaires collect information about a group of people by asking them questions and analyzing the results. They are a solid choice if your research topic seeks to investigate something about the characteristics, preferences, opinions, or beliefs of a group of people.

Surveys and questionnaires can take place online, in person, or through the mail. It is best to have a combination of open-ended and closed-ended questions, and how the questions are phrased matters. Be sure to avoid leading questions, and ask any related questions in groups, starting with the most basic ones first.

Observational studies are an easy and popular way to answer a research question based purely on what you, the researcher, observes. If there are practical or ethical concerns that prevent you from conducting a traditional experiment , observational studies are often a good stopgap.

There are three types of observational studies: cross-sectional studies , cohort studies, and case-control studies. If you decide to conduct observational research, you can choose the one that’s best for you. All three are quite straightforward and easy to design—just beware of confounding variables and observer bias creeping into your analysis.

Similarly to surveys and questionnaires, interviews and focus groups also rely on asking questions to collect information about a group of people. However, how this is done is slightly different. Instead of sending your questions out into the world, interviews and focus groups involve two or more people—one of whom is you, the interviewer, who asks the questions.

There are 3 main types of interviews:

• Structured interviews ask predetermined questions in a predetermined order.
• Unstructured interviews are more flexible and free-flowing, proceeding based on the interviewee’s previous answers.
• Semi-structured interviews fall in between, asking a mix of predetermined questions and off-the-cuff questions.

While interviews are a rich source of information, they can also be deceptively challenging to do well. Be careful of interviewer bias creeping into your process. This is best mitigated by avoiding double-barreled questions and paying close attention to your tone and delivery while asking questions.

Alternatively, a focus group is a group interview, led by a moderator. Focus groups can provide more nuanced interactions than individual interviews, but their small sample size means that external validity is low.

Primary research can often be quite simple to pursue yourself. Here are a few examples of different research methods you can use to explore different topics.

Primary research is a great choice for many research projects, but it has distinct advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages of primary research

Advantages include:

• The ability to conduct really tailored, thorough research, down to the “nitty-gritty” of your topic . You decide what you want to study or observe and how to go about doing that.
• You maintain control over the quality of the data collected, and can ensure firsthand that it is objective, reliable , and valid .
• The ensuing results are yours, for you to disseminate as you see fit. You maintain proprietary control over what you find out, allowing you to share your findings with like-minded individuals or those conducting related research that interests you for replication or discussion purposes.

Disadvantages of primary research

Disadvantages include:

• In order to be done well, primary research can be very expensive and time consuming. If you are constrained in terms of time or funding, it can be very difficult to conduct your own high-quality primary research.
• Primary research is often insufficient as a standalone research method, requiring secondary research to bolster it.
• Primary research can be prone to various types of research bias . Bias can manifest on the part of the researcher as observer bias , Pygmalion effect , or demand characteristics . It can occur on the part of participants as a Hawthorne effect or social desirability bias .

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Chi square goodness of fit test
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

The 3 main types of primary research are:

Exploratory research aims to explore the main aspects of an under-researched problem, while explanatory research aims to explain the causes and consequences of a well-defined problem.

There are several methods you can use to decrease the impact of confounding variables on your research: restriction, matching, statistical control and randomization.

In restriction , you restrict your sample by only including certain subjects that have the same values of potential confounding variables.

In matching , you match each of the subjects in your treatment group with a counterpart in the comparison group. The matched subjects have the same values on any potential confounding variables, and only differ in the independent variable .

In statistical control , you include potential confounders as variables in your regression .

In randomization , you randomly assign the treatment (or independent variable) in your study to a sufficiently large number of subjects, which allows you to control for all potential confounding variables.

A questionnaire is a data collection tool or instrument, while a survey is an overarching research method that involves collecting and analyzing data from people using questionnaires.

When conducting research, collecting original data has significant advantages:

• You can tailor data collection to your specific research aims (e.g. understanding the needs of your consumers or user testing your website)
• You can control and standardize the process for high reliability and validity (e.g. choosing appropriate measurements and sampling methods )

However, there are also some drawbacks: data collection can be time-consuming, labor-intensive and expensive. In some cases, it’s more efficient to use secondary data that has already been collected by someone else, but the data might be less reliable.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

George, T. (2024, January 12). Primary Research | Definition, Types, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 12, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/primary-research/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, data collection | definition, methods & examples, observer bias | definition, examples, prevention, what is qualitative research | methods & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

10 Advantages & Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

Quantitative research is a powerful tool for those looking to gather empirical data about their topic of study. Using statistical models and math, researchers evaluate their hypothesis.

Quantitative Research

When researchers look at gathering data, there are two types of testing methods they can use: quantitative research, or qualitative research. Quantitative research looks to capture real, measurable data in the form of numbers and figures; whereas qualitative research is concerned with recording opinion data, customer characteristics, and other non-numerical information.

Quantitative research is a powerful tool for those looking to gather empirical data about their topic of study. Using statistical models and math, researchers evaluate their hypothesis. An integral component of quantitative research - and truly, all research - is the careful and considered analysis of the resulting data points.

There are several key advantages and disadvantages to conducting quantitative research that should be considered when deciding which type of testing best fits the occasion.

5 Advantages of Quantitative Research

• Quantitative research is concerned with facts & verifiable information.

Quantitative research is primarily designed to capture numerical data - often for the purpose of studying a fact or phenomenon in their population. This kind of research activity is very helpful for producing data points when looking at a particular group - like a customer demographic. All of this helps us to better identify the key roots of certain customer behaviors. 

Businesses who research their customers intimately often outperform their competitors. Knowing the reasons why a customer makes a particular purchasing decision makes it easier for companies to address issues in their audiences. Data analysis of this kind can be used for a wide range of applications, even outside the world of commerce. 

• Quantitative research can be done anonymously. 

Unlike qualitative research questions - which often ask participants to divulge personal and sometimes sensitive information - quantitative research does not require participants to be named or identified. As long as those conducting the testing are able to independently verify that the participants fit the necessary profile for the test, then more identifying information is unnecessary. 

• Quantitative research processes don't need to be directly observed.

Whereas qualitative research demands close attention be paid to the process of data collection, quantitative research data can be collected passively. Surveys, polls, and other forms of asynchronous data collection generate data points over a defined period of time, freeing up researchers to focus on more important activities. 

• Quantitative research is faster than other methods.

Quantitative research can capture vast amounts of data far quicker than other research activities. The ability to work in real-time allows analysts to immediately begin incorporating new insights and changes into their work - dramatically reducing the turn-around time of their projects. Less delays and a larger sample size ensures you will have a far easier go of managing your data collection process.

• Quantitative research is verifiable and can be used to duplicate results.

The careful and exact way in which quantitative tests must be designed enables other researchers to duplicate the methodology. In order to verify the integrity of any experimental conclusion, others must be able to replicate the study on their own. Independently verifying data is how the scientific community creates precedent and establishes trust in their findings.

5 Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

• Limited to numbers and figures.

Quantitative research is an incredibly precise tool in the way that it only gathers cold hard figures. This double edged sword leaves the quantitative method unable to deal with questions that require specific feedback, and often lacks a human element. For questions like, “What sorts of emotions does our advertisement evoke in our test audiences?” or “Why do customers prefer our product over the competing brand?”, using the quantitative research method will not derive a meaningful answer.

• Testing models are more difficult to create.

Creating a quantitative research model requires careful attention to be paid to your design. From the hypothesis to the testing methods and the analysis that comes after, there are several moving parts that must be brought into alignment in order for your test to succeed. Even one unintentional error can invalidate your results, and send your team back to the drawing board to start all over again.

• Tests can be intentionally manipulative.  

Bad actors looking to push an agenda can sometimes create qualitative tests that are faulty, and designed to support a particular end result. Apolitical facts and figures can be turned political when given a limited context. You can imagine an example in which a politician devises a poll with answers that are designed to give him a favorable outcome - no matter what respondents pick.

• Results are open to subjective interpretation.

Whether due to researchers' bias or simple accident, research data can be manipulated in order to give a subjective result. When numbers are not given their full context, or were gathered in an incorrect or misleading way, the results that follow can not be correctly interpreted. Bias, opinion, and simple mistakes all work to inhibit the experimental process - and must be taken into account when designing your tests. 

• More expensive than other forms of testing. 

Quantitative research often seeks to gather large quantities of data points. While this is beneficial for the purposes of testing, the research does not come free. The grander the scope of your test and the more thorough you are in it’s methodology, the more likely it is that you will be spending a sizable portion of your marketing expenses on research alone. Polling and surveying, while affordable means of gathering quantitative data, can not always generate the kind of quality results a research project necessitates. 

Key Takeaways 

Numerical data is a vital component of almost any research project. Quantitative data can provide meaningful insight into qualitative concerns. Focusing on the facts and figures enables researchers to duplicate tests later on, and create their own data sets.

To streamline your quantitative research process:

Have a plan. Tackling your research project with a clear and focused strategy will allow you to better address any errors or hiccups that might otherwise inhibit your testing. 

Define your audience. Create a clear picture of your target audience before you design your test. Understanding who you want to test beforehand gives you the ability to choose which methodology is going to be the right fit for them. 

Test, test, and test again. Verifying your results through repeated and thorough testing builds confidence in your decision making. It’s not only smart research practice - it’s good business.

About Author

Send Your First Survey Today!

Set up and begin receiving results within minutes. Sign up for free, no contract required.

