Real qualitative researchers do not count: The use of numbers in qualitative research

Abstract

Two myths about qualitative research are that real qualitative researchers do not count and cannot count. These antinumber myths have led to the underutilization of numbers in qualitative research and to the simplistic view of qualitative research as non-or antinumber. Yet numbers are integral to qualitative research, as meaning depends, in part, on number. As in quantitative research, numbers are used in qualitative research to establish the signi®cance of a research project, to document what is known about a problem, and to describe a sample. But they are also useful for showcasing the labor and complexity of qualitative work and to generate meaning from qualitative data; to document, verify, and test researcher interpretations or conclusions; and to re-present target events and experiences. Although numbers are important in the treatment of qualitative data, qualitative researchers should avoid the counting pitfalls of verbal counting, overcounting, misleading counting, and acontextual counting.

Using qualitative metasummary to synthesize qualitative and quantitative descriptive findings

“…Qualitative metasummary results are by themselves valuable end-products of a systematic review, and they can serve as empirical foundations for the use of more interpretive qualitative research synthesis methods. Qualitative metasummary reflects a quantitative logic whereby higher frequency findings are taken to be evidence of the replication that is both foundational to validity in quantitative research and to the claim of having discovered a pattern or theme (Sandelowski, 2001) or ''preponderance of evidence'' (Thorne, Jensen, Kearney, Noblit, & Sandelowski, 2004, p. 1362 in qualitative research. Qualitative metasummary entails treating research reports as indexes of the studies conducted, and the research findings in these reports as indexes of the experiences of the persons who participated in those studies (Sandelowski & Barroso, 2007).…”

The ontological deficiencies of process modeling in practice

“…The coding assisted in our qualitative examination by adding quantified information to our response analysis, which, in turn, allowed us to produce more valid, persuasive arguments about the level of support received for our propositions (Sandelowski, 2001). …”

The Perceptions of Emergency Vehicle Drivers Using Simulation in Driver Training

“…Emergent themes were analyzed and quantified (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003) for frequency analysis. The investigator used the "numbered nature of phenomena" (Sandelowski, 2001). …”