2) Qualitative research uses data collective which involve the participant actively and sensitively in the study. Qualitative research also uses multiple methods which humanistic and interactive. 3) Qualitative research is rising out instead of just prefigured. The researcher may use questions that have been changed and be refined as to learn whom to ask and what to ask. 4) Qualitative research is fundamentally interpretive.
Mixed methods approach can also be useful when one methodology does not provide the information that is required (Bulsara, n.d). Thus, the use of mixed methods is important because it is more than simply collecting and analysing both kinds of data; it also involves the use of both approaches in tandem so that the overall strength of the study is greater than either qualitative or quantitative research (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007) and it is exploratory. The data provided by qualitative method is data typically collected in the participants’ setting, data analysing inductively building from particulars to general themes, and the researcher making interpretations of the meaning of the data (Creswell, 2007). The purpose of mixed methods is that both quantitative and qualitative research in combination provides a better understanding of a research problem than either research approach alone. The aspects of using mixed methods raises issues such as
This method takes less time as the interviews and questionnaires are not requiring too much detail. Researchers have proper control group and comparison group to make the research impact more valid. Although its cover a wider range but as an issue it’s more costly because it includes travelling. Quantitative research is something one can bet on as it’s based on exact numbers and figures showing the differences. It includes more concerned interviews with relevant defined question which cannot be changed.
Research approach can be categorized into quantitative and qualitative research (Yates, 2004; Creswell, 2009). For this study, both quantitative and qualitative approaches were adopted. The adoption of each of the approaches in any research process come along with their limitations; therefore biases inherent in any of the methods could nullify or neutralize the biases of other methods (Hurmerinta – Peltomaki & Nummela, 2006). Usually, quantitative research conducts a deductive approach to the relationship between theory and research which focus on testing of theory (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Yin, 2008). Conversely, qualitative research emphasizes the words rather than quantification with data.
These methods can be quantitative or qualitative based. For quantitative research, the host is attentive to data collected from surveys, polls, and censuses. These surveys, polls, and censuses focuses on who the participants are, where they are from, and occurrences. This is different from participant observation as this method of collecting data limits the interaction of the host with the people and culture. Another method is comparative research.
The Qualitative method tend to be open ended with less structured protocols; rely more heavily on interactive interviews where respondents may be interviewed several times to follow up on a particular issue to clarify concepts or check the reliability of data and use triangulation to increase the credibility of the findings. (Krishnamurthi, Cabrera and Karlovsky,2004). These attributes give the qualitative research method the advantage of providing depth and detail. They help to look deeper than analysing ranks and counts by recording attitudes, feelings and behaviours. The open- ended questions help to encourage respondents to expand on their responses which may open up new topic areas not initially considered and help to simulate participants’ experiences.
INTRODUCTION It is generally agreed upon that people use language to convey both referential information and "create and sustain expressive meanings"(Malinowski, 1930, p. 231). Academic discourse, as a kind of communication, is no exception.According to Hyland (2004), academic writers do not just produce texts which represent an external reality, but use language to offer a credible representation of their work and themselves and Hyland's view, metadiscourse is based on a view of writing as a social and communicative engagement and, in academic contexts, shows the ways writers project themselves into their argumentation in order to control their interactive intentions and signal their perspectives and commitments. In so doing, writers try to convey their personality, credibility, consideration of the reader and the relationship to the subject matter and to readers by using certain devices in their texts. The devices, according to Hyland (2005), including words, phrases, main clauses and even punctuation and typographic marks, are referred to as metadiscourse.
First, the literature review helps the writer to establish credibility. Second, allows the writer to set his own work in the context of others. Third, referencing of others allows us to accommodate a wide variety of readers. Finally,
In cases where thereare no other cases available for replication, the researcher can adopt the single-case design. The multiple-case design, on the other hand, can be adopted with real-life events that shownumerous sources of evidence through replication rather than sampling logic. According to Yin (1994), generalisation of results from case studies, from either single or multiple designs, stems on theory rather than on populations. By replicating the case through pattern-matching,a technique linking several pieces of information from the same case to some theoretical proposition (Campbell, 1975), multiple-case design enhances and supports the previousresults. This helps raise the level of confidence in the robustness of the method.are no other cases available for replication, the researcher can adopt the single-case