example of purpose statement in qualitative research

Words with Friends Cheat
Wordle Solver
Word Unscrambler
Scrabble Dictionary
Anagram Solver
Wordscapes Answers

Make Our Dictionary Yours

Grammar and writing tips
Fun language articles
#WordOfTheDay and quizzes

By signing in, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy .

We'll see you in your inbox soon.

Research Paper Purpose Statement Examples

DESCRIPTION Students collaborating in library
SOURCE Klaus Vedfelt / DigitalVision / Getty Images
PERMISSION Used under Getty Images license

When you’re doing academic research, it’s important to define your purpose. That is where a purpose statement comes in. It clearly defines the objective of your qualitative or quantitative research. Get the details on a research purpose statement and how to create one through unique and real-world examples.

What Is a Purpose Statement?

If you think about the words “purpose statement ,” it really tells you what it is. In a research paper , a purpose statement tells you what the purpose of the research will be. In a sentence or two, it clearly defines the direction, reason or goals for the research being conducted.

Making a Purpose Statement

A purpose statement will clearly define what is being explored or studied, how it is being explored and where it is being explored. You will typically see quantitative research purpose statements, which focus on comparing measurable variables, or qualitative research purpose statements, which explore a central phenomenon. Examine how these are different through examples.

Qualitative Research Purpose Statement Examples

Qualitative research purpose statements will present a clear purpose or intent, and study a specific idea. The data is descriptive in nature, rather than focusing on countable, numerical figures. Additionally, you’ll clearly see how and where the learning will take place. The examples clearly define this.

The present article describes a qualitative study of the career development of 18 prominent, highly achieving African American Black and White women in the United States across eight occupational fields. Our aim in the study was to explore critical influences on the career development of these women, particularly those related to their attainment of professional success.

In this psychological research purpose statement, the author is using a qualitative purpose statement. Not only does the author present right away that this will be a qualitative study, but the purpose statement focuses on one idea or concept. The author also uses the action word “explore” to explain how they will learn from the study, in addition to breaking down who will be in the study and where the research will take place.

The purpose of this qualitative study is to discover four genetic factors of aggression of female lions in the Atlanta zoo. The study aims to understand critical influences that affect this aggression through DNA analysis.

The use of the action word “discover” along with the study of a single phenomenon make this a clear qualitative study. The strategy for how the study will be conducted and where it will take place are broken down clearly.

Quantitative Research Purpose Examples

Unlike a qualitative research purpose statement, quantitative purpose statements explore how numerical variables relate or correlate with one another. These purpose statements will define the objective or intent, clarify the variables and outline where the research will take place. Check out the format of this type of research statement through examples.

This study had two purposes: (a) to examine the possible predicting abilities of socioeconomic status, per pupil expenditures, percentage of highly qualified teachers and attendance rates for on-time educational attainment in the state of Virginia and (b) to compare the Appalachian School Divisions of Virginia with the non-Appalachian school divisions for each of these variables.

This sociology paper offers a good example of a quantitative research purpose statement. Not only does the author break down what is going to be studied, but also the different variables that will be looked at. In this case, socioeconomic status, pupil expenditures and attendance, to name a few, are the attributes being recorded. They also discuss where the study will take place.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate a relationship that might exist between oxidative balance and clinical features of PKU and MSUD patients in a South Alabama research facility. The oxidative DNA damage markers and amino acid plasma of 20 controls, 22 MSUD and 40 PKU patients were measured.

This quantitative purpose statement discusses the variables, participants and research site. It connects the independent and dependent variables in the first sentence to clarify for the reader the intention and goals of the study. It also breaks down the variables and how they will relate to one another.

A Unique Purpose

You might be wondering how a research paper purpose statement is different from a problem statement, thesis statement or research question.

In a problem statement , you identify the need for the research because you have identified a problem that needs to be studied. It is the first step, before creating your purpose statement.
A thesis statement is unique from a purpose statement in that it makes a prediction of the study. A purpose statement, on the other hand, just provides readers with your goals. It doesn’t make any assertions of what the study may find or conclude.
Research questions are guided by your purpose statement. Using your goals, you can further modify what you want your research to answer through your research questions. When crafting your research questions, it is important to remember what makes a good research question and what doesn’t.

Creating a Purpose Statement

When creating your own purpose statement, there are a few things that you will want to keep in mind:

Clearly define your study as quantitative or qualitative.
Use words to clarify your intent like “explore” or “compare.”
Clearly define how the research will take place.
Discuss who or what will be researched.
Clarify where the research will take place.

Defining Your Purpose

When you’re doing research, it is important to define your purpose. Whether you’re testing genes or looking at behavior, you need to clearly define the aim of your research. To help you on your way to graduate writing prowess, it is important to perfect your academic writing skills .

From John W. Creswell \(2016\). 30 Essential Skills for the Qualitative Researcher \ . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

How to Write a Purpose Statement (Templates, Examples)

By Status.net Editorial Team on September 30, 2023 — 15 minutes to read

Key Elements of a Purpose Statement Part 1
How to Write a Purpose Statement Step-by-Step Part 2
Identifying Your Goals Part 3
Defining Your Audience Part 4
Outlining Your Methods Part 5
Stating the Expected Outcomes Part 6
Purpose Statement Example for a Research Paper Part 7
Purpose Statement Example For Personal Goals Part 8
Purpose Statement Example For Business Objectives Part 9
Purpose Statement Example For an Essay Part 10
Purpose Statement Example For a Proposal Part 11
Purpose Statement Example For a Report Part 12
Purpose Statement Example For a Project Part 13
Purpose Statement Templates Part 14

A purpose statement is a vital component of any project, as it sets the tone for the entire piece of work. It tells the reader what the project is about, why it’s important, and what the writer hopes to achieve.

Part 1 Key Elements of a Purpose Statement

When writing a purpose statement, there are several key elements that you should keep in mind. These elements will help you to create a clear, concise, and effective statement that accurately reflects your goals and objectives.

1. The Problem or Opportunity

The first element of a purpose statement is the problem or opportunity that you are addressing. This should be a clear and specific description of the issue that you are trying to solve or the opportunity that you are pursuing.

2. The Target Audience

The second element is the target audience for your purpose statement. This should be a clear and specific description of the group of people who will benefit from your work.

3. The Solution

The third element is the solution that you are proposing. This should be a clear and specific description of the action that you will take to address the problem or pursue the opportunity.

4. The Benefits

The fourth element is the benefits that your solution will provide. This should be a clear and specific description of the positive outcomes that your work will achieve.

5. The Action Plan

The fifth element is the action plan that you will follow to implement your solution. This should be a clear and specific description of the steps that you will take to achieve your goals.

Part 2 How to Write a Purpose Statement Step-by-Step

Writing a purpose statement is an essential part of any research project. It helps to clarify the purpose of your study and provides direction for your research. Here are some steps to follow when writing a purpose statement:

Start with a clear research question: The first step in writing a purpose statement is to have a clear research question. This question should be specific and focused on the topic you want to research.
Identify the scope of your study: Once you have a clear research question, you need to identify the scope of your study. This involves determining what you will and will not include in your research.
Define your research objectives: Your research objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. They should also be aligned with your research question and the scope of your study.
Determine your research design: Your research design will depend on the nature of your research question and the scope of your study. You may choose to use a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods approach.
Write your purpose statement: Your purpose statement should be a clear and concise statement that summarizes the purpose of your study. It should include your research question, the scope of your study, your research objectives, and your research design.

Research question: What are the effects of social media on teenage mental health?

Scope of study: This study will focus on teenagers aged 13-18 in the United States.

Research objectives: To determine the prevalence of social media use among teenagers, to identify the types of social media used by teenagers, to explore the relationship between social media use and mental health, and to provide recommendations for parents, educators, and mental health professionals.

Research design: This study will use a mixed-methods approach, including a survey and interviews with teenagers and mental health professionals.

Purpose statement: The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of social media on teenage mental health among teenagers aged 13-18 in the United States. The study will use a mixed-methods approach, including a survey and interviews with teenagers and mental health professionals. The research objectives are to determine the prevalence of social media use among teenagers, to identify the types of social media used by teenagers, to explore the relationship between social media use and mental health, and to provide recommendations for parents, educators, and mental health professionals.

Part 3 Section 1: Identifying Your Goals

Before you start writing your purpose statement, it’s important to identify your goals. To do this, ask yourself the following questions:

What do I want to achieve?
What problem do I want to solve?
What impact do I want to make?

Once you have a clear idea of your goals, you can start crafting your purpose statement. Your purpose statement should be a clear and concise statement that outlines the purpose of your work.

For example, if you’re writing a purpose statement for a business, your statement might look something like this:

“Our purpose is to provide high-quality products and services that improve the lives of our customers and contribute to the growth and success of our company.”

If you’re writing a purpose statement for a non-profit organization, your statement might look something like this:

“Our purpose is to improve the lives of underserved communities by providing access to education, healthcare, and other essential services.”

Remember, your purpose statement should be specific, measurable, and achievable. It should also be aligned with your values and goals, and it should inspire and motivate you to take action.

Part 4 Section 2: Defining Your Audience

Once you have established the purpose of your statement, it’s important to consider who your audience is. The audience for your purpose statement will depend on the context in which it will be used. For example, if you’re writing a purpose statement for a research paper, your audience will likely be your professor or academic peers. If you’re writing a purpose statement for a business proposal, your audience may be potential investors or clients.

Defining your audience is important because it will help you tailor your purpose statement to the specific needs and interests of your readers. You want to make sure that your statement is clear, concise, and relevant to your audience.

To define your audience, consider the following questions:

Who will be reading your purpose statement?
What is their level of knowledge or expertise on the topic?
What are their needs and interests?
What do they hope to gain from reading your purpose statement?

Once you have a clear understanding of your audience, you can begin to craft your purpose statement with their needs and interests in mind. This will help ensure that your statement is effective in communicating your goals and objectives to your readers.

For example, if you’re writing a purpose statement for a research paper on the effects of climate change on agriculture, your audience may be fellow researchers in the field of environmental science. In this case, you would want to make sure that your purpose statement is written in a way that is clear and concise, using technical language that is familiar to your audience.

Or, if you’re writing a purpose statement for a business proposal to potential investors, your audience may be less familiar with the technical aspects of your project. In this case, you would want to make sure that your purpose statement is written in a way that is easy to understand, using clear and concise language that highlights the benefits of your proposal.

The key to defining your audience is to put yourself in their shoes and consider what they need and want from your purpose statement.

Part 5 Section 3: Outlining Your Methods

After you have identified the purpose of your statement, it is time to outline your methods. This section should describe how you plan to achieve your goal and the steps you will take to get there. Here are a few tips to help you outline your methods effectively:

Start with a general overview: Begin by providing a brief overview of the methods you plan to use. This will give your readers a sense of what to expect in the following paragraphs.
Break down your methods: Break your methods down into smaller, more manageable steps. This will make it easier for you to stay organized and for your readers to follow along.
Use bullet points: Bullet points can help you organize your ideas and make your methods easier to read. Use them to list the steps you will take to achieve your goal.
Be specific: Make sure you are specific about the methods you plan to use. This will help your readers understand exactly what you are doing and why.
Provide examples: Use examples to illustrate your methods. This will make it easier for your readers to understand what you are trying to accomplish.

Part 6 Section 4: Stating the Expected Outcomes

After defining the problem and the purpose of your research, it’s time to state the expected outcomes. This is where you describe what you hope to achieve by conducting your research. The expected outcomes should be specific and measurable, so you can determine if you have achieved your goals.

It’s important to be realistic when stating your expected outcomes. Don’t make exaggerated or false claims, and don’t promise something that you can’t deliver. Your expected outcomes should be based on your research question and the purpose of your study.

Here are some examples of expected outcomes:

To identify the factors that contribute to employee turnover in the company.
To develop a new marketing strategy that will increase sales by 20% within the next year.
To evaluate the effectiveness of a new training program for improving customer service.
To determine the impact of social media on consumer behavior.

When stating your expected outcomes, make sure they align with your research question and purpose statement. This will help you stay focused on your goals and ensure that your research is relevant and meaningful.

In addition to stating your expected outcomes, you should also describe how you will measure them. This could involve collecting data through surveys, interviews, or experiments, or analyzing existing data from sources such as government reports or industry publications.

Part 7 Purpose Statement Example for a Research Paper

If you are writing a research paper, your purpose statement should clearly state the objective of your study. Here is an example of a purpose statement for a research paper:

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of social media on the mental health of teenagers in the United States.

This purpose statement clearly states the objective of the study and provides a specific focus for the research.

Part 8 Purpose Statement Example For Personal Goals

When writing a purpose statement for your personal goals, it’s important to clearly define what you want to achieve and why. Here’s a template that can help you get started:

“I want to [goal] so that [reason]. I will achieve this by [action].”

Example: “I want to lose 10 pounds so that I can feel more confident in my body. I will achieve this by going to the gym three times a week and cutting out sugary snacks.”

Remember to be specific and realistic when setting your goals and actions, and to regularly review and adjust your purpose statement as needed.

Part 9 Purpose Statement Example For Business Objectives

If you’re writing a purpose statement for a business objective, this template can help you get started:

[Objective] [Action verb] [Target audience] [Outcome or benefit]

Here’s an example using this template:

Increase online sales by creating a more user-friendly website for millennial shoppers.

This purpose statement is clear and concise. It identifies the objective (increase online sales), the action verb (creating), the target audience (millennial shoppers), and the outcome or benefit (a more user-friendly website).

Part 10 Purpose Statement Example For an Essay

“The purpose of this essay is to examine the causes and consequences of climate change, with a focus on the role of human activities, and to propose solutions that can mitigate its impact on the environment and future generations.”

This purpose statement clearly states the subject of the essay (climate change), what aspects will be explored (causes, consequences, human activities), and the intended outcome (proposing solutions). It provides a clear roadmap for the reader and sets the direction for the essay.

Part 11 Purpose Statement Example For a Proposal

“The purpose of this proposal is to secure funding and support for the establishment of a community garden in [Location], aimed at promoting sustainable urban agriculture, fostering community engagement, and improving local access to fresh, healthy produce.”

