? Any reduction and approximation of the phenomenon cannot lose sight of the fact thatsocial qualitative and that quantitative is one of the forms of expression; ? Qualitative and quantitative approaches are not opposed, they complement each other as theories and methods of analysis and interpretation. Silva (apud BIASOLI-ALVES & ROMANELLI, 1998) points out that: ? It is necessary to know the paradigms that support the researcher’s practice;? It is necessary to know the philosophical worldviews that underpin the researches and their forms of social commitment, so that the researcher’s practice is not alienated; ? The good quality of the research depends on the congruence of its development in relation to the paradigmatic vision that underlies it, and of this with the strategies and adopted; ? There are criteria of quality and methodological rigor in all paradigms, it is necessary to know how to follow them and explain them at work; ? The opposition between qualitative and quantitative methodology is false, there is opposition in paradigms that underpin research; ? In addition to the methodological preparation for the implementation of the research, the ethical commitment of the researcher to the people (subjects), financial institutionsand society involved in research.
Conclusion:Quantitative and Qualitative approaches offer different perspectives but are not necessarily opposite poles. The elements of both approaches can be used in joint studies, to provide more information than could be used one of the methods in isolation. In reviewing the literature on the history of psychology and its establishment as a science, we perceive that the path traced by psychology has been correlated with the paradigm of sciences in the 9th and 20th centuries, which were based on positivism and scientific posited objectivism, neutrality in relation to the subjects in the research and the extreme control of variables in empirical situations. In the last decades of the twentieth Psychology 7century with the questions about paradigms scientists, the humanities and psychology adopted an approach that emphasized the man as a historical and social being, thus began to contextualize him in his researches. The study of behaviour, psyche, relationships and meanings that human beings attribute to their interpersonal and social interactions. In this way, there is a reflection on the methodology of research and quantitative and qualitative aspects that are relevant in studies of the human sciences and that methodologies have their value in the way they are used.
The approaches use a different language and reading of reality, appropriate to theoretical-philosophical conception of man and world. And the languages used as resource in the analysis of researched material (analyses of speeches, contents from speeches or mathematics) should be adequate to the objectives and procedures adopted in the research. Quantitative research (questioned in relation to its mathematical end of the twentieth century) contribute to the reading of social and historical reality, and reveal data can lead to more complex qualitative investigations, an outdated and worthless model. And, the researches that seek the understanding of the human phenomena, the qualitative ones, emphasized and valued in the new scientific paradigm, require attention and care in their the problem they intend to study. They also need, and often, concrete data and objectivesprovided by quantitative research. Thus we conclude that these approaches are distinct in their conception and methodology, which are not opposites but complementary in the studies and in the reading and understanding of reality.
Psychology 8Reference:Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Bryman, A. (1984). The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: a question of method or epistemology?. British journal of Sociology, 75-92.Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J.
D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age International.O’Reilly, C. A.
, Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991).
People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of management journal, 34(3), 487-516.Osborne, J. W. (1994). Some similarities and differences among phenomenological and other methods of psychological qualitative research. Canadian Psychology, 35(2), 167.
Pope, C., & Mays, N. (1995). Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introductionto qualitative methods in health and health services research. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 311(6996), 42.Ryan, G. W.
, & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes.
Field methods, 15(1), 85-109.Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (Vol. 46).
Sage.Winter, G. (2000). A comparative discussion of the notion of’validity’in qualitative and quantitative research.
The qualitative report, 4(3), 1-14.