Page 1 of 6

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 10, No. 2

Publication Date: February 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/assrj.102.15106.

Alsoaery, A., Alshehri, H., & Abdullah, H. (2023). How Far is the Qualitative and Quantitative Divide More Imagined than Real?

Philosophy and Traditions in Management Research. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(2). 474-479.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

How Far is the Qualitative and Quantitative Divide More

Imagined than Real? Philosophy and Traditions in Management

Research

Abdulrahman Alsoaery

College of Business, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia

Hessa Alshehri

Halah Abdullah

ABSTRACT

This article represents the debate in the two main research approaches namely

qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative and quantitative approaches have special

roles in research studies in numerous disciplines. Despite the debate on the division

between the two approaches, there are a series of advantages and disadvantages,

though depending on the aims and objectives of researchers. However, there is

intense and significant disagreement concerning both nature of data and

philosophical assumptions. Researchers, for that reason, increasingly demonstrate

interest in merging the two concepts, in order to reap the merits of each as can be

noticed in the increase number of this integrated approach in the management

research.

Keywords: Qualitative, Quantitative

INTRODUCTION

Research considers a significant part in the academic field, especially in social sciences as

scholars seek to establish a truthful and objective description of the world phenomena. In that

way, researchers can draw conclusions in every situation and in relation to other factors or

variables. The debate concerning the imagination of qualitative and quantitative research has

evolved compared to any other subject in methodology. By illustrating the dissimilarity,

quantitative research involves the use of numerical data while qualitative research focuses on

description and analysis of social occurrences. Elman (2005) observes, a major recurring issue

in behavioral and social research is the comparative value of the two approaches, exclusively in

connection to intense debates in ontology, epistemology, inductive, and deductive viewpoints.

According to Yilmaz (2013), quantitative and qualitative approaches differ in relation to

theoretical, epistemological, and methodological backgrounds. Primarily, quantitative research

develops explanatory and universal laws based on objective epistemology. Further, it focuses

on measurement as well as analysis of causal interactions between different variables within

the frame of logical and deterministic theories. Qualitative research design on the reverse

focuses on constructivist epistemology besides exploring socially constructed dynamics based

on a flexible and holistic framework (Yilmaz 2013). Even though, there have been progressive

calls for going beyond imaginary differences among methodologies and epistemologies to

Page 2 of 6

475

Alsoaery, A., Alshehri, H., & Abdullah, H. (2023). How Far is the Qualitative and Quantitative Divide More Imagined than Real? Philosophy and

Traditions in Management Research. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(2). 474-479.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.102.15106

establish a well-ordered practical pluralism, there have been inadequate explorations that

employ the approach in literature. This article will discuss and evaluate the qualitative and

quantitative divide and, furthermore, will try to demonstrate some of the advantages and

disadvantages of both approaches in the subsequent paragraphs.

THE DEBATE ON THE TWO APPROACHES

The early applications of statistics traced back in the late 19th century in the disciplines of social

sciences turn out to vital in just before 20th century as quantitative methodologies multiplied

complexity, stature, and forced qualitative approach of empirical analysis out of public interest

(Forte 2002). In that period, the difference between quantitative and qualitative approaches

related unsuitably, with the competing of epistemological standpoints of interpretivism and

positivism as the former stand with the notion of inductive and the latter with the deductive

logic. As Brady and David (2004) assert, usually identified by quantitative methods, positivists

present their viewpoints as hegemonic with a single logic inference. Still, scholars have settled

that there is insignificant difference between quantitative and qualitative research, to the

degree that the distinctions exist, yet they disadvantage the knowledge focusing on qualitative

approach. According to Bryman and Bell (2015, pp. 627-628), qualitative and quantitative

research designs show differences in structure. For instance, quantitative research remains

unstructured, provides a researcher’s point of view and involves testing of theories. However,

qualitative research reflects participants’ point of view and is theory emergent (Bryman & Bell

2015, pp. 627-628). Supporters of qualitative work emphasise the related quantification limits

alongside the understandings scholars achieve via an explanatory tactic to philosophical or

social action. According to Goldthorpe (2000), in place of a combined rationality, interpretivists

hint that there are varieties of rationalities employed in social science works. The multiple

logics come from ontological or epistemological promises.

