Qualitative
and Quantitative Methodologies for Understanding Social Realities. Systematic Review
Las metodologías
cualitativa y cuantitativa para la comprensión de las realidades sociales. Revisión
Sistemática
Víctor Guzmán-Brand1 , Laura Gelvez-García2
Abstract
Objective: To identify the characteristics of qualitative and
quantitative methodologies for understanding social realities. Methodology: This
is a systematic review of qualitative literature consisting of a structured process
of searching, selecting, and analyzing information in specialized databases. Results:
The systematic review included 35 articles from high-impact scientific
journals and 23 thematic books, selected from recognized databases, to address
recent research and reinforce key concepts. Discussion: Quantitative and
qualitative methodologies differ in their objectives and approaches: while
quantitative methodology seeks to generalize findings through statistical
analysis, qualitative methodology delves into contextual meanings and dynamics.
However, combining the two allows us to overcome individual limitations and
offers a more comprehensive understanding of social phenomena. Conclusions: Qualitative
and quantitative research offer complementary approaches to addressing social
phenomena. While qualitative research focuses on understanding subjectivity,
meanings, and specific contexts, quantitative research seeks to measure,
analyze, and generalize results using standardized methods. Their integration
allows for a more comprehensive understanding, combining interpretive depth
with statistical rigor.
Keywords: research, qualitative, quantitative, understanding,
reality, social.
Resumen
Objetivo: es conocer las características de las metodologías
cualitativa y cuantitativa para comprender las realidades sociales. Metodología:
es una revisión sistemática de la literatura de tipo
cualitativo que consiste en un proceso estructurado de búsqueda, selección y
análisis de información en bases de datos especializadas. Resultados: la revisión sistemática incluyó 35 artículos de
revistas científicas de alto impacto y 23 libros temáticos, seleccionados de
bases de datos reconocidas, para abordar investigaciones recientes y reforzar
conceptos clave. Discusiones: la metodología cuantitativa y cualitativa se
distinguen por sus objetivos y enfoques: mientras la cuantitativa busca
generalizar resultados a través del análisis estadístico, la cualitativa
profundiza en los significados y dinámicas contextuales. Sin embargo, su
combinación permite superar limitaciones individuales y ofrece una comprensión
más completa de los fenómenos sociales. Conclusiones: la investigación cualitativa y cuantitativa ofrecen enfoques
complementarios para abordar los fenómenos sociales. Mientras la cualitativa se
centra en comprender la subjetividad, los significados y contextos
particulares, la cuantitativa busca medir, analizar y generalizar resultados
mediante métodos estandarizados. Su integración permite una comprensión más
completa, combinando profundidad interpretativa y rigor estadístico.
Palabras Clave: investigación, cualitativa, cuantitativa, comprender,
realidad, social.
Introduction
One of the essential characteristics of human beings
is their natural inclination to understand and explain the world around them. Driven
by their innate capacity to seek meaning and purpose, humans have developed
science and technology as key tools for interpreting and transforming the world
(Harari, 2018). This quest for truth and understanding of the phenomena around
them has been the primary driving force behind the development of scientific
research, a systematic process that applies rigorous methods to generate
knowledge (Piña-Ferrer, 2023). Over time, science has fueled technological
advancement, establishing a feedback loop in which both fields drive each other
forward. This connection has enabled humanity to tackle complex problems and
broaden its horizons toward new discoveries (Münch and Ángeles, 2012).
In the social sciences, the challenge for researchers
lies in constantly reflecting on how to generate data and demonstrate that the
invisible also exists, whether through qualitative or quantitative approaches, while
adopting a constructivist perspective (Sánchez, 2019). This approach involves
recognizing the dynamic interaction between the interpretation of the reality
under investigation and the transformation of that interpretation into
representative data that account for what is being studied. In this context,
the challenge lies in continuing to advance along the path toward the
construction of knowledge (Cohen and Gómez, 2019). This requires continually questioning
the methodologies employed and exploring new ways of interpreting and
representing reality. Only through this reflective and dynamic process can the
boundaries of understanding in the social sciences be expanded.
The term “method” comes from Greek and means “path to
achieving a result.” It is defined as the set of procedures used to acquire
scientific knowledge. On the other hand, the study of method—or of methods in a
broader sense—is called methodology (Jiménez et al., 2023). The concept of research
methodology is used to describe the steps and procedures followed in a specific
study, to identify the working models applied in a discipline or specialty, and
also to refer to the set of practices and recommendations that are passed on to
students (Bautista, 2010).
A key aspect of learning about research methods is
that it makes us more critical and discerning consumers of information.
Training in these methodologies enhances our ability to reason logically when faced
with real-world events and problems. We constantly receive information from
various sources, such as the media, sales strategies, and other people.
However, much of this information may be inaccurate, overly simplified, or even
false. Understanding research approaches allows students to develop more
analytical thinking and evaluate the quality of the information they receive
(Kassin et al., 2015).
In this regard, the main objective of this research is
to examine the characteristics of qualitative and quantitative methodologies
for understanding social realities, using information gathering based on the
guidelines of a systematic review as a tool.
Methodology
A qualitative systematic review consists of a
structured process that collects, analyzes, and organizes previous theories and
empirical findings related to a specific phenomenon (Hyun et al., 2024). The
purpose of this approach is to synthesize the available information, presenting
it in an organized manner across categories that allow for an in-depth
description and understanding of the phenomenon (Anza et al., 2020). Similar to
a literature review, this type of systematic review is characterized by its
methodological rigor, as it classifies and articulates data in a coherent
manner, thereby facilitating a comprehensive and structured overview of
existing knowledge on the topic under study (Ramos-Galarza and García-Cruz,
2024).