Helpfull is the easiest way to get feedback from thousands of people in minutes. Our online focus group platform provides a pool of qualified panelists to give you their real detailed opinions helping you make better, more informed decisions.

Institutvert.org

quantitative research advantages and disadvantages

When it comes to conducting research, there are various methods one can employ. One of the most widely used approaches is quantitative research. This method involves the collection and analysis of numerical data to answer research questions. While quantitative research offers several advantages, it also comes with a set of disadvantages that researchers should consider. In this article, we will explore the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research and discuss why understanding them is important.

Advantages of Quantitative Research

One of the key advantages of quantitative research is its objectivity. By focusing on numerical data, researchers can minimize bias in their analysis. This makes quantitative research highly reliable and allows for more accurate comparisons between different groups or variables.

Another advantage of quantitative research is its potential for generalizability. By using large sample sizes, researchers can draw conclusions that are more likely to hold true for the larger population. This is particularly useful when studying social or psychological phenomena that affect a wide range of individuals.

Additionally, the replicability of quantitative research is worth mentioning. By using standardized procedures and statistical analyses, researchers can easily replicate studies and assess their validity. This not only helps in verifying the results but also contributes to the overall credibility of the research.

Furthermore, quantitative research enables the application of advanced statistical techniques. This allows researchers to uncover patterns, relationships, and trends in their data that may not be readily apparent. These statistical analyses provide a deeper understanding of the research question and can lead to more robust and comprehensive findings.

Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

Despite its advantages, quantitative research also has some limitations that researchers should be aware of. One of the main disadvantages is the lack of contextual understanding. Since quantitative research relies on numerical measures, it may overlook the underlying factors or contexts that contribute to the observed outcomes. This can limit the depth of understanding.

Another disadvantage is the restrictions in question design. Quantitative research generally relies on structured questionnaires or surveys, which limit the types of questions that can be asked. As a result, important nuances or complexities may be overlooked, leading to a less comprehensive understanding of the research topic.

Data validity concerns are also a significant disadvantage of quantitative research. Self-reported measures, such as surveys, are prone to biases and inaccuracies. Participants may provide socially desirable responses or misinterpret the questions, affecting the reliability and validity of the data collected.

Lastly, quantitative research has a limited scope when it comes to exploring complex social, emotional, or cultural phenomena. These phenomena often involve subjective experiences that cannot be easily quantified. Qualitative methodologies, such as interviews or observations, are better suited for capturing the richness and depth of such phenomena.

Benefits of Knowing the Quantitative Research Advantages and Disadvantages

Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research is essential for researchers and practitioners alike. By knowing the strengths and weaknesses of this research approach, researchers can make informed decisions about the methodologies they adopt and the questions they ask. This knowledge can also guide the interpretation and communication of research findings, ensuring a more accurate representation of the data.

For practitioners, knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research is valuable in critically evaluating and synthesizing existing research. It helps them recognize the limitations and potential biases in studies, enabling them to make evidence-based decisions in their respective fields.

Overall, being aware of the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research promotes a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of research outcomes. It encourages researchers to consider alternative research approaches when necessary and highlights the importance of triangulating findings from different methodologies to gain a more holistic understanding of complex phenomena.

In conclusion, quantitative research offers several advantages, including objectivity, generalizability, replicability, and the application of advanced statistical techniques. However, it also has some disadvantages, such as the lack of contextual understanding, restrictions in question design, data validity concerns, and a limited scope for exploring certain phenomena. By understanding these advantages and disadvantages, researchers can make informed decisions, interpret findings accurately, and contribute to the development of robust research in their respective fields.

• quantitative and qualitative research advantages and disadvantages
• a thorough list of balanced scorecard advantages and disadvantages
• 5 advantages and 5 disadvantages
• about internet advantages and disadvantages
• 13 traditional economy advantages and disadvantages
• secondary research advantages and disadvantages
• total quality management advantages and disadvantages

HARMONY PLATFORM .css-vxhqob{display:inline-block;line-height:1em;-webkit-flex-shrink:0;-ms-flex-negative:0;flex-shrink:0;color:currentColor;vertical-align:middle;fill:currentColor;stroke:none;margin-left:var(--chakra-space-4);height:var(--chakra-sizes-4);width:var(--chakra-sizes-2);margin-bottom:var(--chakra-space-1);}

Harmony platform.

Engage employees, inform customers and manage your workplace in one platform.

• Workplace Mobile App

HOW IT WORKS

• Omnichannel Feeds
• Integrations
• Analytics & Insights
• Workplace Management
• Consultancy

Find our how the Poppulo Harmony platform can help you to engage employees and customers, and deliver a great workplace experience.

• Employee Comms
• Customer Experience
• Workplace Experience
• Leadership Comms
• Change and Transformation
• Wayfinding & Directories
• Patient Comms

FEATURED CASE STUDIES

Using Digital Signage to Elevate the Workplace Experience

Aligning people and business goals through integrated employee communications

Valley Health

Launching an internal mobile app to keep frontline and back office employees informed

OUR COMPANY

Our company overview.

• About Poppulo

FEATURED CASE STUDY

Implementing an internal Mobile App in the software industry

RESOURCES OVERVIEW

We bring the best minds in employee comms together to share their knowledge and insights across our webinars, blogs, guides, and much more.

• Webinars & Guides
• Case Studies
• Maturity Model

FEATURED CONTENT

The Ultimate Guide to Internal Comms Strategy

The way we work, where we work, and how we work has fundamentally changed...

The Multi-Million Dollar Impact of Communication on Employee & Customer Experience

The stats speak for themselves—and the facts are unarguable...

10 Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research

  — August 5th, 2021

Research is about gathering data so that it can inform meaningful decisions. In the workplace, this can be invaluable in allowing informed decision-making that will meet with wider strategic organizational goals.

However, research comes in a variety of guises and, depending on the methodologies applied, can achieve different ends. There are broadly two key approaches to research -- qualitative and quantitative.

Focus Group Guide: Top Tips and Traps for Employee Focus Groups

Qualitative v quantitative – what’s the difference.

Qualitative Research is at the touchy-feely end of the spectrum. It’s not so much about bean-counting and much more about capturing people’s opinions and emotions.

“Research following a qualitative approach is exploratory and seeks to explain ‘how’ and ‘why’ a particular phenomenon, or behavior, operates as it does in a particular context.” (simplypsychology.org)

Examples of the way qualitative research is often gathered includes:

Interviews are a conversation based inquiry where questions are used to obtain information from participants. Interviews are typically structured to meet the researcher’s objectives.

Focus Groups

Focus group discussions are a common qualitative research strategy . In a focus group discussion, the interviewer talks to a group of people about their thoughts, opinions, beliefs, and attitudes towards a topic. Participants are typically a group who are similar in some way, such as income, education, or career. In the context of a company, the group dynamic is likely their common experience of the workplace.

Observation

Observation is a systematic research method in which researchers look at the activity of their subjects in their typical environment. Observation gives direct information about your research. Using observation can capture information that participants may not think to reveal or see as important during interviews/focus groups.

Existing Documents

This is also called secondary data. A qualitative data collection method entails extracting relevant data from existing documents. This data can then be analyzed using a qualitative data analysis method called content analysis. Existing documents might be work documents, work email , or any other material relevant to the organization.

Quantitative Research is the ‘bean-counting’ bit of the research spectrum. This isn’t to demean its value. Now encompassed by the term ‘ People Analytics ’, it plays an equally important role as a tool for business decision-making.

Organizations can use a variety of quantitative data-gathering methods to track productivity. In turn, this can help:

• To rank employees and work units
• To award raises or promotions.
• To measure and justify termination or disciplining of staff
• To measure productivity
• To measure group/individual targets

Examples might include measuring workforce productivity. If Widget Makers Inc., has two production lines and Line A is producing 25% more per day than Line B, capturing this data immediately informs management/HR of potential issues. Is the slower production on Line B due to human factors or is there a production process issue?

Quantitative Research can help capture real-time activities in the workplace and point towards what needs management attention.

The Pros & Cons of the Qualitative approach

By its nature, qualitative research is far more experiential and focused on capturing people’s feelings and views. This undoubtedly has value, but it can also bring many more challenges than simply capturing quantitative data. Here are a few challenges and benefits to consider.

• Qualitative Research can capture changing attitudes within a target group such as consumers of a product or service, or attitudes in the workplace.
• Qualitative approaches to research are not bound by the limitations of quantitative methods. If responses don’t fit the researcher’s expectation that’s equally useful qualitative data to add context and perhaps explain something that numbers alone are unable to reveal .
• Qualitative Research provides a much more flexible approach . If useful insights are not being captured researchers can quickly adapt questions, change the setting or any other variable to improve responses.
• Qualitative data capture allows researchers to be far more speculative about what areas they choose to investigate and how to do so. It allows data capture to be prompted by a researcher’s instinctive or ‘gut feel’ for where good information will be found.

Qualitative research can be more targeted . If you want to compare productivity across an entire organization, all parts, process, and participants need to be accounted for. Qualitative research can be far more concentrated, sampling specific groups and key points in a company to gather meaningful data. This can both speed the process of data capture and keep the costs of data-gathering down.