Why this purpose statement is effective:

The subject of the proposal is clear: the establishment of a community garden.
The specific goals of the project are outlined: promoting sustainable urban agriculture, fostering community engagement, and improving local access to fresh produce.
The overall objective of the proposal is evident: securing funding and support.

Part 12 Purpose Statement Example For a Report

“The purpose of this report is to analyze current market trends in the electric vehicle (EV) industry, assess consumer preferences and buying behaviors, and provide strategic recommendations to guide [Company Name] in entering this growing market segment.”

The subject of the report is provided: market trends in the electric vehicle industry.
The specific goals of the report are analysis of market trends, assessment of consumer preferences, and strategic recommendations.
The overall objective of the report is clear: providing guidance for the company’s entry into the EV market.

Part 13 Purpose Statement Example For a Project

“The purpose of this project is to design and implement a new employee wellness program that promotes physical and mental wellbeing in the workplace.”

This purpose statement clearly outlines the objective of the project, which is to create a new employee wellness program. The program is designed to promote physical and mental wellbeing in the workplace, which is a key concern for many employers. By implementing this program, the company aims to improve employee health, reduce absenteeism, and increase productivity. The purpose statement is concise and specific, providing a clear direction for the project team to follow. It highlights the importance of the project and its potential benefits for the company and its employees.

Part 14 Purpose Statement Templates

When writing a purpose statement, it can be helpful to use a template to ensure that you cover all the necessary components:

Template 1: To [action] [target audience] in order to [outcome]

This template is a straightforward way to outline your purpose statement. Simply fill in the blanks with the appropriate information:

The purpose of […] is
To [action]: What action do you want to take?
[Target audience]: Who is your target audience?
In order to [outcome]: What outcome do you hope to achieve?

For example:

The purpose of our marketing campaign is to increase brand awareness among young adults in urban areas, in order to drive sales and revenue growth.
The purpose of our employee training program is to improve customer service skills among our frontline staff, in order to enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty.
The purpose of our new product launch is to expand our market share in the healthcare industry, by offering a unique solution to the needs of elderly patients with chronic conditions.

Template 2: This [project/product] is designed to [action] [target audience] by [method] in order to [outcome].

This template is useful for purpose statements that involve a specific project or product. Fill in the blanks with the appropriate information:

This [project/product]: What is your project or product?
Is designed to [action]: What action do you want to take?
By [method]: What method will you use to achieve your goal?
This app is designed to provide personalized nutrition advice to athletes by analyzing their training data in order to optimize performance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the key elements of a purpose statement.

A purpose statement should clearly communicate the main goal or objective of your writing. It should be concise and specific, providing a clear direction for your work. The key elements of a purpose statement include the topic or subject matter, the intended audience, and the overall goal or objective of your writing.

How can a purpose statement benefit your writing?

A purpose statement can help you stay focused and on track when writing. It can also help you to avoid going off-topic or getting bogged down in unnecessary details. By clearly identifying the main goal or objective of your writing, a purpose statement can help you to stay organized and ensure that your writing is effective and impactful.

What are some common mistakes to avoid when writing a purpose statement?

One common mistake is being too vague or general in your purpose statement. Another mistake is making your purpose statement too long or complex, which can make it difficult to understand. Additionally, it’s important to avoid including unnecessary information or details that are not directly relevant to your main goal or objective.

How can you tailor your purpose statement to your audience?

When writing a purpose statement, it’s important to consider your audience and their needs. You should tailor your purpose statement to your audience by using language and terminology that they will understand. You should also consider their level of knowledge or expertise on the subject matter and adjust your purpose statement accordingly.

What are some effective templates for writing a purpose statement?

There are many effective templates for writing a purpose statement, but one common approach is to use the following structure: “The purpose of this writing is to [insert goal or objective] for [insert audience] regarding [insert topic or subject matter].”

Can you provide examples of successful purpose statements?

“The purpose of this report is to provide an analysis of the current market trends and make recommendations for future growth strategies for our company.”
“The purpose of this essay is to explore the impact of social media on modern communication and its implications for society.”
“The purpose of this proposal is to secure funding for a new community center that will provide educational and recreational opportunities for local residents.”
How to Write a Personal Mission Statement (20 Examples)
How to Write a Letter of Employment (Templates, Examples)
How to Ask for a Letter of Recommendation [Examples]
Individual Development Plan [Examples & Templates]
How to Write a Two-Week Notice [Effective Examples]
Job Application Email (Templates, Examples)

Visit the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
Apply to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
Give to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Search Form

Research question, purpose statement, hypothesis(es).

Here’s a good example of how to narrow your topic into a good research question:

Too broad — Rural America
Narrowed topic — Role of women in rural America?
Research question — What is the central role of women in today’s farming communities?

If you’re asked to write a proposal before you begin your actual research, the proposal will contain a purpose statement that states in some detail what you want to learn about in your research project; it looks something like this:

Ex.: “This study will examine the…”

Your purpose statement leads you to write a more refined thesis statement or hypothesis(es), an assertion that you can defend and support with evidence gathered in your literature review and research. Here are some examples:

Ex.: “In the United States, government regulation plays an important role in the fight against air pollution.” Or, conversely,
Ex.: “United States government regulation has little effect in the fight against air pollution.”

The type of design selected for your study depends on your research question(s), hypothesis(es), or problem.

You’ll use evidence you’ve gathered in your research to confirm — or reject — your hypothesis.

How to Write a Qualitative Purpose Statement

Yashekia king.

A qualitative purpose statement in a research plan is an important step when you completing your master’s degree thesis or doctoral degree dissertation. The purpose statement allows you to clearly and concisely describe the intent of your qualitative study so that your reader can anticipate the information he will receive in your research report. Qualitative research involves capturing the complexity of behavior that occurs in natural settings, while the opposite goal of quantitative research is to collect data in the form of numbers. Write a qualitative purpose statement in about 100 words or less.

Describe the type of testing or method of inquiry you will use to do your qualitative research. State if you plan to perform an experiment or do a correlational analysis, the process of using statistical data to evaluate the extent of relations between variables. Explain if you will perform ethnographic research, a social science research method that depends on personal experience and participation rather than just observation.

Explain the purpose of the qualitative study you will perform. For instance, identify the variables you are testing and analyzing or the observable occurrences or phenomena you are striving to discover. Use words such as “discover,” “explore,” “develop” or “describe” regarding your research objective and indicate what is likely necessary to conduct the study. Foreshadow the hypotheses you will test or the questions your research will raise. Describe the significance of your study and how it will contribute to past research and existing knowledge on your research topic.

Name the setting and population of your qualitative study. For example, state that your research concerns employees working in a national restaurant chain or people with disabilities and their families. Describe how the researcher and participants will interact with one another in your study - if will they be observed, interviewed or asked to fill out a questionnaire, for example.

Expand on your primary qualitative study purpose by explaining additional purposes of your research. Describe extra variables related to these additional purposes as well as additional qualitative phenomena you want to discover. Reiterate the central concepts and ideas being studied.

Read over your qualitative purpose statement, making sure the statement is written in future tense so that you indicate what the purpose and variables "will be." Check for errors in spelling, grammar, usage and punctuation.
1 WordNet: Correlational Analysis
2 American University: Notes on Qualitative Research; Julie Mertus
3 Emory University: The Elements of a Proposal; Frank Pajares; 2007

About the Author

YaShekia King, of Indianapolis, began writing professionally in 2003. Her work has appeared in several publications including the "South Bend Tribune" and "Clouds Across the Stars," an international book. She also is a licensed Realtor and clinical certified dental assistant. King holds a bachelor's degree in journalism from Ball State University.

How to Write a Problem and Purpose Statement in Nursing...

How to Write a Rationale for Your Dissertation

How to Format a Quantitative Research Design

How to Develop a Problem Statement

How to Form a Theoretical Study of a Dissertation

How to Develop a Research Proposal

How to Write a Research Paper Proposal

How to Measure Qualitative Research

How to Write a Sample Topic Proposal

How to Write a Research Methodology

Independent vs. Dependent Variables in Sociology

How to Write a Research Proposal for College

How to Write an Ethnographic Case Study

How to Write Research Objectives

What Is a Preliminary Research Design?

How to Write a Ph.D. Concept Paper

How to Design and Conduct Mixed Method Research

List of Topics for Quantitative and Qualitative Research

Definition of Data Interpretation

Regardless of how old we are, we never stop learning. Classroom is the educational resource for people of all ages. Whether you’re studying times tables or applying to college, Classroom has the answers.

Accessibility
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright Policy
Manage Preferences

The purpose of qualitative research

Cite this chapter.

Janice M. Morse 3 &
Peggy Anne Field 4

687 Accesses

5 Citations

Research fills a vital and important role in society: it is the means by which discoveries are made, ideas are confirmed or refuted, events controlled or predicted and theory developed or refined. All of these functions contribute to the development of knowledge. However, no single research approach fulfills all of these functions, and the contribution of qualitative research is both vital and unique to the goals of research in general. Qualitative research enables us to make sense of reality, to describe and explain the social world and to develop explanatory models and theories. It is the primary means by which the theoretical foundations of social sciences may be constructed or re-examined.

Research is to see what everybody has seen and to think what nobody has thought. (Albert Szent-Gyorgy)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bohannan, L. (1956/1992) Shakespeare in the bush, in Qualitative Health Research , (ed. J.M. Morse), Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 20–30.

Google Scholar

Brace, C.L., Gamble, G.R. and Bond, J.T. (eds) (1971) Race and Intelligence: Anthropological Studies Number 8 , American Anthropological Association, Washington, DC.

Burton, A. (1974) The nature of personality theory, in Operational Theories of Personality , (ed. A. Burton), Brunner/Mazel, New York, pp. 1–19.

Chapman, C.R. (1976) Measurement of pain: problems and issues. Advances in Pain Research and Therapy , 1 , 345.

Corbin, J. (1986) Coding, writing memos, and diagramming, in From Practice to Grounded Theory , (eds W.C. Chenitz and J.M. Swanson), Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, CA, pp. 91–101.

Duffy, M.E. (1985) Designing nursing research: the qualitative — quantitative debate. Journal of Advanced Nursing , 10 , 225–32.

Article PubMed CAS Google Scholar

Elliott, M.R. (1983) Maternal infant bonding. Canadian Nurse , 79 (8), 28–31.

PubMed CAS Google Scholar

Engelhardt, H.T. (1974/1992) The disease of masturbation: values and the concept of disease, in Qualitative Health Research , (ed. J.M. Morse), Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 5–19.

Feyerabend, P. (1978) Against Method , Varo, London.

Geertz, C. (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures , Basic Books, New York.

Glaser, B.G. (1978) Theoretical Sensitivity , The Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.

Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research , Aldine, Chicago.

Goodwin, L.D. and Goodwin, W.L. (1984) Qualitative vs. quantitative research or qualitative and quantitative research? Nursing Research , 33 (6), 378–80.

Hinds, P.S., Chaves, D.E. and Cypess, S.M. (1992) Context as a source of meaning and understanding, in Qualitative Health Research , (ed. J.M. Morse), Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 31–49.

Klaus, M.H. and Kennel, J.H. (1976) Parent Infant Bonding: The Impact of Early Separation or Loss on Family Development , Mosby, St Louis.

Morse, J.M. (1989/1992) ‘Euch, those are for your husband!’: examination of cultural values and assumptions associated with breastfeeding, in Qualitative Health Research , (ed. J.M. Morse), Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 50–60.

Morse, J.M. (1992) If you believe in theories.... Qualitative Health Research , 2 (3), 259–61.

Article Google Scholar

Morse, J.M., Harrison, M. and Prowse, M. (1986) Minimal breastfeeding. Journal of Obstetric Gynecologic and Neonatal Nursing , 15 (4), 333–8.

Article CAS Google Scholar

Pelto, P.J. and Pelto, G.H. (1978) Anthropological Research: The Structure of Inquiry , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Book Google Scholar

Scheper-Hughes, N. (1992) Death Without Weeping , University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Smith, J.K. (1983) Quantitative versus qualitative research: an attempt to clarify the issue. Educational Researcher , 12 (3), 6–13.

Smith, J.K. and Heshusius, L. (1986) Closing down the conversation: the end of the quantitative — qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational Researcher , 15 , 4–12.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques , Sage, Newbury Park, CA.

Tesch, S. (1981) Disease causality and politics. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law , 6 (1), 369–89.

Vidich, A.J. and Lyman, S.M. (1994) Qualitative methods: their history in sociology and anthropology, in Handbook of Qualitative Research , (eds N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln), Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 23–59.

Wolcott, H.F. (1992) Posturing in qualitative research, in The Handbook of Qualitative Research in Education , (eds M.D. LeCompte, W.L. Millroy and J. Preissle), Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 3–52.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Nursing, Pennsylvania State University, USA

Janice M. Morse ( Professor of Nursing and Behavioural Science )

Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Canada

Peggy Anne Field ( Professor Emeritus )

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Morse, J.M., Field, P.A. (1996). The purpose of qualitative research. In: Nursing Research. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-4471-9_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-4471-9_1

Publisher Name : Springer, Boston, MA

Print ISBN : 978-0-412-60510-9

Online ISBN : 978-1-4899-4471-9

eBook Packages : Springer Book Archive

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Section 1: Home
Narrowing Your Topic
Problem Statement
Purpose Statement

Alignment of Problem, Purpose, and Questions

Overarching alignment of doctoral project/dissertation-in-practice components, alignment of the quantitative research components, the quantitative general and specific problem, alignment of the qualitative research components, the qualitative phenomenon and specific problem.

Conceptual Framework
Avoiding Common Mistakes
Synthesis and Analysis in Writing Support This link opens in a new window
Qualitative Research Questions This link opens in a new window
Quantitative Research Questions This link opens in a new window
Qualitative & Quantitative Research Support with the ASC This link opens in a new window
Library Research Consultations This link opens in a new window
Library Guide: Research Process This link opens in a new window
ASC Guide: Outlining and Annotating This link opens in a new window
Library Guide: Organizing Research & Citations This link opens in a new window
Library Guide: RefWorks This link opens in a new window
Library Guide: Copyright Information This link opens in a new window

In a project designed to address a local problem as is the case in the applied doctoral experience, alignment of problem, purpose, and questions is key to having a successful project outcome. To help check alignment, some students find the following activity to be helpful.

