This document discusses the debate between qualitative and quantitative research methods and argues that mixed methods research provides a solution. It provides advantages and disadvantages of both qualitative and quantitative research. Mixed methods allows researchers to gain a more comprehensive understanding by combining both approaches. Using multiple research methods offsets the weaknesses of individual methods.

1. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
MUNHUMUTAPA FACULTY OF COMMERCE
DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
NAME : LEOPTRA MUTAZU
REG NUMBER : M173629
PROGRAMME : BCOMM INFORMATION SYSTEMS
MODULE : RHM101
LECTURE : MR R.MAWONIKE
ASSIGNMENT : 1
QUESTION :”The mixed method is the solution to the qualitative-quantitative
debate.” Discuss [100]
CONTACT : +263773121459
MARK……………………………………………………………………………………………..
COMMENTS………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
Mixed methods research can answer research questions that the other methodologies cannot. I
agree with contention that mixed method research is solution to qualitative and quantitate debate.
Some people would say that we are beyond the debate and can now freely use mixed- method
designs to carry out relevant and valuable research. According to Carey (1993), “quantitative and
qualitative techniques are merely tools; integrating them allows us to answer questions of
substantial importance”. However, just because they are often combined does not mean that it is
always appropriate to do so.
We believe that mixed-methods research is now being adopted uncritically by a new generation of
researchers who have overlooked the underlying assumptions behind the qualitative-quantitative
debate. In short, the philosophical distinctions between them have become so blurred that
researchers are left with the impression that the differences between the two are merely technical
Smith and (Heshius., 1986, p.67).
This essay discusses qualitative, quantitative and mixed method. Some scholars define qualitative
research method as a school of thought where data is in the form of words, narrations and
descriptions to mention but a few. In qualitative research the participants are expects and the
researcher is there to learn. In addition qualitative research observations are being taken during
experimental that is not numerical in nature. Qualitative research it is open ended dynamic in
nature and provides flexible depth of understanding lastly researcher ideas can be evaluated. In
comparison there are limitations which are responses are not measured, neither are
they statistically representative. Correspondingly depth understanding dependent on interviewer
skills, orientation and interpretation also cannot be repeated as easily with exactly replicable and
thus comparable results as quantitative.

3. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
Quantitative methods are standardized, making them effective in comparing research findings with
similar studies. Additionally, they allow researchers to summarize vast sources of data.
Quantitative methods are reliable and valid because they employ prescribed procedures. They also
eliminate bias in a study because they involve many cases and few variables, which prevent
researchers from using subjects known to them. Quantitative methods enable researchers to
correlate independent and dependent variables in order to determine causality within a study
framework. Furthermore, these methods allow researchers to control the data collection
environment so that extraneous variables are not introduced into a study.
On the other hand, the University of Southern California notes that the use of standardized
questions in quantitative research may cause structural bias. In fact, research findings may reflect
the view of the researcher rather than those of the respondent. The findings of quantitative research
methods are numerical and therefore lack a detailed narrative of human perception. The
respondents may also provide answers that reflect their preconceived hypotheses. About.com notes
that the generation and testing of hypotheses in quantitative research methods can be subjective
and misleading. Structured instruments such as questionnaires are used to gather quantitative data.
To begin with, the researcher merges quantitative and qualitative data in order to provide a
comprehensive analysis of the research problem. In this design, the investigator collects both forms
of data at the same time and then integrates the information in the interpretation of the overall
results. Also, in this design, the researcher may embed one smaller form of data within another
larger data collection in order to analyze different types of questions (Creswell, 2009, p.67). The
purpose of this form of research is that both qualitative and quantitative research, in combination,
provide a better understanding of a research problem or issue than either research approach alone.
However the combination of two paradigms minimize the complexity of data.
.

4. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2011) found that the “mixed method is explored that
qualitative data provide understanding through greater depth, whereas quantitative data provide
broader, more general understanding” (p.45), each approach has its advantages and limitations.
Qualitative data may provide a deep examination of a phenomenon of interest but only with respect
to a handful of participants. On the other hand, quantitative data can provide information across a
much broader sampling of participants, but the depth of that information is certainly limited. Apart
from that depending on the goals of a research study as well as its guiding research questions one
type of data alone may not tell the complete picture or adequately answer the research questions.
Additionally, the results from the analysis of qualitative data and those from the collection of
quantitative data may be contradictory, which could not have been discovered if only one type or
the other was collected and analyzed. However it has been shown that using both types of data in
a single research study provides depth as well as breadth (Creswell, 2009, p.55).
Bergman, M. M. (2008) found that “It can be seen that sometimes researchers find themselves in
situations where the results of the study do not provide complete understanding of the research
problem, further explanation is needed”(p.456). This additional explanation can be provided
through the collection and analysis of a second set of data that helps explain the results of
the initial set of data. For instance, quantitative data can be used to provide numerical expressions
of the relationships among variables or differences between groups, but detailed understanding of
what those relationships mean or from where the differences came. An illustration of the
meanings behind the results of the statistical tests can be provided only by qualitative data
collection and analysis, as a follow up to the initial collection of quantitative data.
Mixed methods research is now viewed as the third methodological movement. The purpose of
mixing approaches is to afford opportunity to gain a more complete understanding of research
problems (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). Researchers anticipate that mixing methods will enable
them to capture the complexity of human phenomena (Sandelowski, 2001). Mixed methods
research responds to the interests and needs of diverse stakeholders in research. This is clearly
identified by Greene (2005,p.209) who suggests that “a mixed method approach offers greater
possibilities than a single method approach for responding to decision makers agenda, as well as
to the interests of other legitimate stakeholders.” likewise the selection of mixed methods as a
methodology seeks to provide hard data for the decision makers.

5. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
Consequently mixed method research responds to the pressures and outcomes. Creswell and Plano
Clark (2007) have identified that “within the nursing discipline, mixed methods research has been
discussed and used extensively”(p.123). Similarly, Sale, J. E., Lohfeld, L. H., and Brazil, K.
(2002). Explained that “there is growing acceptance that the design provides an appropriate
methodology to address the complex health problems frequently faced by the researchers” (p.234).
Meanwhile by building on the strengths, acknowledging and limiting the weaknesses of mixed
methods research, researchers can address these ‘complex problems’ in a creative and imaginative
way.
Notwithstanding mixed method provides strengths that offset the weaknesses of both quantitative
and qualitative research. For instance, quantitative research is weak in understanding the context
or setting in which people behave, something that qualitative research makes up for. On the other
hand, qualitative research is seen as deficient because of the potential for biased interpretations
made by the researcher and the difficulty in generalizing findings to a large group. Quantitative
research does not have these weaknesses. To sum up, by using both types of research, the strengths
of each approach can make up for the weaknesses of the other.
Apart from that final results may include both observations and statistical analyses. Therefore, the
results are validated within the study. Using both approaches in one study provides additional
evidence and support for the findings. Mixed methods combine inductive and deductive thinking
and reasoning. In other words research can use both words and numbers to communicate the results
and findings and thus, appeal to a wider audience. Combining methodologies helps to reduce the
personal biases of the researcher.

6. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
To summarize, facts speaks for themselves a solution to mixed-method research and the
quantitative-qualitative debate. Qualitative and quantitative research methods have grown out of,
and still represent, different paradigms. However, the fact that the approaches are incommensurate
does not mean that multiple methods cannot be combined in a single study if it is done for
complementary purposes. Each method studies different phenomena. The distinction of
phenomena in mixed-methods research is crucial and can be clarified by labelling the phenomenon
examined by each method. For example, a mixed-methods study to develop a measure of burnout
experienced by nurses could be described as a qualitative study of the lived experience of burnout
to inform a quantitative measure of burnout. Although the phenomenon ‘burnout’ may appear the
same across methods, the distinction between “lived experience” and “measure” reconciles the
phenomenon to its respective method and paradigm.

7. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
Bibliography
Bergman, M. M. (Ed.). (2008). Advances in mixed methods research: Theories and applications.
Sage.
Carey JW. Linking qualitative and quantitative methods: Integrating cultural factors into public
health. Qualitative Health Research. 1993;3:298–318.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Sage Publications, Incorporated.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
Creswell, J.W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E., & Hyun, H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in
education (8th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis
and applications (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Haase JE, Myers ST. Reconciling paradigm assumptions of qualitative and quantitative
research. Western Journal of Nursing Research. 1988;10:128–137.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm
whose time has come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-26.

8. REGNUMBER M173629 LEOPTRA MUTAZU
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods
research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2), 112-133.
Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H. and Brazil, K. (2002) Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate:
Implications for Mixed-Methods Research, Quality and Quantity, 36, 1, pp. 43-53.
https://www.google.co.zw/search?site=&source=hp&q=barnard+%26+sandelowski+2001&oq=S
andelowski%2C+2001&gs_l=psy-
ab.1.1.0j0i22i30k1.2666.20459.0.23068.14.9.2.0.0.0.395.1300.2-2j2.4.0....0...1.1.64.psy-
ab..8.6.1310.0..35i39k1j0i131k1j0i67k1j0i10k1.4OfRALryxS4
What are the advantages and disadvantages of mix method research?. Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_advantages_and_disadvantages_of_mix_metho
d_research [accessed Jul 27, 2017].
Sale, J. E., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate:
Implications for mixed-methods research. Quality and quantity, 36(1), 43-53.