Business acumen in internal communications – Why it matters and how to build it

• Sample size can be a big issue. If you seek to infer from a sample of, for example, 200 employees, based upon a sample of 5 employees, this raises the question of whether sampling will provide a true reflection of the views of the remaining 97.5% of the company?
• Sample bias - HR departments will have competing agendas. One argument against qualitative methods alone is that HR tasked with finding the views of the workforce may be influenced both consciously or unconsciously, to select a sample that favors an anticipated outcome .
• Self-selection bias may arise where companies ask staff to volunteer their views . Whether in a paper, online survey , or focus group, if an HR department calls for participants there will be the issue of staff putting themselves forward. The argument goes that this group, in self-selecting itself, rather than being a randomly selected snapshot of a department, will inevitably have narrowed its relevance to those that typically are willing to come forward with their views. Quantitative data is gathered whether someone volunteered or not.
• The artificiality of qualitative data capture. The act of bringing together a group is inevitably outside of the typical ‘norms ’ of everyday work life and culture and may influence the participants in unforeseen ways.
• Are the right questions being posed to participants? You can only get answers to questions you think to ask . In qualitative approaches, asking about “how” and “why” can be hugely informative, but if researchers don’t ask, that insight may be missed.

The reality is that any research approach has both pros and cons. The art of effective and meaningful data gathering is thus to be aware of the limitations and strengths of each method.

In the case of Qualitative research, its value is inextricably linked to the number-crunching that is Quantitative data. One is the Ying to the other’s Yang. Each can only provide half of the picture, but together, you get a more complete view of what’s occurring within an organization.

The best on communications delivered weekly to your inbox.

UPCOMING WEBINAR – SEPTEMBER 4TH

The change opportunity: how ic fuels organizational success.

• Login to Survey Tool Review Center

Secondary Research Advantages, Limitations, and Sources

Summary: secondary research should be a prerequisite to the collection of primary data, but it rarely provides all the answers you need. a thorough evaluation of the secondary data is needed to assess its relevance and accuracy..

5 minutes to read. By author Michaela Mora on January 25, 2022 Topics: Relevant Methods & Tips , Business Strategy , Market Research

Secondary research is based on data already collected for purposes other than the specific problem you have. Secondary research is usually part of exploratory market research designs.

The connection between the specific purpose that originates the research is what differentiates secondary research from primary research. Primary research is designed to address specific problems. However, analysis of available secondary data should be a prerequisite to the collection of primary data.

Advantages of Secondary Research

Secondary data can be faster and cheaper to obtain, depending on the sources you use.

Secondary research can help to:

• Answer certain research questions and test some hypotheses.
• Formulate an appropriate research design (e.g., identify key variables).
• Interpret data from primary research as it can provide some insights into general trends in an industry or product category.
• Understand the competitive landscape.

Limitations of Secondary Research

The usefulness of secondary research tends to be limited often for two main reasons:

Lack of relevance

Secondary research rarely provides all the answers you need. The objectives and methodology used to collect the secondary data may not be appropriate for the problem at hand.

Given that it was designed to find answers to a different problem than yours, you will likely find gaps in answers to your problem. Furthermore, the data collection methods used may not provide the data type needed to support the business decisions you have to make (e.g., qualitative research methods are not appropriate for go/no-go decisions).

Lack of Accuracy

Secondary data may be incomplete and lack accuracy depending on;

• The research design (exploratory, descriptive, causal, primary vs. repackaged secondary data, the analytical plan, etc.)
• Sampling design and sources (target audiences, recruitment methods)
• Data collection method (qualitative and quantitative techniques)
• Analysis point of view (focus and omissions)
• Reporting stages (preliminary, final, peer-reviewed)
• Rate of change in the studied topic (slowly vs. rapidly evolving phenomenon, e.g., adoption of specific technologies).
• Lack of agreement between data sources.

Criteria for Evaluating Secondary Research Data

Before taking the information at face value, you should conduct a thorough evaluation of the secondary data you find using the following criteria:

• Purpose : Understanding why the data was collected and what questions it was trying to answer will tell us how relevant and useful it is since it may or may not be appropriate for your objectives.
• Methodology used to collect the data : Important to understand sources of bias.
• Accuracy of data: Sources of errors may include research design, sampling, data collection, analysis, and reporting.
• When the data was collected : Secondary data may not be current or updated frequently enough for the purpose that you need.
• Content of the data : Understanding the key variables, units of measurement, categories used and analyzed relationships may reveal how useful and relevant it is for your purposes.
• Source reputation : In the era of purposeful misinformation on the Internet, it is important to check the expertise, credibility, reputation, and trustworthiness of the data source.

Secondary Research Data Sources

Compared to primary research, the collection of secondary data can be faster and cheaper to obtain, depending on the sources you use.

Secondary data can come from internal or external sources.

Internal sources of secondary data include ready-to-use data or data that requires further processing available in internal management support systems your company may be using (e.g., invoices, sales transactions, Google Analytics for your website, etc.).

Prior primary qualitative and quantitative research conducted by the company are also common sources of secondary data. They often generate more questions and help formulate new primary research needed.

However, if there are no internal data collection systems yet or prior research, you probably won’t have much usable secondary data at your disposal.

External sources of secondary data include:

• Published materials
• External databases
• Syndicated services.

Published Materials

Published materials can be classified as:

• General business sources: Guides, directories, indexes, and statistical data.
• Government sources: Census data and other government publications.

External Databases

In many industries across a variety of topics, there are private and public databases that can bed accessed online or by downloading data for free, a fixed fee, or a subscription.

These databases can include bibliographic, numeric, full-text, directory, and special-purpose databases. Some public institutions make data collected through various methods, including surveys, available for others to analyze.

Syndicated Services

These services are offered by companies that collect and sell pools of data that have a commercial value and meet shared needs by a number of clients, even if the data is not collected for specific purposes those clients may have.

Syndicated services can be classified based on specific units of measurements (e.g., consumers, households, organizations, etc.).

The data collection methods for these data may include:

• Surveys (Psychographic and Lifestyle, advertising evaluations, general topics)
• Household panels (Purchase and media use)
• Electronic scanner services (volume tracking data, scanner panels, scanner panels with Cable TV)
• Audits (retailers, wholesalers)
• Direct inquiries to institutions
• Clipping services tracking PR for institutions
• Corporate reports

You can spend hours doing research on Google in search of external sources, but this is likely to yield limited insights. Books, articles journals, reports, blogs posts, and videos you may find online are usually analyses and summaries of data from a particular perspective. They may be useful and give you an indication of the type of data used, but they are not the actual data. Whenever possible, you should look at the actual raw data used to draw your own conclusion on its value for your research objectives. You should check professionally gathered secondary research.

Here are some external secondary data sources often used in market research that you may find useful as starting points in your research. Some are free, while others require payment.

• Pew Research Center : Reports about the issues, attitudes, and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis, and other empirical social science research.
• Data.Census.gov : Data dissemination platform to access demographic and economic data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
• Data.gov : The US. government’s open data source with almost 200,00 datasets ranges in topics from health, agriculture, climate, ecosystems, public safety, finance, energy, manufacturing, education, and business.
• Google Scholar : A web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.
• Google Public Data Explorer : Makes large, public-interest datasets easy to explore, visualize and communicate.
• Google News Archive : Allows users to search historical newspapers and retrieve scanned images of their pages.
• Mckinsey & Company : Articles based on analyses of various industries.
• Statista : Business data platform with data across 170+ industries and 150+ countries.
• Claritas : Syndicated reports on various market segments.
• Mintel : Consumer reports combining exclusive consumer research with other market data and expert analysis.
• MarketResearch.com : Data aggregator with over 350 publishers covering every sector of the economy as well as emerging industries.
• Packaged Facts : Reports based on market research on consumer goods and services industries.
• Dun & Bradstreet : Company directory with business information.

Related Articles

• What Is Market Research?
• Step by Step Guide to the Market Research Process
• How to Leverage UX and Market Research To Understand Your Customers
• Why Your Business Needs Discovery Research
• Your Market Research Plan to Succeed As a Startup
• Top Reason Why Businesses Fail & What To Do About It
• What To Value In A Market Research Vendor
• Don’t Let The Budget Dictate Your Market Research Approach
• How To Use Research To Find High-Order Brand Benefits
• How To Prioritize What To Research
• Don’t Just Trust Your Gut — Do Research
• Understanding the Pros and Cons of Mixed-Mode Research

Subscribe to our newsletter to get notified about future articles

Subscribe and don’t miss anything!

Recent Articles

• How AI Can Further Remove Researchers in Search of Productivity and Lower Costs
• Re: Design/Growth Podcast – Researching User Experiences for Business Growth
• Why You Need Positioning Concept Testing in New Product Development
• Why Conjoint Analysis Is Best for Price Research
• The Rise of UX
• Making the Case Against the Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity Meter
• How to Future-Proof Experience Management and Your Business
• When Using Focus Groups Makes Sense
• How to Make Segmentation Research Actionable
• How To Integrate Market Research and UX Research for Desired Business Outcomes

Popular Articles

• Which Rating Scales Should I Use?
• What To Consider in Survey Design
• 6 Decisions To Make When Designing Product Concept Tests
• Write Winning Product Concepts To Get Accurate Results In Concept Tests
• How to Use Qualitative and Quantitative Research in Product Development
• The Opportunity of UX Research Webinar
• Myths & Misunderstandings About UX – MR Realities Podcast
• 12 Research Techniques to Solve Choice Overload
• Concept Testing for UX Researchers
• UX Research Geeks Podcast – Using Market Research for Better Context in UX
• A Researcher’s Path – Data Stories Leaders At Work Podcast
• How To Improve Racial and Gender Inclusion in Survey Design

• Privacy Overview
• Strictly Necessary Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

• Market Research
• Sustainable Businesses
• Supply Chain Management
• Operations & Technology
• Business Law & Taxes
• Business Insurance
• Business Finance
• Becoming an Owner
• University of Washington
• San Jose State University
• University of California, San Diego

Quantitative research is the process of gathering observable data to answer a research question using statistical , computational, or mathematical techniques. It is often seen as more accurate or valuable than qualitative research, which focuses on gathering non-numerical data.