Activity - Aligning Problem, Purpose, and Questions Download this activity to check the alignment of your problem, purpose, and questions.

Instructions for completing the activity:

Copy each segment of your specific problem statement into a cell in the first column.
Then copy the corresponding segment of your purpose statement into the second column.
Finally, copy the related questions into the third column.
Read across to note any discrepancies.

Activity example:

For information: Please visit the NU ASC website and view the resources on constructing a problem statement.

The problem of your study can be determined by gaps in the literature; HOWEVER, a gap in the literature is not the problem. A problem is a clear and distinct problem that can be empirically verified and has a consequence. NOTE: A problem statement does not suggest any action to be taken nor does it ask a question.

Example: “My car has a flat tire, so I cannot go to work and my livelihood is affected.” (This is a statement of fact and can be verified.)

As soon as an action is noted, it becomes a purpose statement – “I need to investigate why I have a flat tire.”

If you ask a question, it is no longer a problem statement either – “How does my flat tire affect my livelihood?”

Your general and specific problem statements should have at least two to three current (within three years) citations.

An example problem statement format is provided below. Please use the information and templates below to construct each component based on the quantitative research design selected earlier.

Constructing the General problem and Specific Problem Statements using the Funnel Approach

The premise is that the “funnel” approach to constructing the problem statement funnels from a general problem to a specific one.

The general problem statement. Using the funnel approach to write a problem statement, the first component developed is the general problem. The general problem represents a situation that exists that can be directly attributed to a specific problem that is the focus of the doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice.

Exercise #3.

Based on the type of problem addressed by the doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice, write the general problem statement below.

"The general problem is (describe the situation linked to the negative outcome) (two-three citations)."

The Specific Problem Statement

Once again, using the funnel approach to write a problem statement (see Problem Statement webinar on the NU ASC website at http://www.viddler.com/v/a70ecc81), the second component developed is the “specific problem.” The specific problem represents an undesirable or negative outcome that can be researched, and is directly attributable to the general problem.

Exercise #4.

With the type of problem in mind, write the specific problem addressed by the proposed project below.

"The specific problem to be studied is when the (study population/site/program) experience/results in/causes (the general problem), (state the negative outcome) (two to three citations."

Following the Problem Statement is the Purpose Statement. The purpose should directly align with the problem.

The Purpose Statement.

The purpose statement describes the aim of the doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice and includes the project design, method, and variables.

Based on the design the purpose statement can be constructed slightly differently.

Correlational Design Purpose Statement

The purpose of this quantitative correlational Doctoral Project or Applied Dissertation is to examine if there is a relationship between (variable 1) and (variable 2).

Causal Comparative Design Purpose Statement

The purpose of this quantitative causal-comparative doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice is to examine the difference in (dependent variable) between (group 1) and (group2).

NOTE: The groups represent the independent variable. For example, you could be investigating the difference between high school and college students, so the independent variable is education level.

Exercise #5.

Based on the design write the purpose statement for the proposed doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice below.

"The purpose of this quantitative (design) doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice is to examine (connection) of (variables)."

Doctoral Project or Dissertation-in-Practice Research Questions

The type and number of research questions are dependent upon the design and purpose of the doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice.

Visit the following site to identify the appropriate structure for the proposed project: http://dissertation.laerd.com/how-to-structure-quantitative-research-questions.php

Causal Comparative Research Questions

RQ1. What is the difference in (dependent variable) between (group 1)? (group 2), (group…n)? OR RQ1. How are/is (group 1) different from (group 2) in terms of (dependent variable) for (participants) at (research location)?

Correlational Research Questions

Q1. What is the relationship of (variable 1)to ( variable 2) for (participants) at (research location)?

Exercise #6.

Write the appropriate number research question(s) based on the project design and purpose of the proposed Doctoral Project or Applied Dissertation.

Research Question: RQ1. (see examples above to complete)

Hypotheses For each research question there should be a null and alternative hypothesis.

Causal Comparative Hypotheses H10. There is no difference in (dependent variable between (group 1) and (group 2). H1A. There is a statistically significant difference in (dependent variable between (group 1) and (group 2). Correlational Hypotheses H10. There is no relationship between (variable 1) and (variable 2). H1A. There is a relationship between (variable 1) and (variable 2).

Visit Please review the following site to properly construct hypotheses: https://statistics.laerd.com/statistical-guides/hypothesis-testing-3.php

Write the appropriate hypotheses for the proposed doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice below.

H10. (see examples above to complete) H1A. (see examples above to complete)

For information: Please visit the NU ASC website and view the webinar about constructing a problem statement.

As soon as an action is noted, it becomes a purpose statement – “I need to investigate why I have a flat tire.”

If you ask a question, it is no longer a problem statement either – “How does my flat tire affect my livelihood?”

In qualitative studies, the problem is the phenomenon under study.

The General Problem Statement

Using the funnel approach, i.e., moving from a general to a specific problem, to write a problem statement (see Problem Statement webinar, on the NU ASC website at http://www.viddler.com/v/a70ecc81, the first component developed is the “phenomenon,” also known as the general problem. The phenomenon represents a situation that exists that can be directly attributed to a specific problem that is the focus of the purposed Doctoral Project or Applied Dissertation.

Use the script below by replacing the italicized text with the appropriate information to write a one-sentence statement representing the phenomenon, and include at least two to three current (within three years) citations to support the statement.

"The general problem is that (describe the phenomenon) (two to three current citations)."

Use the script below by replacing the italicized text with the appropriate information to write a one-sentence statement representing the specific problem, and include at least two to three current (within three years) citations to support the statement.

"The specific problem is when the (doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice participants) (experience the phenomenon), (negative/undesirable outcome) (two to three current citations)."

Often, it may be more effective to write one overarching problem statement that includes both the general and specific problems.

The Purpose Statement

The purpose statement describes the aim of the proposed doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice and includes the research methodology and design, phenomenon, and project participants.

Use the script below by replacing the italicized text with the appropriate information to write a one-sentence statement representing the purpose statement.

"The purpose of this qualitative (design) study is to explore (the phenomenon), as perceived by ( Doctoral Project or Dissertation in Practice participants)."

Research Questions

Often, one question is designed to explore the barriers or challenges related to the phenomenon, and the second question asks about how to improve the phenomenon. However, there can be more than two research questions. The questions can be constructed in several different ways; a few examples are shown in RQ1. And RQ2. The questions should always include the phenomenon and doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice participants and ask the “How,” “What,” or “Why,” as related to the phenomenon.

Use the script below by replacing the italicized text with the appropriate information to write two one-sentence research questions that together explore the phenomenon as it is perceived by the (Doctoral Project or Applied Dissertation participants).

"RQ1. What are the challenges of the (phenomenon) from the perspectives of the (doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice participants)?" "RQ2. How can the (phenomenon) be improved, as perceived by the ( Doctoral Project or Dissertation in Practice participants)?"

<< Previous: Purpose Statement
Next: Conceptual Framework >>
Last Updated: Jun 21, 2023 12:28 PM
URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1013602

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List

What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research

Patrik aspers.

1 Department of Sociology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

2 Seminar for Sociology, Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

3 Department of Media and Social Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

What is qualitative research? If we look for a precise definition of qualitative research, and specifically for one that addresses its distinctive feature of being “qualitative,” the literature is meager. In this article we systematically search, identify and analyze a sample of 89 sources using or attempting to define the term “qualitative.” Then, drawing on ideas we find scattered across existing work, and based on Becker’s classic study of marijuana consumption, we formulate and illustrate a definition that tries to capture its core elements. We define qualitative research as an iterative process in which improved understanding to the scientific community is achieved by making new significant distinctions resulting from getting closer to the phenomenon studied. This formulation is developed as a tool to help improve research designs while stressing that a qualitative dimension is present in quantitative work as well. Additionally, it can facilitate teaching, communication between researchers, diminish the gap between qualitative and quantitative researchers, help to address critiques of qualitative methods, and be used as a standard of evaluation of qualitative research.

If we assume that there is something called qualitative research, what exactly is this qualitative feature? And how could we evaluate qualitative research as good or not? Is it fundamentally different from quantitative research? In practice, most active qualitative researchers working with empirical material intuitively know what is involved in doing qualitative research, yet perhaps surprisingly, a clear definition addressing its key feature is still missing.

To address the question of what is qualitative we turn to the accounts of “qualitative research” in textbooks and also in empirical work. In his classic, explorative, interview study of deviance Howard Becker ( 1963 ) asks ‘How does one become a marijuana user?’ In contrast to pre-dispositional and psychological-individualistic theories of deviant behavior, Becker’s inherently social explanation contends that becoming a user of this substance is the result of a three-phase sequential learning process. First, potential users need to learn how to smoke it properly to produce the “correct” effects. If not, they are likely to stop experimenting with it. Second, they need to discover the effects associated with it; in other words, to get “high,” individuals not only have to experience what the drug does, but also to become aware that those sensations are related to using it. Third, they require learning to savor the feelings related to its consumption – to develop an acquired taste. Becker, who played music himself, gets close to the phenomenon by observing, taking part, and by talking to people consuming the drug: “half of the fifty interviews were conducted with musicians, the other half covered a wide range of people, including laborers, machinists, and people in the professions” (Becker 1963 :56).

Another central aspect derived through the common-to-all-research interplay between induction and deduction (Becker 2017 ), is that during the course of his research Becker adds scientifically meaningful new distinctions in the form of three phases—distinctions, or findings if you will, that strongly affect the course of his research: its focus, the material that he collects, and which eventually impact his findings. Each phase typically unfolds through social interaction, and often with input from experienced users in “a sequence of social experiences during which the person acquires a conception of the meaning of the behavior, and perceptions and judgments of objects and situations, all of which make the activity possible and desirable” (Becker 1963 :235). In this study the increased understanding of smoking dope is a result of a combination of the meaning of the actors, and the conceptual distinctions that Becker introduces based on the views expressed by his respondents. Understanding is the result of research and is due to an iterative process in which data, concepts and evidence are connected with one another (Becker 2017 ).

Indeed, there are many definitions of qualitative research, but if we look for a definition that addresses its distinctive feature of being “qualitative,” the literature across the broad field of social science is meager. The main reason behind this article lies in the paradox, which, to put it bluntly, is that researchers act as if they know what it is, but they cannot formulate a coherent definition. Sociologists and others will of course continue to conduct good studies that show the relevance and value of qualitative research addressing scientific and practical problems in society. However, our paper is grounded in the idea that providing a clear definition will help us improve the work that we do. Among researchers who practice qualitative research there is clearly much knowledge. We suggest that a definition makes this knowledge more explicit. If the first rationale for writing this paper refers to the “internal” aim of improving qualitative research, the second refers to the increased “external” pressure that especially many qualitative researchers feel; pressure that comes both from society as well as from other scientific approaches. There is a strong core in qualitative research, and leading researchers tend to agree on what it is and how it is done. Our critique is not directed at the practice of qualitative research, but we do claim that the type of systematic work we do has not yet been done, and that it is useful to improve the field and its status in relation to quantitative research.

The literature on the “internal” aim of improving, or at least clarifying qualitative research is large, and we do not claim to be the first to notice the vagueness of the term “qualitative” (Strauss and Corbin 1998 ). Also, others have noted that there is no single definition of it (Long and Godfrey 2004 :182), that there are many different views on qualitative research (Denzin and Lincoln 2003 :11; Jovanović 2011 :3), and that more generally, we need to define its meaning (Best 2004 :54). Strauss and Corbin ( 1998 ), for example, as well as Nelson et al. (1992:2 cited in Denzin and Lincoln 2003 :11), and Flick ( 2007 :ix–x), have recognized that the term is problematic: “Actually, the term ‘qualitative research’ is confusing because it can mean different things to different people” (Strauss and Corbin 1998 :10–11). Hammersley has discussed the possibility of addressing the problem, but states that “the task of providing an account of the distinctive features of qualitative research is far from straightforward” ( 2013 :2). This confusion, as he has recently further argued (Hammersley 2018 ), is also salient in relation to ethnography where different philosophical and methodological approaches lead to a lack of agreement about what it means.

Others (e.g. Hammersley 2018 ; Fine and Hancock 2017 ) have also identified the treat to qualitative research that comes from external forces, seen from the point of view of “qualitative research.” This threat can be further divided into that which comes from inside academia, such as the critique voiced by “quantitative research” and outside of academia, including, for example, New Public Management. Hammersley ( 2018 ), zooming in on one type of qualitative research, ethnography, has argued that it is under treat. Similarly to Fine ( 2003 ), and before him Gans ( 1999 ), he writes that ethnography’ has acquired a range of meanings, and comes in many different versions, these often reflecting sharply divergent epistemological orientations. And already more than twenty years ago while reviewing Denzin and Lincoln’ s Handbook of Qualitative Methods Fine argued:

While this increasing centrality [of qualitative research] might lead one to believe that consensual standards have developed, this belief would be misleading. As the methodology becomes more widely accepted, querulous challengers have raised fundamental questions that collectively have undercut the traditional models of how qualitative research is to be fashioned and presented (1995:417).

According to Hammersley, there are today “serious treats to the practice of ethnographic work, on almost any definition” ( 2018 :1). He lists five external treats: (1) that social research must be accountable and able to show its impact on society; (2) the current emphasis on “big data” and the emphasis on quantitative data and evidence; (3) the labor market pressure in academia that leaves less time for fieldwork (see also Fine and Hancock 2017 ); (4) problems of access to fields; and (5) the increased ethical scrutiny of projects, to which ethnography is particularly exposed. Hammersley discusses some more or less insufficient existing definitions of ethnography.

The current situation, as Hammersley and others note—and in relation not only to ethnography but also qualitative research in general, and as our empirical study shows—is not just unsatisfactory, it may even be harmful for the entire field of qualitative research, and does not help social science at large. We suggest that the lack of clarity of qualitative research is a real problem that must be addressed.

Towards a Definition of Qualitative Research

Seen in an historical light, what is today called qualitative, or sometimes ethnographic, interpretative research – or a number of other terms – has more or less always existed. At the time the founders of sociology – Simmel, Weber, Durkheim and, before them, Marx – were writing, and during the era of the Methodenstreit (“dispute about methods”) in which the German historical school emphasized scientific methods (cf. Swedberg 1990 ), we can at least speak of qualitative forerunners.

