how to conduct a quantitative research study

• Privacy Policy

Home » Quantitative Research – Methods, Types and Analysis

Quantitative Research – Methods, Types and Analysis

Table of Contents

Quantitative Research

Quantitative research is a type of research that collects and analyzes numerical data to test hypotheses and answer research questions . This research typically involves a large sample size and uses statistical analysis to make inferences about a population based on the data collected. It often involves the use of surveys, experiments, or other structured data collection methods to gather quantitative data.

Quantitative Research Methods

Quantitative Research Methods are as follows:

Descriptive Research Design

Descriptive research design is used to describe the characteristics of a population or phenomenon being studied. This research method is used to answer the questions of what, where, when, and how. Descriptive research designs use a variety of methods such as observation, case studies, and surveys to collect data. The data is then analyzed using statistical tools to identify patterns and relationships.

Correlational Research Design

Correlational research design is used to investigate the relationship between two or more variables. Researchers use correlational research to determine whether a relationship exists between variables and to what extent they are related. This research method involves collecting data from a sample and analyzing it using statistical tools such as correlation coefficients.

Quasi-experimental Research Design

Quasi-experimental research design is used to investigate cause-and-effect relationships between variables. This research method is similar to experimental research design, but it lacks full control over the independent variable. Researchers use quasi-experimental research designs when it is not feasible or ethical to manipulate the independent variable.

Experimental Research Design

Experimental research design is used to investigate cause-and-effect relationships between variables. This research method involves manipulating the independent variable and observing the effects on the dependent variable. Researchers use experimental research designs to test hypotheses and establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Survey Research

Survey research involves collecting data from a sample of individuals using a standardized questionnaire. This research method is used to gather information on attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of individuals. Researchers use survey research to collect data quickly and efficiently from a large sample size. Survey research can be conducted through various methods such as online, phone, mail, or in-person interviews.

Quantitative Research Analysis Methods

Here are some commonly used quantitative research analysis methods:

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis is the most common quantitative research analysis method. It involves using statistical tools and techniques to analyze the numerical data collected during the research process. Statistical analysis can be used to identify patterns, trends, and relationships between variables, and to test hypotheses and theories.

Regression Analysis

Regression analysis is a statistical technique used to analyze the relationship between one dependent variable and one or more independent variables. Researchers use regression analysis to identify and quantify the impact of independent variables on the dependent variable.

Factor Analysis

Factor analysis is a statistical technique used to identify underlying factors that explain the correlations among a set of variables. Researchers use factor analysis to reduce a large number of variables to a smaller set of factors that capture the most important information.

Structural Equation Modeling

Structural equation modeling is a statistical technique used to test complex relationships between variables. It involves specifying a model that includes both observed and unobserved variables, and then using statistical methods to test the fit of the model to the data.

Time Series Analysis

Time series analysis is a statistical technique used to analyze data that is collected over time. It involves identifying patterns and trends in the data, as well as any seasonal or cyclical variations.

Multilevel Modeling

Multilevel modeling is a statistical technique used to analyze data that is nested within multiple levels. For example, researchers might use multilevel modeling to analyze data that is collected from individuals who are nested within groups, such as students nested within schools.

Applications of Quantitative Research

Quantitative research has many applications across a wide range of fields. Here are some common examples:

• Market Research : Quantitative research is used extensively in market research to understand consumer behavior, preferences, and trends. Researchers use surveys, experiments, and other quantitative methods to collect data that can inform marketing strategies, product development, and pricing decisions.
• Health Research: Quantitative research is used in health research to study the effectiveness of medical treatments, identify risk factors for diseases, and track health outcomes over time. Researchers use statistical methods to analyze data from clinical trials, surveys, and other sources to inform medical practice and policy.
• Social Science Research: Quantitative research is used in social science research to study human behavior, attitudes, and social structures. Researchers use surveys, experiments, and other quantitative methods to collect data that can inform social policies, educational programs, and community interventions.
• Education Research: Quantitative research is used in education research to study the effectiveness of teaching methods, assess student learning outcomes, and identify factors that influence student success. Researchers use experimental and quasi-experimental designs, as well as surveys and other quantitative methods, to collect and analyze data.
• Environmental Research: Quantitative research is used in environmental research to study the impact of human activities on the environment, assess the effectiveness of conservation strategies, and identify ways to reduce environmental risks. Researchers use statistical methods to analyze data from field studies, experiments, and other sources.

Characteristics of Quantitative Research

Here are some key characteristics of quantitative research:

• Numerical data : Quantitative research involves collecting numerical data through standardized methods such as surveys, experiments, and observational studies. This data is analyzed using statistical methods to identify patterns and relationships.
• Large sample size: Quantitative research often involves collecting data from a large sample of individuals or groups in order to increase the reliability and generalizability of the findings.
• Objective approach: Quantitative research aims to be objective and impartial in its approach, focusing on the collection and analysis of data rather than personal beliefs, opinions, or experiences.
• Control over variables: Quantitative research often involves manipulating variables to test hypotheses and establish cause-and-effect relationships. Researchers aim to control for extraneous variables that may impact the results.
• Replicable : Quantitative research aims to be replicable, meaning that other researchers should be able to conduct similar studies and obtain similar results using the same methods.
• Statistical analysis: Quantitative research involves using statistical tools and techniques to analyze the numerical data collected during the research process. Statistical analysis allows researchers to identify patterns, trends, and relationships between variables, and to test hypotheses and theories.
• Generalizability: Quantitative research aims to produce findings that can be generalized to larger populations beyond the specific sample studied. This is achieved through the use of random sampling methods and statistical inference.

Examples of Quantitative Research

Here are some examples of quantitative research in different fields:

• Market Research: A company conducts a survey of 1000 consumers to determine their brand awareness and preferences. The data is analyzed using statistical methods to identify trends and patterns that can inform marketing strategies.
• Health Research : A researcher conducts a randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of a new drug for treating a particular medical condition. The study involves collecting data from a large sample of patients and analyzing the results using statistical methods.
• Social Science Research : A sociologist conducts a survey of 500 people to study attitudes toward immigration in a particular country. The data is analyzed using statistical methods to identify factors that influence these attitudes.
• Education Research: A researcher conducts an experiment to compare the effectiveness of two different teaching methods for improving student learning outcomes. The study involves randomly assigning students to different groups and collecting data on their performance on standardized tests.
• Environmental Research : A team of researchers conduct a study to investigate the impact of climate change on the distribution and abundance of a particular species of plant or animal. The study involves collecting data on environmental factors and population sizes over time and analyzing the results using statistical methods.
• Psychology : A researcher conducts a survey of 500 college students to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health. The data is analyzed using statistical methods to identify correlations and potential causal relationships.
• Political Science: A team of researchers conducts a study to investigate voter behavior during an election. They use survey methods to collect data on voting patterns, demographics, and political attitudes, and analyze the results using statistical methods.

How to Conduct Quantitative Research

Here is a general overview of how to conduct quantitative research:

• Develop a research question: The first step in conducting quantitative research is to develop a clear and specific research question. This question should be based on a gap in existing knowledge, and should be answerable using quantitative methods.
• Develop a research design: Once you have a research question, you will need to develop a research design. This involves deciding on the appropriate methods to collect data, such as surveys, experiments, or observational studies. You will also need to determine the appropriate sample size, data collection instruments, and data analysis techniques.
• Collect data: The next step is to collect data. This may involve administering surveys or questionnaires, conducting experiments, or gathering data from existing sources. It is important to use standardized methods to ensure that the data is reliable and valid.
• Analyze data : Once the data has been collected, it is time to analyze it. This involves using statistical methods to identify patterns, trends, and relationships between variables. Common statistical techniques include correlation analysis, regression analysis, and hypothesis testing.
• Interpret results: After analyzing the data, you will need to interpret the results. This involves identifying the key findings, determining their significance, and drawing conclusions based on the data.
• Communicate findings: Finally, you will need to communicate your findings. This may involve writing a research report, presenting at a conference, or publishing in a peer-reviewed journal. It is important to clearly communicate the research question, methods, results, and conclusions to ensure that others can understand and replicate your research.

When to use Quantitative Research

Here are some situations when quantitative research can be appropriate:

• To test a hypothesis: Quantitative research is often used to test a hypothesis or a theory. It involves collecting numerical data and using statistical analysis to determine if the data supports or refutes the hypothesis.
• To generalize findings: If you want to generalize the findings of your study to a larger population, quantitative research can be useful. This is because it allows you to collect numerical data from a representative sample of the population and use statistical analysis to make inferences about the population as a whole.
• To measure relationships between variables: If you want to measure the relationship between two or more variables, such as the relationship between age and income, or between education level and job satisfaction, quantitative research can be useful. It allows you to collect numerical data on both variables and use statistical analysis to determine the strength and direction of the relationship.
• To identify patterns or trends: Quantitative research can be useful for identifying patterns or trends in data. For example, you can use quantitative research to identify trends in consumer behavior or to identify patterns in stock market data.
• To quantify attitudes or opinions : If you want to measure attitudes or opinions on a particular topic, quantitative research can be useful. It allows you to collect numerical data using surveys or questionnaires and analyze the data using statistical methods to determine the prevalence of certain attitudes or opinions.

Purpose of Quantitative Research

The purpose of quantitative research is to systematically investigate and measure the relationships between variables or phenomena using numerical data and statistical analysis. The main objectives of quantitative research include:

• Description : To provide a detailed and accurate description of a particular phenomenon or population.
• Explanation : To explain the reasons for the occurrence of a particular phenomenon, such as identifying the factors that influence a behavior or attitude.
• Prediction : To predict future trends or behaviors based on past patterns and relationships between variables.
• Control : To identify the best strategies for controlling or influencing a particular outcome or behavior.

Quantitative research is used in many different fields, including social sciences, business, engineering, and health sciences. It can be used to investigate a wide range of phenomena, from human behavior and attitudes to physical and biological processes. The purpose of quantitative research is to provide reliable and valid data that can be used to inform decision-making and improve understanding of the world around us.

Advantages of Quantitative Research

There are several advantages of quantitative research, including:

• Objectivity : Quantitative research is based on objective data and statistical analysis, which reduces the potential for bias or subjectivity in the research process.
• Reproducibility : Because quantitative research involves standardized methods and measurements, it is more likely to be reproducible and reliable.
• Generalizability : Quantitative research allows for generalizations to be made about a population based on a representative sample, which can inform decision-making and policy development.
• Precision : Quantitative research allows for precise measurement and analysis of data, which can provide a more accurate understanding of phenomena and relationships between variables.
• Efficiency : Quantitative research can be conducted relatively quickly and efficiently, especially when compared to qualitative research, which may involve lengthy data collection and analysis.
• Large sample sizes : Quantitative research can accommodate large sample sizes, which can increase the representativeness and generalizability of the results.

Limitations of Quantitative Research

There are several limitations of quantitative research, including:

• Limited understanding of context: Quantitative research typically focuses on numerical data and statistical analysis, which may not provide a comprehensive understanding of the context or underlying factors that influence a phenomenon.
• Simplification of complex phenomena: Quantitative research often involves simplifying complex phenomena into measurable variables, which may not capture the full complexity of the phenomenon being studied.
• Potential for researcher bias: Although quantitative research aims to be objective, there is still the potential for researcher bias in areas such as sampling, data collection, and data analysis.
• Limited ability to explore new ideas: Quantitative research is often based on pre-determined research questions and hypotheses, which may limit the ability to explore new ideas or unexpected findings.
• Limited ability to capture subjective experiences : Quantitative research is typically focused on objective data and may not capture the subjective experiences of individuals or groups being studied.
• Ethical concerns : Quantitative research may raise ethical concerns, such as invasion of privacy or the potential for harm to participants.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

One-to-One Interview – Methods and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Questionnaire – Definition, Types, and Examples

Explanatory Research – Types, Methods, Guide

Ethnographic Research -Types, Methods and Guide

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Quantitative Methods
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Quantitative methods emphasize objective measurements and the statistical, mathematical, or numerical analysis of data collected through polls, questionnaires, and surveys, or by manipulating pre-existing statistical data using computational techniques . Quantitative research focuses on gathering numerical data and generalizing it across groups of people or to explain a particular phenomenon.

Babbie, Earl R. The Practice of Social Research . 12th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage, 2010; Muijs, Daniel. Doing Quantitative Research in Education with SPSS . 2nd edition. London: SAGE Publications, 2010.

Need Help Locating Statistics?

Resources for locating data and statistics can be found here:

Statistics & Data Research Guide

Characteristics of Quantitative Research

Your goal in conducting quantitative research study is to determine the relationship between one thing [an independent variable] and another [a dependent or outcome variable] within a population. Quantitative research designs are either descriptive [subjects usually measured once] or experimental [subjects measured before and after a treatment]. A descriptive study establishes only associations between variables; an experimental study establishes causality.

Quantitative research deals in numbers, logic, and an objective stance. Quantitative research focuses on numeric and unchanging data and detailed, convergent reasoning rather than divergent reasoning [i.e., the generation of a variety of ideas about a research problem in a spontaneous, free-flowing manner].

Its main characteristics are :

• The data is usually gathered using structured research instruments.
• The results are based on larger sample sizes that are representative of the population.
• The research study can usually be replicated or repeated, given its high reliability.
• Researcher has a clearly defined research question to which objective answers are sought.
• All aspects of the study are carefully designed before data is collected.
• Data are in the form of numbers and statistics, often arranged in tables, charts, figures, or other non-textual forms.
• Project can be used to generalize concepts more widely, predict future results, or investigate causal relationships.
• Researcher uses tools, such as questionnaires or computer software, to collect numerical data.

The overarching aim of a quantitative research study is to classify features, count them, and construct statistical models in an attempt to explain what is observed.

  Things to keep in mind when reporting the results of a study using quantitative methods :

• Explain the data collected and their statistical treatment as well as all relevant results in relation to the research problem you are investigating. Interpretation of results is not appropriate in this section.
• Report unanticipated events that occurred during your data collection. Explain how the actual analysis differs from the planned analysis. Explain your handling of missing data and why any missing data does not undermine the validity of your analysis.
• Explain the techniques you used to "clean" your data set.
• Choose a minimally sufficient statistical procedure ; provide a rationale for its use and a reference for it. Specify any computer programs used.
• Describe the assumptions for each procedure and the steps you took to ensure that they were not violated.
• When using inferential statistics , provide the descriptive statistics, confidence intervals, and sample sizes for each variable as well as the value of the test statistic, its direction, the degrees of freedom, and the significance level [report the actual p value].
• Avoid inferring causality , particularly in nonrandomized designs or without further experimentation.
• Use tables to provide exact values ; use figures to convey global effects. Keep figures small in size; include graphic representations of confidence intervals whenever possible.
• Always tell the reader what to look for in tables and figures .

NOTE:   When using pre-existing statistical data gathered and made available by anyone other than yourself [e.g., government agency], you still must report on the methods that were used to gather the data and describe any missing data that exists and, if there is any, provide a clear explanation why the missing data does not undermine the validity of your final analysis.

Babbie, Earl R. The Practice of Social Research . 12th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage, 2010; Brians, Craig Leonard et al. Empirical Political Analysis: Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods . 8th ed. Boston, MA: Longman, 2011; McNabb, David E. Research Methods in Public Administration and Nonprofit Management: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches . 2nd ed. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2008; Quantitative Research Methods. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Singh, Kultar. Quantitative Social Research Methods . Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2007.

Basic Research Design for Quantitative Studies

Before designing a quantitative research study, you must decide whether it will be descriptive or experimental because this will dictate how you gather, analyze, and interpret the results. A descriptive study is governed by the following rules: subjects are generally measured once; the intention is to only establish associations between variables; and, the study may include a sample population of hundreds or thousands of subjects to ensure that a valid estimate of a generalized relationship between variables has been obtained. An experimental design includes subjects measured before and after a particular treatment, the sample population may be very small and purposefully chosen, and it is intended to establish causality between variables. Introduction The introduction to a quantitative study is usually written in the present tense and from the third person point of view. It covers the following information:

• Identifies the research problem -- as with any academic study, you must state clearly and concisely the research problem being investigated.
• Reviews the literature -- review scholarship on the topic, synthesizing key themes and, if necessary, noting studies that have used similar methods of inquiry and analysis. Note where key gaps exist and how your study helps to fill these gaps or clarifies existing knowledge.
• Describes the theoretical framework -- provide an outline of the theory or hypothesis underpinning your study. If necessary, define unfamiliar or complex terms, concepts, or ideas and provide the appropriate background information to place the research problem in proper context [e.g., historical, cultural, economic, etc.].

Methodology The methods section of a quantitative study should describe how each objective of your study will be achieved. Be sure to provide enough detail to enable the reader can make an informed assessment of the methods being used to obtain results associated with the research problem. The methods section should be presented in the past tense.

• Study population and sampling -- where did the data come from; how robust is it; note where gaps exist or what was excluded. Note the procedures used for their selection;
• Data collection – describe the tools and methods used to collect information and identify the variables being measured; describe the methods used to obtain the data; and, note if the data was pre-existing [i.e., government data] or you gathered it yourself. If you gathered it yourself, describe what type of instrument you used and why. Note that no data set is perfect--describe any limitations in methods of gathering data.
• Data analysis -- describe the procedures for processing and analyzing the data. If appropriate, describe the specific instruments of analysis used to study each research objective, including mathematical techniques and the type of computer software used to manipulate the data.