Thus, a search is conducted for publications from primary
sources of information—such as articles, books, and documents—that address the
topic under study. This search is carried out in specialized databases such as
SciELO, Dialnet, Redalyc, Scopus, and EBSCO, with the aid of specialized search
engines such as Google Scholar and RefSeek. To improve the filtering of
documents, the following search equation was formulated: (“qualitative
methodology” OR “qualitative approach”) AND (“quantitative methodology” OR
“quantitative approach”) AND (“understanding of social realities” OR “social
phenomena” OR “social analysis”) AND (“comparison” OR “complementarity” OR
“differences”). The material is then selected according to the following
inclusion and exclusion criteria:
Table
1.
Outline
of Eligibility Criteria
|
Criterion |
Inclusion |
Exclusion |
|
Publication type |
Scientific
articles published in peer-reviewed, indexed journals. |
Articles
not peer-reviewed. Popular science articles, essays, academic papers, theses,
brief reports. |
|
Publication status |
Open access. |
Restricted access. In
preprint status. |
|
Publication language |
Spanish, English, or Portuguese. |
Another language. |
|
Publication period |
Preference was given to
articles from the last five years. |
For books, information
was selected from the most representative authors. |
|
Topic |
Documents
that directly address the topic. |
Documents
that did not focus on the topic. |
Note: Prepared by the authors.
This systematic review was conducted using the major databases
that include high-impact, peer-reviewed scientific journals. Thirty-five (35)
articles that met the established criteria were selected, covering recent
research related to the topic. In addition, twenty-three (23) books on the
subject published by various publishers were included to reinforce the
concepts. Disagreements that arose during the selection process were resolved
by consensus among the authors. The strategy employed is detailed in full in
Figure 1, represented as a flowchart as follows:
Figure
1.
Flowchart
Structure
Note: Developed according to the guidelines of Haddaway et al. (2020). Created
by the authors.
Results
The researcher—whether an individual or an
institution—is dedicated to the exploration and discovery of the unknown,
guided by an active, enthusiastic, and persevering attitude. Among their
essential characteristics are curiosity—which drives originality and constant
attention to detail—a strong work ethic, supported by efficient organization of
time and resources; and qualities such as concentration, impartiality, and the
ability to formulate sound hypotheses (Baas et al., 2012). Ethics is a
fundamental pillar of their work, manifested in honesty in respecting observed
data, a love of truth in the tireless pursuit of knowledge, modesty in valuing
the contributions of colleagues, and a commitment to putting science at the
service of humanity (Guzmán-Brand and Gelvez-García, 2024).
Qualitative research aims to understand phenomena by exploring
participants’ experiences, taking into account their natural environment and
the context in which they occur (Hernández-Sampieri and Mendoza, 2018). Its
main objectives are to analyze and understand human behavior within specific
contexts, with the aim of identifying patterns, themes, and shared
characteristics across different societies (Pimienta and De la Hoz, 2017). In
this way, it seeks to understand the cultural, social, and psychological
dynamics behind human interactions, identifying the factors that shape behavior
(Deslauriers, 2004).
In the qualitative approach, the researcher poses a
problem without following a rigid or preestablished process, continuously
adapting to what is observed (Alegre, 2022). This approach is based primarily
on inductive reasoning, which moves from the particular to the general.
Initially, the researcher explores and describes specific aspects in order to generate
theory based on them (Salazar-Escorcia, 2020). In a typical qualitative study,
the process begins with interviews with one person; the data obtained are
analyzed, and preliminary conclusions are drawn. Then, more interviews are
conducted, the new information is examined, and the previous conclusions are
adjusted. This process is repeated iteratively, with the goal of achieving a
deeper and broader understanding of the phenomenon under study
(Hernández-Sampieri et al., 2019).
This methodology allows the researcher to empathize
with the participants, seeking to understand how they experience and live their
realities (Ríos-González, 2024). Each perspective holds a unique richness, and
by working with this approach, it is possible to understand individuals’
personal experiences and, in a sense, connect with their daily struggles.
Furthermore, it allows for an appreciation of intimate concepts, such as beauty
and pain, which often go unnoticed in other research methods (Guzmán, 2021). In
this way, it focuses on the meanings and actions of individuals, as well as on
how these relate to other behaviors within the community. Its objective is to
explain social phenomena, seeking a deep understanding of them (Piña-Ferrer,
2023).
Researchers are required to demonstrate deep
sensitivity and awareness regarding the effects their work may have on the people
being studied. This involves interacting in a natural and non-intrusive manner,
respecting both the individuals and their reality (Loayza, 2020). During data
collection, an approach based on spontaneous conversations is prioritized over
the use of structured questionnaires. Furthermore, researchers must be able to
set aside their own beliefs, perspectives, and biases, avoiding taking any
aspect of the reality under study for granted (Espinoza, 2020). This approach
values the different perspectives of the subjects as fundamental elements,
prioritizing a detailed understanding of their viewpoints rather than seeking
absolute truths or traditional moral judgments (Bernal, 2016).
According to Calle (2023), qualitative methods play a
crucial role in obtaining descriptive information about a specific population,
as they focus on exploring experiences, perceptions, and meanings from the
participants’ perspective; this approach is essential for understanding how individuals
interpret their reality, providing a holistic view of their lived experiences.
Mora (2022) emphasizes that this type of data allows us to capture the essence
of human experiences, beyond what numbers can reflect. As Molano et al. (2021)
argue, this approach is particularly valuable for addressing complex phenomena
that cannot be reduced to quantifiable variables.
Qualitative research is chosen when the objective is
to analyze how specific individuals perceive and experience the phenomena around
them, delving into their perspectives, interpretations, and meanings
(Hernández-Sampieri and Mendoza, 2018). According to Ramírez-Elías and
Arbesú-García (2019), this approach is ideal for exploring participants’
subjective experiences, allowing for a richer and more detailed understanding
of their reality. Context and specific cases are essential for interpreting the
phenomena under study, with case studies being a commonly used tool in this
approach (Hernández-Sampieri and Mendoza, 2018).