Qualitative research looks at opinions, concepts, characteristics, and descriptions. Quantitative research looks at measurable, numerical relationships. As with any other process, it's important to recognize the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research.

How Can Businesses Use Quantitative Research?

Research benefits small businesses by helping you make informed decisions. Conducting market research should be a regular part of any business plan, allowing you to grow efficiently and make good use of your available resources.

Businesses can use research to:

• Learn more about customer opinions and buying patterns .
• Test new products and services before launching them.
• Make decisions about product packaging, branding, and other visual elements.
• Understand patterns in your market or industry.
• Analyze the behavior of your competitors.
• Identify the best use of your marketing resources.
• Compare how successful different promotions will be before scaling up.
• Decide on where new locations or stores should be.

When deciding what type of research will benefit your business, it is important to consider the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research.

Advantages of Quantitative Research

The use of statistical analysis and hard numbers found in quantitative research has distinct advantages in the research process.

• Can be tested and checked. Quantitative research requires careful experimental design and the ability for anyone to replicate both the test and the results. This makes the data you gather more reliable and less open to argument.
• Straightforward analysis. When you collect quantitative data, the type of results will tell you which statistical tests are appropriate to use. As a result, interpreting your data and presenting those findings is straightforward and less open to error and subjectivity.
• Prestige. Research that involves complex statistics and data analysis is considered valuable and impressive because many people don't understand the mathematics involved. Quantitative research is associated with technical advancements like computer modeling, stock selection, portfolio evaluation, and other data-based business decisions. The association of prestige and value with quantitative research can reflect well on your small business.

Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

However, the focus on numbers found in quantitative research can also be limiting, leading to several disadvantages.

• False focus on numbers. Quantitative research can be limited in its pursuit of concrete, statistical relationships, which can lead to researchers overlooking broader themes and relationships. By focusing solely on numbers, you run the risk of missing surprising or big-picture information that can benefit your business.
• Difficulty setting up a research model. When you conduct quantitative research, you need to carefully develop a hypothesis and set up a model for collecting and analyzing data. Any errors in your set up, bias on the part of the researcher, or mistakes in execution can invalidate all your results. Even coming up with a hypothesis can be subjective, especially if you have a specific question that you already know you want to prove or disprove.
• Can be misleading. Many people assume that because quantitative research is based on statistics it is more credible or scientific than observational, qualitative research. However, both kinds of research can be subjective and misleading. The opinions and biases of a researcher are just as likely to impact quantitative approaches to information gathering. In fact, the impact of this bias occurs earlier in the process of quantitative research than it does in qualitative research.

Tips for Conducting Quantitative Research

If you decide to conduct quantitative research for your small business,

• Work with a professional. Professional market researchers and data analysts are trained in how to conduct survey research and run statistical models. To ensure that your research is well-designed and your results are accurate, work with a professional. If you can't afford to hire researchers for the length of the project, look for someone who can help just with set-up or analysis.
• Have a clear research question. To save time and resources, have a clear idea of what question you want answered before you begin researching. You can find areas that need research by looking at your marketing plan and identifying where you struggle to make an informed decision.
• Don't be afraid to change your model. Research is a process, and needing to change direction or start over doesn't mean you have failed or done something wrong. Often, successful research will raise new questions. Keep track of those new questions so that you can continue answering them as you move forward.
• Combine quantitative and qualitative research. Successfully running a small business relies on understanding people, and the behavior of your customers and competitors cannot be reduced to numbers. As you conduct quantitative research, try to collect qualitative data as well. This can take the form of open-ended questions on surveys, panel discussions, or even just keeping track of opinions or concerns that customers share. By combining the two types of research, you'll end up with the best possible picture of how your business can grow and succeed within its market.
• Deductive and Inductive Market Research
• Qualitative or Quantitative? How to Choose a Method for Your Survey
• Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods
• Establishing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research
• How to Conduct Market Research Surveys
• Market Research 101: Develop the Research Plan
• What Is a Market Research Focus Group?
• Quantitative and Qualitative Segmentation Research
• Surveys Research: Confidence Intervals and Levels
• How to Analyze Interview Data and Survey Responses
• Learn About Using Cross Tabs in Quantitative Research
• How to Measure Brand Equity
• Market Research 101: Data Analysis
• Learn About Syndicated Market Research
• What Is Market Research?
• How Market Researchers Choose Which Movies You See

16 Key Advantages and Disadvantages of Qualitative Research Methods

Qualitative research is the process of natural inquisitiveness which wants to find an in-depth understanding of specific social phenomena within a regular setting. It is a process that seeks to find out why people act the way that they do in specific situations. By relying on the direct experiences that each person has every day, it becomes possible to define the meaning of a choice – or even a life.

Researchers who use the qualitative process are looking at multiple methods of inquiry to review human-related activities. This process is a way to measure the very existence of humanity. Multiple options are available to complete the work, including discourse analysis, biographies, case studies, and various other theories.

This process results in three primary areas of focus, which are individual actions, overall communication, and cultural influence. Each option must make the common assumption that knowledge is subjective instead of objective, which means the researchers must learn from their participants to understand what is valuable and what is not in their studies.

List of the Pros of Qualitative Research

1. Qualitative research is a very affordable method of research. Qualitative research is one of the most affordable ways to glean information from individuals who are being studied. Focus groups tend to be the primary method of collecting information using this process because it is fast and effective. Although there are research studies that require an extensive period of observation to produce results, using a group interview session can produce usable information in under an hour. That means you can proceed faster with the ideas you wish to pursue when compared to other research methods.

2. Qualitative research provides a predictive element. The data which researchers gather when using the qualitative research process provides a predictive element to the project. This advantage occurs even though the experiences or perspectives of the individuals participating in the research can vary substantially from person-to-person. The goal of this work is not to apply the information to the general public, but to understand how specific demographics react in situations where there are challenges to face. It is a process which allows for product development to occur because the pain points of the population have been identified.

3. Qualitative research focuses on the details of personal choice. The qualitative research process looks at the purpose of the decision that an individual makes as the primary information requiring collection. It does not take a look at the reasons why someone would decide to make the choices that they do in the first place. Other research methods preferred to look at the behavior, but this method wants to know the entire story behind each individual choice so that the entire population or society can benefit from the process.

4. Qualitative research uses fluid operational structures. The qualitative research process relies on data gathering based on situations that researchers are watching and experiencing personally. Instead of relying on a specific framework to collect and preserve information under rigid guidelines, this process finds value in the human experience. This method makes it possible to include the intricacies of the human experience with the structures required to find conclusions that are useful to the demographics involved – and possible to the rest of society as well.

5. Qualitative research uses individual choices as workable data. When we have an understanding of why individual choices occurred, then we can benefit from the diversity that the human experience provides. Each unique perspective makes it possible for every other person to gather more knowledge about a situation because there are differences to examine. It is a process which allows us to discover more potential outcomes because there is more information present from a variety of sources. Researchers can then take the perspectives to create guidelines that others can follow if they find themselves stuck in a similar situation.

6. Qualitative research is an open-ended process. One of the most significant advantages of qualitative research is that it does not rely on specific deadlines, formats, or questions to create a successful outcome. This process allows researchers to ask open-ended questions whenever they feel it is appropriate because there may be more data to collect. There are not the same time elements involved in this process either, as qualitative research can continue indefinitely until those working on the project feel like there is nothing more to glean from the individuals participating.

Because of this unique structure, researchers can look for data points that other methods might overlook because a greater emphasis is often placed on the interview or observational process with firm deadlines.

7. Qualitative research works to remove bias from its collected information. Unconscious bias is a significant factor in every research project because it relies on the ability of the individuals involved to control their thoughts, emotions, and reactions. Everyone has preconceived notions and stereotypes about specific demographics and nationalities which can influence the data collected. No one is 100% immune to this process. The format of qualitative research allows for these judgments to be set aside because it prefers to look at the specific structures behind each choice of person makes.

This research method also collects information about the events which lead up to a specific decision instead of trying to examine what happens after the fact. That’s why this advantage allows the data to be more accurate compared to the other research methods which are in use.

8. Qualitative research provides specific insight development. The average person tends to make a choice based on comfort, convenience, or both. We also tend to move forward in our circumstances based on what we feel is comfortable to our spiritual, moral, or ethical stances. Every form of communication that we use becomes a potential foundation for researchers to understand the demographics of humanity in better ways. By looking at the problems we face in everyday situations, it becomes possible to discover new insights that can help us to solve do you need problems which can come up. It is a way for researchers to understand the context of what happens in society instead of only looking at the outcomes.

9. Qualitative research requires a smaller sample size. Qualitative research studies wrap up faster that other methods because a smaller sample size is possible for data collection with this method. Participants can answer questions immediately, creating usable and actionable information that can lead to new ideas. This advantage makes it possible to move forward with confidence in future choices because there is added predictability to the results which are possible.

10. Qualitative research provides more useful content. Authenticity is highly demanded in today’s world because there is no better way to understand who we are as an individual, a community, or a society. Qualitative research works hard to understand the core concepts of how each participant defines themselves without the influence of outside perspectives. It wants to see how people structure their lives, and then take that data to help solve whatever problems they might have. Although no research method can provide guaranteed results, there is always some type of actionable information present with this approach.