Results The finding of your study should be written objectively and in a succinct and precise format. In quantitative studies, it is common to use graphs, tables, charts, and other non-textual elements to help the reader understand the data. Make sure that non-textual elements do not stand in isolation from the text but are being used to supplement the overall description of the results and to help clarify key points being made. Further information about how to effectively present data using charts and graphs can be found here .

• Statistical analysis -- how did you analyze the data? What were the key findings from the data? The findings should be present in a logical, sequential order. Describe but do not interpret these trends or negative results; save that for the discussion section. The results should be presented in the past tense.

Discussion Discussions should be analytic, logical, and comprehensive. The discussion should meld together your findings in relation to those identified in the literature review, and placed within the context of the theoretical framework underpinning the study. The discussion should be presented in the present tense.

• Interpretation of results -- reiterate the research problem being investigated and compare and contrast the findings with the research questions underlying the study. Did they affirm predicted outcomes or did the data refute it?
• Description of trends, comparison of groups, or relationships among variables -- describe any trends that emerged from your analysis and explain all unanticipated and statistical insignificant findings.
• Discussion of implications – what is the meaning of your results? Highlight key findings based on the overall results and note findings that you believe are important. How have the results helped fill gaps in understanding the research problem?
• Limitations -- describe any limitations or unavoidable bias in your study and, if necessary, note why these limitations did not inhibit effective interpretation of the results.

Conclusion End your study by to summarizing the topic and provide a final comment and assessment of the study.

• Summary of findings – synthesize the answers to your research questions. Do not report any statistical data here; just provide a narrative summary of the key findings and describe what was learned that you did not know before conducting the study.
• Recommendations – if appropriate to the aim of the assignment, tie key findings with policy recommendations or actions to be taken in practice.
• Future research – note the need for future research linked to your study’s limitations or to any remaining gaps in the literature that were not addressed in your study.

Black, Thomas R. Doing Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences: An Integrated Approach to Research Design, Measurement and Statistics . London: Sage, 1999; Gay,L. R. and Peter Airasain. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications . 7th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merril Prentice Hall, 2003; Hector, Anestine. An Overview of Quantitative Research in Composition and TESOL . Department of English, Indiana University of Pennsylvania; Hopkins, Will G. “Quantitative Research Design.” Sportscience 4, 1 (2000); "A Strategy for Writing Up Research Results. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper." Department of Biology. Bates College; Nenty, H. Johnson. "Writing a Quantitative Research Thesis." International Journal of Educational Science 1 (2009): 19-32; Ouyang, Ronghua (John). Basic Inquiry of Quantitative Research . Kennesaw State University.

Strengths of Using Quantitative Methods

Quantitative researchers try to recognize and isolate specific variables contained within the study framework, seek correlation, relationships and causality, and attempt to control the environment in which the data is collected to avoid the risk of variables, other than the one being studied, accounting for the relationships identified.

Among the specific strengths of using quantitative methods to study social science research problems:

• Allows for a broader study, involving a greater number of subjects, and enhancing the generalization of the results;
• Allows for greater objectivity and accuracy of results. Generally, quantitative methods are designed to provide summaries of data that support generalizations about the phenomenon under study. In order to accomplish this, quantitative research usually involves few variables and many cases, and employs prescribed procedures to ensure validity and reliability;
• Applying well established standards means that the research can be replicated, and then analyzed and compared with similar studies;
• You can summarize vast sources of information and make comparisons across categories and over time; and,
• Personal bias can be avoided by keeping a 'distance' from participating subjects and using accepted computational techniques .

Babbie, Earl R. The Practice of Social Research . 12th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage, 2010; Brians, Craig Leonard et al. Empirical Political Analysis: Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods . 8th ed. Boston, MA: Longman, 2011; McNabb, David E. Research Methods in Public Administration and Nonprofit Management: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches . 2nd ed. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2008; Singh, Kultar. Quantitative Social Research Methods . Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2007.

Limitations of Using Quantitative Methods

Quantitative methods presume to have an objective approach to studying research problems, where data is controlled and measured, to address the accumulation of facts, and to determine the causes of behavior. As a consequence, the results of quantitative research may be statistically significant but are often humanly insignificant.

Some specific limitations associated with using quantitative methods to study research problems in the social sciences include:

• Quantitative data is more efficient and able to test hypotheses, but may miss contextual detail;
• Uses a static and rigid approach and so employs an inflexible process of discovery;
• The development of standard questions by researchers can lead to "structural bias" and false representation, where the data actually reflects the view of the researcher instead of the participating subject;
• Results provide less detail on behavior, attitudes, and motivation;
• Researcher may collect a much narrower and sometimes superficial dataset;
• Results are limited as they provide numerical descriptions rather than detailed narrative and generally provide less elaborate accounts of human perception;
• The research is often carried out in an unnatural, artificial environment so that a level of control can be applied to the exercise. This level of control might not normally be in place in the real world thus yielding "laboratory results" as opposed to "real world results"; and,
• Preset answers will not necessarily reflect how people really feel about a subject and, in some cases, might just be the closest match to the preconceived hypothesis.

Research Tip

Finding Examples of How to Apply Different Types of Research Methods

SAGE publications is a major publisher of studies about how to design and conduct research in the social and behavioral sciences. Their SAGE Research Methods Online and Cases database includes contents from books, articles, encyclopedias, handbooks, and videos covering social science research design and methods including the complete Little Green Book Series of Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences and the Little Blue Book Series of Qualitative Research techniques. The database also includes case studies outlining the research methods used in real research projects. This is an excellent source for finding definitions of key terms and descriptions of research design and practice, techniques of data gathering, analysis, and reporting, and information about theories of research [e.g., grounded theory]. The database covers both qualitative and quantitative research methods as well as mixed methods approaches to conducting research.

SAGE Research Methods Online and Cases

• << Previous: Qualitative Methods
• Next: Insiderness >>
• Last Updated: May 30, 2024 9:38 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Korean Med Sci
• v.37(16); 2022 Apr 25

A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research Questions and Hypotheses in Scholarly Articles

Edward barroga.

1 Department of General Education, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke’s International University, Tokyo, Japan.

Glafera Janet Matanguihan

2 Department of Biological Sciences, Messiah University, Mechanicsburg, PA, USA.

The development of research questions and the subsequent hypotheses are prerequisites to defining the main research purpose and specific objectives of a study. Consequently, these objectives determine the study design and research outcome. The development of research questions is a process based on knowledge of current trends, cutting-edge studies, and technological advances in the research field. Excellent research questions are focused and require a comprehensive literature search and in-depth understanding of the problem being investigated. Initially, research questions may be written as descriptive questions which could be developed into inferential questions. These questions must be specific and concise to provide a clear foundation for developing hypotheses. Hypotheses are more formal predictions about the research outcomes. These specify the possible results that may or may not be expected regarding the relationship between groups. Thus, research questions and hypotheses clarify the main purpose and specific objectives of the study, which in turn dictate the design of the study, its direction, and outcome. Studies developed from good research questions and hypotheses will have trustworthy outcomes with wide-ranging social and health implications.

INTRODUCTION

Scientific research is usually initiated by posing evidenced-based research questions which are then explicitly restated as hypotheses. 1 , 2 The hypotheses provide directions to guide the study, solutions, explanations, and expected results. 3 , 4 Both research questions and hypotheses are essentially formulated based on conventional theories and real-world processes, which allow the inception of novel studies and the ethical testing of ideas. 5 , 6

It is crucial to have knowledge of both quantitative and qualitative research 2 as both types of research involve writing research questions and hypotheses. 7 However, these crucial elements of research are sometimes overlooked; if not overlooked, then framed without the forethought and meticulous attention it needs. Planning and careful consideration are needed when developing quantitative or qualitative research, particularly when conceptualizing research questions and hypotheses. 4

There is a continuing need to support researchers in the creation of innovative research questions and hypotheses, as well as for journal articles that carefully review these elements. 1 When research questions and hypotheses are not carefully thought of, unethical studies and poor outcomes usually ensue. Carefully formulated research questions and hypotheses define well-founded objectives, which in turn determine the appropriate design, course, and outcome of the study. This article then aims to discuss in detail the various aspects of crafting research questions and hypotheses, with the goal of guiding researchers as they develop their own. Examples from the authors and peer-reviewed scientific articles in the healthcare field are provided to illustrate key points.

DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

A research question is what a study aims to answer after data analysis and interpretation. The answer is written in length in the discussion section of the paper. Thus, the research question gives a preview of the different parts and variables of the study meant to address the problem posed in the research question. 1 An excellent research question clarifies the research writing while facilitating understanding of the research topic, objective, scope, and limitations of the study. 5

On the other hand, a research hypothesis is an educated statement of an expected outcome. This statement is based on background research and current knowledge. 8 , 9 The research hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a new phenomenon 10 or a formal statement on the expected relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable. 3 , 11 It provides a tentative answer to the research question to be tested or explored. 4

Hypotheses employ reasoning to predict a theory-based outcome. 10 These can also be developed from theories by focusing on components of theories that have not yet been observed. 10 The validity of hypotheses is often based on the testability of the prediction made in a reproducible experiment. 8

Conversely, hypotheses can also be rephrased as research questions. Several hypotheses based on existing theories and knowledge may be needed to answer a research question. Developing ethical research questions and hypotheses creates a research design that has logical relationships among variables. These relationships serve as a solid foundation for the conduct of the study. 4 , 11 Haphazardly constructed research questions can result in poorly formulated hypotheses and improper study designs, leading to unreliable results. Thus, the formulations of relevant research questions and verifiable hypotheses are crucial when beginning research. 12

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Excellent research questions are specific and focused. These integrate collective data and observations to confirm or refute the subsequent hypotheses. Well-constructed hypotheses are based on previous reports and verify the research context. These are realistic, in-depth, sufficiently complex, and reproducible. More importantly, these hypotheses can be addressed and tested. 13

There are several characteristics of well-developed hypotheses. Good hypotheses are 1) empirically testable 7 , 10 , 11 , 13 ; 2) backed by preliminary evidence 9 ; 3) testable by ethical research 7 , 9 ; 4) based on original ideas 9 ; 5) have evidenced-based logical reasoning 10 ; and 6) can be predicted. 11 Good hypotheses can infer ethical and positive implications, indicating the presence of a relationship or effect relevant to the research theme. 7 , 11 These are initially developed from a general theory and branch into specific hypotheses by deductive reasoning. In the absence of a theory to base the hypotheses, inductive reasoning based on specific observations or findings form more general hypotheses. 10

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions and hypotheses are developed according to the type of research, which can be broadly classified into quantitative and qualitative research. We provide a summary of the types of research questions and hypotheses under quantitative and qualitative research categories in Table 1 .

Research questions in quantitative research

In quantitative research, research questions inquire about the relationships among variables being investigated and are usually framed at the start of the study. These are precise and typically linked to the subject population, dependent and independent variables, and research design. 1 Research questions may also attempt to describe the behavior of a population in relation to one or more variables, or describe the characteristics of variables to be measured ( descriptive research questions ). 1 , 5 , 14 These questions may also aim to discover differences between groups within the context of an outcome variable ( comparative research questions ), 1 , 5 , 14 or elucidate trends and interactions among variables ( relationship research questions ). 1 , 5 We provide examples of descriptive, comparative, and relationship research questions in quantitative research in Table 2 .

Hypotheses in quantitative research

In quantitative research, hypotheses predict the expected relationships among variables. 15 Relationships among variables that can be predicted include 1) between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable ( simple hypothesis ) or 2) between two or more independent and dependent variables ( complex hypothesis ). 4 , 11 Hypotheses may also specify the expected direction to be followed and imply an intellectual commitment to a particular outcome ( directional hypothesis ) 4 . On the other hand, hypotheses may not predict the exact direction and are used in the absence of a theory, or when findings contradict previous studies ( non-directional hypothesis ). 4 In addition, hypotheses can 1) define interdependency between variables ( associative hypothesis ), 4 2) propose an effect on the dependent variable from manipulation of the independent variable ( causal hypothesis ), 4 3) state a negative relationship between two variables ( null hypothesis ), 4 , 11 , 15 4) replace the working hypothesis if rejected ( alternative hypothesis ), 15 explain the relationship of phenomena to possibly generate a theory ( working hypothesis ), 11 5) involve quantifiable variables that can be tested statistically ( statistical hypothesis ), 11 6) or express a relationship whose interlinks can be verified logically ( logical hypothesis ). 11 We provide examples of simple, complex, directional, non-directional, associative, causal, null, alternative, working, statistical, and logical hypotheses in quantitative research, as well as the definition of quantitative hypothesis-testing research in Table 3 .

Research questions in qualitative research

Unlike research questions in quantitative research, research questions in qualitative research are usually continuously reviewed and reformulated. The central question and associated subquestions are stated more than the hypotheses. 15 The central question broadly explores a complex set of factors surrounding the central phenomenon, aiming to present the varied perspectives of participants. 15

There are varied goals for which qualitative research questions are developed. These questions can function in several ways, such as to 1) identify and describe existing conditions ( contextual research question s); 2) describe a phenomenon ( descriptive research questions ); 3) assess the effectiveness of existing methods, protocols, theories, or procedures ( evaluation research questions ); 4) examine a phenomenon or analyze the reasons or relationships between subjects or phenomena ( explanatory research questions ); or 5) focus on unknown aspects of a particular topic ( exploratory research questions ). 5 In addition, some qualitative research questions provide new ideas for the development of theories and actions ( generative research questions ) or advance specific ideologies of a position ( ideological research questions ). 1 Other qualitative research questions may build on a body of existing literature and become working guidelines ( ethnographic research questions ). Research questions may also be broadly stated without specific reference to the existing literature or a typology of questions ( phenomenological research questions ), may be directed towards generating a theory of some process ( grounded theory questions ), or may address a description of the case and the emerging themes ( qualitative case study questions ). 15 We provide examples of contextual, descriptive, evaluation, explanatory, exploratory, generative, ideological, ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and qualitative case study research questions in qualitative research in Table 4 , and the definition of qualitative hypothesis-generating research in Table 5 .

Qualitative studies usually pose at least one central research question and several subquestions starting with How or What . These research questions use exploratory verbs such as explore or describe . These also focus on one central phenomenon of interest, and may mention the participants and research site. 15

Hypotheses in qualitative research

Hypotheses in qualitative research are stated in the form of a clear statement concerning the problem to be investigated. Unlike in quantitative research where hypotheses are usually developed to be tested, qualitative research can lead to both hypothesis-testing and hypothesis-generating outcomes. 2 When studies require both quantitative and qualitative research questions, this suggests an integrative process between both research methods wherein a single mixed-methods research question can be developed. 1

FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions followed by hypotheses should be developed before the start of the study. 1 , 12 , 14 It is crucial to develop feasible research questions on a topic that is interesting to both the researcher and the scientific community. This can be achieved by a meticulous review of previous and current studies to establish a novel topic. Specific areas are subsequently focused on to generate ethical research questions. The relevance of the research questions is evaluated in terms of clarity of the resulting data, specificity of the methodology, objectivity of the outcome, depth of the research, and impact of the study. 1 , 5 These aspects constitute the FINER criteria (i.e., Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, and Relevant). 1 Clarity and effectiveness are achieved if research questions meet the FINER criteria. In addition to the FINER criteria, Ratan et al. described focus, complexity, novelty, feasibility, and measurability for evaluating the effectiveness of research questions. 14

The PICOT and PEO frameworks are also used when developing research questions. 1 The following elements are addressed in these frameworks, PICOT: P-population/patients/problem, I-intervention or indicator being studied, C-comparison group, O-outcome of interest, and T-timeframe of the study; PEO: P-population being studied, E-exposure to preexisting conditions, and O-outcome of interest. 1 Research questions are also considered good if these meet the “FINERMAPS” framework: Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant, Manageable, Appropriate, Potential value/publishable, and Systematic. 14

As we indicated earlier, research questions and hypotheses that are not carefully formulated result in unethical studies or poor outcomes. To illustrate this, we provide some examples of ambiguous research question and hypotheses that result in unclear and weak research objectives in quantitative research ( Table 6 ) 16 and qualitative research ( Table 7 ) 17 , and how to transform these ambiguous research question(s) and hypothesis(es) into clear and good statements.

a These statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

b These statements are direct quotes from Higashihara and Horiuchi. 16

a This statement is a direct quote from Shimoda et al. 17

The other statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

To construct effective research questions and hypotheses, it is very important to 1) clarify the background and 2) identify the research problem at the outset of the research, within a specific timeframe. 9 Then, 3) review or conduct preliminary research to collect all available knowledge about the possible research questions by studying theories and previous studies. 18 Afterwards, 4) construct research questions to investigate the research problem. Identify variables to be accessed from the research questions 4 and make operational definitions of constructs from the research problem and questions. Thereafter, 5) construct specific deductive or inductive predictions in the form of hypotheses. 4 Finally, 6) state the study aims . This general flow for constructing effective research questions and hypotheses prior to conducting research is shown in Fig. 1 .

Research questions are used more frequently in qualitative research than objectives or hypotheses. 3 These questions seek to discover, understand, explore or describe experiences by asking “What” or “How.” The questions are open-ended to elicit a description rather than to relate variables or compare groups. The questions are continually reviewed, reformulated, and changed during the qualitative study. 3 Research questions are also used more frequently in survey projects than hypotheses in experiments in quantitative research to compare variables and their relationships.