Perhaps the most extended discussion of what later became known as qualitative methods in a classic work is Bronisław Malinowski’s ( 1922 ) Argonauts in the Western Pacific , although even this study does not explicitly address the meaning of “qualitative.” In Weber’s ([1921–-22] 1978) work we find a tension between scientific explanations that are based on observation and quantification and interpretative research (see also Lazarsfeld and Barton 1982 ).

If we look through major sociology journals like the American Sociological Review , American Journal of Sociology , or Social Forces we will not find the term qualitative sociology before the 1970s. And certainly before then much of what we consider qualitative classics in sociology, like Becker’ study ( 1963 ), had already been produced. Indeed, the Chicago School often combined qualitative and quantitative data within the same study (Fine 1995 ). Our point being that before a disciplinary self-awareness the term quantitative preceded qualitative, and the articulation of the former was a political move to claim scientific status (Denzin and Lincoln 2005 ). In the US the World War II seem to have sparked a critique of sociological work, including “qualitative work,” that did not follow the scientific canon (Rawls 2018 ), which was underpinned by a scientifically oriented and value free philosophy of science. As a result the attempts and practice of integrating qualitative and quantitative sociology at Chicago lost ground to sociology that was more oriented to surveys and quantitative work at Columbia under Merton-Lazarsfeld. The quantitative tradition was also able to present textbooks (Lundberg 1951 ) that facilitated the use this approach and its “methods.” The practices of the qualitative tradition, by and large, remained tacit or was part of the mentoring transferred from the renowned masters to their students.

This glimpse into history leads us back to the lack of a coherent account condensed in a definition of qualitative research. Many of the attempts to define the term do not meet the requirements of a proper definition: A definition should be clear, avoid tautology, demarcate its domain in relation to the environment, and ideally only use words in its definiens that themselves are not in need of definition (Hempel 1966 ). A definition can enhance precision and thus clarity by identifying the core of the phenomenon. Preferably, a definition should be short. The typical definition we have found, however, is an ostensive definition, which indicates what qualitative research is about without informing us about what it actually is :

Qualitative research is multimethod in focus, involving an interpretative, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical materials – case study, personal experience, introspective, life story, interview, observational, historical, interactional, and visual texts – that describe routine and problematic moments and meanings in individuals’ lives. (Denzin and Lincoln 2005 :2)

Flick claims that the label “qualitative research” is indeed used as an umbrella for a number of approaches ( 2007 :2–4; 2002 :6), and it is not difficult to identify research fitting this designation. Moreover, whatever it is, it has grown dramatically over the past five decades. In addition, courses have been developed, methods have flourished, arguments about its future have been advanced (for example, Denzin and Lincoln 1994) and criticized (for example, Snow and Morrill 1995 ), and dedicated journals and books have mushroomed. Most social scientists have a clear idea of research and how it differs from journalism, politics and other activities. But the question of what is qualitative in qualitative research is either eluded or eschewed.

We maintain that this lacuna hinders systematic knowledge production based on qualitative research. Paul Lazarsfeld noted the lack of “codification” as early as 1955 when he reviewed 100 qualitative studies in order to offer a codification of the practices (Lazarsfeld and Barton 1982 :239). Since then many texts on “qualitative research” and its methods have been published, including recent attempts (Goertz and Mahoney 2012 ) similar to Lazarsfeld’s. These studies have tried to extract what is qualitative by looking at the large number of empirical “qualitative” studies. Our novel strategy complements these endeavors by taking another approach and looking at the attempts to codify these practices in the form of a definition, as well as to a minor extent take Becker’s study as an exemplar of what qualitative researchers actually do, and what the characteristic of being ‘qualitative’ denotes and implies. We claim that qualitative researchers, if there is such a thing as “qualitative research,” should be able to codify their practices in a condensed, yet general way expressed in language.

Lingering problems of “generalizability” and “how many cases do I need” (Small 2009 ) are blocking advancement – in this line of work qualitative approaches are said to differ considerably from quantitative ones, while some of the former unsuccessfully mimic principles related to the latter (Small 2009 ). Additionally, quantitative researchers sometimes unfairly criticize the first based on their own quality criteria. Scholars like Goertz and Mahoney ( 2012 ) have successfully focused on the different norms and practices beyond what they argue are essentially two different cultures: those working with either qualitative or quantitative methods. Instead, similarly to Becker ( 2017 ) who has recently questioned the usefulness of the distinction between qualitative and quantitative research, we focus on similarities.

The current situation also impedes both students and researchers in focusing their studies and understanding each other’s work (Lazarsfeld and Barton 1982 :239). A third consequence is providing an opening for critiques by scholars operating within different traditions (Valsiner 2000 :101). A fourth issue is that the “implicit use of methods in qualitative research makes the field far less standardized than the quantitative paradigm” (Goertz and Mahoney 2012 :9). Relatedly, the National Science Foundation in the US organized two workshops in 2004 and 2005 to address the scientific foundations of qualitative research involving strategies to improve it and to develop standards of evaluation in qualitative research. However, a specific focus on its distinguishing feature of being “qualitative” while being implicitly acknowledged, was discussed only briefly (for example, Best 2004 ).

In 2014 a theme issue was published in this journal on “Methods, Materials, and Meanings: Designing Cultural Analysis,” discussing central issues in (cultural) qualitative research (Berezin 2014 ; Biernacki 2014 ; Glaeser 2014 ; Lamont and Swidler 2014 ; Spillman 2014). We agree with many of the arguments put forward, such as the risk of methodological tribalism, and that we should not waste energy on debating methods separated from research questions. Nonetheless, a clarification of the relation to what is called “quantitative research” is of outmost importance to avoid misunderstandings and misguided debates between “qualitative” and “quantitative” researchers. Our strategy means that researchers, “qualitative” or “quantitative” they may be, in their actual practice may combine qualitative work and quantitative work.

In this article we accomplish three tasks. First, we systematically survey the literature for meanings of qualitative research by looking at how researchers have defined it. Drawing upon existing knowledge we find that the different meanings and ideas of qualitative research are not yet coherently integrated into one satisfactory definition. Next, we advance our contribution by offering a definition of qualitative research and illustrate its meaning and use partially by expanding on the brief example introduced earlier related to Becker’s work ( 1963 ). We offer a systematic analysis of central themes of what researchers consider to be the core of “qualitative,” regardless of style of work. These themes – which we summarize in terms of four keywords: distinction, process, closeness, improved understanding – constitute part of our literature review, in which each one appears, sometimes with others, but never all in the same definition. They serve as the foundation of our contribution. Our categories are overlapping. Their use is primarily to organize the large amount of definitions we have identified and analyzed, and not necessarily to draw a clear distinction between them. Finally, we continue the elaboration discussed above on the advantages of a clear definition of qualitative research.

In a hermeneutic fashion we propose that there is something meaningful that deserves to be labelled “qualitative research” (Gadamer 1990 ). To approach the question “What is qualitative in qualitative research?” we have surveyed the literature. In conducting our survey we first traced the word’s etymology in dictionaries, encyclopedias, handbooks of the social sciences and of methods and textbooks, mainly in English, which is common to methodology courses. It should be noted that we have zoomed in on sociology and its literature. This discipline has been the site of the largest debate and development of methods that can be called “qualitative,” which suggests that this field should be examined in great detail.

In an ideal situation we should expect that one good definition, or at least some common ideas, would have emerged over the years. This common core of qualitative research should be so accepted that it would appear in at least some textbooks. Since this is not what we found, we decided to pursue an inductive approach to capture maximal variation in the field of qualitative research; we searched in a selection of handbooks, textbooks, book chapters, and books, to which we added the analysis of journal articles. Our sample comprises a total of 89 references.

In practice we focused on the discipline that has had a clear discussion of methods, namely sociology. We also conducted a broad search in the JSTOR database to identify scholarly sociology articles published between 1998 and 2017 in English with a focus on defining or explaining qualitative research. We specifically zoom in on this time frame because we would have expect that this more mature period would have produced clear discussions on the meaning of qualitative research. To find these articles we combined a number of keywords to search the content and/or the title: qualitative (which was always included), definition, empirical, research, methodology, studies, fieldwork, interview and observation .

As a second phase of our research we searched within nine major sociological journals ( American Journal of Sociology , Sociological Theory , American Sociological Review , Contemporary Sociology , Sociological Forum , Sociological Theory , Qualitative Research , Qualitative Sociology and Qualitative Sociology Review ) for articles also published during the past 19 years (1998–2017) that had the term “qualitative” in the title and attempted to define qualitative research.

Lastly we picked two additional journals, Qualitative Research and Qualitative Sociology , in which we could expect to find texts addressing the notion of “qualitative.” From Qualitative Research we chose Volume 14, Issue 6, December 2014, and from Qualitative Sociology we chose Volume 36, Issue 2, June 2017. Within each of these we selected the first article; then we picked the second article of three prior issues. Again we went back another three issues and investigated article number three. Finally we went back another three issues and perused article number four. This selection criteria was used to get a manageable sample for the analysis.

The coding process of the 89 references we gathered in our selected review began soon after the first round of material was gathered, and we reduced the complexity created by our maximum variation sampling (Snow and Anderson 1993 :22) to four different categories within which questions on the nature and properties of qualitative research were discussed. We call them: Qualitative and Quantitative Research, Qualitative Research, Fieldwork, and Grounded Theory. This – which may appear as an illogical grouping – merely reflects the “context” in which the matter of “qualitative” is discussed. If the selection process of the material – books and articles – was informed by pre-knowledge, we used an inductive strategy to code the material. When studying our material, we identified four central notions related to “qualitative” that appear in various combinations in the literature which indicate what is the core of qualitative research. We have labeled them: “distinctions”, “process,” “closeness,” and “improved understanding.” During the research process the categories and notions were improved, refined, changed, and reordered. The coding ended when a sense of saturation in the material arose. In the presentation below all quotations and references come from our empirical material of texts on qualitative research.

Analysis – What is Qualitative Research?

In this section we describe the four categories we identified in the coding, how they differently discuss qualitative research, as well as their overall content. Some salient quotations are selected to represent the type of text sorted under each of the four categories. What we present are examples from the literature.

Qualitative and Quantitative

This analytic category comprises quotations comparing qualitative and quantitative research, a distinction that is frequently used (Brown 2010 :231); in effect this is a conceptual pair that structures the discussion and that may be associated with opposing interests. While the general goal of quantitative and qualitative research is the same – to understand the world better – their methodologies and focus in certain respects differ substantially (Becker 1966 :55). Quantity refers to that property of something that can be determined by measurement. In a dictionary of Statistics and Methodology we find that “(a) When referring to *variables, ‘qualitative’ is another term for *categorical or *nominal. (b) When speaking of kinds of research, ‘qualitative’ refers to studies of subjects that are hard to quantify, such as art history. Qualitative research tends to be a residual category for almost any kind of non-quantitative research” (Stiles 1998:183). But it should be obvious that one could employ a quantitative approach when studying, for example, art history.

The same dictionary states that quantitative is “said of variables or research that can be handled numerically, usually (too sharply) contrasted with *qualitative variables and research” (Stiles 1998:184). From a qualitative perspective “quantitative research” is about numbers and counting, and from a quantitative perspective qualitative research is everything that is not about numbers. But this does not say much about what is “qualitative.” If we turn to encyclopedias we find that in the 1932 edition of the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences there is no mention of “qualitative.” In the Encyclopedia from 1968 we can read:

Qualitative Analysis. For methods of obtaining, analyzing, and describing data, see [the various entries:] CONTENT ANALYSIS; COUNTED DATA; EVALUATION RESEARCH, FIELD WORK; GRAPHIC PRESENTATION; HISTORIOGRAPHY, especially the article on THE RHETORIC OF HISTORY; INTERVIEWING; OBSERVATION; PERSONALITY MEASUREMENT; PROJECTIVE METHODS; PSYCHOANALYSIS, article on EXPERIMENTAL METHODS; SURVEY ANALYSIS, TABULAR PRESENTATION; TYPOLOGIES. (Vol. 13:225)

Some, like Alford, divide researchers into methodologists or, in his words, “quantitative and qualitative specialists” (Alford 1998 :12). Qualitative research uses a variety of methods, such as intensive interviews or in-depth analysis of historical materials, and it is concerned with a comprehensive account of some event or unit (King et al. 1994 :4). Like quantitative research it can be utilized to study a variety of issues, but it tends to focus on meanings and motivations that underlie cultural symbols, personal experiences, phenomena and detailed understanding of processes in the social world. In short, qualitative research centers on understanding processes, experiences, and the meanings people assign to things (Kalof et al. 2008 :79).

Others simply say that qualitative methods are inherently unscientific (Jovanović 2011 :19). Hood, for instance, argues that words are intrinsically less precise than numbers, and that they are therefore more prone to subjective analysis, leading to biased results (Hood 2006 :219). Qualitative methodologies have raised concerns over the limitations of quantitative templates (Brady et al. 2004 :4). Scholars such as King et al. ( 1994 ), for instance, argue that non-statistical research can produce more reliable results if researchers pay attention to the rules of scientific inference commonly stated in quantitative research. Also, researchers such as Becker ( 1966 :59; 1970 :42–43) have asserted that, if conducted properly, qualitative research and in particular ethnographic field methods, can lead to more accurate results than quantitative studies, in particular, survey research and laboratory experiments.

Some researchers, such as Kalof, Dan, and Dietz ( 2008 :79) claim that the boundaries between the two approaches are becoming blurred, and Small ( 2009 ) argues that currently much qualitative research (especially in North America) tries unsuccessfully and unnecessarily to emulate quantitative standards. For others, qualitative research tends to be more humanistic and discursive (King et al. 1994 :4). Ragin ( 1994 ), and similarly also Becker, ( 1996 :53), Marchel and Owens ( 2007 :303) think that the main distinction between the two styles is overstated and does not rest on the simple dichotomy of “numbers versus words” (Ragin 1994 :xii). Some claim that quantitative data can be utilized to discover associations, but in order to unveil cause and effect a complex research design involving the use of qualitative approaches needs to be devised (Gilbert 2009 :35). Consequently, qualitative data are useful for understanding the nuances lying beyond those processes as they unfold (Gilbert 2009 :35). Others contend that qualitative research is particularly well suited both to identify causality and to uncover fine descriptive distinctions (Fine and Hallett 2014 ; Lichterman and Isaac Reed 2014 ; Katz 2015 ).

