Qualitative Analysis

This section will be devoted to a critical analysis of Chapter 1 from Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology, Eighth Edition. We will be touching on some of the fundamentals of theory and how it applies to qualitative research.

     In its most basic and general form, qualitative analysis is simply the study of human behavior and decision-making. Its purpose is to answer the questions of how and why people do the things they do, not necessarily the who, where, or when. (The latter three are down the path of quantitative, or numerical analysis.)
     The goal of qualitative research is to understand humans and how they function and respond in a society. Methods almost always take the form of focused studies of a small sample, rather than an attempt to get a view of the group as a whole (as in surveys or polls.) The strategy is to test whether certain phenomena link to other phenomena (the reading used an example of whether or not church attendance leads to decreased rates of delinquency–it doesn’t.) Once a pattern is found in a small group, the theory can be tested on a larger scale. Using quantitative methods, scientists can then determine whether the theory is still valid when applied to the whole. 

     In the article cited, the author stresses the importance throughout of a balanced take on theory and methodology. The statement is made repeatedly that we are not to commit “methodological narcissism”–that is, method for method’s sake, making something more complicated than it has to be simply to make it seem more credible or “scientific.” In qualitative research, it is acceptable to provide analyses that consist of appearance and impressions. Once research moves to quantitative, it is a must to provide data in the form of cold, hard numbers.

     Derived from this definition, it isn’t inaccurate to speculate that people might use crude versions of qualitative analysis without even realizing they are doing so. Sometimes to be qualitative, scientists will use methods like immersion–living in a specific place with a specific group of people, and recording responses and thought patterns either in the subject or in themselves that differ from some form of a control sample.

     While it is important to remain objective when performing any type of scientific research, we do have to understand our subject when that science is sociological. It is important to keep in mind that there are always exceptions to any theories, especially in humanity. We have to keep a level head because data could be corrupt, location-specific or even time-specific. What is true for one person on one day may not be true for another person on another day. People change and circumstances change. Sometimes errors in research occur, and researchers must leave room for them to do so and yet still be useful.

     Future research on the subject will involve how to better clarify the theories proposed. Things will change between now and the future, and theories and their applications will change with them. Literature will be more accurate and will have more data underneath its belt, so it will be easier to determine if previous experimentation was beneficial or not. From these data, scientists will be better prepared to present new theories, make new connections, and thus write better literature on the subject.

     From this reading, we can easily see how more research improves our understanding. In a way, we could say that qualitative analysis helps to “humanize” scientific research and experimentation. Also, it is imperative for gaining a greater insight into human behavior.