Hypotheses are constructed based on the variables identified and as an if-then statement, following the template, ‘If a specific action is taken, then a certain outcome is expected.’ At this stage, some ideas regarding expectations from the research to be conducted must be drawn. 18 Then, the variables to be manipulated (independent) and influenced (dependent) are defined. 4 Thereafter, the hypothesis is stated and refined, and reproducible data tailored to the hypothesis are identified, collected, and analyzed. 4 The hypotheses must be testable and specific, 18 and should describe the variables and their relationships, the specific group being studied, and the predicted research outcome. 18 Hypotheses construction involves a testable proposition to be deduced from theory, and independent and dependent variables to be separated and measured separately. 3 Therefore, good hypotheses must be based on good research questions constructed at the start of a study or trial. 12

In summary, research questions are constructed after establishing the background of the study. Hypotheses are then developed based on the research questions. Thus, it is crucial to have excellent research questions to generate superior hypotheses. In turn, these would determine the research objectives and the design of the study, and ultimately, the outcome of the research. 12 Algorithms for building research questions and hypotheses are shown in Fig. 2 for quantitative research and in Fig. 3 for qualitative research.

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

• EXAMPLE 1. Descriptive research question (quantitative research)
• - Presents research variables to be assessed (distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes)
• “BACKGROUND: Since COVID-19 was identified, its clinical and biological heterogeneity has been recognized. Identifying COVID-19 phenotypes might help guide basic, clinical, and translational research efforts.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the clinical spectrum of patients with COVID-19 contain distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes? ” 19
• EXAMPLE 2. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Shows interactions between dependent variable (static postural control) and independent variable (peripheral visual field loss)
• “Background: Integration of visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive sensations contributes to postural control. People with peripheral visual field loss have serious postural instability. However, the directional specificity of postural stability and sensory reweighting caused by gradual peripheral visual field loss remain unclear.
• Research question: What are the effects of peripheral visual field loss on static postural control ?” 20
• EXAMPLE 3. Comparative research question (quantitative research)
• - Clarifies the difference among groups with an outcome variable (patients enrolled in COMPERA with moderate PH or severe PH in COPD) and another group without the outcome variable (patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH))
• “BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in COPD is a poorly investigated clinical condition.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Which factors determine the outcome of PH in COPD?
• STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed the characteristics and outcome of patients enrolled in the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA) with moderate or severe PH in COPD as defined during the 6th PH World Symposium who received medical therapy for PH and compared them with patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) .” 21
• EXAMPLE 4. Exploratory research question (qualitative research)
• - Explores areas that have not been fully investigated (perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment) to have a deeper understanding of the research problem
• “Problem: Interventions for children with obesity lead to only modest improvements in BMI and long-term outcomes, and data are limited on the perspectives of families of children with obesity in clinic-based treatment. This scoping review seeks to answer the question: What is known about the perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment? This review aims to explore the scope of perspectives reported by families of children with obesity who have received individualized outpatient clinic-based obesity treatment.” 22
• EXAMPLE 5. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Defines interactions between dependent variable (use of ankle strategies) and independent variable (changes in muscle tone)
• “Background: To maintain an upright standing posture against external disturbances, the human body mainly employs two types of postural control strategies: “ankle strategy” and “hip strategy.” While it has been reported that the magnitude of the disturbance alters the use of postural control strategies, it has not been elucidated how the level of muscle tone, one of the crucial parameters of bodily function, determines the use of each strategy. We have previously confirmed using forward dynamics simulations of human musculoskeletal models that an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. The objective of the present study was to experimentally evaluate a hypothesis: an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. Research question: Do changes in the muscle tone affect the use of ankle strategies ?” 23

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

• EXAMPLE 1. Working hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - A hypothesis that is initially accepted for further research to produce a feasible theory
• “As fever may have benefit in shortening the duration of viral illness, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response when taken during the early stages of COVID-19 illness .” 24
• “In conclusion, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response . The difference in perceived safety of these agents in COVID-19 illness could be related to the more potent efficacy to reduce fever with ibuprofen compared to acetaminophen. Compelling data on the benefit of fever warrant further research and review to determine when to treat or withhold ibuprofen for early stage fever for COVID-19 and other related viral illnesses .” 24
• EXAMPLE 2. Exploratory hypothesis (qualitative research)
• - Explores particular areas deeper to clarify subjective experience and develop a formal hypothesis potentially testable in a future quantitative approach
• “We hypothesized that when thinking about a past experience of help-seeking, a self distancing prompt would cause increased help-seeking intentions and more favorable help-seeking outcome expectations .” 25
• “Conclusion
• Although a priori hypotheses were not supported, further research is warranted as results indicate the potential for using self-distancing approaches to increasing help-seeking among some people with depressive symptomatology.” 25
• EXAMPLE 3. Hypothesis-generating research to establish a framework for hypothesis testing (qualitative research)
• “We hypothesize that compassionate care is beneficial for patients (better outcomes), healthcare systems and payers (lower costs), and healthcare providers (lower burnout). ” 26
• Compassionomics is the branch of knowledge and scientific study of the effects of compassionate healthcare. Our main hypotheses are that compassionate healthcare is beneficial for (1) patients, by improving clinical outcomes, (2) healthcare systems and payers, by supporting financial sustainability, and (3) HCPs, by lowering burnout and promoting resilience and well-being. The purpose of this paper is to establish a scientific framework for testing the hypotheses above . If these hypotheses are confirmed through rigorous research, compassionomics will belong in the science of evidence-based medicine, with major implications for all healthcare domains.” 26
• EXAMPLE 4. Statistical hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - An assumption is made about the relationship among several population characteristics ( gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD ). Validity is tested by statistical experiment or analysis ( chi-square test, Students t-test, and logistic regression analysis)
• “Our research investigated gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD in a Japanese clinical sample. Due to unique Japanese cultural ideals and expectations of women's behavior that are in opposition to ADHD symptoms, we hypothesized that women with ADHD experience more difficulties and present more dysfunctions than men . We tested the following hypotheses: first, women with ADHD have more comorbidities than men with ADHD; second, women with ADHD experience more social hardships than men, such as having less full-time employment and being more likely to be divorced.” 27
• “Statistical Analysis
• ( text omitted ) Between-gender comparisons were made using the chi-squared test for categorical variables and Students t-test for continuous variables…( text omitted ). A logistic regression analysis was performed for employment status, marital status, and comorbidity to evaluate the independent effects of gender on these dependent variables.” 27

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESIS AS WRITTEN IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES IN RELATION TO OTHER PARTS

• EXAMPLE 1. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• “Pregnant women need skilled care during pregnancy and childbirth, but that skilled care is often delayed in some countries …( text omitted ). The focused antenatal care (FANC) model of WHO recommends that nurses provide information or counseling to all pregnant women …( text omitted ). Job aids are visual support materials that provide the right kind of information using graphics and words in a simple and yet effective manner. When nurses are not highly trained or have many work details to attend to, these job aids can serve as a content reminder for the nurses and can be used for educating their patients (Jennings, Yebadokpo, Affo, & Agbogbe, 2010) ( text omitted ). Importantly, additional evidence is needed to confirm how job aids can further improve the quality of ANC counseling by health workers in maternal care …( text omitted )” 28
• “ This has led us to hypothesize that the quality of ANC counseling would be better if supported by job aids. Consequently, a better quality of ANC counseling is expected to produce higher levels of awareness concerning the danger signs of pregnancy and a more favorable impression of the caring behavior of nurses .” 28
• “This study aimed to examine the differences in the responses of pregnant women to a job aid-supported intervention during ANC visit in terms of 1) their understanding of the danger signs of pregnancy and 2) their impression of the caring behaviors of nurses to pregnant women in rural Tanzania.” 28
• EXAMPLE 2. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• “We conducted a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate and compare changes in salivary cortisol and oxytocin levels of first-time pregnant women between experimental and control groups. The women in the experimental group touched and held an infant for 30 min (experimental intervention protocol), whereas those in the control group watched a DVD movie of an infant (control intervention protocol). The primary outcome was salivary cortisol level and the secondary outcome was salivary oxytocin level.” 29
• “ We hypothesize that at 30 min after touching and holding an infant, the salivary cortisol level will significantly decrease and the salivary oxytocin level will increase in the experimental group compared with the control group .” 29
• EXAMPLE 3. Background, aim, and hypothesis are provided
• “In countries where the maternal mortality ratio remains high, antenatal education to increase Birth Preparedness and Complication Readiness (BPCR) is considered one of the top priorities [1]. BPCR includes birth plans during the antenatal period, such as the birthplace, birth attendant, transportation, health facility for complications, expenses, and birth materials, as well as family coordination to achieve such birth plans. In Tanzania, although increasing, only about half of all pregnant women attend an antenatal clinic more than four times [4]. Moreover, the information provided during antenatal care (ANC) is insufficient. In the resource-poor settings, antenatal group education is a potential approach because of the limited time for individual counseling at antenatal clinics.” 30
• “This study aimed to evaluate an antenatal group education program among pregnant women and their families with respect to birth-preparedness and maternal and infant outcomes in rural villages of Tanzania.” 30
• “ The study hypothesis was if Tanzanian pregnant women and their families received a family-oriented antenatal group education, they would (1) have a higher level of BPCR, (2) attend antenatal clinic four or more times, (3) give birth in a health facility, (4) have less complications of women at birth, and (5) have less complications and deaths of infants than those who did not receive the education .” 30

Research questions and hypotheses are crucial components to any type of research, whether quantitative or qualitative. These questions should be developed at the very beginning of the study. Excellent research questions lead to superior hypotheses, which, like a compass, set the direction of research, and can often determine the successful conduct of the study. Many research studies have floundered because the development of research questions and subsequent hypotheses was not given the thought and meticulous attention needed. The development of research questions and hypotheses is an iterative process based on extensive knowledge of the literature and insightful grasp of the knowledge gap. Focused, concise, and specific research questions provide a strong foundation for constructing hypotheses which serve as formal predictions about the research outcomes. Research questions and hypotheses are crucial elements of research that should not be overlooked. They should be carefully thought of and constructed when planning research. This avoids unethical studies and poor outcomes by defining well-founded objectives that determine the design, course, and outcome of the study.

Disclosure: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author Contributions:

• Conceptualization: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Methodology: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - original draft: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - review & editing: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.

How to Research Guide

• What is Research
• Research Terms
• Subject vs. Keyword
• Crafting Searches
• Primary, Secondary, & Tertiary
• Credible Resources

Quantitative Research

What is quantitative research, purpose of quantitative research, how do i know if the study is a quantitative design what type is it, sample quantitative student paper, acknowledgment.

• Qualitative Research
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative
• Scientific Method
• Literature Review

Quantitative methodology is the dominant research framework in the social sciences. It refers to a set of strategies, techniques, and assumptions used to study psychological, social, and economic processes through the exploration of numeric patterns .

• Quantitative research gathers a range of numeric data. Some of the numeric data is intrinsically quantitative (e.g. personal income), while in other cases the numeric structure is imposed (e.g. ‘On a scale from 1 to 10, how depressed did you feel last week?’).
• The collection of quantitative information allows researchers to conduct simple to extremely sophisticated statistical analyses that aggregate the data (e.g. averages, percentages), show relationships among the data (e.g. ‘Students with lower grade point averages tend to score lower on a depression scale’) or compare across aggregated data (e.g. the USA has a higher gross domestic product than Spain).
• Quantitative research includes methodologies such as questionnaires, structured observations, or experiments and stands in contrast to qualitative research. Qualitative research involves the collection and analysis of narratives and/or open-ended observations through methodologies such as interviews, focus groups, or ethnographies.

Source: The SAGE encyclopedia of action research (Vols. 1-2). London, : SAGE Publications Ltd doi: 10.4135/9781446294406

The purpose of quantitative research is to generate knowledge and create an understanding of the social world.

• Quantitative research is used by social scientists, including communication researchers, to observe phenomena or occurrences affecting individuals. Social scientists are concerned with the study of people.
• Quantitative research is a way to learn about a particular group of people, known as a sample population. Using scientific inquiry, quantitative research relies on data that are observed or measured to examine questions about the sample population.

Source: The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods;(Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc doi: 10.4135/9781483381411<

Quantitative Research Designs: Descriptive non-experimental, Quasi-experimental, or Experimental?

• Studies do not always explicitly state what kind of research design is being used.  You will need to know how to decipher which design type is used. 

The following video will help you determine the quantitative design type.

• Quantitiative student paper From the American Psychological Association

This resource is adapted from the UTA Libraries, Quantitative and Qualitative Research Guide. Thank you to them for sharing their content, which may be reused and adapted under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license . 

• << Previous: Types of Research
• Next: Qualitative Research >>
• Last Updated: Apr 26, 2024 11:31 AM
• URL: https://davenport.libguides.com/research-how

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• What Is Quantitative Research? | Definition & Methods

What Is Quantitative Research? | Definition & Methods

Published on 4 April 2022 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on 10 October 2022.

Quantitative research is the process of collecting and analysing numerical data. It can be used to find patterns and averages, make predictions, test causal relationships, and generalise results to wider populations.

Quantitative research is the opposite of qualitative research , which involves collecting and analysing non-numerical data (e.g. text, video, or audio).

Quantitative research is widely used in the natural and social sciences: biology, chemistry, psychology, economics, sociology, marketing, etc.

• What is the demographic makeup of Singapore in 2020?
• How has the average temperature changed globally over the last century?
• Does environmental pollution affect the prevalence of honey bees?
• Does working from home increase productivity for people with long commutes?

Table of contents

Quantitative research methods, quantitative data analysis, advantages of quantitative research, disadvantages of quantitative research, frequently asked questions about quantitative research.

You can use quantitative research methods for descriptive, correlational or experimental research.

• In descriptive research , you simply seek an overall summary of your study variables.
• In correlational research , you investigate relationships between your study variables.
• In experimental research , you systematically examine whether there is a cause-and-effect relationship between variables.

Correlational and experimental research can both be used to formally test hypotheses , or predictions, using statistics. The results may be generalised to broader populations based on the sampling method used.

To collect quantitative data, you will often need to use operational definitions that translate abstract concepts (e.g., mood) into observable and quantifiable measures (e.g., self-ratings of feelings and energy levels).

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Once data is collected, you may need to process it before it can be analysed. For example, survey and test data may need to be transformed from words to numbers. Then, you can use statistical analysis to answer your research questions .

Descriptive statistics will give you a summary of your data and include measures of averages and variability. You can also use graphs, scatter plots and frequency tables to visualise your data and check for any trends or outliers.

Using inferential statistics , you can make predictions or generalisations based on your data. You can test your hypothesis or use your sample data to estimate the population parameter .

You can also assess the reliability and validity of your data collection methods to indicate how consistently and accurately your methods actually measured what you wanted them to.

Quantitative research is often used to standardise data collection and generalise findings . Strengths of this approach include:

• Replication

Repeating the study is possible because of standardised data collection protocols and tangible definitions of abstract concepts.

• Direct comparisons of results

The study can be reproduced in other cultural settings, times or with different groups of participants. Results can be compared statistically.

• Large samples

Data from large samples can be processed and analysed using reliable and consistent procedures through quantitative data analysis.

• Hypothesis testing

Using formalised and established hypothesis testing procedures means that you have to carefully consider and report your research variables, predictions, data collection and testing methods before coming to a conclusion.

Despite the benefits of quantitative research, it is sometimes inadequate in explaining complex research topics. Its limitations include:

• Superficiality

Using precise and restrictive operational definitions may inadequately represent complex concepts. For example, the concept of mood may be represented with just a number in quantitative research, but explained with elaboration in qualitative research.

• Narrow focus

Predetermined variables and measurement procedures can mean that you ignore other relevant observations.

• Structural bias

Despite standardised procedures, structural biases can still affect quantitative research. Missing data , imprecise measurements or inappropriate sampling methods are biases that can lead to the wrong conclusions.

• Lack of context

Quantitative research often uses unnatural settings like laboratories or fails to consider historical and cultural contexts that may affect data collection and results.

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to test a hypothesis by systematically collecting and analysing data, while qualitative methods allow you to explore ideas and experiences in depth.

In mixed methods research , you use both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods to answer your research question .

Data collection is the systematic process by which observations or measurements are gathered in research. It is used in many different contexts by academics, governments, businesses, and other organisations.

Operationalisation means turning abstract conceptual ideas into measurable observations.

For example, the concept of social anxiety isn’t directly observable, but it can be operationally defined in terms of self-rating scores, behavioural avoidance of crowded places, or physical anxiety symptoms in social situations.

Before collecting data , it’s important to consider how you will operationalise the variables that you want to measure.

Reliability and validity are both about how well a method measures something:

• Reliability refers to the  consistency of a measure (whether the results can be reproduced under the same conditions).
• Validity   refers to the  accuracy of a measure (whether the results really do represent what they are supposed to measure).

If you are doing experimental research , you also have to consider the internal and external validity of your experiment.

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2022, October 10). What Is Quantitative Research? | Definition & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved 3 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/introduction-to-quantitative-research/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

Quantitative Research: What It Is, Practices & Methods

Quantitative research involves analyzing and gathering numerical data to uncover trends, calculate averages, evaluate relationships, and derive overarching insights. It’s used in various fields, including the natural and social sciences. Quantitative data analysis employs statistical techniques for processing and interpreting numeric data.

Research designs in the quantitative realm outline how data will be collected and analyzed with methods like experiments and surveys. Qualitative methods complement quantitative research by focusing on non-numerical data, adding depth to understanding. Data collection methods can be qualitative or quantitative, depending on research goals. Researchers often use a combination of both approaches to gain a comprehensive understanding of phenomena.

