The Gap Within: Differences between Approaches in Qualitative Methods

42 Pages Posted: 23 Aug 2010

See all articles by Erin Kimball

Erin Kimball

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Kendra Koivu

University of New Mexico

Date Written: August 22, 2010

Abstract

Since the debate between qualitative and quantitative research began, most scholars have treated qualitative methods as a homogeneous entity. This homogenization of the "qualitative methodologist" is both harmful and unwarranted. In this article, we seek to rectify this burgeoning assumption before it becomes further entrenched in the field. Rather than a "tale of two cultures," we argue that the practice of qualitative methods within the social sciences is actually a tale of many sub-cultures, and that these dissimilarities emerge as a result of differences in ontological and epistemological assumptions. Specifically, we argue that there are four "ideal types" represented within qualitative methods: Quantitative Emulation, Eclectic small-N research, Set-theory, and Empirical Interpretivism.

Suggested Citation

Kimball, Erin and Koivu, Kendra, The Gap Within: Differences between Approaches in Qualitative Methods (August 22, 2010). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1663342 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1663342

Erin Kimball (Contact Author)

affiliation not provided to SSRN ( email )

Kendra Koivu

University of New Mexico ( email )

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
188
Abstract Views
1,190
Rank
290,592
PlumX Metrics