Introduction

Research is a systematic investigation process to get answers of the identified problem. Social science area is an extended field that uses the objective scientific method. This vast field is divided in two approaches, one is naturalistic and another is more traditional (Payne S. L., 2000). This report mainly discusses the research methodology and two different approaches. The qualitative approach, which is mostly used in attitudinal survey and categorical analysis, whereas the quantitative method is used in numerical data analysis. The shift from ontology to data source identification and all the process in between is identified and explained in the chapter (Cameron, 2010).. Further, the research methodology, key characteristics, strengths and weaknesses are also discussed in the following discussions (Baumann, 2011).

Explanation of quantitative and qualitative social research methodologies and paradigms that inform them

Before investigation it must be identified what research paradigms do, the research belongs to. The positivists, constructivists and pragmatists are three main criteria of the most common paradigms. The first step of the research is to connect the reality of the research through ontology, epistemology. Then comes the theoretical perspective and deciding on the methodology and data sources. This is the main paradigm shift in old research methods (Cameron, 2010).

Quantitative research

This method consists of the study of data that are analysed in concern of interpretation of numbers. The quantitative method of research is concerned with describing events and scientific data. Collection of numerical data that represents sets of data to analyse. Quantitative research has some general characteristics (Theobald, 2008).

• Control element is important for quantitative method and necessary for unambiguous answer to questions. Inquiry of the questions is necessary for control.
• Operational rule must be applied to measure the steps taken in research.
• Replication of the data should be reliable
• Systematic approach to hypothesis testing is done in empirical test

Qualitative research

This method is more time consuming and critical analysis. This method is less dependent on the numeric data.

• The qualitative research method is natural and inquiry are not contrived
• This is also not dependent in the separate variables
• In major areas of research, qualitative method is used as this provides more in-depth and critical analysis as well as considers the different perspective of the researchers

It has been identified that there are four different paradigms in research identified by researchers

Positivism – in both of the two methodologies, it involves hypothesis testing to gain the main objective of the research numerically tested. Thus, a prediction of happens in the future date and critical realism incorporates value of the assumption. This is mainly focused on quantitative data. Interpretivism – Critical humanism is a subordinate type of interpretative paradigm. The approach of the researchers involves people and they studied the process of research. The data gathered in the process is for social change.

Reflexivity– the reflexivity of the relationship between the research and people being studied. The more focus of the reflexivity element is given in emphasis in qualitative research.

Community of practise – the people in the work community and their consult with the course of study and helps incorporate other’s points in the work. This also helps in taking perspectives of their contribution to the research.

Explanation of their historical context and identification of what kind of research each method is best suited to

Since 1960, the strong move toward qualitative method, the naturalistic or subjective approach is in social science research method has caught the attention of the researchers. Scientific method has always leaned toward the quantitative approach. It was also termed, as homothetic and social reality is the main objective of the individual. When the subject of the social research is based on the variables in and observations are high in numeric values the effectiveness of quantitative method rises compared to qualitative method of researching. Qualitative method is required for attitude-based research. The attitude survey, demographic analysis, statement based interpretation comes under qualitative method of survey (Theobald, 2008). The quantitative method is interpretative and regarded with numbers. Therefore, the analysing with the research is subjective, diagnostic or impressionistic are also taken into consideration while choosing the method. Various factors must be accounted and evaluated. For chemistry and astrophysical experiments, the experimental research design methods are selected. The opinion-based research is used in experimental, arbitrary, interval and ordinal type of research. Quantification of the behavioural measurements is applied in numerical scale, intensity or behaviour, testing emotions or preferences. Observation research methods are also used quasi-experimental methods, case study solution to know the and why of the problem. It is mainly used in social sciences and anthropology study (Hoggart, 2017, April). 

Evaluation of the impact of the two methodologies on social research

Utilising the approaches of the qualitative and quantitative method is needed and evaluating the impact on research has become an enhanced area of research methodology assessments. The implementation and adaption of the combined research study is needs to be aggregated. Quantitative method of data analysing predict relationships among variables but qualitative method uses social analytical frameworks and relationships, interpret patterns and observed trends (Card, 2015).

Analytical insights or in depths analysis takes interventions of interpretative leaps based on the two research methods. Combining the impact of evaluation of qualitative and quantitative method needs integration of fieldwork and knowledge gap analysis. Qualitative analysis suggests the importance of construction and complementary indicators and replaces the existing indicators. Sequencing the information according the specific and predefined questions generates the qualitative study. In that case, the contextual study conducted in a sample and subsample survey allows to do comparison in the investigation and large survey in the same quantity (Makagon M. M., 2012). Merging the findings sufficiently to evaluate the impact, improves the analysis process as well as influences of policies of the research.

To measure the change in qualitative methods the consideration of quantifying the qualitative impacts is necessary. Quantification addresses the application of indicators and indexes that includes both of observing changes in behaviour or perception of scoring data. In the contextual way the indicators can be collected in various ways, for example survey instrument in existing longitudinal survey of a relatively large sample of targeted population (Payne, 2000). These data are analysed with the approach of community scorecard or citizen report card. Qualitative research triangulates the results, in addition explains the relationships, trends and patterns (Hoggart, 2017, April).

Demonstration of critical analysis of the strengths and limitations of each of the methodologies

The strength and limitation of qualitative method

Strengths

• Validity and reliability is a major concern for qualitative method of research
• Qualitative research is important for the suggesting the possible relationships, dynamic processes, cause and effect of relationship.
• This research methodology is a dependent on social analysis (Makagon M. M., 2012).

Limitations 

• It is difficult to apply conventional standards of reliability and validity to every hybrid research
• The context of research, conditions and events cannot be generalised in this approach of research. Data collection, interpretations and analysis is lengthy process
• Researchers always emphasised on the subject of the study (Payne, 2000)

The strength and limitation of quantitative method

Strengths

• Precision through this approach is highly managed
• Control of the research is maintained through sample design
• Statistical techniques are a approach to sophisticated analysis and also the replicability
• This approach can be used in producing causality statement, thus controlled experiments (Hoggart, 2017, April)

Limitations

• As this research method is mostly based on numeric method complexity rises if it is difficult to control all the involved variables
• The mechanistic of ethos to exclude notions of freedom and moral responsibility
• It also fails to take into consideration the different perspectives of interpretation
• The hypothesis is mostly based on assumptions and the facts may not be true for all context (Baumann, 2011).

Reference

Baumann, A. N. A., Domenech Rodríguez, M., & PARRA?CARDONA, J. R. (2011). Community?based applied research with Latino immigrant families: informing practice and research according to ethical and social justice principles. Family process, 50(2), 132-148.

Cameron, L., & Maslen, R. (2010). Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. Equinox.  

Card, N. A. (2015). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. Guilford Publications.

Hoggart, L. (2017, April). Collaboration or collusion? Involving research users in applied social research. In Women’s Studies International Forum (Vol. 61, pp. 100-107). Pergamon.

Makagon, M. M., McCowan, B., & Mench, J. A. (2012). How can social network analysis contribute to social behavior research in applied ethology?. Applied animal behaviour science, 138(3), 152-161.

Payne, S. L. (2000). Challenges for research ethics and moral knowledge construction in the applied social sciences. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(4), 307-318.

Payne, S. L. (2000). Challenges for research ethics and moral knowledge construction in the applied social sciences. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(4), 307-318.

Theobald, S., & Nhlema-Simwaka, B. (2008). The research, policy and practice interface: Reflections on using applied social research to promote equity in health in Malawi. Social Science & Medicine, 67(5), 760-770.