What is Quantitative Research?

Quantitative research is a systematic investigation of phenomena by gathering quantifiable data and performing statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques. Quantitative research collects statistically significant information from existing and potential customers using sampling methods and sending out online surveys , online polls , and questionnaires , for example.

One of the main characteristics of this type of research is that the results can be depicted in numerical form. After carefully collecting structured observations and understanding these numbers, it’s possible to predict the future of a product or service, establish causal relationships or Causal Research , and make changes accordingly. Quantitative research primarily centers on the analysis of numerical data and utilizes inferential statistics to derive conclusions that can be extrapolated to the broader population.

An example of a quantitative research study is the survey conducted to understand how long a doctor takes to tend to a patient when the patient walks into the hospital. A patient satisfaction survey can be administered to ask questions like how long a doctor takes to see a patient, how often a patient walks into a hospital, and other such questions, which are dependent variables in the research. This kind of research method is often employed in the social sciences, and it involves using mathematical frameworks and theories to effectively present data, ensuring that the results are logical, statistically sound, and unbiased.

Data collection in quantitative research uses a structured method and is typically conducted on larger samples representing the entire population. Researchers use quantitative methods to collect numerical data, which is then subjected to statistical analysis to determine statistically significant findings. This approach is valuable in both experimental research and social research, as it helps in making informed decisions and drawing reliable conclusions based on quantitative data.

Quantitative Research Characteristics

Quantitative research has several unique characteristics that make it well-suited for specific projects. Let’s explore the most crucial of these characteristics so that you can consider them when planning your next research project:

• Structured tools: Quantitative research relies on structured tools such as surveys, polls, or questionnaires to gather quantitative data . Using such structured methods helps collect in-depth and actionable numerical data from the survey respondents, making it easier to perform data analysis.
• Sample size: Quantitative research is conducted on a significant sample size  representing the target market . Appropriate Survey Sampling methods, a fundamental aspect of quantitative research methods, must be employed when deriving the sample to fortify the research objective and ensure the reliability of the results.
• Close-ended questions: Closed-ended questions , specifically designed to align with the research objectives, are a cornerstone of quantitative research. These questions facilitate the collection of quantitative data and are extensively used in data collection processes.
• Prior studies: Before collecting feedback from respondents, researchers often delve into previous studies related to the research topic. This preliminary research helps frame the study effectively and ensures the data collection process is well-informed.
• Quantitative data: Typically, quantitative data is represented using tables, charts, graphs, or other numerical forms. This visual representation aids in understanding the collected data and is essential for rigorous data analysis, a key component of quantitative research methods.
• Generalization of results: One of the strengths of quantitative research is its ability to generalize results to the entire population. It means that the findings derived from a sample can be extrapolated to make informed decisions and take appropriate actions for improvement based on numerical data analysis.

Quantitative Research Methods

Quantitative research methods are systematic approaches used to gather and analyze numerical data to understand and draw conclusions about a phenomenon or population. Here are the quantitative research methods:

• Primary quantitative research methods
• Secondary quantitative research methods

Primary Quantitative Research Methods

Primary quantitative research is the most widely used method of conducting market research. The distinct feature of primary research is that the researcher focuses on collecting data directly rather than depending on data collected from previously done research. Primary quantitative research design can be broken down into three further distinctive tracks and the process flow. They are:

A. Techniques and Types of Studies

There are multiple types of primary quantitative research. They can be distinguished into the four following distinctive methods, which are:

01. Survey Research

Survey Research is fundamental for all quantitative outcome research methodologies and studies. Surveys are used to ask questions to a sample of respondents, using various types such as online polls, online surveys, paper questionnaires, web-intercept surveys , etc. Every small and big organization intends to understand what their customers think about their products and services, how well new features are faring in the market, and other such details.

By conducting survey research, an organization can ask multiple survey questions , collect data from a pool of customers, and analyze this collected data to produce numerical results. It is the first step towards collecting data for any research. You can use single ease questions . A single-ease question is a straightforward query that elicits a concise and uncomplicated response.

This type of research can be conducted with a specific target audience group and also can be conducted across multiple groups along with comparative analysis . A prerequisite for this type of research is that the sample of respondents must have randomly selected members. This way, a researcher can easily maintain the accuracy of the obtained results as a huge variety of respondents will be addressed using random selection. 

Traditionally, survey research was conducted face-to-face or via phone calls. Still, with the progress made by online mediums such as email or social media, survey research has also spread to online mediums.There are two types of surveys , either of which can be chosen based on the time in hand and the kind of data required:

Cross-sectional surveys: Cross-sectional surveys are observational surveys conducted in situations where the researcher intends to collect data from a sample of the target population at a given point in time. Researchers can evaluate various variables at a particular time. Data gathered using this type of survey is from people who depict similarity in all variables except the variables which are considered for research . Throughout the survey, this one variable will stay constant.

• Cross-sectional surveys are popular with retail, SMEs, and healthcare industries. Information is garnered without modifying any parameters in the variable ecosystem.
• Multiple samples can be analyzed and compared using a cross-sectional survey research method.
• Multiple variables can be evaluated using this type of survey research.
• The only disadvantage of cross-sectional surveys is that the cause-effect relationship of variables cannot be established as it usually evaluates variables at a particular time and not across a continuous time frame.

Longitudinal surveys: Longitudinal surveys are also observational surveys , but unlike cross-sectional surveys, longitudinal surveys are conducted across various time durations to observe a change in respondent behavior and thought processes. This time can be days, months, years, or even decades. For instance, a researcher planning to analyze the change in buying habits of teenagers over 5 years will conduct longitudinal surveys.

• In cross-sectional surveys, the same variables were evaluated at a given time, and in longitudinal surveys, different variables can be analyzed at different intervals.
• Longitudinal surveys are extensively used in the field of medicine and applied sciences. Apart from these two fields, they are also used to observe a change in the market trend analysis , analyze customer satisfaction, or gain feedback on products/services.
• In situations where the sequence of events is highly essential, longitudinal surveys are used.
• Researchers say that when research subjects need to be thoroughly inspected before concluding, they rely on longitudinal surveys.

02. Correlational Research

A comparison between two entities is invariable. Correlation research is conducted to establish a relationship between two closely-knit entities and how one impacts the other, and what changes are eventually observed. This research method is carried out to give value to naturally occurring relationships, and a minimum of two different groups are required to conduct this quantitative research method successfully. Without assuming various aspects, a relationship between two groups or entities must be established.

Researchers use this quantitative research design to correlate two or more variables using mathematical analysis methods. Patterns, relationships, and trends between variables are concluded as they exist in their original setup. The impact of one of these variables on the other is observed, along with how it changes the relationship between the two variables. Researchers tend to manipulate one of the variables to attain the desired results.

Ideally, it is advised not to make conclusions merely based on correlational research. This is because it is not mandatory that if two variables are in sync that they are interrelated.

Example of Correlational Research Questions :

• The relationship between stress and depression.
• The equation between fame and money.
• The relation between activities in a third-grade class and its students.

03. Causal-comparative Research

This research method mainly depends on the factor of comparison. Also called quasi-experimental research , this quantitative research method is used by researchers to conclude the cause-effect equation between two or more variables, where one variable is dependent on the other independent variable. The independent variable is established but not manipulated, and its impact on the dependent variable is observed. These variables or groups must be formed as they exist in the natural setup. As the dependent and independent variables will always exist in a group, it is advised that the conclusions are carefully established by keeping all the factors in mind.

Causal-comparative research is not restricted to the statistical analysis of two variables but extends to analyzing how various variables or groups change under the influence of the same changes. This research is conducted irrespective of the type of relationship that exists between two or more variables. Statistical analysis plan is used to present the outcome using this quantitative research method.

Example of Causal-Comparative Research Questions:

• The impact of drugs on a teenager. The effect of good education on a freshman. The effect of substantial food provision in the villages of Africa.

04. Experimental Research

Also known as true experimentation, this research method relies on a theory. As the name suggests, experimental research is usually based on one or more theories. This theory has yet to be proven before and is merely a supposition. In experimental research, an analysis is done around proving or disproving the statement. This research method is used in natural sciences. Traditional research methods are more effective than modern techniques.

There can be multiple theories in experimental research. A theory is a statement that can be verified or refuted.

After establishing the statement, efforts are made to understand whether it is valid or invalid. This quantitative research method is mainly used in natural or social sciences as various statements must be proved right or wrong.

• Traditional research methods are more effective than modern techniques.
• Systematic teaching schedules help children who struggle to cope with the course.
• It is a boon to have responsible nursing staff for ailing parents.

B. Data Collection Methodologies

The second major step in primary quantitative research is data collection. Data collection can be divided into sampling methods and data collection using surveys and polls.

01. Data Collection Methodologies: Sampling Methods

There are two main sampling methods for quantitative research: Probability and Non-probability sampling .

Probability sampling: A theory of probability is used to filter individuals from a population and create samples in probability sampling . Participants of a sample are chosen by random selection processes. Each target audience member has an equal opportunity to be selected in the sample.

There are four main types of probability sampling:

• Simple random sampling: As the name indicates, simple random sampling is nothing but a random selection of elements for a sample. This sampling technique is implemented where the target population is considerably large.
• Stratified random sampling: In the stratified random sampling method , a large population is divided into groups (strata), and members of a sample are chosen randomly from these strata. The various segregated strata should ideally not overlap one another.
• Cluster sampling: Cluster sampling is a probability sampling method using which the main segment is divided into clusters, usually using geographic segmentation and demographic segmentation parameters.
• Systematic sampling: Systematic sampling is a technique where the starting point of the sample is chosen randomly, and all the other elements are chosen using a fixed interval. This interval is calculated by dividing the population size by the target sample size.

Non-probability sampling: Non-probability sampling is where the researcher’s knowledge and experience are used to create samples. Because of the researcher’s involvement, not all the target population members have an equal probability of being selected to be a part of a sample.

There are five non-probability sampling models:

• Convenience sampling: In convenience sampling , elements of a sample are chosen only due to one prime reason: their proximity to the researcher. These samples are quick and easy to implement as there is no other parameter of selection involved.
• Consecutive sampling: Consecutive sampling is quite similar to convenience sampling, except for the fact that researchers can choose a single element or a group of samples and conduct research consecutively over a significant period and then perform the same process with other samples.
• Quota sampling: Using quota sampling , researchers can select elements using their knowledge of target traits and personalities to form strata. Members of various strata can then be chosen to be a part of the sample as per the researcher’s understanding.
• Snowball sampling: Snowball sampling is conducted with target audiences who are difficult to contact and get information. It is popular in cases where the target audience for analysis research is rare to put together.
• Judgmental sampling: Judgmental sampling is a non-probability sampling method where samples are created only based on the researcher’s experience and research skill .

02. Data collection methodologies: Using surveys & polls

Once the sample is determined, then either surveys or polls can be distributed to collect the data for quantitative research.

Using surveys for primary quantitative research

A survey is defined as a research method used for collecting data from a pre-defined group of respondents to gain information and insights on various topics of interest. The ease of survey distribution and the wide number of people it can reach depending on the research time and objective makes it one of the most important aspects of conducting quantitative research.

Fundamental levels of measurement – nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio scales

Four measurement scales are fundamental to creating a multiple-choice question in a survey. They are nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio measurement scales without the fundamentals of which no multiple-choice questions can be created. Hence, it is crucial to understand these measurement levels to develop a robust survey.

Use of different question types

To conduct quantitative research, close-ended questions must be used in a survey. They can be a mix of multiple question types, including multiple-choice questions like semantic differential scale questions , rating scale questions , etc.

Survey Distribution and Survey Data Collection

In the above, we have seen the process of building a survey along with the research design to conduct primary quantitative research. Survey distribution to collect data is the other important aspect of the survey process. There are different ways of survey distribution. Some of the most commonly used methods are:

• Email: Sending a survey via email is the most widely used and effective survey distribution method. This method’s response rate is high because the respondents know your brand. You can use the QuestionPro email management feature to send out and collect survey responses.
• Buy respondents: Another effective way to distribute a survey and conduct primary quantitative research is to use a sample. Since the respondents are knowledgeable and are on the panel by their own will, responses are much higher.
• Embed survey on a website: Embedding a survey on a website increases a high number of responses as the respondent is already in close proximity to the brand when the survey pops up.
• Social distribution: Using social media to distribute the survey aids in collecting a higher number of responses from the people that are aware of the brand.
• QR code: QuestionPro QR codes store the URL for the survey. You can print/publish this code in magazines, signs, business cards, or on just about any object/medium.
• SMS survey: The SMS survey is a quick and time-effective way to collect a high number of responses.
• Offline Survey App: The QuestionPro App allows users to circulate surveys quickly, and the responses can be collected both online and offline.

Survey example

An example of a survey is a short customer satisfaction (CSAT) survey that can quickly be built and deployed to collect feedback about what the customer thinks about a brand and how satisfied and referenceable the brand is.

Using polls for primary quantitative research

Polls are a method to collect feedback using close-ended questions from a sample. The most commonly used types of polls are election polls and exit polls . Both of these are used to collect data from a large sample size but using basic question types like multiple-choice questions.

C. Data Analysis Techniques

The third aspect of primary quantitative research design is data analysis . After collecting raw data, there must be an analysis of this data to derive statistical inferences from this research. It is important to relate the results to the research objective and establish the statistical relevance of the results.

Remember to consider aspects of research that were not considered for the data collection process and report the difference between what was planned vs. what was actually executed.

It is then required to select precise Statistical Analysis Methods , such as SWOT, Conjoint, Cross-tabulation, etc., to analyze the quantitative data.

• SWOT analysis: SWOT Analysis stands for the acronym of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threat analysis. Organizations use this statistical analysis technique to evaluate their performance internally and externally to develop effective strategies for improvement.
• Conjoint Analysis: Conjoint Analysis is a market analysis method to learn how individuals make complicated purchasing decisions. Trade-offs are involved in an individual’s daily activities, and these reflect their ability to decide from a complex list of product/service options.
• Cross-tabulation: Cross-tabulation is one of the preliminary statistical market analysis methods which establishes relationships, patterns, and trends within the various parameters of the research study.
• TURF Analysis: TURF Analysis , an acronym for Totally Unduplicated Reach and Frequency Analysis, is executed in situations where the reach of a favorable communication source is to be analyzed along with the frequency of this communication. It is used for understanding the potential of a target market.

Inferential statistics methods such as confidence interval, the margin of error, etc., can then be used to provide results.

Secondary Quantitative Research Methods

Secondary quantitative research or desk research is a research method that involves using already existing data or secondary data. Existing data is summarized and collated to increase the overall effectiveness of the research.

This research method involves collecting quantitative data from existing data sources like the internet, government resources, libraries, research reports, etc. Secondary quantitative research helps to validate the data collected from primary quantitative research and aid in strengthening or proving, or disproving previously collected data.

The following are five popularly used secondary quantitative research methods:

• Data available on the internet: With the high penetration of the internet and mobile devices, it has become increasingly easy to conduct quantitative research using the internet. Information about most research topics is available online, and this aids in boosting the validity of primary quantitative data.
• Government and non-government sources: Secondary quantitative research can also be conducted with the help of government and non-government sources that deal with market research reports. This data is highly reliable and in-depth and hence, can be used to increase the validity of quantitative research design.
• Public libraries: Now a sparingly used method of conducting quantitative research, it is still a reliable source of information, though. Public libraries have copies of important research that was conducted earlier. They are a storehouse of valuable information and documents from which information can be extracted.
• Educational institutions: Educational institutions conduct in-depth research on multiple topics, and hence, the reports that they publish are an important source of validation in quantitative research.
• Commercial information sources: Local newspapers, journals, magazines, radio, and TV stations are great sources to obtain data for secondary quantitative research. These commercial information sources have in-depth, first-hand information on market research, demographic segmentation, and similar subjects.

Quantitative Research Examples

Some examples of quantitative research are:

• A customer satisfaction template can be used if any organization would like to conduct a customer satisfaction (CSAT) survey . Through this kind of survey, an organization can collect quantitative data and metrics on the goodwill of the brand or organization in the customer’s mind based on multiple parameters such as product quality, pricing, customer experience, etc. This data can be collected by asking a net promoter score (NPS) question , matrix table questions, etc. that provide data in the form of numbers that can be analyzed and worked upon.
• Another example of quantitative research is an organization that conducts an event, collecting feedback from attendees about the value they see from the event. By using an event survey , the organization can collect actionable feedback about the satisfaction levels of customers during various phases of the event such as the sales, pre and post-event, the likelihood of recommending the organization to their friends and colleagues, hotel preferences for the future events and other such questions.

What are the Advantages of Quantitative Research?

There are many advantages to quantitative research. Some of the major advantages of why researchers use this method in market research are:

Collect Reliable and Accurate Data:

Quantitative research is a powerful method for collecting reliable and accurate quantitative data. Since data is collected, analyzed, and presented in numbers, the results obtained are incredibly reliable and objective. Numbers do not lie and offer an honest and precise picture of the conducted research without discrepancies. In situations where a researcher aims to eliminate bias and predict potential conflicts, quantitative research is the method of choice.

Quick Data Collection:

Quantitative research involves studying a group of people representing a larger population. Researchers use a survey or another quantitative research method to efficiently gather information from these participants, making the process of analyzing the data and identifying patterns faster and more manageable through the use of statistical analysis. This advantage makes quantitative research an attractive option for projects with time constraints.

