Persuasive Research Uses a Triangular Approach

Content Analysis is a Method for Quantitative and Qualitative Data

Sep 15, 2009

When you get a writing job that needs to be researched it is best to include more than one method of data analysis. This article provides an overview of good practice.

Multiple research strategies and method triangulation add authority to research findings, and this article presents expert opinions to highlight why it is useful to use more than one type of research to help you investigate questions and theories.

Expert Views on Research Methods

While qualitative analysis is good for studying a small amount of sources thoroughly, or skimming through primary sources to form theories, quantitative analysis is better for finding patterns in a vast amount of material and providing statistics to argue the validity of the research findings.

Within the qualitative and quantitative methodologies there are also many research methods that can be used. As Brannen explained: ‘Method triangulation may be between-methods or within-method….between-methods means using different methods in relation to the same object of study…’[1]

Arksey and Knight also wrote there were different types of methodological triangulation, and the rationale is that cumulatively the weaknesses of one research method are offset by the strengths of the others.’[2]

Bryman corroborated the above definitions when he wrote that the logic of ‘triangulation’ is that the ‘findings from one type of study can be checked against the findings deriving from the other type. For example, the results of a qualitative investigation might be checked against a quantitative study. The aim is generally to enhance the validity of findings.’[3]

Content Analysis, a Common Method

One of the most popular research methods is content analysis. Holsti defined content analysis as 'any technique for making inferences by objectively and systematically identifying specified characteristics of messages.'[4]

Fiske confirmed that content analysis is usually improved by a mixture of quantitative and qualitative analysis; with the quantitative data providing hard evidence to support or oppose theories formed from qualitative analysis.[5]

Denis McQuail provided a specific example of how this methodology has been utilised: 'An example of such a hybrid approach is the work on British television news of the Glasgow Media Group (1976, 1980, 1985), which combined rigorous and detailed quantitative analysis of industrial news with an [qualitative] attempt to “unpack” the deeper cultural meaning of specific news stories.’[6]

Good research can be conducted utilising either qualitative or quantitative methodologies, but the triangulation of research through using a mixture of different methods from both methodologies can provide more conclusive and persuasive results.

.[1] J. Brannen., Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches: an overview, in J. Brannen (ed)., Mixing Methods: qualitative and quantitative research, (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1992), pp. 3-37, p. 11.

[2] H. Arksey., and P. Knight., Interviewing for Social Scientists: An Introductory Resource with Examples, (London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi, Sage, 1999), p. 23.

[3] A. Bryman., Quantitative and qualitative research: further reflections on their integration, in J. Brannen (ed)., op.cit, pp. 57-78, p. 59-60.

[4] O. R. Holsti., Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities, (Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co, 1969), p. 2-14.

[5] J. Fiske., Introduction to Communication Studies (2nd edition), (London and New York: Routledge, 1990), p. 190.

The copyright of the article Persuasive Research Uses a Triangular Approach in Scientific Research Methods is owned by Marc Latham. Permission to republish Persuasive Research Uses a Triangular Approach in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.