There are other ways to separate these two traditions, including normative statements about what qualitative research should be (that is, better or worse than quantitative approaches, concerned with scientific approaches to societal change or vice versa; Snow and Morrill 1995 ; Denzin and Lincoln 2005 ), or whether it should develop falsifiable statements; Best 2004 ).

We propose that quantitative research is largely concerned with pre-determined variables (Small 2008 ); the analysis concerns the relations between variables. These categories are primarily not questioned in the study, only their frequency or degree, or the correlations between them (cf. Franzosi 2016 ). If a researcher studies wage differences between women and men, he or she works with given categories: x number of men are compared with y number of women, with a certain wage attributed to each person. The idea is not to move beyond the given categories of wage, men and women; they are the starting point as well as the end point, and undergo no “qualitative change.” Qualitative research, in contrast, investigates relations between categories that are themselves subject to change in the research process. Returning to Becker’s study ( 1963 ), we see that he questioned pre-dispositional theories of deviant behavior working with pre-determined variables such as an individual’s combination of personal qualities or emotional problems. His take, in contrast, was to understand marijuana consumption by developing “variables” as part of the investigation. Thereby he presented new variables, or as we would say today, theoretical concepts, but which are grounded in the empirical material.

Qualitative Research

This category contains quotations that refer to descriptions of qualitative research without making comparisons with quantitative research. Researchers such as Denzin and Lincoln, who have written a series of influential handbooks on qualitative methods (1994; Denzin and Lincoln 2003 ; 2005 ), citing Nelson et al. (1992:4), argue that because qualitative research is “interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and sometimes counterdisciplinary” it is difficult to derive one single definition of it (Jovanović 2011 :3). According to them, in fact, “the field” is “many things at the same time,” involving contradictions, tensions over its focus, methods, and how to derive interpretations and findings ( 2003 : 11). Similarly, others, such as Flick ( 2007 :ix–x) contend that agreeing on an accepted definition has increasingly become problematic, and that qualitative research has possibly matured different identities. However, Best holds that “the proliferation of many sorts of activities under the label of qualitative sociology threatens to confuse our discussions” ( 2004 :54). Atkinson’s position is more definite: “the current state of qualitative research and research methods is confused” ( 2005 :3–4).

Qualitative research is about interpretation (Blumer 1969 ; Strauss and Corbin 1998 ; Denzin and Lincoln 2003 ), or Verstehen [understanding] (Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1996 ). It is “multi-method,” involving the collection and use of a variety of empirical materials (Denzin and Lincoln 1998; Silverman 2013 ) and approaches (Silverman 2005 ; Flick 2007 ). It focuses not only on the objective nature of behavior but also on its subjective meanings: individuals’ own accounts of their attitudes, motivations, behavior (McIntyre 2005 :127; Creswell 2009 ), events and situations (Bryman 1989) – what people say and do in specific places and institutions (Goodwin and Horowitz 2002 :35–36) in social and temporal contexts (Morrill and Fine 1997). For this reason, following Weber ([1921-22] 1978), it can be described as an interpretative science (McIntyre 2005 :127). But could quantitative research also be concerned with these questions? Also, as pointed out below, does all qualitative research focus on subjective meaning, as some scholars suggest?

Others also distinguish qualitative research by claiming that it collects data using a naturalistic approach (Denzin and Lincoln 2005 :2; Creswell 2009 ), focusing on the meaning actors ascribe to their actions. But again, does all qualitative research need to be collected in situ? And does qualitative research have to be inherently concerned with meaning? Flick ( 2007 ), referring to Denzin and Lincoln ( 2005 ), mentions conversation analysis as an example of qualitative research that is not concerned with the meanings people bring to a situation, but rather with the formal organization of talk. Still others, such as Ragin ( 1994 :85), note that qualitative research is often (especially early on in the project, we would add) less structured than other kinds of social research – a characteristic connected to its flexibility and that can lead both to potentially better, but also worse results. But is this not a feature of this type of research, rather than a defining description of its essence? Wouldn’t this comment also apply, albeit to varying degrees, to quantitative research?

In addition, Strauss ( 2003 ), along with others, such as Alvesson and Kärreman ( 2011 :10–76), argue that qualitative researchers struggle to capture and represent complex phenomena partially because they tend to collect a large amount of data. While his analysis is correct at some points – “It is necessary to do detailed, intensive, microscopic examination of the data in order to bring out the amazing complexity of what lies in, behind, and beyond those data” (Strauss 2003 :10) – much of his analysis concerns the supposed focus of qualitative research and its challenges, rather than exactly what it is about. But even in this instance we would make a weak case arguing that these are strictly the defining features of qualitative research. Some researchers seem to focus on the approach or the methods used, or even on the way material is analyzed. Several researchers stress the naturalistic assumption of investigating the world, suggesting that meaning and interpretation appear to be a core matter of qualitative research.

We can also see that in this category there is no consensus about specific qualitative methods nor about qualitative data. Many emphasize interpretation, but quantitative research, too, involves interpretation; the results of a regression analysis, for example, certainly have to be interpreted, and the form of meta-analysis that factor analysis provides indeed requires interpretation However, there is no interpretation of quantitative raw data, i.e., numbers in tables. One common thread is that qualitative researchers have to get to grips with their data in order to understand what is being studied in great detail, irrespective of the type of empirical material that is being analyzed. This observation is connected to the fact that qualitative researchers routinely make several adjustments of focus and research design as their studies progress, in many cases until the very end of the project (Kalof et al. 2008 ). If you, like Becker, do not start out with a detailed theory, adjustments such as the emergence and refinement of research questions will occur during the research process. We have thus found a number of useful reflections about qualitative research scattered across different sources, but none of them effectively describe the defining characteristics of this approach.

Although qualitative research does not appear to be defined in terms of a specific method, it is certainly common that fieldwork, i.e., research that entails that the researcher spends considerable time in the field that is studied and use the knowledge gained as data, is seen as emblematic of or even identical to qualitative research. But because we understand that fieldwork tends to focus primarily on the collection and analysis of qualitative data, we expected to find within it discussions on the meaning of “qualitative.” But, again, this was not the case.

Instead, we found material on the history of this approach (for example, Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1996 ; Atkinson et al. 2001), including how it has changed; for example, by adopting a more self-reflexive practice (Heyl 2001), as well as the different nomenclature that has been adopted, such as fieldwork, ethnography, qualitative research, naturalistic research, participant observation and so on (for example, Lofland et al. 2006 ; Gans 1999 ).

We retrieved definitions of ethnography, such as “the study of people acting in the natural courses of their daily lives,” involving a “resocialization of the researcher” (Emerson 1988 :1) through intense immersion in others’ social worlds (see also examples in Hammersley 2018 ). This may be accomplished by direct observation and also participation (Neuman 2007 :276), although others, such as Denzin ( 1970 :185), have long recognized other types of observation, including non-participant (“fly on the wall”). In this category we have also isolated claims and opposing views, arguing that this type of research is distinguished primarily by where it is conducted (natural settings) (Hughes 1971:496), and how it is carried out (a variety of methods are applied) or, for some most importantly, by involving an active, empathetic immersion in those being studied (Emerson 1988 :2). We also retrieved descriptions of the goals it attends in relation to how it is taught (understanding subjective meanings of the people studied, primarily develop theory, or contribute to social change) (see for example, Corte and Irwin 2017 ; Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1996 :281; Trier-Bieniek 2012 :639) by collecting the richest possible data (Lofland et al. 2006 ) to derive “thick descriptions” (Geertz 1973 ), and/or to aim at theoretical statements of general scope and applicability (for example, Emerson 1988 ; Fine 2003 ). We have identified guidelines on how to evaluate it (for example Becker 1996 ; Lamont 2004 ) and have retrieved instructions on how it should be conducted (for example, Lofland et al. 2006 ). For instance, analysis should take place while the data gathering unfolds (Emerson 1988 ; Hammersley and Atkinson 2007 ; Lofland et al. 2006 ), observations should be of long duration (Becker 1970 :54; Goffman 1989 ), and data should be of high quantity (Becker 1970 :52–53), as well as other questionable distinctions between fieldwork and other methods:

Field studies differ from other methods of research in that the researcher performs the task of selecting topics, decides what questions to ask, and forges interest in the course of the research itself . This is in sharp contrast to many ‘theory-driven’ and ‘hypothesis-testing’ methods. (Lofland and Lofland 1995 :5)

But could not, for example, a strictly interview-based study be carried out with the same amount of flexibility, such as sequential interviewing (for example, Small 2009 )? Once again, are quantitative approaches really as inflexible as some qualitative researchers think? Moreover, this category stresses the role of the actors’ meaning, which requires knowledge and close interaction with people, their practices and their lifeworld.

It is clear that field studies – which are seen by some as the “gold standard” of qualitative research – are nonetheless only one way of doing qualitative research. There are other methods, but it is not clear why some are more qualitative than others, or why they are better or worse. Fieldwork is characterized by interaction with the field (the material) and understanding of the phenomenon that is being studied. In Becker’s case, he had general experience from fields in which marihuana was used, based on which he did interviews with actual users in several fields.

Grounded Theory

Another major category we identified in our sample is Grounded Theory. We found descriptions of it most clearly in Glaser and Strauss’ ([1967] 2010 ) original articulation, Strauss and Corbin ( 1998 ) and Charmaz ( 2006 ), as well as many other accounts of what it is for: generating and testing theory (Strauss 2003 :xi). We identified explanations of how this task can be accomplished – such as through two main procedures: constant comparison and theoretical sampling (Emerson 1998:96), and how using it has helped researchers to “think differently” (for example, Strauss and Corbin 1998 :1). We also read descriptions of its main traits, what it entails and fosters – for instance, an exceptional flexibility, an inductive approach (Strauss and Corbin 1998 :31–33; 1990; Esterberg 2002 :7), an ability to step back and critically analyze situations, recognize tendencies towards bias, think abstractly and be open to criticism, enhance sensitivity towards the words and actions of respondents, and develop a sense of absorption and devotion to the research process (Strauss and Corbin 1998 :5–6). Accordingly, we identified discussions of the value of triangulating different methods (both using and not using grounded theory), including quantitative ones, and theories to achieve theoretical development (most comprehensively in Denzin 1970 ; Strauss and Corbin 1998 ; Timmermans and Tavory 2012 ). We have also located arguments about how its practice helps to systematize data collection, analysis and presentation of results (Glaser and Strauss [1967] 2010 :16).

Grounded theory offers a systematic approach which requires researchers to get close to the field; closeness is a requirement of identifying questions and developing new concepts or making further distinctions with regard to old concepts. In contrast to other qualitative approaches, grounded theory emphasizes the detailed coding process, and the numerous fine-tuned distinctions that the researcher makes during the process. Within this category, too, we could not find a satisfying discussion of the meaning of qualitative research.

Defining Qualitative Research

In sum, our analysis shows that some notions reappear in the discussion of qualitative research, such as understanding, interpretation, “getting close” and making distinctions. These notions capture aspects of what we think is “qualitative.” However, a comprehensive definition that is useful and that can further develop the field is lacking, and not even a clear picture of its essential elements appears. In other words no definition emerges from our data, and in our research process we have moved back and forth between our empirical data and the attempt to present a definition. Our concrete strategy, as stated above, is to relate qualitative and quantitative research, or more specifically, qualitative and quantitative work. We use an ideal-typical notion of quantitative research which relies on taken for granted and numbered variables. This means that the data consists of variables on different scales, such as ordinal, but frequently ratio and absolute scales, and the representation of the numbers to the variables, i.e. the justification of the assignment of numbers to object or phenomenon, are not questioned, though the validity may be questioned. In this section we return to the notion of quality and try to clarify it while presenting our contribution.

Broadly, research refers to the activity performed by people trained to obtain knowledge through systematic procedures. Notions such as “objectivity” and “reflexivity,” “systematic,” “theory,” “evidence” and “openness” are here taken for granted in any type of research. Next, building on our empirical analysis we explain the four notions that we have identified as central to qualitative work: distinctions, process, closeness, and improved understanding. In discussing them, ultimately in relation to one another, we make their meaning even more precise. Our idea, in short, is that only when these ideas that we present separately for analytic purposes are brought together can we speak of qualitative research.

Distinctions

We believe that the possibility of making new distinctions is one the defining characteristics of qualitative research. It clearly sets it apart from quantitative analysis which works with taken-for-granted variables, albeit as mentioned, meta-analyses, for example, factor analysis may result in new variables. “Quality” refers essentially to distinctions, as already pointed out by Aristotle. He discusses the term “qualitative” commenting: “By a quality I mean that in virtue of which things are said to be qualified somehow” (Aristotle 1984:14). Quality is about what something is or has, which means that the distinction from its environment is crucial. We see qualitative research as a process in which significant new distinctions are made to the scholarly community; to make distinctions is a key aspect of obtaining new knowledge; a point, as we will see, that also has implications for “quantitative research.” The notion of being “significant” is paramount. New distinctions by themselves are not enough; just adding concepts only increases complexity without furthering our knowledge. The significance of new distinctions is judged against the communal knowledge of the research community. To enable this discussion and judgements central elements of rational discussion are required (cf. Habermas [1981] 1987 ; Davidsson [ 1988 ] 2001) to identify what is new and relevant scientific knowledge. Relatedly, Ragin alludes to the idea of new and useful knowledge at a more concrete level: “Qualitative methods are appropriate for in-depth examination of cases because they aid the identification of key features of cases. Most qualitative methods enhance data” (1994:79). When Becker ( 1963 ) studied deviant behavior and investigated how people became marihuana smokers, he made distinctions between the ways in which people learned how to smoke. This is a classic example of how the strategy of “getting close” to the material, for example the text, people or pictures that are subject to analysis, may enable researchers to obtain deeper insight and new knowledge by making distinctions – in this instance on the initial notion of learning how to smoke. Others have stressed the making of distinctions in relation to coding or theorizing. Emerson et al. ( 1995 ), for example, hold that “qualitative coding is a way of opening up avenues of inquiry,” meaning that the researcher identifies and develops concepts and analytic insights through close examination of and reflection on data (Emerson et al. 1995 :151). Goodwin and Horowitz highlight making distinctions in relation to theory-building writing: “Close engagement with their cases typically requires qualitative researchers to adapt existing theories or to make new conceptual distinctions or theoretical arguments to accommodate new data” ( 2002 : 37). In the ideal-typical quantitative research only existing and so to speak, given, variables would be used. If this is the case no new distinction are made. But, would not also many “quantitative” researchers make new distinctions?