Wider Scope of Data Analysis:

Quantitative research, thanks to its utilization of statistical methods, offers an extensive range of data collection and analysis. Researchers can delve into a broader spectrum of variables and relationships within the data, enabling a more thorough comprehension of the subject under investigation. This expanded scope is precious when dealing with complex research questions that require in-depth numerical analysis.

Eliminate Bias:

One of the significant advantages of quantitative research is its ability to eliminate bias. This research method leaves no room for personal comments or the biasing of results, as the findings are presented in numerical form. This objectivity makes the results fair and reliable in most cases, reducing the potential for researcher bias or subjectivity.

In summary, quantitative research involves collecting, analyzing, and presenting quantitative data using statistical analysis. It offers numerous advantages, including the collection of reliable and accurate data, quick data collection, a broader scope of data analysis, and the elimination of bias, making it a valuable approach in the field of research. When considering the benefits of quantitative research, it’s essential to recognize its strengths in contrast to qualitative methods and its role in collecting and analyzing numerical data for a more comprehensive understanding of research topics.

Best Practices to Conduct Quantitative Research

Here are some best practices for conducting quantitative research:

• Differentiate between quantitative and qualitative: Understand the difference between the two methodologies and apply the one that suits your needs best.
• Choose a suitable sample size: Ensure that you have a sample representative of your population and large enough to be statistically weighty.
• Keep your research goals clear and concise: Know your research goals before you begin data collection to ensure you collect the right amount and the right quantity of data.
• Keep the questions simple: Remember that you will be reaching out to a demographically wide audience. Pose simple questions for your respondents to understand easily.

Quantitative Research vs Qualitative Research

Quantitative research and qualitative research are two distinct approaches to conducting research, each with its own set of methods and objectives. Here’s a comparison of the two:

Quantitative Research

• Objective: The primary goal of quantitative research is to quantify and measure phenomena by collecting numerical data. It aims to test hypotheses, establish patterns, and generalize findings to a larger population.
• Data Collection: Quantitative research employs systematic and standardized approaches for data collection, including techniques like surveys, experiments, and observations that involve predefined variables. It is often collected from a large and representative sample.
• Data Analysis: Data is analyzed using statistical techniques, such as descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, and mathematical modeling. Researchers use statistical tests to draw conclusions and make generalizations based on numerical data.
• Sample Size: Quantitative research often involves larger sample sizes to ensure statistical significance and generalizability.
• Results: The results are typically presented in tables, charts, and statistical summaries, making them highly structured and objective.
• Generalizability: Researchers intentionally structure quantitative research to generate outcomes that can be helpful to a larger population, and they frequently seek to establish causative connections.
• Emphasis on Objectivity: Researchers aim to minimize bias and subjectivity, focusing on replicable and objective findings.

Qualitative Research

• Objective: Qualitative research seeks to gain a deeper understanding of the underlying motivations, behaviors, and experiences of individuals or groups. It explores the context and meaning of phenomena.
• Data Collection: Qualitative research employs adaptable and open-ended techniques for data collection, including methods like interviews, focus groups, observations, and content analysis. It allows participants to express their perspectives in their own words.
• Data Analysis: Data is analyzed through thematic analysis, content analysis, or grounded theory. Researchers focus on identifying patterns, themes, and insights in the data.
• Sample Size: Qualitative research typically involves smaller sample sizes due to the in-depth nature of data collection and analysis.
• Results: Findings are presented in narrative form, often in the participants’ own words. Results are subjective, context-dependent, and provide rich, detailed descriptions.
• Generalizability: Qualitative research does not aim for broad generalizability but focuses on in-depth exploration within a specific context. It provides a detailed understanding of a particular group or situation.
• Emphasis on Subjectivity: Researchers acknowledge the role of subjectivity and the researcher’s influence on the Research Process . Participant perspectives and experiences are central to the findings.

Researchers choose between quantitative and qualitative research methods based on their research objectives and the nature of the research question. Each approach has its advantages and drawbacks, and the decision between them hinges on the particular research objectives and the data needed to address research inquiries effectively.

Quantitative research is a structured way of collecting and analyzing data from various sources. Its purpose is to quantify the problem and understand its extent, seeking results that someone can project to a larger population.

Companies that use quantitative rather than qualitative research typically aim to measure magnitudes and seek objectively interpreted statistical results. So if you want to obtain quantitative data that helps you define the structured cause-and-effect relationship between the research problem and the factors, you should opt for this type of research.

At QuestionPro , we have various Best Data Collection Tools and features to conduct investigations of this type. You can create questionnaires and distribute them through our various methods. We also have sample services or various questions to guarantee the success of your study and the quality of the collected data.

Quantitative research is a systematic and structured approach to studying phenomena that involves the collection of measurable data and the application of statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques for analysis.

Quantitative research is characterized by structured tools like surveys, substantial sample sizes, closed-ended questions, reliance on prior studies, data presented numerically, and the ability to generalize findings to the broader population.

The two main methods of quantitative research are Primary quantitative research methods, involving data collection directly from sources, and Secondary quantitative research methods, which utilize existing data for analysis.

1.Surveying to measure employee engagement with numerical rating scales. 2.Analyzing sales data to identify trends in product demand and market share. 4.Examining test scores to assess the impact of a new teaching method on student performance. 4.Using website analytics to track user behavior and conversion rates for an online store.

1.Differentiate between quantitative and qualitative approaches. 2.Choose a representative sample size. 3.Define clear research goals before data collection. 4.Use simple and easily understandable survey questions.

MORE LIKE THIS

How Can I Help You? — Tuesday CX Thoughts

Jun 5, 2024

Why Multilingual 360 Feedback Surveys Provide Better Insights

Jun 3, 2024

Raked Weighting: A Key Tool for Accurate Survey Results

May 31, 2024

Top 8 Data Trends to Understand the Future of Data

May 30, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Quantitative and Qualitative Research

• I NEED TO . . .

What is Quantitative Research?

• What is Qualitative Research?
• Quantitative vs Qualitative
• Step 1: Accessing CINAHL
• Step 2: Create a Keyword Search
• Step 3: Create a Subject Heading Search
• Step 4: Repeat Steps 1-3 for Second Concept
• Step 5: Repeat Steps 1-3 for Quantitative Terms
• Step 6: Combining All Searches
• Step 7: Adding Limiters
• Step 8: Save Your Search!
• What Kind of Article is This?
• More Research Help This link opens in a new window

Quantitative methodology is the dominant research framework in the social sciences. It refers to a set of strategies, techniques and assumptions used to study psychological, social and economic processes through the exploration of numeric patterns . Quantitative research gathers a range of numeric data. Some of the numeric data is intrinsically quantitative (e.g. personal income), while in other cases the numeric structure is  imposed (e.g. ‘On a scale from 1 to 10, how depressed did you feel last week?’). The collection of quantitative information allows researchers to conduct simple to extremely sophisticated statistical analyses that aggregate the data (e.g. averages, percentages), show relationships among the data (e.g. ‘Students with lower grade point averages tend to score lower on a depression scale’) or compare across aggregated data (e.g. the USA has a higher gross domestic product than Spain). Quantitative research includes methodologies such as questionnaires, structured observations or experiments and stands in contrast to qualitative research. Qualitative research involves the collection and analysis of narratives and/or open-ended observations through methodologies such as interviews, focus groups or ethnographies.

Coghlan, D., Brydon-Miller, M. (2014).  The SAGE encyclopedia of action research  (Vols. 1-2). London, : SAGE Publications Ltd doi: 10.4135/9781446294406

What is the purpose of quantitative research?

The purpose of quantitative research is to generate knowledge and create understanding about the social world. Quantitative research is used by social scientists, including communication researchers, to observe phenomena or occurrences affecting individuals. Social scientists are concerned with the study of people. Quantitative research is a way to learn about a particular group of people, known as a sample population. Using scientific inquiry, quantitative research relies on data that are observed or measured to examine questions about the sample population.

Allen, M. (2017).  The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods  (Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc doi: 10.4135/9781483381411

How do I know if the study is a quantitative design?  What type of quantitative study is it?

Quantitative Research Designs: Descriptive non-experimental, Quasi-experimental or Experimental?

Studies do not always explicitly state what kind of research design is being used.  You will need to know how to decipher which design type is used.  The following video will help you determine the quantitative design type.

• << Previous: I NEED TO . . .
• Next: What is Qualitative Research? >>
• Last Updated: Jun 3, 2024 3:46 PM
• URL: https://libguides.uta.edu/quantitative_and_qualitative_research

University of Texas Arlington Libraries 702 Planetarium Place · Arlington, TX 76019 · 817-272-3000

• Internet Privacy
• Accessibility
• Problems with a guide? Contact Us.

Research Methods and Design

• Action Research
• Case Study Design
• Literature Review
• Quantitative Research Methods
• Qualitative Research Methods
• Mixed Methods Study
• Indigenous Research and Ethics This link opens in a new window
• Identifying Empirical Research Articles This link opens in a new window
• Research Ethics and Quality
• Data Literacy
• Get Help with Writing Assignments

Quantitative research methods

a method of research that relies on measuring variables using a numerical system, analyzing these measurements using any of a variety of statistical models, and reporting relationships and associations among the studied variables. For example, these variables may be test scores or measurements of reaction time. The goal of gathering this quantitative data is to understand, describe, and predict the nature of a phenomenon, particularly through the development of models and theories. Quantitative research techniques include experiments and surveys. 

SAGE Research Methods Videos

What are the strengths of quantitative research.

Professor Norma T. Mertz briefly discusses qualitative research and how it has changed since she entered the field. She emphasizes the importance of defining a research question before choosing a theoretical approach to research.

This is just one segment in a series about quantitative methods. You can find additional videos in our SAGE database, Research Methods: 

Videos covering research methods and statistics

Further Reading

• << Previous: Literature Review
• Next: Qualitative Research Methods >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:51 AM

CityU Home - CityU Catalog

Henry Ford Hospital Nursing Research Toolkit

• Step 1: Getting Started
• Step 2: Project Assistance
• Step 3: Research Question
• Step 4: Review Literature
• Step 5: Use Theory
• Step 6: Apply with IRB
• Quantitative Research Steps
• Additional Reading
• About This Guide

Quantitative Method - Identifying and Refining the Research Question

• Identify the problem and decide on a research question
• Initiate a literature search and review the literature
• Identify a theoretical framework to guide the study
• Formulate a hypothesis (a predicted statement of researcher's expectations or predictions about relationships among variables). Non-intervention studies don't have a hypothesis  because introducing a testable intervention/treatment is not part of the research)

Design and Planning

• Where will data be collected?
• How often will data be collected?
• What outcomes will be measured?
• What strategies will be used to minimize bias?
• Decide exactly what the treatment or intervention will involve
• Who will administer it?
• How frequently?
• Over what time frame?
• Identify what the alternative (control group) condition is
• Identify the population to be studied
• Design the sampling plan. The sample is a representative subset of the population: how will the sample be selected, recruited, and how many participants will there be?
• Specify methods to measure research variables: Will data be collected using self-reports, observations or biophysiological measures?
• It's always, always better to use a data collection instrument that's reliable and valid instead of creating your own instrument. Valid, reliable tools are precise instruments that have been tested for reliability (results are consistent) and validity (concept is accurately measured).
• Safeguarding subjects: protecting the rights of participants begins with submitting an Internal Review Board (IRB) application to ensure that human rights are protected.
• Finalizing the research plan. Ask other researchers to review the study protocol. It's also helpful to pretest measuring instruments with a small pilot group to identify problems that may occur. 

Data Collection / Preparing for Analysis

• Who will collect the data?
• When and where will data be collected?
• How will the study be described to participants?
• How will the information be recorded? 
• Preparing the data for analysis: who will code/prepare and enter data for analysis?
• Analyzing the data

Consult with a statistician: If you have decided on a research question and are planning a research study, the next step is to meet with a Biostatistician.  A Biostatistician can assist with turning your research question into a statistical question that is focused on outcomes that can be tested and measured. They will also determine the appropriate sample size for your study. Check with your unit manager to make sure the Biostats meeting can be billed to your unit cost center. 

Henry Ford Health Public Health Sciences (PHS) can assist with this step. 

Interpretation of Results

• Cathy Draus:  [email protected]  at the Center for Nursing Research and Evidence-Based Practice (H101 Main campus) can assist with interpretation of statistical results. 

Dissemination

• Prepare manuscript for journal submission or apply to present a poster or podium presentation at a conference
• https://ebn.bmj.com/content/5/2/38
• https://henryford.libguides.com/nursing/writingpubl
• Plan for the use of the evidence in the practice setting and make recommendations in your article or presentation as to how the evidence can be translated into practice. It's also important to indicate the implications your study has for nursing practice
• << Previous: Step 7: Choose Research Method
• Next: Additional Reading >>
• Last Updated: Mar 4, 2024 12:18 PM
• URL: https://henryford.libguides.com/hfhnursingresearch

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• Write for Us
• BMJ Journals More You are viewing from: Google Indexer

You are here

• Volume 21, Issue 4
• How to appraise quantitative research
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

This article has a correction. Please see:

• Correction: How to appraise quantitative research - April 01, 2019

• Xabi Cathala 1 ,
• Calvin Moorley 2
• 1 Institute of Vocational Learning , School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University , London , UK
• 2 Nursing Research and Diversity in Care , School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University , London , UK
• Correspondence to Mr Xabi Cathala, Institute of Vocational Learning, School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University London UK ; cathalax{at}lsbu.ac.uk and Dr Calvin Moorley, Nursing Research and Diversity in Care, School of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University, London SE1 0AA, UK; Moorleyc{at}lsbu.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2018-102996

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Introduction

Some nurses feel that they lack the necessary skills to read a research paper and to then decide if they should implement the findings into their practice. This is particularly the case when considering the results of quantitative research, which often contains the results of statistical testing. However, nurses have a professional responsibility to critique research to improve their practice, care and patient safety. 1  This article provides a step by step guide on how to critically appraise a quantitative paper.

Title, keywords and the authors

The authors’ names may not mean much, but knowing the following will be helpful:

Their position, for example, academic, researcher or healthcare practitioner.

Their qualification, both professional, for example, a nurse or physiotherapist and academic (eg, degree, masters, doctorate).

This can indicate how the research has been conducted and the authors’ competence on the subject. Basically, do you want to read a paper on quantum physics written by a plumber?

The abstract is a resume of the article and should contain:

Introduction.

Research question/hypothesis.

Methods including sample design, tests used and the statistical analysis (of course! Remember we love numbers).

Main findings.

Conclusion.

The subheadings in the abstract will vary depending on the journal. An abstract should not usually be more than 300 words but this varies depending on specific journal requirements. If the above information is contained in the abstract, it can give you an idea about whether the study is relevant to your area of practice. However, before deciding if the results of a research paper are relevant to your practice, it is important to review the overall quality of the article. This can only be done by reading and critically appraising the entire article.

The introduction

Example: the effect of paracetamol on levels of pain.

My hypothesis is that A has an effect on B, for example, paracetamol has an effect on levels of pain.

My null hypothesis is that A has no effect on B, for example, paracetamol has no effect on pain.

My study will test the null hypothesis and if the null hypothesis is validated then the hypothesis is false (A has no effect on B). This means paracetamol has no effect on the level of pain. If the null hypothesis is rejected then the hypothesis is true (A has an effect on B). This means that paracetamol has an effect on the level of pain.

Background/literature review

The literature review should include reference to recent and relevant research in the area. It should summarise what is already known about the topic and why the research study is needed and state what the study will contribute to new knowledge. 5 The literature review should be up to date, usually 5–8 years, but it will depend on the topic and sometimes it is acceptable to include older (seminal) studies.

Methodology

In quantitative studies, the data analysis varies between studies depending on the type of design used. For example, descriptive, correlative or experimental studies all vary. A descriptive study will describe the pattern of a topic related to one or more variable. 6 A correlational study examines the link (correlation) between two variables 7  and focuses on how a variable will react to a change of another variable. In experimental studies, the researchers manipulate variables looking at outcomes 8  and the sample is commonly assigned into different groups (known as randomisation) to determine the effect (causal) of a condition (independent variable) on a certain outcome. This is a common method used in clinical trials.

There should be sufficient detail provided in the methods section for you to replicate the study (should you want to). To enable you to do this, the following sections are normally included:

Overview and rationale for the methodology.

Participants or sample.

Data collection tools.

Methods of data analysis.

Ethical issues.

Data collection should be clearly explained and the article should discuss how this process was undertaken. Data collection should be systematic, objective, precise, repeatable, valid and reliable. Any tool (eg, a questionnaire) used for data collection should have been piloted (or pretested and/or adjusted) to ensure the quality, validity and reliability of the tool. 9 The participants (the sample) and any randomisation technique used should be identified. The sample size is central in quantitative research, as the findings should be able to be generalised for the wider population. 10 The data analysis can be done manually or more complex analyses performed using computer software sometimes with advice of a statistician. From this analysis, results like mode, mean, median, p value, CI and so on are always presented in a numerical format.

The author(s) should present the results clearly. These may be presented in graphs, charts or tables alongside some text. You should perform your own critique of the data analysis process; just because a paper has been published, it does not mean it is perfect. Your findings may be different from the author’s. Through critical analysis the reader may find an error in the study process that authors have not seen or highlighted. These errors can change the study result or change a study you thought was strong to weak. To help you critique a quantitative research paper, some guidance on understanding statistical terminology is provided in  table 1 .