Ramírez-Elías and Arbesú-García (2019) emphasize that
case studies provide an appropriate framework for contextualizing phenomena
within their natural environment. Furthermore, writing and text play a crucial
role in all stages of the qualitative research process ( , from transcription
to the presentation of findings. According to Graham (2012), one of the most
significant challenges in this type of research is the transformation of
complex social situations into text, a process that requires precision and
sensitivity.
Qualitative research seeks to understand experiences,
interactions, and documents in their natural context, highlighting the
particularities of these elements without relying on predefined concepts or
hypotheses (Rodríguez-Gómez, 2023). Concepts, when used, are developed and
adjusted during the research process. This approach prioritizes adapting
methods and theories to the object of study, modifying them or developing new strategies
when necessary (Tracy, 2021). Researchers are an integral part of the process,
contributing reflexivity and unique perspectives drawn from their interaction
with the field (Abad, 2020).
Qualitative research often involves a process of
relating the researcher’s perspective on the object of study to the concepts
that frame the research (García, 2023). These perspectives or images are
constructed through case analysis, identifying similarities among various manifestations
of the phenomenon that appear to belong to the same general category (Finol and
Arrieta, 2021). In turn, these images are linked to concepts, understood as
general ideas that apply to multiple specific expressions. Concepts represent
abstract syntheses of properties shared by members of a category of social
phenomena (Gómez et al., 2010).
Qualitative data collection techniques aim to deepen
our understanding of participants’ experiences and perceptions, focusing on subjectivity
and the interpretation of context. In-depth interviews are a key tool, as they
allow for the collection of detailed information through direct interaction,
while focus groups enable a collective exploration of a topic, facilitating an
understanding of the group’s beliefs and attitudes (Benavides-Lara et al.,
2022; Rodas and Pacheco, 2020; Piza et al., 2019).
Participant observation adds an immersive dimension to
the research process, allowing the researcher to integrate into the study setting
to observe behaviors and situations within their natural context—a hallmark of
qualitative methodology (Jociles, 2017). Through content analysis, researchers
can examine a variety of materials, such as texts and recordings, to identify
patterns and underlying meanings, facilitating a deep interpretation of the
phenomena under study (Piza et al., 2019).
Likewise,
diaries and personal records offer a valuable window into participants’ subjective
experiences, providing access to their most intimate reflections and offering a
richer, more detailed understanding of their lived experiences (Sánchez and
Murillo, 2022). Taken together, these qualitative techniques provide a more
nuanced and complex view of social and human phenomena, in contrast to
quantitative approaches, as they allow for the capture of subjective and
contextual dimensions that often elude numerical methods (Sinche-Crispín,
2023).
According to Guerrero (2022), quantitative methodology
is based on the use of specific methods, techniques, strategies, and
instruments designed to measure, count, weigh, and, in general, observe aspects
of reality objectively. This methodology, as Sánchez (2019) argues, is
essential for transforming observations into concrete figures, which
facilitates statistical analysis. Through this approach, it is possible to
identify patterns and relationships in the data, which, in turn, allows for the
establishment of cause-and-effect relationships as well as correlations between
variables. According to Jiménez and Meneses (2021), this type of analysis is
essential for discovering and explaining the fundamental connections between
different elements.
Furthermore, as
Vargas (2011) points out, one of the main strengths of quantitative methodology
lies in its ability to generalize results, allowing valid conclusions to be
extrapolated to broader populations. Quantitative research is characterized by a
rigorous, objective, and systematic approach that facilitates the generation of
knowledge. This method applies deductive reasoning to test theories through
quantifiable variables and enables the extrapolation of findings from a sample
to a broader population (Muñoz et al., 2024).
Quantitative analysis is based on the premise that the
best way to understand fundamental relationships and patterns is to study
phenomena through a large number of cases. According to Yucra and Bernedo (2020),
focusing on a single case or a small number of cases could result in a biased
or unrepresentative view. By analyzing numerous cases, the aim is to neutralize
the particularities of each one, allowing for the construction of a more
general and refined view of social reality, excluding elements specific to a
single case or small group (Castañeda-Meneses and Salamé-Coulon, 2021). This
process is achieved by analyzing the co r covariation between two or more characteristics
or variables present in multiple cases, which generates a systematic
representation of the relationships among them (Gómez et al., 2010).
According to Castañeda (2022), this methodology is
geared toward identifying causalities and correlations, drawing on a realist
approach that is divided into two strands: ontological and epistemological.
Within this framework, ontological realism asserts that what is known has an
objective existence and is knowable, while epistemological realism maintains that
knowledge obtained through scientific and rational methods objectively
represents reality.
Quantitative designs are particularly suitable when
sufficient direct and objective information is available to test and validate
the hypotheses proposed in the study (Cajide, 2024). This approach is
especially useful when the nature of the research problem allows for clear and
precise scientific answers to be obtained through quantitative analysis
(Castañeda, 2022). Furthermore, its application is recommended when sufficient
empirical evidence can be found to support the research process and help
provide an appropriate solution to the problem (Acosta, 2023). The availability
of this empirical data is crucial for ensuring the robustness and validity of
the results obtained. Thus, the quantitative design allows for a precise and
systematic interpretation of the phenomena under study (Muñoz, 2015).
The quantitative approach should be used when the research
problem is concrete and specific, and the goal is to measure observable
real-world phenomena using standardized procedures (Guerrero and Guerrero,
2014). This approach is ideal for formulating hypotheses based on prior
theories, collecting data through numerical measurements, and analyzing the
results using statistical methods (Pimienta and De la Hoz, 2017). Its primary
objective is to establish causal relationships, identify general patterns, and
generate knowledge that is replicable and generalizable to a broader
population. Furthermore, this approach minimizes uncertainty and error through
rigorous process control, ensuring validity, reliability, and objectivity in
the results (Hernández-Sampieri et al., 2014). The
key considerations when choosing a quantitative methodology are:
- Statistical analysis and cause-and-effect
relationships: Quantitative methodology is particularly well-suited for measuring
the dispersion of values, establishing cause-and-effect relationships, and
evaluating factors that impact organizational performance (Asryan, 2024).