List of the Cons of Qualitative Research

1. Qualitative research creates subjective information points. The quality of the information collected using the qualitative research process can sometimes be questionable. This approach requires the researchers to connect all of the data points which they gather to find the answers to their questions. That means the results are dependent upon the skills of those involved to read the non-verbal cues of each participate, understand when and where follow-up questions are necessary, and remember to document each response. Because individuals can interpret this data in many different ways, there can sometimes be differences in the conclusion because each researcher has a different take on what they receive.

2. Qualitative research can involve significant levels of repetition. Although the smaller sample sizes found in qualitative research can be an advantage, this structure can also be a problem when researchers are trying to collect a complete data profile for a specific demographic. Multiple interviews and discovery sessions become necessary to discover what the potential consequences of a future choice will be. When you only bring in a handful of people to discuss a situation, then these individuals may not offer a complete representation of the group being studied. Without multiple follow-up sessions with other participants, there is no way to prove the authenticity of the information collected.

3. Qualitative research is difficult to replicate. The only way that research can turn into fact is through a process of replication. Other researchers must be able to come to the similar conclusions after the initial project publishers the results. Because the nature of this work is subjective, finding opportunities to duplicate the results are quite rare. The scope of information which a project collects is often limited, which means there is always some doubt found in the data. That is why you will often see a margin of error percentage associated with research that uses this method. Because it never involves every potential member of a demographic, it will always be incomplete.

4. Qualitative research relies on the knowledge of the researchers. The only reason why opportunities are available in the first place when using qualitative research is because there are researchers involved which have expertise that relates to the subject matter being studied. When interviewers are unfamiliar with industry concepts, then it is much more challenging to identify follow-up opportunities that would be if the individual conducting the session was familiar with the ideas under discussion. There is no way to correctly interpret the data if the perspective of the researcher is skewed by a lack of knowledge.

5. Qualitative research does not offer statistics. The goal of qualitative research is to seek out moments of commonality. That means you will not find statistical data within the results. It looks to find specific areas of concern or pain points that are usable to the organization funding to research in the first place. The amount of data collected using this process can be extreme, but there is no guarantee that it will ever be usable. You do not have the same opportunities to compare information as you would with other research methods.

6. Qualitative research still requires a significant time investment. It is true that there are times when the qualitative research process is significantly faster than other methods. There is also the disadvantage in the fact that the amount of time necessary to collect accurate data can be unpredictable using this option. It may take months, years, or even decades to complete a research project if there is a massive amount of data to review. That means the researchers involve must make a long-term commitment to the process to ensure the results can be as accurate as possible.

These qualitative research pros and cons review how all of us come to the choices that we make each day. When researchers understand why we come to specific conclusions, then it becomes possible to create new goods and services that can make our lives easier. This process then concludes with solutions which can benefit a significant majority of the people, leading to better best practices in the future.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Dialogues Clin Neurosci
• v.13(2); 2011 Jun

Language: English | Spanish | French

Effectiveness studies: advantages and disadvantages

Estudios de eficacia: ventajas y desventajas, avantages et inconvénients des études d'efficacité, hans-jürgen möller.

Department of Psychiatry, Ludwig-Maximilians-University München, Munich, Germany

In recent years, so-called “effectiveness studies,” also called “real-world studies” or “pragmatic trials, ” have gained increasing importance in the context of evidencebased medicine. These studies follow less restrictive methodological standards than phase III studies in terms of patient selection, comedication, and other design issues, and their results should therefore be better generalizable than those of phase III trials. Effectiveness studies, like other types of phase IV studies, can therefore contribute to knowledge about medications and supply relevant information in addition to that gained from phase III trials. However, the less restrictive design and inherent methodological problems of phase IV studies have to be carefully considered. For example, the greater variance caused by the different kinds of confounders as well as problematic design issues, such as insensitive primary outcome criteria, unblinded treatment conditions, inclusion of chronic refractory patients, etc, can lead to wrong conclusions. Due to these methodological problems, effectiveness studies are on a principally lower level of evidence, adding only a complementary view to the results of phase III trials without falsifying their results.

En los últimos años los así llamados “estudios de eficacia”, tambien denominados “estudios del mundo real” o “ensayos praqmáticos” han qanado una importancia creciente en el contexto de la medicina basada en la evidencia, Esios estudios siguen estándares metodológicos menos restrictivos que los estudios de fase III en términos de la seleccíon de pacientes, la comedicación y otros temas del diseño, y por lo tanto sus resultados deben ser más generalizables que los de los ensayos de fase III, Los estudios de eficacia, como otros tipos de estudios de fase IV, pueden por lo tanto contribuir al conocimiento de los medicamentos y aportar información relevante además de la que se obtiene de los ensayos de fase III. Sin embargo, el diseño menos restrictivo y los problemas metodológicos inherentes a los estudios de fase IV tienen que ser considerados cuidadosamente. Por ejemplo, la mayor varianza causada por los diferentes tipos de confundentes así como los temas de diseños problemáticos, tales como los criterios para los resultados primarios indiferentes, las condiciones de tratamientos no ciegos, la inclusión de pacientes crónicos refractarios, etc. pueden llevar a conclusiones erróneas. Debido a estos problemas metodológicos, los estudios de eficacia se encuentran principalmente en un nivel de evidencia más bajo, agregando sólo una visión complementaria a los resultados de los estudios de fase III sin desmentir sus resultados,

Ces dernières années, les « études d'efficacité », aussi appelées « études en conditions réelles » ou « essais pragmatiques » ont acquis une importance croissante dans le contexte de la médecine basée sur les preuves. Ces études suivent des standards méthodologiques moins restrictifs que les études de phase 3 en termes deselection des patients, de traitement concomitant et d'autres problèmes de conception ; leurs résultats peuvent donc être plus facilement généralisés que ceux des études de phase 3. Les études d'efficacité, comme d'autres types d'études de phase 4, peuvent donc contribuer à la connaissance des traitements et fournir une information pertinente, s'ajouiantà celle des études de phase 3, il faut cependant soigneusement prendre en compte leur schéma moins restrictif, et les problèmes méthodologiques inhérents aux études de phase 4. Par exemple, une plus grande variance due à différentes sortes de variables confondantes et à des questions délicates de conception, comme des critères de jugement primaires non sensibles, des traitements qui n'ont pas été faits en aveugle, une inclusion de patients chroniques réfraciaires etc... peuvent conduire à des conclusions erronées. Les études d'efficacité, du fait de ces problèmes méthodologiques, sont d'un niveau de preuve nettement plus bas, n'apportant qu'un regard complémentaire sur les résultats des études de phase 3, sans les falsifier.

An the context of evidence-based medicine, 1 randomized control-group trials (RCTs) are considered to be the decisive level of scientifically proven evidence as far as therapeutic aspects are concerned. 2 Placebocontrolled trials, especially for certain psychiatric indications, are ranked higher in terms of evidence than active control-group studies. 3 Especially in terms of licensing perspectives, there is a demand from the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration to demonstrate efficacy based on RCTs including a placebo control group lor obvious methodological reasons. The knowledge gained from noninterventional (observational) studies (NIS) as well as from single-case studies is only seen as being relevant when it is an addition to such studies or a replacement in indications where empirical studies ol a higher methodological degree are lacking. This view corresponds to the general methodological understanding of empirical research. Evidence graduation is geared to the fact that for methodological reasons certain study designs yield results that are more likely to be reliable. This corresponds with the rules of the methodology of empirical research. 4 , 5 Thus, randomized control-group studies have a higher value than nonrandomized or uncontrolled studies.

Do effectiveness studies tell us the truth?

There is a general consensus that the results of phase III studies are not fully generalizable: they have a high internal validity but insufficient external validity. One of the reasons for this is the strict selection of patients according to various clinically relevant characteristics such as the exclusion of suicidally, comorbidity, etc. For this reason it has long been a tradition within clinical psychopharmacology to complement the phase III trial results with ones more strongly oriented towards everyday clinical practice and conditions, ie, studies in patients who better represent the “average” patients and treated under conditions as close as possible to “routine” care, eg, phase IV studies ( Figure 1 .) However, it has thereby always been stressed that because of many immanent methodological problems, eg, biases due to lack of double-blind conditions or any blinding, such as phase naturalistic observational studies (NIS), only deliver complementary knowledge and cannot falsify the results of phase III studies. 6

However, this strict rule can be weakened if the phase IV studies are performed, like phase III studies, as randomized control-group studies in an unblinded or even in blind or double-blind approach.

Some experts seem inclined to attach a greater importance to the results of these studies than to the methodologically stricter phase III studies. 7 This might in particular be the result from criticism arising from the increasingly common practice, especially in the USA, to include, in phase III studies, not “real” patients from care settings, but suitable persons found through advertisements. Of course, rather than this questionable approach, properly performed phase III studies in “real” patients should be advocated. Even so, some experts judge the “real- world approach” of effectiveness studies to be more valuable than phase III trials, at least in terms of clinical relevance.

Some methodological considerations on effectiveness studies

Effectiveness studies are intended to fill the gap between methodologically rigorous RCTs in the sense of phase III trials and naturalistic observational studies. As such, they are hybrids of the RCT methodology and naturalistic designs and are therefore termed “practical clinical trials.” 8 They are intentionally designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatments under real-world conditions and in patient samples representative of everydayclinical practice (Table I) . They can be performed as RCTs, but less demanding designs are also possible. If they use even a blind 9 or double-blind 10 RCT approach they come close to phase III trials considering design aspects, with the only difference being that patient selection is not that restrictive and that, eg, comorbidity or comedication are allowed.