• View inline

Some basic guidance for understanding statistics

Quantitative studies examine the relationship between variables, and the p value illustrates this objectively.  11  If the p value is less than 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected and the hypothesis is accepted and the study will say there is a significant difference. If the p value is more than 0.05, the null hypothesis is accepted then the hypothesis is rejected. The study will say there is no significant difference. As a general rule, a p value of less than 0.05 means, the hypothesis is accepted and if it is more than 0.05 the hypothesis is rejected.

The CI is a number between 0 and 1 or is written as a per cent, demonstrating the level of confidence the reader can have in the result. 12  The CI is calculated by subtracting the p value to 1 (1–p). If there is a p value of 0.05, the CI will be 1–0.05=0.95=95%. A CI over 95% means, we can be confident the result is statistically significant. A CI below 95% means, the result is not statistically significant. The p values and CI highlight the confidence and robustness of a result.

Discussion, recommendations and conclusion

The final section of the paper is where the authors discuss their results and link them to other literature in the area (some of which may have been included in the literature review at the start of the paper). This reminds the reader of what is already known, what the study has found and what new information it adds. The discussion should demonstrate how the authors interpreted their results and how they contribute to new knowledge in the area. Implications for practice and future research should also be highlighted in this section of the paper.

A few other areas you may find helpful are:

Limitations of the study.

Conflicts of interest.

Table 2 provides a useful tool to help you apply the learning in this paper to the critiquing of quantitative research papers.

Quantitative paper appraisal checklist

• 1. ↵ Nursing and Midwifery Council , 2015 . The code: standard of conduct, performance and ethics for nurses and midwives https://www.nmc.org.uk/globalassets/sitedocuments/nmc-publications/nmc-code.pdf ( accessed 21.8.18 ).
• Gerrish K ,
• Moorley C ,
• Tunariu A , et al
• Shorten A ,

Competing interests None declared.

Patient consent Not required.

Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Correction notice This article has been updated since its original publication to update p values from 0.5 to 0.05 throughout.

Linked Articles

• Miscellaneous Correction: How to appraise quantitative research BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and RCN Publishing Company Ltd Evidence-Based Nursing 2019; 22 62-62 Published Online First: 31 Jan 2019. doi: 10.1136/eb-2018-102996corr1

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• Dissertation Coaching
• Qualitative Data Analysis
• Statistical Consulting
• Dissertation Editing
• On-Demand Courses

5 Steps to Successful Quantitative Research

Conducting a quantitative research project requires careful planning, preparation, and execution to ensure reliable and valid results. By following a structured approach, you can avoid unnecessary frustrations and setbacks and maximize the quality of your findings.

🗓️ Click here to book a 45 minute meeting with a statistician on our team.

Step 1: establish your research questions.

Crafting well-defined research questions is the foundation of your quantitative research project. These questions should directly address the gaps identified in your problem statement and guide your entire study. Ensure that your research questions are clear, feasible, and focused on the relationship between variables, including the independent and dependent variables.

Consider the following questions when developing your research question(s):

• Is variable 1 related to variable 2?
• Which is the independent variable?
• Which is the dependent variable?
• What is the proposed direction of the relationship?

Example Research Question: Does remote work positively impact the productivity of IT professionals in the United States? Independent Variable : Remote Work Dependent Variable : Productivity of IT Professionals

Remember, the independent variable is the factor that you manipulate or consider as the cause in your study. In this case, remote work refers to the working arrangement where employees work outside of a traditional office environment. It could be quantified in various ways, such as the proportion of time spent working remotely (full-time, part-time), or the type of remote work arrangement (fully remote, hybrid). Operationalization : To make this variable measurable, you might categorize participants based on their remote work status (e.g., no remote work, part-time remote work, full-time remote work) or ask them to report the number of hours per week they work remotely.

Keeping with the above example, the dependent variable is what you measure or the effect that is being studied. In this case, it’s the “productivity of IT professionals”. Productivity in a professional setting often refers to the output or efficiency of work conducted by an individual. Operationalization : Measuring productivity can be complex, as it might include various dimensions like the quantity of work, quality of work, adherence to deadlines, or self-reported productivity levels. You could use specific metrics relevant to IT work, such as the number of tasks completed, quality ratings of completed tasks, or time taken to complete certain tasks. Alternatively, you could use survey questions where professionals self-assess their productivity.

Step 2: Select your research design

Choosing the right research design is crucial for obtaining relevant insights. Depending on your research questions, consider whether a descriptive, correlational, quasi-experimental, or true experimental design aligns with your objectives. Each design offers unique advantages and allows you to investigate specific aspects of your research topic. The choice of research design will depend entirely on what you want to know (i.e., your research questions).

• Are you trying to describe a particular phenomenon without extending your results beyond your study sample? If so, a descriptive research design may be the best option.
• Do you intend to investigate whether a relationship is present between two or more variables? If so, a correlational research design will do the trick.
• Are you assessing the impact of an educational intervention? Perhaps a quasi-experimental research design needs to be considered.
• Do you have access to a highly controlled environment where you are able to manipulate and/or control for all potential confounding variables? A true experimental research design will be the best fit.

Step 3: Collect, capture and code your data

The collection, capturing, and coding of data require meticulous attention to detail to maintain data integrity. Depending on your research approach, you can use online platforms or manual paper-based methods to collect questionnaire-based data. Regardless of the method, ensure compliance with ethical protocols, maintain participant anonymity, and follow your Institutional Review Board (IRB) guidelines.

While this may be the most time-consuming and arduous part of your research project, it is also the most crucial to ensure reliable and valid results. Any shortcuts or mistakes made in this part of the process may have a ripple effect further down the line and can set you back. Thus, it’s worthwhile taking the extra time and making sure that spend sufficient time on it the first (and hopefully only) time round.

Continuing with the earlier example on remote work and the productivity of IT professionals, imagine you are conducting a survey that includes questions about remote work arrangements (hours per week, type of remote work), productivity metrics (task completion rate, quality of work), and demographic information (age, experience level).

Sampling Strategy : Define your sampling strategy. For instance, you might choose to use stratified sampling to ensure representation from different states, company sizes, or industry sectors within IT. Choosing Data Collection Platforms : Utilize reliable online survey platforms like Qualtrics or SurveyMonkey for efficient data collection. These platforms can also help in structuring the survey for better response rates. Pilot Testing : Conduct a pilot test of your survey with a small group of IT professionals to refine questions for clarity and to check the survey’s length and flow. Data Collection Period : Set a realistic timeline for data collection, considering response rates and the availability of participants. Data Entry : If using paper-based surveys, plan for accurate data entry into a digital format. For online surveys, ensure the data is accurately captured in the platform. Coding Guide : Develop a coding guide for open-ended responses or categorical data, ensuring consistency in how responses are interpreted and recorded.

Step 4: Clean and analyze your data

Preparing and cleaning your data is a critical step in ensuring accurate and reliable results. Address any typos, data capturing errors, missing data, outliers, or anomalies that may affect your dataset. Once the cleaning process is complete, embark on the data analysis journey, starting with descriptive statistics to summarize the basic features of your dataset. Move on to inferential statistics, allowing you to make inferences about the broader population and test your hypotheses.

There are usually two main components to the data analysis; (1) descriptive statistics and (2) inferential statistics .

Descriptive statistics are the methods that you can use to summarize the basic features of the dataset.

• For example, how many people participated in your study?
• How many of them were males?
• How many of them were interns, junior management and senior management?
• What was the average age?
• What was the average salary?

Descriptive statistics takes the data that you have in front of you on your spreadsheet and puts it into a usable, easily understood format. It does not extend beyond your dataset to the broader population.

Inferential statistics are the extra steps beyond descriptive statistics that allow you to extend your results beyond your dataset to the broader population. This is where you take your results from your spreadsheet and make inferences about the broader population that your sample is supposed to represent. Inferential statistics are used to examine relationships, compare groups, make predictions, etc. and are used to answer your research questions and test your hypotheses. This is the part where you get to extrapolate your results and give them life outside of the spreadsheet.

Step 5: Present your results

The final step involves presenting your findings in a clear, engaging, and well-structured manner. Organize your results in a logical sequence that aligns with your research questions, following any provided dissertation guidelines. Ensure that your presentation flows smoothly and is easily understandable for the reader, while effectively conveying the significance of your research outcomes.

Final thoughts

Navigating the intricacies of quantitative research may seem daunting, but by following a step-by-step guide and seeking support when needed, you can successfully navigate the process. Remember to adhere to ethical guidelines, maintain data integrity, and present your results in a manner that effectively communicates the importance of your research. If you require guidance or support along the way, feel free to reach out to us for a complimentary 30-minute consultation to help you achieve your research goals.

🔗 Download the Quantitative Research Success Checklist: Your Guide to Achieving Reliable Results.

Author:  Jessica Parker, EdD

Related posts.

Download our free guide on how to overcome the top 10 challenges common to doctoral candidates and graduate sooner.

Thank You 🙌

Root out friction in every digital experience, super-charge conversion rates, and optimize digital self-service

Uncover insights from any interaction, deliver AI-powered agent coaching, and reduce cost to serve

Increase revenue and loyalty with real-time insights and recommendations delivered to teams on the ground

Know how your people feel and empower managers to improve employee engagement, productivity, and retention

Take action in the moments that matter most along the employee journey and drive bottom line growth

Whatever they’re are saying, wherever they’re saying it, know exactly what’s going on with your people

Get faster, richer insights with qual and quant tools that make powerful market research available to everyone

Run concept tests, pricing studies, prototyping + more with fast, powerful studies designed by UX research experts

Track your brand performance 24/7 and act quickly to respond to opportunities and challenges in your market

Explore the platform powering Experience Management

• Free Account
• For Digital
• For Customer Care
• For Human Resources
• For Researchers
• Financial Services
• All Industries

Popular Use Cases

• Customer Experience
• Employee Experience
• Net Promoter Score
• Voice of Customer
• Customer Success Hub
• Product Documentation
• Training & Certification
• XM Institute
• Popular Resources
• Customer Stories
• Artificial Intelligence

Market Research

• Partnerships
• Marketplace

The annual gathering of the experience leaders at the world’s iconic brands building breakthrough business results, live in Salt Lake City.

• English/AU & NZ
• Español/Europa
• Español/América Latina
• Português Brasileiro
• REQUEST DEMO
• Experience Management
• Quantitative Research

Try Qualtrics for free

Your ultimate guide to quantitative research.

12 min read You may be already using quantitative research and want to check your understanding, or you may be starting from the beginning. Here’s an exploration of this research method and how you can best use it for maximum effect for your business.

You may be already using quantitative research and want to check your understanding, or you may be starting from the beginning. Here’s an exploration of this research method and how you can best use it for maximum effect for your business.

What is quantitative research?

Quantitative is the research method of collecting quantitative data – this is data that can be converted into numbers or numerical data, which can be easily quantified, compared, and analyzed.

Quantitative research deals with primary and secondary sources where data is represented in numerical form. This can include closed-question poll results, statistics, and census information or demographic data .

Quantitative data tends to be used when researchers are interested in understanding a particular moment in time and examining data sets over time to find trends and patterns.

To collect numerical data, surveys are often employed as one of the main research methods to source first-hand information in primary research . Quantitative research can also come from third-party research studies .

Quantitative research is widely used in the realms of social sciences, such as biology, chemistry, psychology, economics, sociology, and marketing .

Research teams collect data that is significant to proving or disproving a hypothesis research question – known as the research objective. When they collect quantitative data, researchers will aim to use a sample size that is representative of the total population of the target market they’re interested in.

Then the data collected will be manually or automatically stored and compared for insights.

Free eBook: The ultimate guide to conducting market research

Quantitative vs qualitative research

While the quantitative research definition focuses on numerical data, qualitative research is defined as data that supplies non-numerical information.

Quantitative research focuses on the thoughts, feelings, and values of a participant , to understand why people act in the way they do . They result in data types like quotes, symbols, images, and written testimonials.

These data types tell researchers subjective information, which can help us assign people into categories, such as a participant’s religion, gender , social class, political alignment, likely favored products to buy, or their preferred training learning style.

For this reason, qualitative research is often used in social research, as this gives a window into the behavior and actions of people.

In general, if you’re interested in measuring something or testing a hypothesis, use quantitative methods. If you want to explore ideas, thoughts, and meanings, use qualitative methods.

However, quantitative and qualitative research methods are both recommended when you’re looking to understand a point in time, while also finding out the reason behind the facts.

Quantitative research data collection methods

Quantitative research methods can use structured research instruments like:

• Surveys : A survey is a simple-to-create and easy-to-distribute research method , which helps gather information from large groups of participants quickly. Traditionally, paper-based surveys can now be made online, so costs can stay quite low.

Quantitative questions tend to be closed questions that ask for a numerical result, based on a range of options, or a yes/no answer that can be tallied quickly.

• Face-to-face or phone interviews: Interviews are a great way to connect with participants , though they require time from the research team to set up and conduct.

Researchers may also have issues connecting with participants in different geographical regions . The researcher uses a set of predefined close-ended questions, which ask for yes/no or numerical values.

• Polls: Polls can be a shorter version of surveys , used to get a ‘flavor’ of what the current situation is with participants. Online polls can be shared easily, though polls are best used with simple questions that request a range or a yes/no answer.

Quantitative data is the opposite of qualitative research, another dominant framework for research in the social sciences, explored further below.

Quantitative data types

Quantitative research methods often deliver the following data types:

• Test Scores
• Percent of training course completed
• Performance score out of 100
• Number of support calls active
• Customer Net Promoter Score (NPS)

When gathering numerical data, the emphasis is on how specific the data is, and whether they can provide an indication of what ‘is’ at the time of collection. Pre-existing statistical data can tell us what ‘was’ for the date and time range that it represented

Quantitative research design methods (with examples)

Quantitative research has a number of quantitative research designs you can choose from:

Descriptive

This design type describes the state of a data type is telling researchers, in its native environment. There won’t normally be a clearly defined research question to start with. Instead, data analysis will suggest a conclusion , which can become the hypothesis to investigate further.

Examples of descriptive quantitative design include:

• A description of child’s Christmas gifts they received that year
• A description of what businesses sell the most of during Black Friday
• A description of a product issue being experienced by a customer

Correlational

This design type looks at two or more data types, the relationship between them, and the extent that they differ or align. This does not look at the causal links deeper – instead statistical analysis looks at the variables in a natural environment.

Examples of correlational quantitative design include:

• The relationship between a child’s Christmas gifts and their perceived happiness level
• The relationship between a business’ sales during Black Friday and the total revenue generated over the year
• The relationship between a customer’s product issue and the reputation of the product

Causal-Comparative/Quasi-Experimental

This design type looks at two or more data types and tries to explain any relationship and differences between them, using a cause-effect analysis. The research is carried out in a near-natural environment, where information is gathered from two groups – a naturally occurring group that matches the original natural environment, and one that is not naturally present.

This allows for causal links to be made, though they might not be correct, as other variables may have an impact on results.

Examples of causal-comparative/quasi-experimental quantitative design include:

• The effect of children’s Christmas gifts on happiness
• The effect of Black Friday sales figures on the productivity of company yearly sales
• The effect of product issues on the public perception of a product

Experimental Research

This design type looks to make a controlled environment in which two or more variables are observed to understand the exact cause and effect they have. This becomes a quantitative research study, where data types are manipulated to assess the effect they have. The participants are not naturally occurring groups, as the setting is no longer natural. A quantitative research study can help pinpoint the exact conditions in which variables impact one another.

Examples of experimental quantitative design include:

• The effect of children’s Christmas gifts on a child’s dopamine (happiness) levels
• The effect of Black Friday sales on the success of the company
• The effect of product issues on the perceived reliability of the product

Quantitative research methods need to be carefully considered, as your data collection of a data type can be used to different effects. For example, statistics can be descriptive or correlational (or inferential). Descriptive statistics help us to summarize our data, while inferential statistics help infer conclusions about significant differences.

Advantages of quantitative research

• Easy to do : Doing quantitative research is more straightforward, as the results come in numerical format, which can be more easily interpreted.
• Less interpretation : Due to the factual nature of the results, you will be able to accept or reject your hypothesis based on the numerical data collected.
• Less bias : There are higher levels of control that can be applied to the research, so bias can be reduced , making your data more reliable and precise.

Disadvantages of quantitative research

• Can’t understand reasons: Quantitative research doesn’t always tell you the full story, meaning you won’t understand the context – or the why, of the data you see, why do you see the results you have uncovered?
• Useful for simpler situations: Quantitative research on its own is not great when dealing with complex issues. In these cases, quantitative research may not be enough.

How to use quantitative research to your business’s advantage

Quantitative research methods may help in areas such as:

• Identifying which advert or landing page performs better
• Identifying how satisfied your customers are
• How many customers are likely to recommend you
• Tracking how your brand ranks in awareness and customer purchase intent
• Learn what consumers are likely to buy from your brand.

6 steps to conducting good quantitative research

Businesses can benefit from quantitative research by using it to evaluate the impact of data types. There are several steps to this:

• Define your problem or interest area : What do you observe is happening and is it frequent? Identify the data type/s you’re observing.
• Create a hypothesis : Ask yourself what could be the causes for the situation with those data types.
• Plan your quantitative research : Use structured research instruments like surveys or polls to ask questions that test your hypothesis.
• Data Collection : Collect quantitative data and understand what your data types are telling you. Using data collected on different types over long time periods can give you information on patterns.
• Data analysis : Does your information support your hypothesis? (You may need to redo the research with other variables to see if the results improve)
• Effectively present data : Communicate the results in a clear and concise way to help other people understand the findings.

