Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

Dialogues : QUANT Researchers on QUAL Methods

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Pilcher, Nick and Cortazzi, M. (2016) Dialogues : QUANT Researchers on QUAL Methods. The Qualitative Report, 21 (3). pp. 450-473. ISSN 1052-0147.

[img]
Preview
PDF
Dialogues_ QUANT Researchers on QUAL Methods.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer.
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0.

Download (736Kb) | Preview
Official URL: http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol21/iss3/1/

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Qualitative researchers commonly perceive that positivist hard-science researchers and policies of governments deprecate qualitative methods and approaches. Curiously though, we could not see anyone asking quantitative researchers โ€˜What do you think about qualitative approaches and methods?โ€™ We did this in interviews with 17 assumed quantitative researchers in the fields of advanced materials construction, civil engineering, transport modelling, computer science, and geotechnics. Surprisingly, these researchers rarely described themselves as purely quantitative, and were rarely against the five qualitative methods discussed. Moreover, many actually used qualitative methods, often in ways we had not anticipated. Drawing on a Bakhtinian grounded framework, we present our analysis as a performed ethnographic dialogue between data extracts and research literature. We present evidence that the alleged qualitative-quantitative divide does not apply here, and suggest dialogic ways to see teach "qualitative" and "quantitative" and some associated terms.

Item Type: Journal Article
Subjects: Q Science > QA Mathematics > QA76 Electronic computers. Computer science. Computer software
Z Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources > Z665 Library Science. Information Science
Divisions: Faculty of Social Sciences > Centre for Applied Linguistics
Journal or Publication Title: The Qualitative Report
Publisher: College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, Nova Southeastern University
ISSN: 1052-0147
Official Date: 3 July 2016
Dates:
DateEvent
3 July 2016Published
Volume: 21
Number: 3
Page Range: pp. 450-473
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Access rights to Published version: Open Access (Creative Commons)
Date of first compliant deposit: 2 August 2016
Date of first compliant Open Access: 2 August 2016

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us