In order to avoid guidelines completely losing their relationship with clinical reality by preferring study types with too little generalizability, greater emphasis should be placed on other empirical research approaches. A drug that has been evaluated in placebo-controlled studies with the selection problems described above should also be tested in studies with less restrictive methodology, eg, randomized control-group studies versus a standard drug; the results should at least show a tendency towards consistency. The 3-arm study design recommended by the European regulatory authority, EMEA/CPMP, 11 in which the experimental substance is compared with placebo and a standard drug, delivers more meaningful results but cannot avoid the problems associated with the extensive selection of patients since it still has a placebo group. Therefore, other types of studies traditionally considered to be phase IV should be part of the evaluation process.

It should be remembered that, traditionally, there was a demand for a psych opharmaceutical drug to be clinically evaluated in a phase model at various methodological levels of empirical research and with approaches of different methodological stringency. This means that evidence for efficacy and toierabiiity should additionally be obtained from phase IV studies, which are more closely oriented towards routine clinical care, 12 - 17 to complement the results of phase III studies with their strict methodology. In such a phase model of clinical/pharmacological evaluation, the evidence from each phase is seen to be complementary and part of the overall evidence. This idea can no longer be found in the systems currently used in guidelines to assess evidence, since evidence is rated according to the study design with the most demanding methodology for the respective therapy (eg, placebo-controlled studies) without ascertaining whether consistent results are available from less restrictive but more generalizable study types. A future grading of evidence that is more relevant for clinical reality should assess whether results are available from studies with both high internal (eg, controlgroup studies) and high external (eg, effectiveness studies, observational studies) validity and whether the results are principally congruent. So far, the current interest in effectiveness studies is principally positive. 10 , 18 , 19 However, the results of these effectiveness studies should not be overinterpreted due to their principal methodological limitations (as demonstrated, eg, for the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness [CATIE] trial). 6

The inclusion of “confounders” (from the perspective of a phase III trial) such as comorbidity or comedication increases the variance and results in a reduced signalto-noise ratio, which makes it more difficult to find differences between two groups (β error problem), even if these factors are adequately considered in the statistical analysis. It might sometimes even be difficult to judge without placebo conditions whether there is a real drug effect, especially if the pre-post difference is unexpectedly low and if there are no differences between two active comparators. Given the fact that these pragmatic trials mostly compare two active compounds, it should be accepted on the basis of the traditional methodology of clinical psychopharmacological trials that only proof of superiority in the statistical sense counts, while the failure to demonstrate a statistically significant difference cannot be interpreted as showing that both treatments are comparable. 3 The latter conclusion is not permissible for principal methodological reasons.

A different statistical design is required to demonstrate equivalency: the so-called equivalency design. However, this methodological approach is also far from the unambiguity of superiority trials. For example, without a placebo control, which is characteristic for effectiveness studies; 20 - 23 one cannot be sure that the active drugs are being compared in a drug-sensitive sample (Table II) . 3 The worst-case scenario is that the drugs show no outcome difference because they are not effective at all in the respective sample. This is not as unlikely as some might believe. In the field of antidepressants, failed studies - in the sense that in a 3-arm study comparing an experimental drug with a standard comparator and placebo not even the standard comparator (internal validator) differs from placebo - are quite common. 24 In recent years there has even been an increasing number of failed studies, especially in the United States, not only in the field of antidepressants but also in the field of antipsychotics, although the antipsychotics generally have a larger effect size than antidepressants. Several factors are relevant in this context, such as low interrater reliability, especially in huge multicenter trials, inclusion of less responsive patients, more chronic patients with residual symptomatology or comorbid patients, no restriction of permitted comedications, etc. In discussing methodological aspects of effectiveness studies it should be questioned whether outcome criteria such as “nondiscontinuation,” or similar categorical end points like “level of caring,” preferably applied in some effectiveness studies, really are ideal outcome criteria, given the fact that they can easily be influenced by the investigators (who may be biased by their expectations if they are not blinded) and are of poorer psychometric value than dimensional ones.

It can be generally questioned whether “nondiscontinuation” really reflects only efficacy and toierabiiity aspects, or whether other parameters beyond drug effects are also involved, eg, confidence in the therapeutic concept. For example, therapeutic concepts like psychotherapy, herbal drug therapy, etc, might be more acceptable to a subgroup of patients, although they mayhave a lower level of efficacy. Different aspects of toierabiiity can have different effects on discontinuation, depending on the specific tolerability problems and on the time patterns of side effects. Thus, one can presume that severe extrapyramidal symptoms occurring right at the start of a study result in an early dropout, the slow development of weight gain rather a later dropout, and tardive dyskinesia (TD) or in most cases even metabolic disorder, a much later dropout. This means that a rough measurement like “discontinuation” or “time to discontinuation” causes a biased distortion per se with respect to the individual antipsychotics being evaluated. This becomes even worse if the transition from the pretreatment antipsychotic to the study antipsychotic is taken into consideration, in particular if it is direct, without a sufficiently long washout phase. Depending on the pharmacological profile of the respective pretreatment drug, for example in terms of D 2 potency, anticholinergic or antihistaminergic properties, and the related pharmacological profile of the study drug, several problems can appear immediately after transition/ 25 These can include reduced antipsychotic efficacy, discontinuation symptoms, hangover of side effects wrongly attributed to the study drug, pharmacodynamic interactions in terms of oversedation, histaminergic, or cholinergic rebound phenomena, etc. Thus, there are good and bad combinations of drugs for this transition process. Theoretically, the best transition is one in which the pretreatment and the studydrug are identical. There are also other critical issues that need to be considered in this context. 26 , 27

Quality of life

Another preferred measure of global outcome used as a primary outcome criterion in some effectiveness studies is “quality of life.” There is no doubt that this is an important outcome criterion which reflects the subjective dimension of the patient's experience. 28 - 30 The classical approach in quality of life research assesses quality of life using a self-rating scale in order to guarantee the subjective perspective. The SF36 31 , 32 is particularly widelyused in psychiatry as well as in other fields of medicine, but there are also several other scales to assess this dimension. 33 - 35 This leads to the general problem of selfrating approaches for the assessment of the primary outcome, if they are not complemented by an observer rating approach. For example, the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study 18 widely relies on self-rating results to assess outcome in terms of depression severity. 9

Generally, there are pros and cons for the use of self-rating scales. They give a complementary view to the observerrating of the same construct/dimension. 36 , 37 The correlation between the observer ratings and self-ratings might not be high and may be quite changeable, depending on the psychopathological state in terms of severity and type of symptoms. 38 It is often unclear exactly what self-ratings of quality of life reflect; severity of the psychopathological state in the global sense, certain dimensions of the psychopathological state, eg, depression, current mood more than real depressive symptoms, side effects of drugs, or the psychosocial situation. 29 , 39 - 43 If such a scale is used as the primary outcome criterion of a study, it is doubtful whether it is sensitive enough to detect intergroup differences in treatment-induced changes, given the high variance of selfrating in general and of self-ratings of quality of life in particular. For example, not many of the studies on antipsychotics that used a quality of life scale as a secondary outcome criterion found significant intergroup differences. 29 , 29 Thus, the use of a quality of life scale carries a high risk of not finding significant differences between two drugs, especially if both are active drugs.

Do effectiveness studies generally fulfil their claim of treating less selective samples of patients than phase III studies? At least some apparently do not. For example, in the effectiveness study comparing olanzapine and haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia, 44 of the 4386 patients assessed for eligibility, only 309 were included in the study (7.0%). This rate is even somewhat lower than the usual rate of 10% to 15% in phase III studies: 45 Some effectiveness studies appear to have a different kind of selection of patients than phase III trials. Often, patients with milder and more chronic symptoms may be selected than is the case in phase III studies, thus making it more difficult per se to demonstrate drug effects and in particular differences between drug effects, because a relevant subgroup of patients might be partially unresponsive to a drug. The data from the Cost Utility of the Latest Antipsychotics in Severe Schizophrenia (CUtLASS) study serve as an example here. In this study, the pre-post changes in the Positive And Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) positive score after 52 weeks amounted to only 2.0 in the first-generation antipsychotic (FGA) arm and 1.5 in the second generation antipsychotic (SGA) arm; these changes are extremely low, even when one takes into account that this study was not an acute treatment study but rather a switch study in partially improved/stabilized patients. Also CATIE 46 and STAR*D 47 patients seem to be more on the chronic and even partially refractory pole.

In order to understand some of the methodological problems of “effectiveness” studies in more detail, the respective review by Möller on effectiveness studies in the field of antipsychotics 6 should be taken into consideration. It is interesting that some of these studies were published in high-ranking journals, although some of them have considerable methodological shortcomings which mean that the conclusions drawn are not tenable, especially not when they are used to falsify the results of phase III studies. Most of these studies arrived at the result that SGAs were generally not superior to FGAs and are thus faced with the comment that not proving superiority does not mean equivalence. The EUFEST study was the only able to demonstrate superiority of SGAs vs haloperidol. A finding of superiority is, for principal methodological reasons (see above) more valid, especially when considering the increased number of confounders in effectiveness studies, than the finding of no statistical differences, which is always difficult to interpret.