- Observational and experimental studies: This approach is ideal for both
experimental research designs, such as clinical trials, and
non-experimental designs, such as observational studies. It allows for the
rigorous collection of descriptive and analytical data (Nwabuko, 2024).
- Assessment of Bias and Accuracy: Quantitative methodology is used to analyze
quantitative biases, allowing for the evaluation of the impact of
systematic errors in observational studies. This helps adjust effect
estimates and describe how biases may influence observed results (Shi et
al., 2024).
- Quantitative Measurement in Clinical
Practice: In the
clinical setting, quantitative methodology is preferred over visual
estimates, such as in measuring postpartum blood loss. This practice
improves accuracy and reduces the likelihood of adverse outcomes (Wang et
al., 2024).
- Supply Chain and Sustainability Research: In the context of sustainable
decision-making within supply chains, mathematical programming and
simulation models are used to evaluate economic, environmental, and social
dimensions, enabling more effective and responsible management (Mena-Reyes
et al., 2024).
Quantitative methodology is crucial in fields that
demand precision, objectivity, and the ability to generalize the results
obtained. According to Vizcaíno et al. (2023), its usefulness is particularly evident
in experimental studies, bias assessments, risk analyses, and data-driven
decision-making. This methodology is highly adaptable, ranging from the exact
sciences to the social sciences, and addresses the specific needs of each field
of study. Quantitative methods are particularly effective for analyzing user
perceptions, collections, systems, services, functions, and staff attitudes, as
they allow for working with large populations and numerical data (Pandey et
al., 2023).
Depending on the chosen research path, data collection
techniques include various structures for obtaining data through interaction
with both direct and indirect contacts (Daruhadi and Sopiati, 2024). The
suitability of methods and techniques is not determined in advance but is
conditioned by the specific problem the research seeks to address, the level of
development of the substantive theory, and the nature of the question the
researcher intends to answer (Padua et al., 2018).
Data collection techniques in quantitative research
are essential for obtaining objective and measurable data (Weinreich, 2011).
These techniques focus on gathering numerical data that, when analyzed
statistically, allow for the identification of patterns and relationships
(Babativa, 2017). On the other hand, the techniques used in qualitative methods
are varied and are employed to obtain detailed and in-depth data, which
facilitates an understanding of phenomena from the participants’ perspective
(Gavidia-Ruíz, 2022).
Quantitative techniques are characterized by their
objectivity and standardization, as they are based on precise measurements that
allow diverse perspectives and experiences to be categorized into a limited
number of predetermined categories, thereby ensuring uniformity in the results
(Butt, 2016). This standardization contributes to the generalizability of the
data, allowing for valid inferences about broader populations and increasing the
applicability of the findings (Clark, et al., 2019). Furthermore, quantitative
data stand out for their ease of comparison; since they are numerical, they can
be summarized and contrasted more clearly than qualitative data, which
simplifies analysis and facilitates the interpretation of results (Indulska,
2012).
Among the techniques, observation is a fundamental
method that consists of a meticulous and systematic process, allowing
hypotheses to be validated or refuted through the direct perception of phenomena
in their natural context, without artificial intervention (González-Vega et
al., 2022; Feria et al., 2020; Fresno, 2019). This approach allows for an
understanding of the representations of the studied community and its group
dynamics (García, 2016; Guerrero and Guerrero, 2014).
Sociometric techniques are based on the premise that
each individual plays a role within society and that this behavior is
influenced both by the specific roles that characterize each person and by the cultural
functions that society imposes—with varying degrees of success—on its members
(Bezanilla, 2011). These techniques,
widely used in the field of psychology, focus on the study and measurement of
internal relationships within social groups. Their primary objective is to
assess the affinities and aversions among the group’s members, which allows for
a simple and graphical representation of the relational structure existing at a
given moment within that group (Useche et al., 2019).
Surveys are a widely used technique in scientific
research for collecting data from a group of people, and they are characterized
by the statistical systematization of responses for the analysis of results
(Salvador-Oliván et al., 2021; Blanchar and Martínez, 2024; Arias, 2020).
Finally, a literature review is key to analyzing the information contained in
documents; it allows data to be processed and presented in a coherent and
well-reasoned manner, thereby enriching the understanding of the topic under
study (Peña, 2022; Meza-Salcedo et al., 2020; Martínez-Corona et al., 2023).
These techniques, although used in different approaches, are essential for data
collection and analysis across various research areas.
This section provides guidance on the differences
between qualitative and quantitative research, which are so marked that they
can be considered to represent two distinct cultures, each with its own
inferential logic. These differences go beyond a simple distinction between the
use of numbers in quantitative methodology and words in qualitative
methodology. Their true differentiation lies in the basic orientations and
mathematical traditions that underpin them, each suited to addressing specific
tasks and achieving diverse objectives.
Quantitative methodology is based on inferential
statistics and the analysis of multiple cases. This approach allows for the
generalization of conclusions based on the study of large volumes of data, which
is useful for identifying patterns and trends in social phenomena. In contrast,
qualitative methodology is based on logic, set theory, and the detailed
analysis of individual cases. This approach prioritizes a deep understanding of
the contexts and particularities of the phenomena under study, highlighting
their uniqueness.
A key aspect that distinguishes the two methodologies
is their conception of causality. Quantitative research adopts a “cause-and-effect”
approach, seeking to establish causal relationships based on patterns observed
in the data. Qualitative research, on the other hand, follows a
“effects-of-causes” approach, focusing on how specific contexts or conditions
generate certain outcomes. Both approaches are valid and necessary, but they
entail different methodological implications (Caminotti and Toppi, 2020).
