泽美道图片,金陵学院教务处,禽流感最新报道
Conclusion
In conclusion, while this approach can be criticized by positivists for its subjective nature and lack of empirical methods, it does, however, offer a more in-depth perspective into individuals and their lives. Qualitative research is rigorous and highly subjective because the researcher’s investigation is overly influenced by the views of the researcher involved. Also, qualitative research does provide a way of extracting more complex, in-depth and comprehensive information from social contexts that would be difficult to retrieve using quantitative methods.
However, this methodology has been criticised by positivists and the objectivist ontology because of the value laden perspective it takes. If the researcher does have any preconceived ideas of the findings, it may cause bias in the results and therefore affect the authenticity of their work. Also the researcher may misinterpret the social phenomena they are studying and therefore have difficulties establishing the real meaning of that particular social situation.
Qualitative research can also be criticised because of its lack of representativeness of the larger population, as qualitative research typically deals with micro social issues that cannot be generalised to the wider population because they are context specific. However qualitative researchers would see this as an advantage because they require a deeper understanding in order to gain Verstehen. Another criticism would be that qualitative methods are also very expensive to conduct, mainly because of the amount of time it takes to interpret data and conduct observational studies.
Despite these criticisms, qualitative research is a flexible, in-depth form of enquiry that is not dominated by statistics or rigid research methods. It is largely dominated by the constructivist ontology and the interpretivist epistemology which believe that the social world is built upon actions and interactions. Researchers adopt this qualitative approach to enable them to form Verstehen with their research topic or group.
Bibliography
Berg, B. (2007) Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, Boston:
Pearson.
Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods (Second Edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.) (2003) The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Denzin, N. K. (1997) Interpretative Ethnography: Ethnographic Practices for the 21st Century, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.) (2003) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Guba, E. G., Lincoln, Y. S. (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In . K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (1995) Ethnography: Principles in Practice, London: Routledge.
Miles, Matthew B. and Huberman, A. Michael (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Morris S. Schwartz and Charlotte Green Schwartz (1955) ‘Problems in Participant Observation’, American Journal of Sociology, 60, pages 343-53.
Prus, R (1996) “The ethnographic research tradition”, in Symbolic Interaction and Ethnographic Research, New York: State University of New York Press.
Silverman, D. (2001) Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction, London: Sage.
Spradley, J. (1980) Participant Observation, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
http://www.jonesinternational.edu/schools/courses/edu793.php
|