The CATIE study

The most famous of effectiveness studies on antipsychotics is the CATIE study. 10 There is no doubt that the CATIE study is an important study when one considers, for example, the large sample size (N=1493 in 57 centers), the complex design with several parallel treatment arms, the 18-month duration of treatment of the first phase, inclusion of sequential treatment phases, etc (phase 1 of the study was published in 2005 10 ). Also, the double-blind conditions of this study and the sophisticated and comprehensive statistical analysis of the extensive database are appealing. Hie study has received a lot of publicity, particularly in the general press, where it was portrayed as showing that SGAs are for the most part not better, but much more expensive, than FGAs. This conclusion is not tenable because of the methodological failings described above and elsewhere. 6 , 48 , 49 However, to end on a more positive note, many other results not only from phase 1 but also phase 2 and 3 are of relevance for clinicians, eg, on different side-effect patterns of individual SGAs, on metabolic issues, on meaningful sequences of antipsychotic treatment in case of partial nonresponse, on the unique efficacy of clozapine in refractory patients, etc. 46 , 50

In the field of antidepressants there are not so many effectiveness studies. To mention one there is the “Texas Algorithm Study“ which tried to demonstrate the superiority of the algorithm approach in treating depressive patients by comparing treatment outcome of depressive patients from two different hospitals. The outcome was more advantageous in the hospital where the algorithm had been applied. However, the weakness of this study was the baseline differences in the two samples, indicating that the patients in the algorithm sample probablyhad a more positive prognosis. Two other studies which evaluated the algorithm approach in a ”real-world“ RCT could confirm the superiority of the treatment strategy. 51 , 52

The most famous effectiveness study in the field of depression treatment is the STAR*D study. 53 Even more than the CATIE study, this study was a gigantic endeavor in terms of sample size, complexity in design, etc. It investigated under unblinded conditions two different sequential treatment approaches in depressive outpatients, who were randomized at baseline to two different groups. At each level of the complex treatment algorithm the outcome difference between the different groups were evaluated. The methodological problems of this study include the low Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) inclusion criteria (HAMD >14), the recruitment of more or less chronic patients in poor psychosocial conditions, overly optimistic power calculations with the consequence that latest for level 3 and 4 the study did not have the necessary power to detect clinically relevant differences. None of the different drug treatment approaches on each level of the sequential treatment algorithm was statistically superior to any of the others; at most some showed a numerical degree of superiority. This “real-world” study reached no clear efficacy results due to inherent methodological problems. From a statistical point of view it does not seem unproblematic that eg, the STAR*D study data were used to generate about 100 publications answering different questions, each of which reporting results based on multiple testings. Given all these problems it has to be questioned whether many really clinically relevant conclusions can be drawn from this study.

Of special methodological interest is the finding that the outcome difference between an a posteriori defined efficacy sample and an effectiveness sample was not as huge as hypothesized. 54 This finding was supported by the results of a naturalistic study on about 1000 depressive inpatients where a similar approach of subdividing the sample a posteriori had been applied. 55 These findings underline that although there are differences in the sample characteristics of phase III trials and “real-world” trials, 56 the relevance for a different outcome does not have to be as huge as anticipated. Thus, phase III studies are apparently more than only “proof of concept” studies, but have some, although limited, generalizability for real-world patients.

Summary and conclusions

Effectiveness studies can contribute to our knowledge about the use and effectiveness of medications. They help to understand that even novel/expensive drugs have their limitations and that it may not be possible to demonstrate consistently their hypothesized superiority in terms of efficacy, safety, compliance, quality of life, etc under “real-world” conditions in chronic, partially refractory, or comorbid patients. In general they can also supply interesting data on dosing issues, sequences of drugs in case of partial response and side-effect patterns. Altogether, the effectiveness studies seem to have a lot of methodological problems, making it difficult to interpret their results. Given the fact that increased variance due to the inclusion of chronic/poorly responsive/comorbid patients, insensitive or problematic outcome parameters, and inadequate sample size increase the risk of a β-error (failure to detect a difference although there is one), and that unblinded designs can induce different kinds of biases. Caution has to be applied when interpreting the results of trials with such problems.

In addition, it is questionable whether some effectiveness studies really do represent the real-world treatment situation better than classical acute and long-term phase III studies, as some of them obviously also recruit a selective patient sample, although the selection is of a different kind than in phase III studies. Effectiveness studies can therefore give only a complementary and not a superior picture of reality. Effectiveness studies, especially those with an inadequate experimental design, are definitely not suitable to cast doubt on the results of the methodologically much stricter phase III studies.

18 Advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research

Quantitative research is a method of gathering and analyzing numerical data to understand a phenomenon or answer a research question.

It involves the use of quantitative data, which can be measured and analyzed using statistical techniques. In this article, we will explore the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research.

Quantitative research is a method of empirical research that focuses on the systematic collection and analysis of numerical data. 

It is often used in social sciences, natural sciences, and various fields to gather and analyze data to make generalizations, identify patterns, and test hypotheses.

Here are some advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research:

• Redaction Team
• September 9, 2023
• Professional Development , Thesis Writing

Advantages of Quantitative Research

• Objective and Reliable Data : Quantitative research method is based on numerical data, making it more objective and less susceptible to researcher bias compared to qualitative research methods.
• Generalizability : To use quantitative research often involves larger sample sizes, which can lead to more generalizable findings and results that can be applied to broader populations.
• Statistical Analysis : It allows for the use of statistical techniques to analyze data, providing a higher degree of precision and the ability to identify patterns and relationships in the data.
• Replicability : Because of its structured and standardized nature, quantitative research can be easily replicated by other researchers, increasing the reliability of findings.
• Quantifiable Outcomes : It is well-suited for measuring and quantifying variables, making it useful for assessing the impact of interventions or treatments.
• Efficiency : Data collection in quantitative method research can be efficient and less time-consuming, especially when using surveys or structured observations.
• Comparative Analysis : Researchers can compare variables, groups, or conditions to identify differences and associations, which can be useful for making informed decisions with data analysis.
• Objective Conclusions : The numerical data generated in quantitative research allows for clear and objective conclusions, facilitating decision-making and policy development.
• Numerical Representation : It provides data that can be graphically represented, making it easier for non-specialists to understand and interpret the findings.

Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

• Simplification : Quantitative research may oversimplify complex phenomena, as it often focuses on variables that can be easily measured, leaving out nuanced or qualitative aspects.
• Lack of Context : It may not capture the full context or meaning behind the data, as it typically does not explore the "why" and "how" of observed relationships.
• Limited Insight : Quantitative research may not provide in-depth insights into people's motivations, emotions, or experiences, which can be better explored through qualitative research methods.
• Difficulty in Capturing Unobservable Constructs : It may not effectively measure abstract or unobservable constructs, such as attitudes, beliefs, or cultural factors, which are better addressed through qualitative research.
• Risk of Measurement Error : Errors can occur during data collection or analysis, leading to inaccurate results. Researchers must take steps to minimize measurement error.
• Lack of Flexibility : Quantitative research typically follows a structured approach, which may limit the ability to adapt to unexpected findings or explore emergent themes.
• Resource-Intensive : Conducting quantitative research involves be resource-intensive, especially when large sample sizes are required or complex statistical analyses are involved.
• Ethical Concerns : The collection of quantitative data, particularly in surveys or experiments, may raise ethical concerns related to privacy of personal information, informed consent, and the potential for harm.
• Difficulty in Exploring Contextual Factors : Quantitative research may not fully capture the influence of contextual factors, such as culture, history, or environment, on the research topic.

Conclusion of Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative Research

Quantitative research is a powerful tool that allows researchers to collect and analyze numerical data to understand a phenomenon or answer research questions.

It offers several advantages, including objectivity, generalizability, real-time analysis, and the ability to analyze large datasets, different from the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research .

However, it is important to recognize its limitations, such as the lack of qualitative richness, the need for a larger sample size, and the inability to explore complex social phenomena.

Researchers should carefully consider the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative research when selecting a research method for their study.

Privacy Overview

Extract insights from customer & stakeholder interviews. At Scale.

Advantages and disadvantages of grounded theory in research.

Home » Advantages and Disadvantages of Grounded Theory in Research

A Balanced Inquiry Approach to Grounded Theory in research offers a structured yet flexible framework for understanding complex social phenomena. Researchers often face the challenge of navigating vast data while seeking meaningful patterns and insights. This approach emphasizes the importance of integrating diverse perspectives, fostering a more comprehensive understanding of the research context.

In recognizing the advantages and disadvantages of grounded theory, this approach encourages critical thinking and adaptability. Researchers can benefit from both the systematic data collection and the spontaneous generation of theories that arise during the inquiry process. Balancing structure with open-minded exploration ultimately enriches the research experience, leading to deeper insights and a more nuanced analysis of the subject matter.

Advantages of Grounded Theory Research

Grounded theory research offers significant advantages, particularly through its balanced inquiry approach. One key benefit is the flexibility it provides researchers, allowing them to adapt their focus as new data emerges. This adaptability promotes a deeper understanding of the social phenomena being studied, as the theory evolves organically from the data itself.

Another advantage is the emphasis on participant perspectives. Grounded theory prioritizes the voices of individuals within the study, ensuring their experiences shape the research outcomes. This inclusivity enhances the validity of the findings and contributes to a richer, more nuanced analysis. Furthermore, using this approach can lead to practical outcomes and theories that are closely related to real-world contexts, making it particularly valuable in applied research settings. Overall, grounded theory research fosters a comprehensive exploration of complex issues through its balanced inquiry approach.