How Qualtrics products can enhance & simplify the quantitative research process

The Qualtrics XM system gives you an all-in-one, integrated solution to help you all the way through conducting quantitative research. From survey creation and data collection to statistical analysis and data reporting, it can help all your internal teams gain insights from your numerical data.

Quantitative methods are catered to your business through templates or advanced survey designs. While you can manually collect data and conduct data analysis in a spreadsheet program, this solution helps you automate the process of quantitative research, saving you time and administration work.

Using computational techniques helps you to avoid human errors, and participant results come in are already incorporated into the analysis in real-time.

Our key tools, Stats IQ™ and Driver IQ™ make analyzing numerical data easy and simple. Choose to highlight key findings based on variables or highlight statistically insignificant findings. The choice is yours.

Some examples of your workspace in action, using drag and drop to create fast data visualizations quickly:

Related resources

Market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read, ethnographic research 11 min read, qualitative vs quantitative research 13 min read, qualitative research questions 11 min read, qualitative research design 12 min read, primary vs secondary research 14 min read, request demo.

Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?

We use cookies on this site to enhance your experience

By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.

A link to reset your password has been sent to your email.

Back to login

We need additional information from you. Please complete your profile first before placing your order.

Thank you. payment completed., you will receive an email from us to confirm your registration, please click the link in the email to activate your account., there was error during payment, orcid profile found in public registry, download history, how to design a quantitative research study.

• Charlesworth Author Services
• 10 December, 2021

Beginning the design of a quantitative research project can feel like stepping foot into a maze; there are lots of different potential routes you can take, and it can be hard to know which the right one is. Due to the potential complexity of designing a study like this, knowing which first step to take can be confusing. To help clarify the process and make it easier for you, we’ve split up the decision making into several distinct points that you can address separately as you plan your quantitative research project.

1. Decide what your key question(s) is/are

First, the most important thing to do is to work out why you’re designing and conducting this experiment in the first place; in other words…

What is the key question that you’re trying to answer? 

Focus on what interests you and use this to guide some of your reading in the area. Read relevant articles and concentrate on the other experiments that they reference. This will help you work out what gaps in knowledge there are in the field and how your own project can make a novel contribution. 

2. Identify the methods you will use

Once you know what the question is that you’re trying to answer, your next step is to work out how you will answer it. In other words…

What will your methodology be?

Reading other papers in the area will be helpful at this stage too. You might find that you can adapt a paradigm from another experiment, or that there are commonly used measures in your area. 

3. Narrow in on your variables

A good thing to do after identifying the method that you will use is to decide exactly what the independent and dependent variables will be in your experiment(s). 

• Independent variable (IV) is the factor that you will manipulate in your experiment. For example, this might be which stimuli a participant is shown or which treatment they are given.
• Dependent variable (DV) is what you are measuring. This could be reaction time, score on a particular measure or ratings that the participants give.

4. Formulate your hypothesis

Now that you’ve identified your question, methodology and variables, you can begin to formulate the hypothesis for your experiment(s). In other words…

What do you expect to happen? 

A hypothesis should be clear and directional, for example:

In this experiment, we expect that participants who see the colourful stimuli will give higher ratings than those who see the black and white stimuli.

Your hypothesis should always be based in evidence, using findings from other previous studies and research to guide what you expect to see. Again, reading relevant papers will help you to arrive at better hypotheses.

Now that you have more clarity on designing your research project, you can proceed to actually put those plans into action. Start preparing for and conducting your experiments to collect the data, then analyse those results to find out if your hypothesis is correct.

Read next (third/ final ) in series: How to design a qualitative research study

Read previous (first) in series: Deciding between a quantitative design and a qualitative design for your study

Maximise your publication success with Charlesworth Author Services.

Charlesworth Author Services, a trusted brand supporting the world’s leading academic publishers, institutions and authors since 1928. 

To know more about our services, visit: Our Services

Share with your colleagues

Related articles.

Deciding between a quantitative design and a qualitative design for your study

Charlesworth Author Services 10/12/2021 00:00:00

Choosing an Appropriate Quantitative Research Design

Charlesworth Author Services 18/01/2021 00:00:00

Developing a competitive research design

Charlesworth Author Services 11/03/2021 00:00:00

Related webinars

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication- Module 3: Understand the structure of an academic paper

Charlesworth Author Services 04/03/2021 00:00:00

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 5: Conduct a Literature Review

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 8: Write a strong methods section

Charlesworth Author Services 05/03/2021 00:00:00

Bitesize Webinar: How to write and structure your academic article for publication: Module 9:Write a strong results and discussion section

Tips for designing your Research Question

Charlesworth Author Services 01/08/2017 00:00:00

How to write the Statement of a Problem

Charlesworth Author Services 19/11/2021 00:00:00

How to write the Rationale for your research

• Human Resources
• Procurement

How to carry out quantitative research

Learn how you can use quantitative research methods to gather game changing business intelligence.

Related posts

What is qualitative research.

• How to dominate local competition with proper market research
• Postgraduate researchers are emerging in the UK

Researchers conduct quantitative research to establish a relationship between one variable and the other, in other words, the independent and the dependent variables. There are two common research design used in quantitative research: descriptive and experimental. A descriptive quantitative research study tries to establish a connection between two variables, whereas an experimental quantitative study seeks to establish causality.

What is market segmentation?

How to research your business idea.

The central tenets of quantitative research are as follows. The findings are typically collected by the use of more structured quantitative research tools. The findings are built around a large participant sample size that is ideally representative of the overall population. Quantitative research is easy to replicate which gives it a higher validity as opposed to qualitative research methods.

For quantitative research, researchers aim to find more objective findings and data from the participants. Each and every tool that is used in quantitative research is very carefully planned, thought out and structured. Findings that are obtained from quantitative research are usually in the form of statistical figures and numbers. Because of its objective nature, quantitative research findings can predict better by establishing causation.

Conducting quantitative research

It is critical that objectivity is maintained throughout a quantitative research. Researchers would usually avoid tainting the findings because of their presence and critically assess the findings for any signs of bias from them or the participants involved in the research. Researchers should also work hard on maintaining the validity of the study and making sure that they are only measuring what they say they are measuring.

There are also wide arrays of external variables that can affect the findings of the study and should be controlled by the researcher. In certain cases, where it is impossible to completely remove a confounding external variable from the study, the researcher should acknowledge its presence and how it may have affected the findings of the study.

Another central aspect of quantitative research is deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning means that your approach will gradually narrow down from being too generic to being specific. This guarantees that the hypothesis or the argument being made at the beginning of the study are accurate. Most researchers, however, would incorporate inductive reasoning at certain points in the research.

Researchers should also strive to make their sample or participants as representative of their target population as possible. This involves careful planning and using an effective selection process. To get maximum accuracy for their findings, researchers often go for random sampling.

It is also important that the study’s findings are not only generalisable in terms of the people involved in it but also situational. This means that the study should be as high on external validity as possible. External validity being how close findings of the research is to real life.

Technology in research has come a long way and quantitative research platforms today provide customizable surveys, branching logic and monadic testing features. They also integrate with qualitative research to empower researchers to conduct interviews and focus group discussions online. This makes it easy for researchers in analysing the insights using transcriptions, highlights, tags and sentiment analysis. Lastly, AI technologies like Facial Coding and Eye Tracking are readily integrated with surveys to capture deep consumer behaviour and reduce bias in surveys.

Purposes and uses of quantitative research

There are many purposes of quantitative research; however for market research here are some of the most important ones:

• It helps researchers know whether or not there is an actual demand or market for the product or services that the company is offering.
• Tell the researchers if your target consumers are already aware of your brand.
• Give a close approximate of the number of people who are willing to avail your product or service.
• Identify your most ideal target demographic.
• Give a glimpse of your target consumers’ purchasing behaviour.
• Identify the change in market trends and patterns.

Main methods used in quantitative research

The main methods used in quantitative research are:

Survey methods collects data gathered from responses given by the participants through questionnaires. These questionnaires are usually close-ended and do not require the participant to spend time elaborating their answers. Survey questionnaires should be easy to understand and quick to answer. Researchers usually dispatch survey questionnaires via post or by hand.

However, nowadays there are cheaper and more convenient ways of distributing survey questionnaires. Surveys are one of the preferred methods for quantitative research because it gives objective data and can reach a huge number of people. One of its downsides is that participants usually do not take surveys seriously and therefore, there is no way for the researcher to vouch for its validity unless if other methods are used alongside it to rectify this disadvantage.

Tracking is simply following the behaviour of the participants and observing them until you can create a pattern. This is most commonly used by websites who deploy trackers that will let the servers know your internet surfing habits and send you advertisements according to your interest based on the websites you frequent the most.

Tracking is slowly becoming a popular method that is used by market researchers. There is also a significant progress on the technology that allows for researchers to track customer behaviour .

Tracking may give you a good insight as to who your customers are, but some of them may not be comfortable with the idea of being tracked and may view such methods as an intrusion of privacy.

Experiments

Quantitative researchers also make use of experiments wherein they manipulate one variable to produce a change in the other variable. The data and findings that emerge from experiments are highly valuable especially for product testing, trying to find out how people are reacting to certain tweaks to an already existing product, consumer decisions, effect of your new advertising campaign and gauging the pricing of your products or services .

Experiments surely give reliable and valid findings. However, they can be expensive and time-consuming because of the amount of variables that you intend to control. Nowadays, market researchers are trying to formulate methods and techniques that are more cost-efficient than conventional experiments.

Structured interviews

The best way to know what people think about your product or service is by asking them in interviews. A structured interview involves a set of questions that the researcher has already planned and thought about before the meeting and only these questions will be asked to the participant.

This is the opposite of open-ended interviews wherein the participant is encouraged to be as descriptive as possible, and the researcher just picks up on things that the participant said that they think should be probed further. Open-ended interviews flow in a conversational manner, whereas structured interviews are to the point.

Structured interviews are easier to quantify than open-ended interviews because structured interviews limit the answers that are allowed to be given during the interview. With the data gathered from a structured interview, the researcher can then come up with a quantitative data by turning their responses into, say, percentages or give it a numeric value.

It will be easier to cross-check responses from different sets of participants and emerge with a more conclusive finding that is borne out of straightforward answers from the participants. Despite this, structured interviews still have some disadvantages. Due to its straightforward nature, there is no way for researchers to know the motivations and reasons behind the participant’s answer.

Main critiques of quantitative research

There are a lot of advantages in doing quantitative research. Quantitative research first and foremost is a cheaper than qualitative research. Most of the methods can be done without needing a large amount of funding, unlike other elaborate experiments. It can be argued that only relevant information is filtered through quantitative research.

However, this claim varies from one research to another because every research has different aims and objectives. If you are looking for straightforward findings, quantitative research is better suited for your needs. Another advantage of quantitative research is that it is easier and less time consuming to conduct. Lastly, the results obtained are easy to convert into quantifiable data which is easier to understand, analyse and present.

For the findings to be valid, the researcher should make sure that they establish the correlation and causation. There are two major issues that affect the validity of the study: internal and external.

Internal validity

Internal validity can only be achieved if the researcher measures what the study claims to measure. Threats to internal validity can come about from experimental procedures, treatments and the varied backgrounds of the participants that prohibit the researcher from making a generalisable understanding of the findings.

External validity

External validity is critical when it comes to quantitative research findings. It is crucial that the findings of your study can be generalised to the population that you have intended the study for. One way of ensuring this is by gathering a representative sample from a bigger chunk of the population and across different groups such as financial, educational, religious and racial background.

If your sample is not representative of the population, your findings would be of no importance whatsoever.

Other criticisms

Lack of detail.

This is probably one of the biggest criticisms of the quantitative study. Yes, quantitative studies give you results that are easily quantifiable and analysed, but at the same time, you let go of crucial details and information in the process.

Regardless of the kind of hypotheses you have, or the kind of study you are conducting, details are important in understanding data and when presenting it. The process of quantifying data may mean that you are compromising on important details. The methods employed for quantitative research also has the same criticisms.

Structured interview and questionnaires

Structured interview and questionnaires are one of the most popular methods or tools used in quantitative research. However, by using these methods, the researcher is not able to probe deeper into the thoughts of the participant and may not be able to find out why the participant has given the answer that he has given.

Details and motivations as to how consumers make decisions are highly important especially for market research . These types of methods can also lead to the participant feeling intimidated and alienated. The presence of the researcher in the room might also bring about demand characteristics wherein the participant gives the researcher the answer they think the researcher expects of them.

Self-report

Some people are uncomfortable in sharing intimate details with strangers, especially researchers. Regardless if the questionnaire wants them to explain in detail or if it’s in a yes or no format. Self-report questionnaires put the participant at ease that they are answering the questions on their own volition and their identities are kept secret.

However, the information derived from a self-report are not always reliable. There is a high probability that they were answered quickly and was not taken seriously by the respondent. Self-reports also do not allow the participant to be more flexible and elaborative in their responses.

Surveys are a very popular method in quantitative and even qualitative research . Surveys may be cost-effective and time efficient, but the results derived from surveys risk being invalid. This problem comes about when the respondents are not truthful in their response, the researchers have surveyed the wrong population, or they have asked the wrong question in the survey which makes it invalid. Surveys should, therefore, be taken from a large number of people and the questions asked should be well-formulated and not misleading.

Tracking is probably one of the most effective methods that can be used to obtain quantitative data. However, the ethics behind this method has been questioned time and again, who sets the guidelines as to what is acceptable and what is an invasion of privacy?

The line that separates both is fine and should be treated carefully. Another question that the researcher should ask himself when he decides to use this method is whether or not it is worth the result and how much deception is required. Debriefing the participants after the study is necessary.

Related topics

Related posts.

For many years, marketing specialists have segmented their target customers to understand who might buy a service or product. It...

Qualitative research is the type of non-statistical inquiry that focuses on the analysis of a social phenomenon. The data that...

Proper research is one of the most powerful tools that you, as an entrepreneur, have at your disposal. It can...

Copyright © 2013 – 2024 Entrepreneur Handbook Ltd. All rights reserved. Registered offices at 20-22 Wenlock Road, London, N1 7GU, UK.

• Human resources
• Start a business

Information

• Advertise with us
• Privacy policy
• Terms of use

Copyright © 2013 - 2024 Entrepreneur Handbook Ltd. All rights reserved. Registered offices at 20-22 Wenlock Road, London, N1 7GU, United Kingdom.

Trends and Motivations in Critical Quantitative Educational Research: A Multimethod Examination Across Higher Education Scholarship and Author Perspectives

• Open access
• Published: 04 June 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Christa E. Winkler   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1700-5444 1 &
• Annie M. Wofford   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2246-1946 2  

9 Altmetric

To challenge “objective” conventions in quantitative methodology, higher education scholars have increasingly employed critical lenses (e.g., quantitative criticalism, QuantCrit). Yet, specific approaches remain opaque. We use a multimethod design to examine researchers’ use of critical approaches and explore how authors discussed embedding strategies to disrupt dominant quantitative thinking. We draw data from a systematic scoping review of critical quantitative higher education research between 2007 and 2021 ( N  = 34) and semi-structured interviews with 18 manuscript authors. Findings illuminate (in)consistencies across scholars’ incorporation of critical approaches, including within study motivations, theoretical framing, and methodological choices. Additionally, interview data reveal complex layers to authors’ decision-making processes, indicating that decisions about embracing critical quantitative approaches must be asset-based and intentional. Lastly, we discuss findings in the context of their guiding frameworks (e.g., quantitative criticalism, QuantCrit) and offer implications for employing and conducting research about critical quantitative research.

Similar content being viewed by others

Ethical Considerations of Conducting Systematic Reviews in Educational Research

When Does a Researcher Choose a Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Research Approach?

Systematic reviews in educational research: methodology, perspectives and application.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Across the field of higher education and within many roles—including policymakers, researchers, and administrators—key leaders and educational partners have historically relied on quantitative methods to inform system-level and student-level changes to policy and practice. This reliance is rooted, in part, on the misconception that quantitative methods depict the objective state of affairs in higher education. This perception is not only inaccurate but also dangerous, as the numbers produced from quantitative methods are “neither objective nor color-blind” (Gillborn et al., 2018 , p. 159). In fact, like all research, quantitative data collection and analysis are informed by theories and beliefs that are susceptible to bias. Further, such bias may come in multiple forms such as researcher bias and bias within the statistical methods themselves (e.g., Bierema et al., 2021 ; Torgerson & Torgerson, 2003 ). Thus, if left unexamined from a critical perspective, quantitative research may inform policies and practices that fuel the engine of cultural and social reproduction in higher education (e.g., Bourdieu, 1977 ).

Largely, critical approaches to higher education research have been dominated by qualitative methods (McCoy & Rodricks, 2015 ). While qualitative approaches are vital, some have argued that a wider conceptualization of critical inquiry may propel our understanding of processes in higher education (Stage & Wells, 2014 ) and that critical research need not be explicitly qualitative (refer to Sablan, 2019 ; Stage, 2007 ). If scholars hope to embrace multiple ways of challenging persistent inequities and structures of oppression in higher education, such as racism, advancing critical quantitative work can help higher education researchers “expose and challenge hidden assumptions that frequently encode racist perspectives beneath the façade of supposed quantitative objectivity” (Gillborn et al., 2018 , p. 158).