The debate further with positivists insisting that there are no noticeable differences among

quantitative and qualitative works, even as interpretivists assert that distinct schools within

social sciences remain irreconcilably drifted, possibly even incommensurable (Smith

1989).Methodological tools employed in social science are neither undeviating given that they

employ similar standards of qualitative and quantitative nor dichotomous consisting of a bright

line separating qualitative and quantitative. As Carpini (2013) contends, even though scholars

approve the overall sentiment presented by unificationists, particularly with objective of

technical accumulation through the methods and fields, such pronouncements remain

pompous and imaginary. In support of this, scholars within the fields of social sciences indicate

that they disregard or altogether condemn the divisions existing between established

scholarship traditions that are relatively defensible and factual. According to Shweder (1996),

the usual dichotomous logic fails to account for the shortfalls in quantitative and qualitative.

Griffin (1992) observes that the philosophical assumptions of a researcher concerning the

nature of reality present the concept of objectivism and constructivism. Reasonably,

quantitative and qualitative research in management presents different phenomenal inferences

on ontological positions. In objectivism, social phenomena along with their meanings convey

an independent existence of social actors. Constructionism, on the other hand, provides social

phenomena as well as their meanings have social actors progressively accomplished, which

implies that categories and social phenomena occur given the interaction and persistent

revision (Dey & Nentwich 2007). Henceforward, when discussing the subjects of quantitative

Page 3 of 6

476

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 2, February-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

or qualitative work, the focus remains on the methods rather than the question of ontology.

Notably, qualitative research relates to quantitative methods, at least in form of ethnographies,

observation of participants, and interviews. Quantitative research, on the reverse, remains

predictably adjoined with quantitative methods, including questionnaires, experiments, or

surveys.

Sandberg (2005) argues that the philosophical concept of dualist ontology in both qualitative

and quantitative research has traditions in the western thinking. A good example is the

oppositions including female-male, sane-insane, and nature-culture binary identity

constructions. As a result, extending the constitutive binary subtleties denotes the quantitative

investigation concept, which has reality in contrast to qualitative works (Hughes 2002).

Significantly, the two sides of the binary need each other to sustain a test of permanency or

identity. Similarly, they present a hierarchal association, denoting that a given pair of one side

would possibly to control the other, considering the idea of positivism and its applicability to

contentious social phenomena (Carr 1994, p. 718). Here, the issue arising from critiques in the

periodic confines remains weak. An important view of binary construction references their

exclusiveness. From this perspective, it follows that a researcher may be appropriate to one

side of the binary, yet cannot rationally fit in the other (Bryman & Bell 2015). The resultant

logic of either or expounds on the reason as to why binaries promote monocultures and

building of camps, hence supporting the creation of stable identities and at the same time

disabling them and shutting the possibility of any intermingling with each other (Eberle 2005).

In reference to the concept of comparability, the imaginary issues between quantitative and

qualitative function in observation and different assumptions. Case in point, quantitative

approaches presume that researchers can easily count, measure, and finally compare a

population of things. On the reverse, qualitative observers assume that the existence of an

empirical background where researchers can easily measure subject pieces (McLaughlin 1991).

In this perspective, researchers consider quantitative work a nomothetic while qualitative

work appropriately categorized as idiographic (Gerring & Craig 2011, p. 6). Here, the major

point of difference rests on the presumption of their comparability of observations rather than

on size (N), presentation style (narrative or numerical), epistemology, or ontology. In its place,

Schwandt (1997) observes that researchers use it as an extensive description for hermeneutic

investigations, such as in ethnography, naturalistic view, and methodology. Qualitative

research, for that reason, is less useful term for describing a particular phenomenon for inquiry.

A notable distinction between quantitative and qualitative reflects a simple matter of narratives

versus numbers, which is counting against recounting. Any work that uses a number employs

the approach of quantitative research, unlike qualitative inquiry that a researcher uses words

(Popay, 2003). In light of this distinction, every work within the spheres of social sciences

comprises both elements, yet this might be an unaccommodating deduction. Then, a researcher

can compute a ratio consisting of various words in particular research in a bid to establish

qualitative or quantitative results. In terms of comparability, the pervasive quantitative or

qualitative splint in observations occur as one population, hence potential members of one

sample. In view of Barth’s comparison, a researcher should identify two forms of variants and

same, meaning construction of an over-arching class in which one can incorporate the two

forms, compare and contrast the same (1999). In precision, qualitative works depend on