Process does not merely suggest that research takes time. It mainly implies that qualitative new knowledge results from a process that involves several phases, and above all iteration. Qualitative research is about oscillation between theory and evidence, analysis and generating material, between first- and second -order constructs (Schütz 1962 :59), between getting in contact with something, finding sources, becoming deeply familiar with a topic, and then distilling and communicating some of its essential features. The main point is that the categories that the researcher uses, and perhaps takes for granted at the beginning of the research process, usually undergo qualitative changes resulting from what is found. Becker describes how he tested hypotheses and let the jargon of the users develop into theoretical concepts. This happens over time while the study is being conducted, exemplifying what we mean by process.

In the research process, a pilot-study may be used to get a first glance of, for example, the field, how to approach it, and what methods can be used, after which the method and theory are chosen or refined before the main study begins. Thus, the empirical material is often central from the start of the project and frequently leads to adjustments by the researcher. Likewise, during the main study categories are not fixed; the empirical material is seen in light of the theory used, but it is also given the opportunity to kick back, thereby resisting attempts to apply theoretical straightjackets (Becker 1970 :43). In this process, coding and analysis are interwoven, and thus are often important steps for getting closer to the phenomenon and deciding what to focus on next. Becker began his research by interviewing musicians close to him, then asking them to refer him to other musicians, and later on doubling his original sample of about 25 to include individuals in other professions (Becker 1973:46). Additionally, he made use of some participant observation, documents, and interviews with opiate users made available to him by colleagues. As his inductive theory of deviance evolved, Becker expanded his sample in order to fine tune it, and test the accuracy and generality of his hypotheses. In addition, he introduced a negative case and discussed the null hypothesis ( 1963 :44). His phasic career model is thus based on a research design that embraces processual work. Typically, process means to move between “theory” and “material” but also to deal with negative cases, and Becker ( 1998 ) describes how discovering these negative cases impacted his research design and ultimately its findings.

Obviously, all research is process-oriented to some degree. The point is that the ideal-typical quantitative process does not imply change of the data, and iteration between data, evidence, hypotheses, empirical work, and theory. The data, quantified variables, are, in most cases fixed. Merging of data, which of course can be done in a quantitative research process, does not mean new data. New hypotheses are frequently tested, but the “raw data is often the “the same.” Obviously, over time new datasets are made available and put into use.

Another characteristic that is emphasized in our sample is that qualitative researchers – and in particular ethnographers – can, or as Goffman put it, ought to ( 1989 ), get closer to the phenomenon being studied and their data than quantitative researchers (for example, Silverman 2009 :85). Put differently, essentially because of their methods qualitative researchers get into direct close contact with those being investigated and/or the material, such as texts, being analyzed. Becker started out his interview study, as we noted, by talking to those he knew in the field of music to get closer to the phenomenon he was studying. By conducting interviews he got even closer. Had he done more observations, he would undoubtedly have got even closer to the field.

Additionally, ethnographers’ design enables researchers to follow the field over time, and the research they do is almost by definition longitudinal, though the time in the field is studied obviously differs between studies. The general characteristic of closeness over time maximizes the chances of unexpected events, new data (related, for example, to archival research as additional sources, and for ethnography for situations not necessarily previously thought of as instrumental – what Mannay and Morgan ( 2015 ) term the “waiting field”), serendipity (Merton and Barber 2004 ; Åkerström 2013 ), and possibly reactivity, as well as the opportunity to observe disrupted patterns that translate into exemplars of negative cases. Two classic examples of this are Becker’s finding of what medical students call “crocks” (Becker et al. 1961 :317), and Geertz’s ( 1973 ) study of “deep play” in Balinese society.

By getting and staying so close to their data – be it pictures, text or humans interacting (Becker was himself a musician) – for a long time, as the research progressively focuses, qualitative researchers are prompted to continually test their hunches, presuppositions and hypotheses. They test them against a reality that often (but certainly not always), and practically, as well as metaphorically, talks back, whether by validating them, or disqualifying their premises – correctly, as well as incorrectly (Fine 2003 ; Becker 1970 ). This testing nonetheless often leads to new directions for the research. Becker, for example, says that he was initially reading psychological theories, but when facing the data he develops a theory that looks at, you may say, everything but psychological dispositions to explain the use of marihuana. Especially researchers involved with ethnographic methods have a fairly unique opportunity to dig up and then test (in a circular, continuous and temporal way) new research questions and findings as the research progresses, and thereby to derive previously unimagined and uncharted distinctions by getting closer to the phenomenon under study.

Let us stress that getting close is by no means restricted to ethnography. The notion of hermeneutic circle and hermeneutics as a general way of understanding implies that we must get close to the details in order to get the big picture. This also means that qualitative researchers can literally also make use of details of pictures as evidence (cf. Harper 2002). Thus, researchers may get closer both when generating the material or when analyzing it.

Quantitative research, we maintain, in the ideal-typical representation cannot get closer to the data. The data is essentially numbers in tables making up the variables (Franzosi 2016 :138). The data may originally have been “qualitative,” but once reduced to numbers there can only be a type of “hermeneutics” about what the number may stand for. The numbers themselves, however, are non-ambiguous. Thus, in quantitative research, interpretation, if done, is not about the data itself—the numbers—but what the numbers stand for. It follows that the interpretation is essentially done in a more “speculative” mode without direct empirical evidence (cf. Becker 2017 ).

Improved Understanding

While distinction, process and getting closer refer to the qualitative work of the researcher, improved understanding refers to its conditions and outcome of this work. Understanding cuts deeper than explanation, which to some may mean a causally verified correlation between variables. The notion of explanation presupposes the notion of understanding since explanation does not include an idea of how knowledge is gained (Manicas 2006 : 15). Understanding, we argue, is the core concept of what we call the outcome of the process when research has made use of all the other elements that were integrated in the research. Understanding, then, has a special status in qualitative research since it refers both to the conditions of knowledge and the outcome of the process. Understanding can to some extent be seen as the condition of explanation and occurs in a process of interpretation, which naturally refers to meaning (Gadamer 1990 ). It is fundamentally connected to knowing, and to the knowing of how to do things (Heidegger [1927] 2001 ). Conceptually the term hermeneutics is used to account for this process. Heidegger ties hermeneutics to human being and not possible to separate from the understanding of being ( 1988 ). Here we use it in a broader sense, and more connected to method in general (cf. Seiffert 1992 ). The abovementioned aspects – for example, “objectivity” and “reflexivity” – of the approach are conditions of scientific understanding. Understanding is the result of a circular process and means that the parts are understood in light of the whole, and vice versa. Understanding presupposes pre-understanding, or in other words, some knowledge of the phenomenon studied. The pre-understanding, even in the form of prejudices, are in qualitative research process, which we see as iterative, questioned, which gradually or suddenly change due to the iteration of data, evidence and concepts. However, qualitative research generates understanding in the iterative process when the researcher gets closer to the data, e.g., by going back and forth between field and analysis in a process that generates new data that changes the evidence, and, ultimately, the findings. Questioning, to ask questions, and put what one assumes—prejudices and presumption—in question, is central to understand something (Heidegger [1927] 2001 ; Gadamer 1990 :368–384). We propose that this iterative process in which the process of understanding occurs is characteristic of qualitative research.

Improved understanding means that we obtain scientific knowledge of something that we as a scholarly community did not know before, or that we get to know something better. It means that we understand more about how parts are related to one another, and to other things we already understand (see also Fine and Hallett 2014 ). Understanding is an important condition for qualitative research. It is not enough to identify correlations, make distinctions, and work in a process in which one gets close to the field or phenomena. Understanding is accomplished when the elements are integrated in an iterative process.

It is, moreover, possible to understand many things, and researchers, just like children, may come to understand new things every day as they engage with the world. This subjective condition of understanding – namely, that a person gains a better understanding of something –is easily met. To be qualified as “scientific,” the understanding must be general and useful to many; it must be public. But even this generally accessible understanding is not enough in order to speak of “scientific understanding.” Though we as a collective can increase understanding of everything in virtually all potential directions as a result also of qualitative work, we refrain from this “objective” way of understanding, which has no means of discriminating between what we gain in understanding. Scientific understanding means that it is deemed relevant from the scientific horizon (compare Schütz 1962 : 35–38, 46, 63), and that it rests on the pre-understanding that the scientists have and must have in order to understand. In other words, the understanding gained must be deemed useful by other researchers, so that they can build on it. We thus see understanding from a pragmatic, rather than a subjective or objective perspective. Improved understanding is related to the question(s) at hand. Understanding, in order to represent an improvement, must be an improvement in relation to the existing body of knowledge of the scientific community (James [ 1907 ] 1955). Scientific understanding is, by definition, collective, as expressed in Weber’s famous note on objectivity, namely that scientific work aims at truths “which … can claim, even for a Chinese, the validity appropriate to an empirical analysis” ([1904] 1949 :59). By qualifying “improved understanding” we argue that it is a general defining characteristic of qualitative research. Becker‘s ( 1966 ) study and other research of deviant behavior increased our understanding of the social learning processes of how individuals start a behavior. And it also added new knowledge about the labeling of deviant behavior as a social process. Few studies, of course, make the same large contribution as Becker’s, but are nonetheless qualitative research.

Understanding in the phenomenological sense, which is a hallmark of qualitative research, we argue, requires meaning and this meaning is derived from the context, and above all the data being analyzed. The ideal-typical quantitative research operates with given variables with different numbers. This type of material is not enough to establish meaning at the level that truly justifies understanding. In other words, many social science explanations offer ideas about correlations or even causal relations, but this does not mean that the meaning at the level of the data analyzed, is understood. This leads us to say that there are indeed many explanations that meet the criteria of understanding, for example the explanation of how one becomes a marihuana smoker presented by Becker. However, we may also understand a phenomenon without explaining it, and we may have potential explanations, or better correlations, that are not really understood.

We may speak more generally of quantitative research and its data to clarify what we see as an important distinction. The “raw data” that quantitative research—as an idealtypical activity, refers to is not available for further analysis; the numbers, once created, are not to be questioned (Franzosi 2016 : 138). If the researcher is to do “more” or “change” something, this will be done by conjectures based on theoretical knowledge or based on the researcher’s lifeworld. Both qualitative and quantitative research is based on the lifeworld, and all researchers use prejudices and pre-understanding in the research process. This idea is present in the works of Heidegger ( 2001 ) and Heisenberg (cited in Franzosi 2010 :619). Qualitative research, as we argued, involves the interaction and questioning of concepts (theory), data, and evidence.

Ragin ( 2004 :22) points out that “a good definition of qualitative research should be inclusive and should emphasize its key strengths and features, not what it lacks (for example, the use of sophisticated quantitative techniques).” We define qualitative research as an iterative process in which improved understanding to the scientific community is achieved by making new significant distinctions resulting from getting closer to the phenomenon studied. Qualitative research, as defined here, is consequently a combination of two criteria: (i) how to do things –namely, generating and analyzing empirical material, in an iterative process in which one gets closer by making distinctions, and (ii) the outcome –improved understanding novel to the scholarly community. Is our definition applicable to our own study? In this study we have closely read the empirical material that we generated, and the novel distinction of the notion “qualitative research” is the outcome of an iterative process in which both deduction and induction were involved, in which we identified the categories that we analyzed. We thus claim to meet the first criteria, “how to do things.” The second criteria cannot be judged but in a partial way by us, namely that the “outcome” —in concrete form the definition-improves our understanding to others in the scientific community.

We have defined qualitative research, or qualitative scientific work, in relation to quantitative scientific work. Given this definition, qualitative research is about questioning the pre-given (taken for granted) variables, but it is thus also about making new distinctions of any type of phenomenon, for example, by coining new concepts, including the identification of new variables. This process, as we have discussed, is carried out in relation to empirical material, previous research, and thus in relation to theory. Theory and previous research cannot be escaped or bracketed. According to hermeneutic principles all scientific work is grounded in the lifeworld, and as social scientists we can thus never fully bracket our pre-understanding.

We have proposed that quantitative research, as an idealtype, is concerned with pre-determined variables (Small 2008 ). Variables are epistemically fixed, but can vary in terms of dimensions, such as frequency or number. Age is an example; as a variable it can take on different numbers. In relation to quantitative research, qualitative research does not reduce its material to number and variables. If this is done the process of comes to a halt, the researcher gets more distanced from her data, and it makes it no longer possible to make new distinctions that increase our understanding. We have above discussed the components of our definition in relation to quantitative research. Our conclusion is that in the research that is called quantitative there are frequent and necessary qualitative elements.

Further, comparative empirical research on researchers primarily working with ”quantitative” approaches and those working with ”qualitative” approaches, we propose, would perhaps show that there are many similarities in practices of these two approaches. This is not to deny dissimilarities, or the different epistemic and ontic presuppositions that may be more or less strongly associated with the two different strands (see Goertz and Mahoney 2012 ). Our point is nonetheless that prejudices and preconceptions about researchers are unproductive, and that as other researchers have argued, differences may be exaggerated (e.g., Becker 1996 : 53, 2017 ; Marchel and Owens 2007 :303; Ragin 1994 ), and that a qualitative dimension is present in both kinds of work.

