Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
The College of Family Physicians of Canada
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums
  • My alerts
The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • RSS feeds
  • Follow cfp Template on Twitter
OtherCollege

Quantitative and qualitative research

Received and interpretivist views of science

Shafik Dharamsi and Ian Scott
Canadian Family Physician August 2009, 55 (8) 843-844;
Shafik Dharamsi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: shafik.dharamsi@familymed.ubc.ca
Ian Scott
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.

Albert Einstein1

Some clinicians still believe that qualitative research is a “soft” science and of lesser value to clinical decision making, but this position is no longer tenable.2-4 A quick search using the key word qualitative on the Canadian Family Physician website generated more than 100 qualitative research articles published in the past 3 years alone.

This paper provides an overview of the history of science to help readers appreciate the basic epistemological commonalities and differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches to research.

Age of Enlightenment

Copernicus (1473-1543), Galileo (1564-1642), Descartes (1596-1650), and Newton (1643-1727) were instrumental in carving the path to the Enlightenment (1700-1789)—an intellectual movement credited with introducing systematic inquiry and the scientific method. Auguste Comte (1798-1857), regarded as the founder of modern social science and credited with advancing a philosophic theory of positivism (ie, that factual knowledge can only be attained through observable experience), emphasized that the search for objective truth and knowledge must follow a nomothetic (ie, relating to the discovery of universal laws) and empirical (ie, based on experiment and observation) approach. Scientists of the Enlightenment era asserted that we must be free of the uncertainties of time, place, history, and culture in order to discover how the world works. This is referred to as the received view of science.5

Received view

Essentially, the received view posits that the world is made up of absolute truths existing independently of human consciousness. Knowledge is available for objective discovery within a causal and factual form. A reductionist approach to problem solving is used; theories are formulated and tested experimentally to verify or falsify different hypotheses; and numerical tests based on probabilistic theory are used to establish the levels of relationships between measurable variables.

Conversely, in Critique of Pure Reason (Immanuel Kant’s 1781 thesis, which followed the work of Plato), Kant asserts that human reason also plays a key role in determining what constitutes knowledge. Unlike Comte, who favoured empirical experience as the most legitimate source of knowledge and who argued that pure knowledge begins and ends with sense experience free of subjective interpretation, Kant states that we not only experience the world as it presents itself to us, but we also interpret it.4

Interpretivist view

Karl Marx (1818-1883), Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), Georg Simmel (1858-1918), Max Weber (1864-1920), Max Scheler (1874-1928), and Karl Mannheim (1893-1947), among others, produced sharp criticisms against the prevailing conception of science for understanding social interactions. Using Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s (1770-1831) idea that subjectivity is an inherent part of cognition, these social scientists rejected the claims that science, as a practice of discovery of a world independent of our senses, can in fact represent the absolute reality of social phenomena. The interpretivist view,6 therefore, posits that knowledge is socially constructed and ephemeral.7 In other words, it is influenced by history, culture, power differences in society, and politics.8 In his cogent thesis The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn argues that the interpretive nature is deeply and undeniably embedded in science.9

Conclusion

What is common among both experienced and budding researchers alike, whether from the positivist tradition or the interpretivist one, is a realization that an increasingly sophisticated representation of any particular phenomenon requires a form of systematic investigation. Those who employ qualitative methods usually seek in-depth perspectives on how society is thought to operate and the related historical, cultural, social, and political influences that affect how decisions are made. Those who use quantitative methods search for laws and principles that can help to predict how the world works. To understand the world better, some researchers use laboratories and clinics while others use cultural and social spaces. Yet all researchers regard their endeavours as a means to improve quality of life and well-being.

Whether researchers use qualitative or quantitative methods, they are building knowledge, which, in the end, is applied to our understanding of the world, allowing us to better care for our patients.

Hypothesis is a quarterly series in Canadian Family Physician, coordinated by the Section of Researchers of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. The goal is to explore clinically relevant research concepts for all CFP readers. Submissions are invited from researchers and nonresearchers. Ideas or submissions can be submitted on-line at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cfp or through the CFP website www.cfp.ca; under “Authors.”

Footnotes

  • Competing interests

    None declared

  • Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada

References

  1. ↵
    ShapiroFRThe Yale book of quotationsNew Haven, CTYale University Press2006
  2. ↵
    GoldsmithMRBankheadCRAustokerJSynthesising quantitative and qualitative research in evidence-based patient informationJ Epidemiol Community Health200761326270
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. Dixon-WoodsMFitzpatrickRQualitative research in systematic reviews. Has established a place for itselfBMJ200132373167656
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    GiacominiMKCookDJUsers’ guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care B. What are the results and how do they help me care for my patients? Evidence-Based Medicine Working GroupJAMA2000284447882
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    HandsDWReconsidering the received view of the “received view”: Kant, Kuhn, and the demise of positivist philosophy of scienceSoc Epistemol2003172-31697310.1080/10269172032000144126
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. ↵
    SchwandtTDDenzinNKLincolnYSThree epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionismThe SAGE handbook of qualitative research2nd edThousand Oaks, CASage Publications, Inc2000189213
  7. ↵
    BergerPLLuckmannTThe social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledgeNew York, NYAnchor Books1966
  8. ↵
    DharamsiSBuilding moral communities? First, do no harmJ Dent Educ20067011123540
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    KuhnTSThe structure of scientific revolutions2nd edChicago, ILThe University of Chicago Press1970
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Family Physician: 55 (8)
Canadian Family Physician
Vol. 55, Issue 8
1 Aug 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The College of Family Physicians of Canada.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Quantitative and qualitative research
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The College of Family Physicians of Canada
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The College of Family Physicians of Canada web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Quantitative and qualitative research
Shafik Dharamsi, Ian Scott
Canadian Family Physician Aug 2009, 55 (8) 843-844;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Quantitative and qualitative research
Shafik Dharamsi, Ian Scott
Canadian Family Physician Aug 2009, 55 (8) 843-844;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Age of Enlightenment
    • Received view
    • Interpretivist view
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Ethnography: traditional and criticalist conceptions of a qualitative research method
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

College

  • Le soleil derrière les nuages
  • Solutions à la pénurie de médecins de famille
  • Le statu quo n’est plus une option
Show more College

Hypothesis

  • The Canadian Primary Care Information Network
  • Impact of patient partner co-design on survey development in primary care research
  • Ask before you ask
Show more Hypothesis

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Collections - English
  • Collections - Française

For Authors

  • Authors and Reviewers
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Permissions
  • Terms of Use

General Information

  • About CFP
  • About the CFPC
  • Advertisers
  • Careers & Locums
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Subscribers

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feeds

Copyright © 2022 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Powered by HighWire