Unlike the quantitative method, which directs the researcher’s
efforts toward deciphering and answering the questions “what?”, “in what way?”,
and “when?” the phenomena under study occur, the qualitative method is oriented
toward a deep understanding of the underlying reasons and mechanisms, focusing
on the “why?” and “how?” these phenomena occur. This qualitative approach seeks
to capture the essence of the contexts, motivations, and subjective
perspectives of the actors involved. Thus, it allows for the description of
events as well as the interpretation of their meaning and the social dynamics
that shape them (Pimienta and De la Hoz, 2017).
Figure
1.
Comparison
of Methodologies.
Qualitative research faces significant challenges, as
it is not possible to achieve a level of precision comparable to that typically
characteristic of quantitative research, especially in the physical and natural
sciences. However, quantitative approaches fall short when dealing with social phenomena,
due to their complexity and subjectivity, requiring interpretive and flexible
approaches that go beyond strict measurement. Nevertheless, although the
quantitative model is often inapplicable in various types of social research,
it offers a valuable basis for making comparisons with qualitative research,
which is more prevalent in the social sciences (Baena, 2014).
From a qualitative perspective, reality is conceived
as a dynamic phenomenon that changes according to context and interactions among
subjects; therefore, the processes that shape it are essential. This approach
does not seek to generalize results but rather to interpret phenomena through
detailed analysis of these processes, thereby enabling the development of
well-founded and flexible theories that adapt to new realities (Calle, 2023).
In contrast, the quantitative perspective views reality as an effect
conditioned by causes, with results that can be generalized, setting aside
context and the particular characteristics of individuals. This approach
focuses on identifying statistical relationships between variables,
prioritizing the demonstration of general patterns over contextual analysis
(Aguilar, 2023).
The complementarity between methodological approaches
is grounded in the principles of consistency and dialectical unity.
Quantitative methodology, based on a hypothetical-deductive logic, contributes
to the research process by explaining cause-and-effect relationships (Castillo,
2021). On the other hand, the qualitative approach, with its
inductive-deductive perspective, delves into the construction and decoding of
meanings related to human subjectivity, considering both individual experiences
and group dynamics arising from social processes (Herrera, 2018). Thus,
combining both methods allows researchers to leverage their respective
strengths to overcome the limitations of each, offering a more comprehensive
and enriching view of the phenomenon under study.
Thus, the central issue lies in the fact that each
method follows a distinct logic. While some methods possess certain virtues,
others excel in different aspects. The various types of social phenomena demand
differentiated theoretical approaches to understanding and explanation
(Salinas-Atausinchi et al., 2023). In this sense, the choice of one paradigm
over another determines and conditions the entire research process. Similarly,
opting for a specific epistemology over another profoundly affects the purpose
of the research and multiple aspects of the research work (Pérez et al., 2020).
Conclusions
Qualitative research is a methodological approach that
focuses on exploring and understanding social phenomena through the analysis of
experiences, perceptions, and meanings from the participants’ perspective.
Unlike the quantitative method, it does not seek to measure or generalize
results, but rather to interpret the subjective and contextual aspects that shape
the reality under study. This type of research values the richness and
diversity of individual narratives, using techniques such as open-ended
interviews, observations, and content analysis. Its goal is to capture the
complexity of human phenomena, prioritizing depth over breadth and providing a
comprehensive view that includes unique emotional, cultural, and social
factors.
Likewise, this subjective approach prioritizes
empathy, respectful interactions, and the contextual interpretation of human phenomena.
Through spontaneous conversations, it captures unique and complex perspectives,
such as values, emotions, or everyday struggles. Furthermore, it fosters the
researcher’s sensitivity to avoid bias and respect the realities being studied.
It offers a deep and nuanced understanding of social phenomena from the
perspective of individuals and communities.
Qualitative research stands out for its flexible
nature and its ability to adapt to the context and the data collected. This approach
seeks to “reconstruct” reality from the perspective of the people being
studied, allowing hypotheses to emerge and be adjusted during the process,
rather than starting from predefined assumptions. Its naturalistic nature
prioritizes the analysis of cases in their everyday environments, respecting
the normal unfolding of phenomena without intervening or manipulating
conditions, which significantly distinguishes it from experimental approaches.
Quantitative methodology is a research approach that employs
methods and techniques designed to measure and observe aspects of reality
objectively, transforming observations into numerical data that facilitate
statistical analysis. This method allows for the identification of patterns and
relationships between variables, establishing correlations and possible
cause-and-effect relationships. Its strength lies in the generalization of
results, extrapolating valid conclusions to broad populations. Furthermore, by
analyzing numerous cases, individual particularities are neutralized,
constructing a systematic and general representation of social reality based on
the relationships between variables.
Likewise, it should be used when the research problem
is concrete, specific, and allows for the measurement of observable real-world
phenomena through standardized procedures. It is ideal for formulating
hypotheses based on prior theories, collecting numerical data, and analyzing it
using statistical methods. This approach seeks to establish causal relationships,
identify general patterns, and generate knowledge that is replicable and
generalizable to a broader population. Furthermore, it minimizes uncertainty
and error through rigorous control of the process, ensuring validity,
reliability, and a precise and systematic interpretation of the phenomena under
study.
Quantitative and qualitative methodologies differ in
their objectives, approaches, and applications, but both are essential for understanding
social phenomena from complementary perspectives. Quantitative research, based
on statistics and the analysis of large volumes of data, seeks to generalize
results by identifying clear patterns and causal relationships. In contrast,
qualitative research focuses on the in-depth analysis of individual cases and
specific contexts, prioritizing an understanding of underlying meanings and
dynamics. Thus, the former offers precision and generalizability, while the
latter provides flexibility and contextual interpretation.
Both approaches also have limitations that can be
overcome by combining them. Quantitative research, while robust in measurement,
may be insufficient to address the complexity and subjectivity of social
phenomena—areas where qualitative research excels by interpreting reality as a
dynamic process influenced by contexts and human interactions. However, the
qualitative approach lacks the capacity for generalization and precision found in
the quantitative approach. The complementarity between these two approaches
allows researchers to capitalize on their respective strengths: the
quantitative approach contributes rigor in measurement and statistical
analysis, while the qualitative approach offers depth in the interpretation and
decoding of meanings, providing a complementary perspective that enriches our
understanding of social phenomena
References
Abad, A. (2020). Qualitative research in higher
education. Revista NOVUM, 2(10), 30–49.
https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/novum/article/view/82670
Acosta, S. (2023). Research Approaches in the
Social Sciences. Revista Latinoamericana Ogmios, 3(8),
82–95.
https://doi.org/10.53595/rlo.v3.i8.084
Aguilar, L. (2023). Qualitative and Quantitative
Research: Brilliant Complements. Socio-Humanistic
Paradigms, 5(1), 7–11.
https://doi.org/10.26752/revistaparadigmassh.v5i1.691
Alegre, M. (2022). Key
Aspects of Data Collection Techniques and Instruments in Qualitative Research:
A Conceptual Reflection. Population and
Development, 28(54),
93–100.https://doi.org/10.18004/pdfce/2076-054x/2022.028.54.093
Anza, I., López, A., González, F., Ruiz, G.,
García, T., Valverde, J., Cinesi, C., Martínez, J., Muñoz, A., Martínez, M., Soria,
V., Navarro, F., Monteagudo, O., Abad, E., Vivo, M., Sánchez, J., Aguinaga, E.,
Sánchez, M., Castillo, M., Roca, A., Ríos, A., Carrillo, A., López, A. (2020). Research Methodology and Evidence-Based Clinical
Practice. Editorial Quaderna.
Arias, J. (2020). Online Research Methods:
Digital Tools for Data Collection. Editorial Independiente.
Asryan, A. (2024). Analysis of Quantitative Data
Using Statistical Methods. Accounting and Control. https://doi.org/10.36871/u.i.k.2024.08.01.008.
Baas, M., Barceló, M., & Herrera, G. (2012).
Research Methodology. Pearson Education.
Babativa, C. (2017). Quantitative Research. Fundación Universitaria del
Área Andina Publishing.
Baena, G. (2014). Research
Methodology. Grupo Editorial Patria.
Bautista, N. (2010). The
Qualitative Research Process: Epistemology, Methodology, and Applications. Manual Moderno Publishing.
Benavides-Lara, M., Pompa, M., Agüero, M., Sánchez-Mendiola, M., Rendón,
V. (2022). Focus Groups as a Research
Strategy in Education: Some Lessons from Their Design, Implementation,
Transcription, and Moderation. CPU-e, Journal of Educational Research, 3(2),
1–25. https://doi.org/10.25009/cpue.v0i34.2793
Bernal, C. (2016). Research Methodology.
Pearson.
Bezanilla, J. (2011). Sociometry: A Method of
Social Research. PEI Publishing.
Blanchar, T., & Martínez, N. (2024).
Interview or Survey?: A Necessary Distinction. Revista
Latina De Comunicación Social, 83(83), 1-25.
https://doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-2025-2339
Butt, N. (2016). LibGuides:
Quantitative Research Methods: Home.
Cajide, J. (2024). Quantitative and Qualitative
Research: Some Considerations. Educational Innovation Journal, (34)3, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.15304/ie.34.10166
Calle, S. (2023). Qualitative and Quantitative Research Designs. *Ciencia Latina: Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal*, 7(4), 1865–1879. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i4.7016
Caminotti, M., & Toppi, H. (2020). Social
Research Methodology: A Toolkit. Editorial Universitaria de Buenos Aires.
Castañeda, M. (2022). The scientificity of
quantitative, qualitative, and emerging methodologies. Revista
Digital De Investigación En Docencia Universitaria, 16(1), 15–35.
https://doi.org/10.19083/ridu.2022.1555
Castañeda-Meneses, P., & Salamé-Coulon, A. (2021). Systematization and Social Work in Chile: The
Long and Winding Road. Journal of Social Work and Social Intervention:
PROSPECTIVA, 31(6), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.25100/prts.v0i29.8196
Castillo, N. (2021). Phenomenology as a Qualitative
Research Method: Questions from Research Practice. Latin American Journal of
Social Research Methodology. 20 (10), 7-18.
http://www.relmis.com.ar/ojs/index.php/relmis/article/view/fenomenologia_como_metodo/167
Clark, T., Foster, L., & Bryman, A. (2019).
11. Collecting Quantitative Data. How to Do Your Social Research Project or
Dissertation. https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198811060.003.0011.
Cohen, N., & Gómez, G. (2019). Research
Methodology: What Is It For? Data Production and Research Designs. Editorial
Teseo.
Daruhadi, G., & Sopiati, P. (2024). Research
Data Collection. International Journal of Social Service and Research. https://doi.org/10.46799/ijssr.v4i7.863.
Deslauriers, J. (2004). Qualitative Research: A
Practical Guide. Papiro Publishing.
Espinoza, E. (2020). Qualitative Research: An
Ethical Tool in the Field of Education. Conrado,
16(75), 103–110. http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1990-86442020000400103&lng=es&tlng=es.
Feria, H., Matilla, M., & Mantecón, S. (2020). The interview and the survey: methods or techniques
of empirical inquiry? Revista Didasc@lia, 3(2),
1-20.
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=7692391
Finol, M., & Arrieta, X. (2021). Qualitative
Research Methods: A Documentary Analysis. Encuentro Educacional, 28(1), 9-28. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8169472
Fresno, C. (2019). Research Methodology: It’s
That Easy. El Cid Editor.
García, G. (2023). Qualitative
Research from the Action Research Method. UNICA Journal of Arts and Humanities,
24(51), 196–210. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10048464
García, J. (2016). Research Methodology for
Administrators. Ediciones de
la U.
Gavidia-Ruíz, A. (2022). Observation
in Research: Method or Technique? A Discussion of Tactics and Strategy.
Trujillo Medical Journal, 17(3), 076–077. doi: https://doi.org/10.17268/rmt.2022.v17i2.4857
Gómez, M., Deslauriers, J., & Álzate, M. (2010). How to Write a Master’s or Doctoral Thesis. Eco Ediciones.
González-Vega, A., Molina, R., López, A., & López, G. (2022). The qualitative interview as a research
technique in the study of organizations. New Trends in Qualitative Research,
14(10), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.14.2022.e571
Graham, R. (2012). Analyzing Qualitative Data. Editions
Morata.
Guerrero, G., & Guerrero, M. (2014). Research Methodology. Grupo Editorial Patria.
Guerrero, V. (2022). Quantitative
Approach: Taxonomy Based on the Depth of Knowledge Inquiry. Llalliq, 2(1),
13–27. https://doi.org/10.32911/llalliq.2022.v2.n1.936
Guzmán, V. (2021). The Qualitative Method and
Its Contribution to Social Science Research. Gestionar: Journal of Business and
Government, 1(4), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.35622/j.rg.2021.04.002
Guzmán-Brand, V., & Gelvez-García, L.
(2024). Ethics and responsibility in the implementation of artificial
intelligence: a systematic review. Revista Ingeniería, Matemáticas y Ciencias de la Información, 11(22),
107–118. doi: 10.21017/rimci.1081.
Haddaway, N., Page, M., Pritchard, C., &
McGuinness, L. (2022). PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA
2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimized digital
transparency and Open Synthesis Campbell Systematic Reviews, 18, e1230. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1230
Harari, Y. (2018). 21 Lessons for the 21st
Century. In Part Three: Despair and Hope. (R. Joandoménec, Trans.) Debate
Hernández, R., & Mendoza, C. (2018).
Research Methodology: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches
(6th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández, C., &
Baptista, M. (2014). Research Methodology. McGraw-Hill.
Hernández-Sampieri, R., Mendoza, P., Méndez, S., & Cuevas, A.
(2019). Research Methodology for
High School. McGraw-Hill.
Herrera, J. (2018). Contemporary Research
Practices: The Challenges of New Epistemological Approaches. Scientific
Journal, 3(7), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.29394/Scientific.issn.2542-2987.2018.3.7.0.6-15
Hyun, J., Farfán, L., & Jiménez, Á. (2024).
How to Write a Systematic Review Article. Spine Surgery Journal, 2(2), 131–137.
doi:10.35366/115863
Indulska, M., Hovorka, D., & Recker, J.
(2012). Quantitative approaches to content analysis: identifying conceptual
drift across publication outlets. European Journal of Information Systems,
21, 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.37.
Jiménez, J., Moreno, M., & De la Cruz, J. (2023).
Meanings of research methodology in doctoral programs in Education. An
exploration from the perspective of the curriculum. Educación, 32(62),
161–184. https://doi.org/10.18800/educacion.202301.007
Jiménez, W., & Meneses, O. (2021). The use
of quantitative techniques in legal and social science research. Revista Inciso, 23(1), 1–20.
https://revistas.ugca.edu.co/index.php/inciso/article/view/1108
Jociles, M. (2018). Participant observation in the ethnographic study of social practices. Revista Colombiana De Antropología, 54(1), 121–150. https://doi.org/10.22380/2539472X.386
Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. (2015). Social Psychology. Cengage Learning.
Loayza, E. (2020). Qualitative Research in the
Humanities and Education: Criteria for Writing Scientific Articles. *Educare Et
Comunicare: Research Journal of the Faculty of Humanities*, 8(2), 56–66. https://doi.org/10.35383/educare.v8i2.536
Martínez-Corona, J., Palacios-Almón, G., & Oliva-Garza, D. (2023). Guide to Literature Review and Analysis: A
Proposal from a Research Perspective. Ra Ximhai: Scientific Journal of Society,
Culture, and Sustainable Development, 19(1), 67–83. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8851658
Mena-Reyes, J., Vergara, F., Linfati, R., & Escobar, J. (2024). Quantitative Techniques for Sustainable Decision Making in the Forest-to-Lumber Supply Chain: A Systematic Review. Forests. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15020297.
Meza-Salcedo, G., Rubio-Rodríguez, G., Mesa, L., & Blandón, A.
(2020). The Formative and
Pedagogical Nature of the Literature Review in Research. Información tecnológica, 31(5), 153–162. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07642020000500153
Molano, M., Valencia, A., & Apraez, M. (2021). Characteristics and importance of qualitative
methodology in scientific research. Revistas Semillas
del Saber, 1(1), 1-20.
https://revistas.unicatolica.edu.co/revista/index.php/semillas/article/view/314
Mora, R. (2022). 19. The Value of Qualitative Research
and Understanding: A Critical Examination. EDUCARE Journal - UPEL-IPB - Second
New Phase 2.0, 26(1), 389–405. https://doi.org/10.46498/reduipb.v26i1.1625
Münch, L., & Ángeles, E. (2012). Research
Methods and Techniques. Trillas Publishing.
Muñoz, C. (2015). Research Methodology. Oxford
University Press.
Muñoz, Y., Castillo, I., & Zuno, J. (2024).
Quantitative Research Method. Ingenio Y Conciencia: Scientific Bulletin of
the Ciudad Sahagún Higher Education Institute, 11(22), 174–175.
https://doi.org/10.29057/escs.v11i22.12573
Nwabuko, O. (2024). An Overview of Research
Study Designs in Quantitative Research Methodology. American Journal of
Medical and Clinical Research & Reviews. https://doi.org/10.58372/2835-6276.1169.
Padua, J., Ahman, I., Apezechea, H., &
Borsotti, C. (2018). Research Techniques Applied to the Social Sciences. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Pandey, P., Madhusudhan, M., & Singh, B. (2023). Quantitative Research Approach and Its
Applications in Library and Information Science Research. Access: An
International Journal of the Nepal Library Association. https://doi.org/10.3126/access.v2i01.58895.
Peña, T. (2022). Stages of Documentary
Information Analysis. Inter-American Journal of Library Science, 45(3), 50–65. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rib.v45n3e340545
Pérez, L., Pérez, R., & Seca, M. (2020). Methodology of Scientific Research. Maipue Publishing.
Pimienta, J., & De la Hoz, A. (2017). Research Methodology. Pearson Education.
Piña-Ferrer, L. (2023). The Qualitative
Approach: A Complex Alternative in the World of Research. Koinonía
Interdisciplinary Peer-Reviewed Journal, 8(15), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.35381/r.k.v8i15.2440
Piza, N., Amaiquema, F., & Beltrán, G. (2019). Methods and Techniques in Qualitative Research:
Some Necessary Clarifications. Conrado, 15(70), 455–459.
http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S199086442019000500455&lng=es&tlng=es.
Ramírez-Elías, A., & Arbesú-García, M. (2019). The Object of Knowledge in Qualitative Research:
An Epistemological Issue. University Nursing, 16(4),
424-435.https://doi.org/10.22201/eneo.23958421e.2019.4.735
Ramos-Galarza, C., & García-Cruz, P. (2024).
Guide to conducting quantitative systematic review studies, CienciAmérica
Journal, 13(1), 1–6, doi: 10.33210/ca.v13i1.444.
Ríos-González, C. (2024). Qualitative Research
in the Context of Public Health: An Update on Concepts. Paraguayan Journal of
Public Health, 14(1), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.18004/rspp.2024.abr.08
Rodas, F., & Pacheco, V. (2020). Focus
Groups: A Framework for Their Implementation. INNOVA Research Journal, 5(3),
182–195. https://doi.org/10.33890/innova.v5.n3.2020.1401
Rodríguez-Gómez, R. (2023). Qualitative Research
in Public Health Published in Colombian Biomedical Journals Between 2011 and
2021. Biomédica, 43(1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.7705/biomedica.6476
Rojas-Gutiérrez, W. (2023). The relevance of
qualitative research. Revista Studium Veritatis, 20(26), 79–97. https://studium.ucss.edu.pe/index.php/SV/article/view/353
Salazar-Escorcia, L. (2020). Qualitative Research: A Response to
Social and Educational Research. Cienciamatria: Interdisciplinary Journal of
Humanities, Education, Science, and Technology, 11(6), 101–110. https://cienciamatriarevista.org.ve/index.php/cm/article/view/327
Salinas-Atausinchi, Y., Sucari, Wilson, Sarmiento-Yujra, L.,
Huaman-Lucana, R., Paullo-Tisoc, Y., & Chavez-Orellana, G. (2023). How Should the Theoretical Framework Be
Implemented in Quantitative Research? Scientific Journal
of Social Sciences, 5(1), 102–113.
https://doi.org/10.53732/rccsociales/05.01.2023.102
Salvador-Oliván, J., Marco-Cuenca, G., & Arquero-Avilés, R. (2021). Evaluation of survey-based research in articles
published in journals in the field of Library and Information Science. Revista Española De Documentación Científica, 44(2), 30-45. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2021.2.1774
Sánchez, A., & Murillo, A. (2021). Methodological approaches in historical research:
quantitative, qualitative, and comparative. Debates
por la historia, 9(2), 147–181.https://doi.org/10.54167/debates-por-la-historia.v9i2.792
Sánchez, F. (2019). Epistemic foundations of
qualitative and quantitative research: consensus and disagreement. Digital
Journal of Research in University Teaching, 13(1), 102-122. https://doi.org/10.19083/ridu.2019.644
Shi, X., Liu, Z., Zhang, M., Hua, W., Li, J., Lee,
J., Dharmarajan, S., Nyhan, K., Naimi, A., Lash, T., Jeffery, M., Ross, J.,
Liew, Z., & Wallach, J. (2024). Quantitative bias analysis methods for
summary-level epidemiological data in the peer-reviewed literature: a
systematic review. Journal of Clinical
Epidemiology, 111507. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.23.24306205.
Sinche-Crispín, F., Infante, L., Espinoza-Quispe, C., Matos-Vila, G.,
& Gilvonio-Yaranga, F. (2023). The Implications of Social Phenomenology and
the Socio-Critical Paradigm in University Education Research. e-Revista Multidisciplinaria
del Saber, 1, e-RMS01112023. https://doi.org/10.61286/e-rms.v1i.5
Tracy, S. (2021). Qualitative Quality: Eight Pillars for High-Quality Qualitative Research. Márgenes Journal, 2(2), 173–201. https://doi.org/10.24310/mgnmar.v2i2.12937
Useche, M., Artigas, W., Queipo, B., & Perozo, E. (2019). Techniques and Instruments for Qualitative and Quantitative
Data Collection. University of La Guajira Press.
Vargas, X. (2011). How to Conduct Qualitative
Research? A Practical Guide to Understanding What Research Is in General and
How to Conduct It, with an Emphasis on the Stages of Qualitative Research.
ETXETA Publishing.
Vizcaíno, P., Cedeño, R., & Maldonado, I.
(2023). Scientific Research Methodology: A Practical Guide. Ciencia Latina:
Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal, 7(4), 9723–9762.
https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i4.7658
Wang, T., Li, H., Liu, Y., & Min, X. (2024).
Quantitative blood loss measurement methods for early detection of primary
postpartum hemorrhage following vaginal birth: A scoping review. Journal of
Clinical Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17216.
Weinreich, N. (2011). Evaluation methods. In Hands-on
Social Marketing: A Step-by-Step Guide to Designing Change for Good (2nd
ed., pp. 271–276). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452224879
Yucra, T., & Bernedo, L. (2020).
Epistemology and Quantitative Research. IGOBERNANZA, 3(12), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.47865/igob.vol3.2020.88