Several things follow from our findings. The most important result is the relation to quantitative research. In our analysis we have separated qualitative research from quantitative research. The point is not to label individual researchers, methods, projects, or works as either “quantitative” or “qualitative.” By analyzing, i.e., taking apart, the notions of quantitative and qualitative, we hope to have shown the elements of qualitative research. Our definition captures the elements, and how they, when combined in practice, generate understanding. As many of the quotations we have used suggest, one conclusion of our study holds that qualitative approaches are not inherently connected with a specific method. Put differently, none of the methods that are frequently labelled “qualitative,” such as interviews or participant observation, are inherently “qualitative.” What matters, given our definition, is whether one works qualitatively or quantitatively in the research process, until the results are produced. Consequently, our analysis also suggests that those researchers working with what in the literature and in jargon is often called “quantitative research” are almost bound to make use of what we have identified as qualitative elements in any research project. Our findings also suggest that many” quantitative” researchers, at least to some extent, are engaged with qualitative work, such as when research questions are developed, variables are constructed and combined, and hypotheses are formulated. Furthermore, a research project may hover between “qualitative” and “quantitative” or start out as “qualitative” and later move into a “quantitative” (a distinct strategy that is not similar to “mixed methods” or just simply combining induction and deduction). More generally speaking, the categories of “qualitative” and “quantitative,” unfortunately, often cover up practices, and it may lead to “camps” of researchers opposing one another. For example, regardless of the researcher is primarily oriented to “quantitative” or “qualitative” research, the role of theory is neglected (cf. Swedberg 2017 ). Our results open up for an interaction not characterized by differences, but by different emphasis, and similarities.

Let us take two examples to briefly indicate how qualitative elements can fruitfully be combined with quantitative. Franzosi ( 2010 ) has discussed the relations between quantitative and qualitative approaches, and more specifically the relation between words and numbers. He analyzes texts and argues that scientific meaning cannot be reduced to numbers. Put differently, the meaning of the numbers is to be understood by what is taken for granted, and what is part of the lifeworld (Schütz 1962 ). Franzosi shows how one can go about using qualitative and quantitative methods and data to address scientific questions analyzing violence in Italy at the time when fascism was rising (1919–1922). Aspers ( 2006 ) studied the meaning of fashion photographers. He uses an empirical phenomenological approach, and establishes meaning at the level of actors. In a second step this meaning, and the different ideal-typical photographers constructed as a result of participant observation and interviews, are tested using quantitative data from a database; in the first phase to verify the different ideal-types, in the second phase to use these types to establish new knowledge about the types. In both of these cases—and more examples can be found—authors move from qualitative data and try to keep the meaning established when using the quantitative data.

A second main result of our study is that a definition, and we provided one, offers a way for research to clarify, and even evaluate, what is done. Hence, our definition can guide researchers and students, informing them on how to think about concrete research problems they face, and to show what it means to get closer in a process in which new distinctions are made. The definition can also be used to evaluate the results, given that it is a standard of evaluation (cf. Hammersley 2007 ), to see whether new distinctions are made and whether this improves our understanding of what is researched, in addition to the evaluation of how the research was conducted. By making what is qualitative research explicit it becomes easier to communicate findings, and it is thereby much harder to fly under the radar with substandard research since there are standards of evaluation which make it easier to separate “good” from “not so good” qualitative research.

To conclude, our analysis, which ends with a definition of qualitative research can thus both address the “internal” issues of what is qualitative research, and the “external” critiques that make it harder to do qualitative research, to which both pressure from quantitative methods and general changes in society contribute.

Acknowledgements

Financial Support for this research is given by the European Research Council, CEV (263699). The authors are grateful to Susann Krieglsteiner for assistance in collecting the data. The paper has benefitted from the many useful comments by the three reviewers and the editor, comments by members of the Uppsala Laboratory of Economic Sociology, as well as Jukka Gronow, Sebastian Kohl, Marcin Serafin, Richard Swedberg, Anders Vassenden and Turid Rødne.

Biographies

is professor of sociology at the Department of Sociology, Uppsala University and Universität St. Gallen. His main focus is economic sociology, and in particular, markets. He has published numerous articles and books, including Orderly Fashion (Princeton University Press 2010), Markets (Polity Press 2011) and Re-Imagining Economic Sociology (edited with N. Dodd, Oxford University Press 2015). His book Ethnographic Methods (in Swedish) has already gone through several editions.

is associate professor of sociology at the Department of Media and Social Sciences, University of Stavanger. His research has been published in journals such as Social Psychology Quarterly, Sociological Theory, Teaching Sociology, and Music and Arts in Action. As an ethnographer he is working on a book on he social world of big-wave surfing.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Patrik Aspers, Email: [email protected] .

Ugo Corte, Email: [email protected] .

Åkerström M. Curiosity and serendipity in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology Review. 2013; 9 (2):10–18. [ Google Scholar ]
Alford, Robert R. 1998. The craft of inquiry. Theories, methods, evidence . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alvesson M, Kärreman D. Qualitative research and theory development . Mystery as method . London: SAGE Publications; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
Aspers, Patrik. 2006. Markets in Fashion, A Phenomenological Approach. London Routledge.
Atkinson P. Qualitative research. Unity and diversity. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 2005; 6 (3):1–15. [ Google Scholar ]
Becker HS. Outsiders. Studies in the sociology of deviance . New York: The Free Press; 1963. [ Google Scholar ]
Becker HS. Whose side are we on? Social Problems. 1966; 14 (3):239–247. [ Google Scholar ]
Becker HS. Sociological work. Method and substance. New Brunswick: Transaction Books; 1970. [ Google Scholar ]
Becker HS. The epistemology of qualitative research. In: Richard J, Anne C, Shweder RA, editors. Ethnography and human development. Context and meaning in social inquiry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1996. pp. 53–71. [ Google Scholar ]
Becker HS. Tricks of the trade. How to think about your research while you're doing it. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
Becker, Howard S. 2017. Evidence . Chigaco: University of Chicago Press.
Becker H, Geer B, Hughes E, Strauss A. Boys in White, student culture in medical school. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers; 1961. [ Google Scholar ]
Berezin M. How do we know what we mean? Epistemological dilemmas in cultural sociology. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 (2):141–151. [ Google Scholar ]
Best, Joel. 2004. Defining qualitative research. In Workshop on Scientific Foundations of Qualitative Research , eds . Charles, Ragin, Joanne, Nagel, and Patricia White, 53-54. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04219/nsf04219.pdf .
Biernacki R. Humanist interpretation versus coding text samples. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 (2):173–188. [ Google Scholar ]
Blumer H. Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1969. [ Google Scholar ]
Brady H, Collier D, Seawright J. Refocusing the discussion of methodology. In: Henry B, David C, editors. Rethinking social inquiry. Diverse tools, shared standards. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield; 2004. pp. 3–22. [ Google Scholar ]
Brown AP. Qualitative method and compromise in applied social research. Qualitative Research. 2010; 10 (2):229–248. [ Google Scholar ]
Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory. London: Sage; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
Corte, Ugo, and Katherine Irwin. 2017. “The Form and Flow of Teaching Ethnographic Knowledge: Hands-on Approaches for Learning Epistemology” Teaching Sociology 45(3): 209-219.
Creswell JW. Research design. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. 3. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
Davidsson D. The myth of the subjective. In: Davidsson D, editor. Subjective, intersubjective, objective. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1988. pp. 39–52. [ Google Scholar ]
Denzin NK. The research act: A theoretical introduction to Ssociological methods. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company Publishers; 1970. [ Google Scholar ]
Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Introduction. The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2003. pp. 1–45. [ Google Scholar ]
Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Introduction. The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2005. pp. 1–32. [ Google Scholar ]
Emerson RM, editor. Contemporary field research. A collection of readings. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press; 1988. [ Google Scholar ]
Emerson RM, Fretz RI, Shaw LL. Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
Esterberg KG. Qualitative methods in social research. Boston: McGraw-Hill; 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
Fine, Gary Alan. 1995. Review of “handbook of qualitative research.” Contemporary Sociology 24 (3): 416–418.
Fine, Gary Alan. 2003. “ Toward a Peopled Ethnography: Developing Theory from Group Life.” Ethnography . 4(1):41-60.
Fine GA, Hancock BH. The new ethnographer at work. Qualitative Research. 2017; 17 (2):260–268. [ Google Scholar ]
Fine GA, Hallett T. Stranger and stranger: Creating theory through ethnographic distance and authority. Journal of Organizational Ethnography. 2014; 3 (2):188–203. [ Google Scholar ]
Flick U. Qualitative research. State of the art. Social Science Information. 2002; 41 (1):5–24. [ Google Scholar ]
Flick U. Designing qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
Frankfort-Nachmias C, Nachmias D. Research methods in the social sciences. 5. London: Edward Arnold; 1996. [ Google Scholar ]
Franzosi R. Sociology, narrative, and the quality versus quantity debate (Goethe versus Newton): Can computer-assisted story grammars help us understand the rise of Italian fascism (1919- 1922)? Theory and Society. 2010; 39 (6):593–629. [ Google Scholar ]
Franzosi R. From method and measurement to narrative and number. International journal of social research methodology. 2016; 19 (1):137–141. [ Google Scholar ]
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1990. Wahrheit und Methode, Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik . Band 1, Hermeneutik. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
Gans H. Participant Observation in an Age of “Ethnography” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 1999; 28 (5):540–548. [ Google Scholar ]
Geertz C. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books; 1973. [ Google Scholar ]
Gilbert N. Researching social life. 3. London: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
Glaeser A. Hermeneutic institutionalism: Towards a new synthesis. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 :207–241. [ Google Scholar ]
Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm L. Strauss. [1967] 2010. The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne: Aldine.
Goertz G, Mahoney J. A tale of two cultures: Qualitative and quantitative research in the social sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
Goffman E. On fieldwork. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 1989; 18 (2):123–132. [ Google Scholar ]
Goodwin J, Horowitz R. Introduction. The methodological strengths and dilemmas of qualitative sociology. Qualitative Sociology. 2002; 25 (1):33–47. [ Google Scholar ]
Habermas, Jürgen. [1981] 1987. The theory of communicative action . Oxford: Polity Press.
Hammersley M. The issue of quality in qualitative research. International Journal of Research & Method in Education. 2007; 30 (3):287–305. [ Google Scholar ]
Hammersley, Martyn. 2013. What is qualitative research? Bloomsbury Publishing.
Hammersley M. What is ethnography? Can it survive should it? Ethnography and Education. 2018; 13 (1):1–17. [ Google Scholar ]
Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Ethnography . Principles in practice . London: Tavistock Publications; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
Heidegger M. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
Heidegger, Martin. 1988. 1923. Ontologie. Hermeneutik der Faktizität, Gesamtausgabe II. Abteilung: Vorlesungen 1919-1944, Band 63, Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
Hempel CG. Philosophy of the natural sciences. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 1966. [ Google Scholar ]
Hood JC. Teaching against the text. The case of qualitative methods. Teaching Sociology. 2006; 34 (3):207–223. [ Google Scholar ]
James W. Pragmatism. New York: Meredian Books; 1907. [ Google Scholar ]
Jovanović G. Toward a social history of qualitative research. History of the Human Sciences. 2011; 24 (2):1–27. [ Google Scholar ]
Kalof L, Dan A, Dietz T. Essentials of social research. London: Open University Press; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
Katz J. Situational evidence: Strategies for causal reasoning from observational field notes. Sociological Methods & Research. 2015; 44 (1):108–144. [ Google Scholar ]
King G, Keohane RO, Sidney S, Verba S. Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1994. Designing social inquiry. [ Google Scholar ]
Lamont M. Evaluating qualitative research: Some empirical findings and an agenda. In: Lamont M, White P, editors. Report from workshop on interdisciplinary standards for systematic qualitative research. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation; 2004. pp. 91–95. [ Google Scholar ]
Lamont M, Swidler A. Methodological pluralism and the possibilities and limits of interviewing. Qualitative Sociology. 2014; 37 (2):153–171. [ Google Scholar ]
Lazarsfeld P, Barton A. Some functions of qualitative analysis in social research. In: Kendall P, editor. The varied sociology of Paul Lazarsfeld. New York: Columbia University Press; 1982. pp. 239–285. [ Google Scholar ]
Lichterman, Paul, and Isaac Reed I (2014), Theory and Contrastive Explanation in Ethnography. Sociological methods and research. Prepublished 27 October 2014; 10.1177/0049124114554458.
Lofland J, Lofland L. Analyzing social settings. A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. 3. Belmont: Wadsworth; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
Lofland J, Snow DA, Anderson L, Lofland LH. Analyzing social settings. A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. 4. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
Long AF, Godfrey M. An evaluation tool to assess the quality of qualitative research studies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2004; 7 (2):181–196. [ Google Scholar ]
Lundberg G. Social research: A study in methods of gathering data. New York: Longmans, Green and Co.; 1951. [ Google Scholar ]
Malinowski B. Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account of native Enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. London: Routledge; 1922. [ Google Scholar ]
Manicas P. A realist philosophy of science: Explanation and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
Marchel C, Owens S. Qualitative research in psychology. Could William James get a job? History of Psychology. 2007; 10 (4):301–324. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
McIntyre LJ. Need to know. Social science research methods. Boston: McGraw-Hill; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
Merton RK, Barber E. The travels and adventures of serendipity . A Study in Sociological Semantics and the Sociology of Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
Mannay D, Morgan M. Doing ethnography or applying a qualitative technique? Reflections from the ‘waiting field‘ Qualitative Research. 2015; 15 (2):166–182. [ Google Scholar ]
Neuman LW. Basics of social research. Qualitative and quantitative approaches. 2. Boston: Pearson Education; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
Ragin CC. Constructing social research. The unity and diversity of method. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press; 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
Ragin, Charles C. 2004. Introduction to session 1: Defining qualitative research. In Workshop on Scientific Foundations of Qualitative Research , 22, ed. Charles C. Ragin, Joane Nagel, Patricia White. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04219/nsf04219.pdf
Rawls, Anne. 2018. The Wartime narrative in US sociology, 1940–7: Stigmatizing qualitative sociology in the name of ‘science,’ European Journal of Social Theory (Online first).
Schütz A. Collected papers I: The problem of social reality. The Hague: Nijhoff; 1962. [ Google Scholar ]
Seiffert H. Einführung in die Hermeneutik. Tübingen: Franke; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
Silverman D. Doing qualitative research. A practical handbook. 2. London: SAGE Publications; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
Silverman D. A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
Silverman D. What counts as qualitative research? Some cautionary comments. Qualitative Sociology Review. 2013; 9 (2):48–55. [ Google Scholar ]
Small ML. “How many cases do I need?” on science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography. 2009; 10 (1):5–38. [ Google Scholar ]
Small, Mario L 2008. Lost in translation: How not to make qualitative research more scientific. In Workshop on interdisciplinary standards for systematic qualitative research, ed in Michelle Lamont, and Patricia White, 165–171. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Snow DA, Anderson L. Down on their luck: A study of homeless street people. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
Snow DA, Morrill C. New ethnographies: Review symposium: A revolutionary handbook or a handbook for revolution? Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 1995; 24 (3):341–349. [ Google Scholar ]
Strauss AL. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. 14. Chicago: Cambridge University Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
Strauss AL, Corbin JM. Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
Swedberg, Richard. 2017. Theorizing in sociological research: A new perspective, a new departure? Annual Review of Sociology 43: 189–206.
Swedberg R. The new 'Battle of Methods'. Challenge January–February. 1990; 3 (1):33–38. [ Google Scholar ]
Timmermans S, Tavory I. Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory. 2012; 30 (3):167–186. [ Google Scholar ]
Trier-Bieniek A. Framing the telephone interview as a participant-centred tool for qualitative research. A methodological discussion. Qualitative Research. 2012; 12 (6):630–644. [ Google Scholar ]
Valsiner J. Data as representations. Contextualizing qualitative and quantitative research strategies. Social Science Information. 2000; 39 (1):99–113. [ Google Scholar ]
Weber, Max. 1904. 1949. Objectivity’ in social Science and social policy. Ed. Edward A. Shils and Henry A. Finch, 49–112. New York: The Free Press.

example of purpose statement in qualitative research

Positionality Statements in Research

Introduction

What is positionality in qualitative research, what are examples of researcher positionality, how does my positionality affect the research process, how do you write a positionality statement for a research project, further reading.

In the qualitative research process, the researcher is the main instrument of data collection , making positionality an important aspect to acknowledge in research. When you conduct research in the social sciences, it is essential for you and your research team to account for researcher identities such as gender, social class, sexual orientation, and other factors, especially if they are relevant to the research topic.

In this article, we'll look at the importance of the researcher's identity in qualitative research, then we'll discuss how a researcher can write about their positionality for an international journal or conference.

Quantitative research is typically straightforward; two plus two always equals four and the speed of light is always constant. The knowledge generated from this sort of research is seen as objective and universal.

Qualitative research , on the other hand, is more subjective in the interpretation of data . Every individual, whether they are the researcher or the participant, looks at the social world in entirely different ways.

When it comes to a researcher's own study, this degree of subjectivity can inform their research methods , research questions , and existing assumptions about the concept or phenomenon they are looking to study.

As a result, the researcher needs to acknowledge their own positionality to contextualize their data collection and data analysis .

Positionality refers to a number of self-identifications ranging from the researcher's background, personal experiences, gender identity, national origin, and other factors that the researcher brings to the research process.

It can also be an acknowledgment of their outsider status relative to the study participants, personal stories about interactions or power dynamics with the study population, or life experiences that bring the researcher to the research question they are addressing.

Positionality is also related to the concept of reflexivity . Both concepts rely on an acknowledgment of the researcher's own background and identity and how these may influence the researcher's interpretations.

While a positionality statement benefits the research audience, the act of reflexivity compels the researcher to become aware of their own influence on the field they are observing. This is an important principle not only for collecting rich data but also for conducting research in an ethical manner.

Fields such as psychological research, sociological research, and education research employ a range of methods , including interviews , focus groups , observations , and ethnographies . When using these methods, the researcher is the most important instrument of data collection .

Take a research study that employs semi-structured interviews , for example. When follow-up questions are generated in the moment as the interviewer responds to answers given by participants, it's important to know a little about the interviewer.

How well does the interviewer know about the expertise and knowledge that their respondents have? Are they close colleagues or are they meeting for the first time? Does the interviewer belong to the same social groups as the interviewee? Answering such questions in a positionality statement helps the research audience understand how the data was generated.

Ethnographies benefit from a more complex statement of positionality. Sociocultural and critical research relies on, among other things, the concept of emic and etic positioning. This concept says that cultures and communities treat people differently depending on whether they are considered insiders or outsiders. Such judgments may be made based on age, race, gender, or cultural background.

As a result, an ethnographer's status as an insider or outsider has potentially significant implications in terms of gaining access to the context, interacting with participants, and analyzing data generated from the ethnography.

Turn data in critical insights with ATLAS.ti

Qualitative analysis is easier than ever thanks to our intuitive research platform. See why with a free trial.

Imagine you are an ethnographer who wants to examine any of the following groups:

indigenous peoples
people with religious beliefs
sex workers
refugees in war zones

Would these groups welcome you or treat you with suspicion? In turn, what kind of bias would you have when observing or interacting with these groups? How might the difference in perspectives affect your methodology and findings?

Positionality can also affect the more mechanical aspects of a study. Informed consent , for example, is critical to gathering data from participants, making the discussion of power dynamics in a positionality statement essential to explaining to the audience how consent was obtained for data collection.

In general, there is no specific form that positionality statements should take in a research paper or presentation. The main objective of expressing positionality is to provide the audience with the sufficient contextualization of your background and identity to allow them to understand how data was collected and analyzed.

That said, scholarly research has two main conventions for writing a positionality statement in a research paper. Positionality statements are often written as part of the research methodology , where the research context, data collection , and data analysis are discussed. Writing positionality statements make the research methodology more transparent .

In this sense, a positionality statement looks like a brief biography of the researcher(s). A few short sentences are usually sufficient, for example:

"The main researcher in this study has significant experience working with patients in hospice care. As a result, she has a familiarity with the issues facing teminally ill patients that informs her reflections of her observations while in the field."

Alternatively, positionality need not be a formal or separate statement. In fields such as anthropology and sociology, and particularly fields where ethnography is commonly employed, research papers tend to resist a clinical structure (i.e., a paper with a strict background section, methodology section, etc.) in favor of a more literary narrative form. This means that positionality often accompanies the narrative developments when there is a relevant connection, for example:

"I observed how the students in class separated into groups according to whom they considered friends outside of formal activities. As a former classroom practitioner, I found this to be quite a natural development. I felt sympathetic toward the teacher, who tried to assign groups to establish more connections among classmates, as I would have done the same during my teaching days."

In the example above, the researcher is explaining what they observed in the field. They are drawn to a particular development (i.e., the grouping of students), which they note because of their previous experience as a teacher.

In this case, their positionality informs how they collected the data, particularly in a dynamic social enviroment where countless developments can occur and the researcher can only document so much at a time. The description of positionality here points out what the researcher did focus on during their research.

Ultimately, the best way to write about positionality depends on the field of research you are in. It is important for you to conduct a literature review of studies relevant to your topic, not only to gain a sense of the current theoretical developments, but also to understand and emulate the writing practices of other researchers.

Keep in mind how positionality statements are written in studies that connect to your research so you can determine the writing style that journals and their peer reviewers find compelling.

There are numerous articles engaging in meta-discussion of positionality and its role in the research process. Here are a few additional references:

Holmes, A. G. D. (2020). Researcher Positionality--A Consideration of Its Influence and Place in Qualitative Research--A New Researcher Guide. Shanlax International Journal of Education , 8 (4), 1-10.
Martin, J. P., Desing, R., & Borrego, M. (2022). Positionality statements are just the tip of the iceberg: Moving towards a reflexive process. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering , 28 (4).
Wilson, C., Janes, G., & Williams, J. (2022). Identity, positionality and reflexivity: Relevance and application to research paramedics. British Paramedic Journal , 7 (2), 43-49.

Researchers turn to ATLAS.ti to make sense of their data

Turn data into knowledge with our powerful data analysis platform. Start with a free trial today.

IMAGES

PPT
PPT
Purpose Statement
FREE 10+ Sample Purpose Statement Templates in PDF
50 Statement Of Purpose Examples (Graduate School, MBA, PhD) ᐅ
Purpose statement

VIDEO

How to write a perfect statement of purpose for Canadian study permit approval
What are the Qualitative Characteristics of Finanancial Statement's?🤔#cafoundation#caintermediate
PRESENTATION OF RESEARCH TITLE AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM (Qualitative Research)
How to Outline Your Statement of Purpose in 10-minutes [Template included]
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE TIPS: HOW TO WRITE AN INTRODUCTION?
HOW TO WRITE AN INTRODUCTION FOR A PhD STATEMENT OF PURPOSE?

COMMENTS

Research Paper Purpose Statement Examples
A purpose statement clearly defines the objective of your qualitative or quantitative research. Learn how to create one through unique and real-world examples.
Purpose Statement
Qualitative Purpose Statement. Creswell (2002) suggested for writing purpose statements in qualitative research include using deliberate phrasing to alert the reader to the purpose statement. Verbs that indicate what will take place in the research and the use of non-directional language that do not suggest an outcome are key.
PDF Chapter 12 Scripting a Qualitative Purpose Statement and Research Questions
The purpose statement is the overall objective or intent of the study. In some projects it is called the "study aim.". It is the most important statement in your qualitative study. It is a statement that conveys the essence of a project. A central question is a single general question that reframes the purpose into a specific question.
PDF Chapter 6 The Purpose Statement
A Qualitative Purpose Statement Good qualitative purpose statements contain information about the central phenomenon explored in the study, the participants in the study, and the research site. It also conveys an emerging design and uses research words drawn from the language of qualitative inquiry (Schwandt, 2014).
How to Write a Purpose Statement (Templates, Examples)
The first element of a purpose statement is the problem or opportunity that you are addressing. This should be a clear and specific description of the issue that you are trying to solve or the opportunity that you are pursuing. 2. The Target Audience. The second element is the target audience for your purpose statement.
Purpose Statement
Qualitative Purpose Statement. Creswell (2002) suggested that purpose statements in qualitative projects or studies include deliberate phrasing to alert the reader to the purpose statement. Verbs are key to indicate what will take place in the project or study research and the use of non-directional language that does not suggest an outcome.
PDF STOP
Qualitative Purpose Statements. B1: Use the term "qualitative" or tell the qualitative type of study you are conducting B2: Use qualitative terms such as: explore, discover, understand, describe B3: State the "central phenomenon" you plan to investigate B4: State the participants and research site in the study.
PDF Your research questions . . . are at the heart of your research design
for designing a research question), purpose statements, research ques-tions, keywords, data collection strategies, and data collection tools. Table 2.1 outlines the foundational connections between the research design, guiding questions, and the purpose statement. In this table (2.1), the purpose statement is presented as an . example. Table 2. ...
PDF Research Questions and Hypotheses
The first signpost is the purpose statement, which establishes the central direction for the study. From the broad, general purpose state- ... Designing Research Example 7.2 Qualitative Central Questions From a Case Study Padula and Miller (1999) conducted a multiple case study that described the
A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research
The development of research questions and the subsequent hypotheses are prerequisites to defining the main research purpose and specific objectives of a study. ... This statement is based on background research and current knowledge.8,9 The research hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a new ... Definitions and examples of qualitative ...
Qualitative Methods in Health Care Research
Qualitative Research Questions and Purpose Statements. Qualitative questions are exploratory and are open-ended. A well-formulated study question forms the basis for developing a protocol, guides the selection of design, and data collection methods. Qualitative research questions generally involve two parts, a central question and related ...
PDF THE PROBLEM AND PURPOSE STATEMENTS
Purpose Statement Example 2. The purpose of this convergent parallel mixed-methods pilot study was to explore the collaboration of PSTs in a reading clinic setting. This research involved the simultaneous collection of qualitative and quantitative data that were analyzed separately and then merged.
What Is Qualitative Research?
Qualitative research involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data (e.g., text, video, or audio) to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a problem or generate new ideas for research. Qualitative research is the opposite of quantitative research, which involves collecting and ...
Research Question, Purpose Statement, Hypothesis(es)
If you're asked to write a proposal before you begin your actual research, the proposal will contain a purpose statement that states in some detail what you want to learn about in your research project; it looks something like this: Ex.: "This study will examine the…". Your purpose statement leads you to write a more refined thesis ...
Qualitative Research: Getting Started
Qualitative research methodology is not a single method, but instead offers a variety of different choices to researchers, according to specific parameters of topic, research question, participants, and settings. The method is the way you carry out your research within the paradigm of quantitative or qualitative research.
How to Write a Qualitative Purpose Statement
A qualitative purpose statement in a research plan is an important step when you completing your master's degree thesis or doctoral degree dissertation. The purpose statement allows you to clearly and concisely describe the intent of your qualitative study so that your reader can anticipate the information he will ...
The purpose of qualitative research
Qualitative research enables us to make sense of reality, to describe and explain the social world and to develop explanatory models and theories. It is the primary means by which the theoretical foundations of social sciences may be constructed or re-examined.
Creating the Problem Statement, Purpose Statement, and Research
Chapter six includes a discussion of problem and purpose statements with examples of each. Research questions and hypotheses are included with examples from qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research designs.
Qualitative Study
Qualitative research is a type of research that explores and provides deeper insights into real-world problems.[1] Instead of collecting numerical data points or intervene or introduce treatments just like in quantitative research, qualitative research helps generate hypotheses as well as further investigate and understand quantitative data. Qualitative research gathers participants ...
PDF Achieving Alignment: How to Achieve Research Alignment In A Study
Example: The Statement Grid - Purpose Statement Development Overall Purpose Statement: The overall purpose of this qualitative, descriptive study is to investigate the issues affecting ...
Alignment
Following the Problem Statement is the Purpose Statement. The purpose should directly align with the problem. The Purpose Statement. The purpose statement describes the aim of the proposed doctoral project or dissertation-in-practice and includes the research methodology and design, phenomenon, and project participants. Exercise #5.
What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research
Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical materials - case study, personal experience, introspective, life story, interview, observational, historical, interactional, and visual texts - that describe routine and problematic moments and meanings in individuals' lives.
Positionality Statements in Research
Positionality statements are often written as part of the research methodology, where the research context, data collection, and data analysis are discussed. Writing positionality statements make the research methodology more transparent. In this sense, a positionality statement looks like a brief biography of the researcher (s).