Balanced Inquiry Approach: Flexibility and Depth

The Balanced Inquiry Approach offers researchers a unique advantage by blending flexibility with depth. This combination allows for exploring complex phenomena while adapting the study design as emerging insights dictate. The approach encourages researchers to pivot their focus based on initial findings, leading to richer and more nuanced data collection.

For a successful implementation of this approach, researchers should consider the following key elements:

• Adaptability : Being open to modifying research questions can uncover new dimensions of a study, enhancing overall findings.
• Iterative Process : Engaging in cycles of data gathering and analysis allows for continuous refinement of theories and concepts.
• Participant-Centric : Fostering open dialogue with participants can yield deeper insights into the subject matter.
• Diverse Data Sources : Utilizing various data sources increases the richness of the findings and helps triangulate results.

Embracing these elements promotes a more engaging and thorough research process, ultimately leading to well-rounded conclusions.

Theory Development: A Balanced Inquiry Approach

In the quest for effective research methodologies, the Balanced Inquiry Approach emerges as a thoughtful framework for theory development. This approach emphasizes synthesizing different perspectives and integrating data from varied sources. By recognizing the complexity of social phenomena, researchers can explore and construct theories that reflect a nuanced understanding of their subject matter.

Adopting a Balanced Inquiry Approach involves several key components. First, it advocates for a comprehensive view that combines qualitative and quantitative data. This ensures a richer analysis that captures the depth and breadth of research questions. Next, it encourages iterative engagement with data, allowing for continuous refinement of theories as new insights emerge. Lastly, this approach promotes collaboration among researchers and stakeholders, enhancing the relevance and application of findings to real-world challenges. Embracing these elements results in a more robust and adaptable framework for developing theories in grounded research contexts.

Disadvantages of Grounded Theory Research

Grounded theory research, while valuable, comes with notable disadvantages that researchers must consider. One significant drawback is the subjective nature of data analysis. Each researcher may interpret findings differently, leading to inconsistencies. This subjectivity can impede the study’s reliability and result in missing valuable insights. Additionally, manual analysis of transcripts can be time-consuming, detracting from overall efficiency, as teams often spend excessive hours interpreting data without an effective strategy in place.

Moreover, the open-ended approach of grounded theory may complicate the research process. As researchers gather immense amounts of qualitative data, they may struggle to derive clear conclusions within their findings. This scattered nature can lead to information overload, making it difficult to maintain a balanced inquiry approach. To mitigate these disadvantages, researchers should establish a framework that promotes consistency and clarity in data analysis while being mindful of potential biases.

Challenges of the Balanced Inquiry Approach in Grounded Theory

The Balanced Inquiry Approach in Grounded Theory presents unique challenges that researchers must navigate thoughtfully. One significant challenge is ensuring that the data collection methods remain systematic while also allowing for the flexibility necessary to explore emerging themes. Researchers may find it difficult to strike this balance, leading to either rigid data collection or chaotic exploration.

Another challenge lies in integrating diverse perspectives without fostering bias. A researcher might inadvertently prioritize certain voices or insights, ultimately skewing the analysis. Additionally, the need for iterative analysis can be demanding, requiring constant engagement with the data while maintaining clarity in the research objectives. By addressing these challenges with a clear strategy, researchers can enhance their application of the Balanced Inquiry Approach in grounded theory, allowing for meaningful insights that respect both structure and adaptability.

Time-Intensity: A Critical Look at the Balanced Inquiry Approach

The Balanced Inquiry Approach, while promoting a comprehensive research framework, inherently carries significant time-intensity challenges. Researchers often find themselves navigating through a plethora of data points, leading to a drawn-out synthesis process. This often hampers not only the efficiency of gathering insights but also the timely application of findings in real-world scenarios.

Moreover, the iterative nature of this approach can become resource-intensive. It requires continuous engagement with participants and repeated cycles of data collection and analysis, demanding not only time but also substantial effort from researchers. One must carefully weigh the benefits of depth and richness in data against the practical timelines involved in research projects. Ultimately, understanding these time-related implications is crucial for researchers considering the Balanced Inquiry Approach, as it impacts both the quality of findings and the overall feasibility of the research endeavor.

Conclusion: The Balanced Inquiry Approach in Grounded Theory – A Final Thought

The Balanced Inquiry Approach emphasizes a comprehensive understanding of experiences and knowledge in the evolving field of research. Integrating grounded theory allows researchers to explore data systematically, encouraging the development of theories based on practical observations. This methodology presents both benefits and challenges, making it essential to navigate the research design carefully.

In conclusion, the balanced inquiry approach fosters an environment conducive to insightful discoveries. By valuing participant perspectives and empirical data, researchers can construct a well-rounded framework for their studies. Adopting this approach not only enhances the depth of analysis but also results in more reliable outcomes, ultimately enriching the research process for all involved.

Turn interviews into actionable insights

On this Page

Document Study: How to Analyze Market Research Data

You may also like, risk sensitivity analysis: ai tools for market research 2024.

Purpose of Grounded Theory in Market Research 2024

Sensitivity risk analysis: how to use ai tools in 2024.

Unlock Insights from Interviews 10x faster

• Request demo
• Get started for free

share this!

August 15, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

Why do researchers often prefer safe over risky projects? Explaining risk aversion in science

by Public Library of Science

A mathematical framework that builds on the economic theory of hidden-action models provides insight into how the unobservable nature of effort and risk shapes investigators' research strategies and the incentive structures within which they work, according to a study published August 15 in PLOS Biology by Kevin Gross from North Carolina State University, U.S., and Carl Bergstrom from the University of Washington, U.S.

Scientific research requires taking risks , as the most cautious approaches are unlikely to lead to the most rapid progress. Yet much funded scientific research plays it safe and funding agencies bemoan the difficulty of attracting high-risk, high-return research projects. Gross and Bergstrom adapted an economic contracting model to explore how the unobservability of risk and effort discourages risky research.

The model considers a hidden-action problem, in which the scientific community must reward discoveries in a way that encourages effort and risk-taking while simultaneously protecting researchers' livelihoods against the unpredictability of scientific outcomes.

Its challenge when doing so is that incentives to motivate effort clash with incentives to motivate risk-taking, because a failed project may be evidence of a risky undertaking but could also be the result of simple sloth. As a result, the incentives that are needed to encourage effort do actively discourage risk-taking.

Scientists respond by working on safe projects that generate evidence of effort but that don't move science forward as rapidly as riskier projects would.

A social planner who prizes scientific productivity above researchers' well-being could remedy the problem by rewarding major discoveries richly enough to induce high-risk research, but in doing so would expose scientists to a degree of livelihood risk that ultimately leaves them worse off.

Because the scientific community is approximately self-governing and constructs its own reward schedule, the incentives that researchers are willing to impose on themselves are inadequate to motivate the scientific risks that would best expedite scientific progress.

In deciding how to reward discoveries, the scientific community must contend with the fact that reward schemes that motivate effort inherently discourage scientific risk-taking, and vice versa.

Because the community must motivate both effort and scientific risk-taking, and because effort is costly to investigators, the community inevitably establishes a tradition that encourages more conservative science than would be optimal for maximizing scientific progress, even when risky research is no more onerous than safer lines of inquiry.

The authors add, "Commentators regularly bemoan the dearth of high-risk, high-return research in science and suppose that this state of affairs is evidence of institutional or personal failings. We argue here that this is not the case; instead, scientists who don't want to gamble with their careers will inevitably choose projects that are safer than scientific funders would prefer."

Journal information: PLoS Biology

Provided by Public Library of Science

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Soundscape study shows how underground acoustics can amplify soil health

Scottish and Irish rocks confirmed as rare record of 'snowball Earth'

6 hours ago

Blind cavefish have extraordinary taste buds that increase with age, research reveals

8 hours ago

'Mercury bomb' threatens millions as Arctic temperatures rise, study warns

Team develops method for control over single-molecule photoswitching

9 hours ago

X-ray irradiation technique helps to control cancer-causing poison in corn

10 hours ago

Physicists uncover new phenomena in fractional quantum Hall effects

Researchers observe 'locked' electron pairs in a superconductor cuprate

Scientists discover superbug's rapid path to antibiotic resistance

11 hours ago

As human activities expand in Antarctica, scientists identify crucial conservation sites

12 hours ago

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

Cover songs versus the original track, which ones are better, why are abba so popular, today's fusion music: t square, cassiopeia, rei & kanade sato.

16 hours ago

Biographies, history, personal accounts

Aug 13, 2024

Is "applausive" implied terminology?

"trolling" in new england.

More from Art, Music, History, and Linguistics

Related Stories

Orangutans and gorillas are able to make economically rational decisions, find researchers

Dec 15, 2022

Study shows children of lower economic status more willing to make risky decisions than wealthier children

Sep 29, 2022

Cash may not be the most effective way to motivate employees

Aug 15, 2022

Risky outdoor play can boost science education

May 7, 2024

New research demonstrates more effective method for measuring impact of scientific publications

Nov 20, 2023

AI can take over key management roles in scientific research, shows study

Apr 2, 2024

Recommended for you

Renewable energy policies provide benefits across state lines, study shows

Larger teams in academic research worsen career prospects, study finds

Aug 14, 2024

The atmosphere in the room can affect strategic decision-making, study finds

Findings suggest empowering women is key to both sustainable energy and gender justice

Study reveals how the Global North drives inequality in international trade

Aug 9, 2024

Dutch survey study links air ventilation and other factors to work-from-home success

Aug 7, 2024

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter