Exploring the Differences Among Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Research Approaches
By:
Agness Minofu: 23010100128
Boaz Selemani: 24010100247
Collins Kamadzi: 23010100194
Grace Chitete: 23010100177
Grace Njere: 23010100176
Joyce Ntepa: 23010100364
Patience Jackson: 23010100154
Prince Kaliza: 23010100195
Rebecca Nkhata: 24010100135
Rhema Ng’ambi: 22010100399
Submitted to:
Mr. Legson Mughogho
In partial fulfillment of the requirements of:
Research Methods for Social Sciences
Course code: REM3013
Assignment: 3
Malawi Assemblies of God University
(MAGU)
Due Date: 20 April 2025
Exploring the Differences Among Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Research Approaches
Research is a systematic and intentional process of investigating questions, analyzing
evidence, and drawing conclusions that contribute to knowledge development (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018). In academic and applied settings, research approaches are generally
categorized into three primary paradigms: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods.
These differ based on their underlying philosophies, data collection techniques, and
analysis strategies. Qualitative research stems from interpretivism, quantitative from
positivism, and mixed methods from pragmatism (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2019).
This essay discusses and compares these three approaches, using scholarly examples to
illustrate their unique characteristics and practical applications.
Qualitative research emphasizes exploring the depth and complexity of human behavior
and social phenomena. Grounded in interpretivist and constructivist traditions, it posits
that reality is subjective and best understood through individuals’ lived experiences
(Denzin & Lincoln, 2018). It relies on methods such as interviews, focus groups,
narrative analysis, and ethnography. The data collected is non-numerical and interpreted
for themes and meanings. For instance, Conway et al. (2025) used semi-structured
interviews with parents to understand their infant feeding choices. This revealed nuanced
emotional and cultural influences. Another study by Tan et al. (2025) used qualitative
methods to analyze caregiver feedback on dementia care interventions. While qualitative
research provides rich detail, it may lack generalizability and is often influenced by the
researcher’s subjectivity (Flick, 2018).
Quantitative research is based on the positivist paradigm, which asserts that reality can be
objectively measured and analyzed using numerical data (Muijs, 2021). Researchers in
this domain focus on establishing relationships, testing hypotheses, and making
generalizable claims. Common methods include surveys, experiments, and statistical
modeling. For example, Setiaasih et al. (2025) conducted a structured survey across
health centers in Indonesia to evaluate readiness for primary health care delivery. The
findings were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Similarly, Conway et
al. (2025) integrated quantitative tools to measure response patterns across demographic
groups. While quantitative research is precise and replicable, it may not capture the depth
or context behind human behavior (Bryman, 2016).
Mixed methods research integrates qualitative and quantitative strategies in a single study
to capitalize on the strengths of both. This approach is guided by the pragmatic paradigm,
which values utility and the research question over strict methodological loyalty
(Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). It is particularly useful in complex studies that require
both numerical trends and contextual understanding. A prominent example is Areia et al.
(2025), who used surveys to quantify patterns in citation use and follow-up interviews to
explore why certain sources built more trust. Mixed methods research designs include
explanatory sequential (quantitative followed by qualitative) and convergent parallel
(simultaneous collection). Though methodologically robust, it requires considerable time
and expertise (Johnson et al., 2007).
In conclusion, qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research differ in their
philosophical assumptions, methodologies, and research purposes. Qualitative research
uncovers deep insights into human behavior, quantitative identifies measurable patterns,
and mixed methods provides comprehensive, triangulated understanding. The selection of
an approach should depend on the research question, the goals of the study, and the
nature of the data being sought. A well-informed methodological choice strengthens the
credibility, depth, and applicability of research findings.
References
Areia, C., Burton, K., Taylor, M., & Watkinson, C. (2025). Research citations building
trust in Wikipedia: Results from a survey of published authors. PLOS ONE.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0320334
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Conway, R. E., Derks, I., Sheen, F., & Steptoe, A. (2025). The impact on parents' infant
feeding choices of increasing age guidance and adding sugar warning labels to
commercial infant foods: A mixed methods study. Contemporary Developments in
Health. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475299125029038
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research (3rd ed.). Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th
ed.). Sage.
Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). Sage.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of
mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806298224
Muijs, D. (2021). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS (3rd ed.). Sage.
Setiaasih, R., Sunjaya, D. K., et al. (2025). Readiness of health posts for primary health
care integration in Indonesia: A mixed-methods study. BMC Public Health.
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-025-22520-x
Tan, J. R. O., Neal, D. P., Vilmen, M., & Boersma, P. (2025). A digital photo activity
intervention for nursing home residents with dementia and their carers: Mixed methods
process evaluation. JMIR Formative Research. https://formative.jmir.org/2025/1/e56586