Across professional networks in higher education, the perspectives of association leaders (e.g., Association for the Study of Higher Education [ASHE]) have often placed qualitative and quantitative research in opposition to each other, with qualitative research being a primary way to amplify the voices of systemically minoritized students, faculty, and staff (Kimball & Friedensen, 2019 ). Yet, given the vast growth of critical higher education research (e.g., Byrd, 2019 ; Espino, 2012 ; Martínez-Alemán et al., 2015 ), recent ASHE presidents have recognized how prior leaders planted transformative seeds of critical theory and praxis (Renn, 2020 ) and advocated for critical higher education scholarship as a disrupter (Stewart, 2022 ). With this shift in discourse, many members of the higher education research community have also grown their desire to expand upon the legacy of critical research—in both qualitative and quantitative forms.

Critical quantitative approaches hold promise as one avenue for meeting recent calls to embrace equity-mindedness and transform the future of higher education research, yet current structures of training and resources for quantitative methods lack guidance on engaging such approaches. For higher education scholars to advance critical inquiry via quantitative methods, we must first understand the extent to which such approaches have been adopted. Accordingly, this study sheds light on critical quantitative approaches used in higher education literature and provides storied insights from the experiences of scholars who have engaged critical perspectives with quantitative methods. We were guided by the following research questions:

To what extent do higher education scholars incorporate critical perspectives into quantitative research?

How do higher education scholars discuss specific strategies to leverage critical perspectives in quantitative research?

Contextualizing Existing Critical Approaches to Quantitative Research

To foreground our analysis of literature employing critical quantitative lenses to studies about higher education, we first must understand the roots of such framing. Broadly, the foundations of critical quantitative approaches align with many elements of equity-mindedness. Equity-mindedness prompts individuals to question divergent patterns in educational outcomes, recognize that racism is embedded in everyday practices, and invest in un/learning the effects of racial identity and racialized expectations (Bensimon, 2018 ). Yet, researchers’ commitments to critical quantitative approaches stand out as a unique thread in the larger fabric of opportunities to embrace equity-mindedness in higher education research. Below, we discuss three significant publications that have been widely applied as frameworks to engage critical quantitative approaches in higher education. While these publications are not the only ones associated with critical inquiry in quantitative research, their evolution, commonalities, and distinctions offer a robust background of epistemological development in this area of scholarship.

Quantitative Criticalism (Stage, 2007 )

Although some higher education scholars have applied critical perspectives in their research for many years, Stage’s ( 2007 ) introduction of quantitative criticalism was a salient contribution to creating greater discourse related to such perspectives. Quantitative criticalism, as a coined paradigmatic approach for engaging critical questions using quantitative data, was among the first of several crucial publications on this topic in a 2007 edition of New Directions for Institutional Research . Collectively, this special issue advanced perspectives on how higher education scholars may challenge traditional positivist and post-positivist paradigms in quantitative inquiry. Instead, researchers could apply (what Stage referred to as) quantitative criticalism to develop research questions centering on social inequities in educational processes and outcomes as well as challenge widely accepted models, measures, and analytic practices.

Notably, Stage ( 2007 ) grounded the motivation for this new paradigmatic approach in the core concepts of critical inquiry (e.g., Kincheloe & McLaren, 1994 ). Tracing critical inquiry back to the German Frankfurt school, Stage discussed how the principles of critical theory have evolved over time and highlighted Kincheloe and McLaren’s ( 1994 ) definition of critical theory as most relevant to the principles of quantitative criticalism. Kincheloe and McLaren’s definition of critical describes how researchers applying critical paradigms in their scholarship center concepts such as socially and historically created power structures, subjectivity, privilege and oppression, and the reproduction of oppression in traditional research approaches. Perhaps most importantly, Kincheloe and McLaren urge scholars to be self-conscious in their decision making—a tall ask of quantitative scholars operating from positivist and post-positivist vantage points.

In advancing quantitative criticalism, Stage ( 2007 ) first argued that all critical scholars must center their outcomes on equity. To enact this core focus on equity in quantitative criticalism, Stage outlined two tasks for researchers. First, critical quantitative researchers must “use data to represent educational processes and outcomes on a large scale to reveal inequities and to identify social or institutional perpetuation of systematic inequities in such processes and outcomes” (p. 10). Second, Stage advocated for critical quantitative researchers to “question the models, measures, and analytic practices of quantitative research in order to offer competing models, measures, and analytic practices that better describe experiences of those who have not been adequately represented” (p. 10). Stage’s arguments and invitations for criticalism spurred crucial conversations, many of which led to the development of a two-part series on critical quantitative approaches in New Directions for Institutional Research (Stage & Wells, 2014 ; Wells & Stage, 2015 ). With nearly a decade of new perspectives to offer, manuscripts within these subsequent special issues expanded the concepts of quantitative criticalism. Specifically, these new contributions advanced the notion that quantitative criticalism should include all parts of the research process—instead of maintaining a focus on paradigm and research questions alone—and made inroads when it came to challenging the (default, dominant) process of quantitative research. While many scholars offered noteworthy perspectives in these special issues (Stage & Wells, 2014 ; Wells & Stage, 2015 ), we now turn to one specific article within these special issues that offered a conceptual model for critical quantitative inquiry.

Critical Quantitative Inquiry (Rios-Aguilar, 2014 )

Building from and guided by the work of other criticalists (namely, Estela Bensimon, Sara Goldrick-Rab, Frances Stage, and Erin Leahey), Rios-Aguilar ( 2014 ) developed a complementary framework representing the process and application of critical quantitative inquiry in higher education scholarship. At the heart of Rios-Aguilar’s conceptualization lies the acknowledgment that quantitative research is a human activity that requires careful decisions. With this foundation comes the pressing need for quantitative scholars to engage in self-reflection and transparency about the processes and outcomes of their methodological choices—actions that could potentially disrupt traditional notions and deficit assumptions that maintain systems of oppression in higher education.

Rios-Aguilar ( 2014 ) offered greater specificity to build upon many principles from other criticalists. For one, methodologically, Rios-Aguilar challenged the notion of using “fancy” statistical methods just for the sake of applying advanced methods. Instead, she argued that critical quantitative scholars should engage “in a self-reflection of the actual research practices and statistical approaches (i.e., choice of centering approach, type of model estimated, number of control variables, etc.) they use and the various influences that affect those practices” (Rios-Aguilar, 2014 , p. 98). In this purview, scholars should ensure that all methodological choices advance their ability to reveal inequities; such choices may include those that challenge the use of reference groups in coding, the interpretation of statistics in ways that move beyond p -values for statistical significance, or the application and alignment of theoretical and conceptual frameworks that focus on the assets of systemically minoritized students. Rios-Aguilar also noted, in agreement with the foundations of equity-mindedness and critical theory, that quantitative criticalists have an obligation to translate findings into tangible changes in policy and practice that can redress inequities.

Ultimately, Rios-Aguilar’s ( 2014 ) framework focused on “the interplay between research questions, theory, method/research practices, and policy/advocacy” to identify how quantitative criticalists’ scholarship can be “relevant and meaningful” (p. 96). Specifically, Rios-Aguilar called upon quantitative criticalists to ask research questions that center on equity and power, engage in self-reflection about their data sources, analyses, and disaggregation techniques, attend to interpretation with practical/policy-related significance, and expand beyond field-level silos in theory and implications. Without challenging dominant approaches in quantitative higher education research, Rios-Aguilar noted that the field will continue to inaccurately capture the experiences of systemically minoritized students. In college access and success, for example, ignoring this need for evolving approaches and models would continue what Bensimon ( 2007 ) referred to as the Tintonian Dynasty, with scholars widely applying and citing Tinto’s work but failing to acknowledge the unique experiences of systemically minoritized students. These and other concrete recommendations have served as a springboard for quantitative criticalists, prompting scholars to incorporate critical approaches in more cohesive and congruent ways.

QuantCrit (Gillborn et al., 2018 )

As an epistemologically different but related form of critical quantitative scholarship, QuantCrit—quantitative critical race theory—has emerged as a vital stream of inquiry that applies critical race theory to methodological approaches. Given that statistical methods were developed in support of the eugenics movement (Zuberi, 2001 ), QuantCrit researchers must consider how the “norms” of quantitative research support white supremacy (Zuberi & Bonilla-Silva, 2008 ). Fortunately, as Garcia et al. ( 2018 ) noted, “[t]he problems concerning the ahistorical and decontextualized ‘default’ mode and misuse of quantitative research methods are not insurmountable” (p. 154). As such, the goal of QuantCrit is to conduct quantitative research in a way that can contextualize and challenge historical, social, political, and economic power structures that uphold racism (e.g., Garcia et al., 2018 ; Gillborn et al., 2018 ).

In coining the term QuantCrit, Gillborn et al. ( 2018 ) provided five QuantCrit tenets adapted from critical race theory. First, the centrality of racism offers a methodological and political statement about how racism is complex, fluid, and rooted in social dynamics of power. Second, numbers are not neutral demonstrates an imperative for QuantCrit researchers—one that prompts scholars to understand how quantitative data have been collected and analyzed to prioritize interests rooted in white, elite worldviews. As such, QuantCrit researchers must reject numbers as “true” and as presenting a unidimensional truth. Third, categories are neither “natural” nor given prompts researchers to consider how “even the most basic decisions in research design can have fundamental consequences for the re/presentation of race inequity” (Gillborn et al., 2018 , p. 171). Notably, even when race is a focus, scholars must operationalize and interpret findings related to race in the context of racism. Fourth, prioritizing voice and insight advances the notion that data cannot “speak for itself” and numerous interpretations are possible. In QuantCrit, this tenet leverages experiential knowledge among People of Color as an interpretive tool. Finally, the fifth tenet explicates how numbers can be used for social justice but statistical research cannot be placed in a position of greater legitimacy in equity efforts relative to qualitative research. Collectively, although Gillborn et al. ( 2018 ) stated that they expect—much like all epistemological foundations—the tenets of QuantCrit to be expanded, we must first understand how these stated principles arise in critical quantitative research.

Bridging Critical Quantitative Concepts as a Guiding Framework

Guided by these framings (i.e., quantitative criticalism, critical quantitative inquiry, QuantCrit) as a specific stream of inquiry within the larger realm of equity-minded educational research, we explore the extent to which the primary elements of these critical quantitative frameworks are applied in higher education. Across the framings discussed, the commitment to equity-mindedness contributes to a shared underlying essence of critical quantitative approaches. Not only do Stage, Rios-Aguilar, and Gillborn et al. aim for researchers to center on inequities and commit to disrupting “neutral” decisions about and interpretations of statistics, but they also advocate for critical quantitative research (by any name) to serve as a tool for advocacy and praxis—creating structural changes to discriminatory policies and practices, rather than ceasing equity-based commitments with publications alone. Thus, the conceptual framework for the present study brings together alignments and distinctions in scholars’ motivations and actualizations of quantitative research through a critical lens.

Specifically, looking to Stage ( 2007 ), quantitative criticalists must center on inequity in their questions and actions to disrupt traditional models, methods, and practices. Second, extending critical inquiry through all aspects of quantitative research (Rios-Aguilar, 2014 ), researchers must interrogate how critical perspectives can be embedded in every part of research. The embedded nature of critical approaches should consider how study questions, frameworks, analytic practices, and advocacy are developed with intentionality, reflexivity, and the goal of unmasking inequities. Third, centering on the five known tenets of QuantCrit (Gillborn et al., 2018 ), QuantCrit researchers should adapt critical race theory for quantitative research. Although QuantCrit tenets are likely to be expanded in the future, the foundations of such research should continue to acknowledge the centrality of racism, advance critiques of statistical neutrality and categories that serve white racial interests, prioritize the lived experiences of People of Color, and complicate how statistics can be one—but not the lone—part of social justice endeavors.

Over many years, higher education scholars have advanced more critical research, as illustrated through publication trends of critical quantitative manuscripts in higher education (Wofford & Winkler, 2022 ). However, the application of critical quantitative approaches remains laced with tensions among paradigms and analytic strategies. Despite recent systematic examinations of critical quantitative scholarship across educational research broadly (Tabron & Thomas, 2023 ), there has yet to be a comprehensive, systematic review of higher education studies that attempt to apply principles rooted in quantitative criticalism, critical quantitative inquiry, and QuantCrit. Thus, much remains to be learned regarding whether and how higher education researchers have been able to apply the principles previously articulated. In order for researchers to fully (re)imagine possibilities for future critical approaches to quantitative higher education research, we must first understand the landscape of current approaches.

Study Aims and Role of the Researchers

Study aims and scope.

For this study, we examined the extent to which authors adopted critical quantitative approaches in higher education research and the trends in tools and strategies they employed to do so. In other words, we sought to understand to what extent, and in what ways, authors—in their own perspectives—applied critical perspectives to quantitative research. We relied on the nomenclature used by the authors of each manuscript (e.g., whether they operated from the lens of quantitative criticalism, QuantCrit, or another approach determined by the authors). Importantly, our intent was not to evaluate the quality of authors’ applications of critical approaches to quantitative research in higher education.

Researcher Positionality

As with all research, our positions and motivations shape how we conceptualized and executed the present study. We come to this work as early career higher education faculty, drawn to the study of higher education as one way to rectify educational disparities, and thus are both deeply invested in understanding how critical quantitative approaches may advance such efforts. After engaging in initial discussions during an association-sponsored workshop on critical quantitative research in higher education, we were motivated to explore these perspectives, understand trends in our field, and inform our own empirical engagement. Throughout our collaboration, we were also reflexive about the social privileges we hold in the academy and society as white, cisgender women—particularly given how quantitative criticalism and QuantCrit create inroads for systemically minoritized scholars to combat the erasure of perspectives from their communities due to small sample sizes. As we work to understand prior critical quantitative endeavors, with the goal of creating opportunity for this work to flourish in the future, we continually reflect on how we can use our positions of privilege to be co-conspirators in the advancement of quantitative research for social justice in higher education.

This study employed a qualitatively driven multimethod sequential design (Hesse-Biber et al., 2015 ) to illuminate how critical quantitative perspectives and methods have been applied in higher education contexts over 15 years. Anguera et al. ( 2018 ) noted that the hallmark feature of multimethod studies is the coexistence of different methodologies. Unlike mixed-methods studies, which integrate both quantitative and qualitative methods, multimethod studies can be exclusively qualitative, exclusively quantitative, or a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. A multimethod research design was also appropriate given the distinct research questions in this study—each answered using a different stream of data. Specifically, we conducted a systematic scoping review of existing literature and facilitated follow-up interviews with a subset of corresponding authors from included publications, as detailed below and in Fig.  1 . We employed a systematic scoping review to examine the extent to which higher education scholars incorporated critical perspectives into quantitative research (research question one), and we then conducted follow-up interviews to elucidate how those scholars discussed specific strategies for leveraging critical perspectives in their quantitative research (research question two).

Sequential multimethod approach to data collection and analysis

Given the scope of our work—which examined the extent to which, and in what ways, authors applied critical perspectives to quantitative higher education research—we employed an exploratory approach with a constructivist lens. Using a constructivist paradigm allowed us to explore the many realities of doing critical quantitative research, with the authors themselves constructing truths from their worldviews (Magoon, 1977 ). In what follows, we contextualize both our methodological choices and the limitations of those choices in executing this study.

Data Sources

Systematic scoping review.

First, we employed a systematic scoping review of published higher education literature. Consistent with the purpose of a scoping review, we sought to “examine the extent, range, and nature” of critical quantitative approaches in higher education that integrate quantitative methods and critical inquiry (Arskey & O’Malley, 2005 , p. 6). We used a multi-stage scoping framework (Arskey & O’Malley, 2005 ; Levac et al., 2010 ) to identify studies that were (a) empirical, (b) conducted within a higher education context, and (c) guided by critical quantitative perspectives. We restricted our review to literature published in 2007 or later (i.e., since Stage’s formal introduction of quantitative criticalism in higher education). All studies considered for review were written in the English language.

The literature search spanned multiple databases, including Academic Search Premier, Scopus, ERIC, PsychINFO, Web of Science, SocINDEX , Psychological and Behavioral Sciences Collection, Sociological Abstracts, and JSTOR. To locate relevant works, we used independent and combined keywords that reflected the inclusion criteria, with the initial search resulting in 285 unique records for eligibility screening. All screening was conducted separately by both authors using the CADIMA online platform (Kohl et al., 2018). In total, 285 title/abstract records were screened for eligibility, with 40 full-text records subsequently screened for eligibility. After separately screening all records, we discussed inconsistencies in title/abstract and full-text eligibility ratings to reach consensus. This strategy led us to a sample of 34 manuscripts that met all inclusion criteria (Fig.  2 ).

Identification of systematic scoping review sample via literature search and screening

Systematic scoping reviews are particularly well-suited for initial examinations of emerging approaches in the literature (Munn et al., 2018 ), aligning with our goal to establish an initial understanding of the landscape of critical quantitative research applications in higher education. It also relies heavily on researcher-led qualitative review of the literature, which we viewed as a vital component of our study, as we sought to identify not just what researchers did (e.g., what topics they explored or in what outlets they did so), but also how they articulated their decision-making process in the literature. Alternative methods to examining the literature, such as bibliometric analysis, supervised topic modeling, and network analysis, may reveal additional insights regarding the scope and structure of critical quantitative research in higher education not addressed in the current study. As noted by Munn et al. ( 2018 ), systematic scoping reviews can serve as a useful precursor to more advanced approaches of research synthesis.

Semi-structured Interviews

To understand how scholars navigated the opportunities and tensions of critical quantitative inquiry in their research, we then conducted semi-structured interviews with authors whose work was identified in the scoping review. For each article meeting the review criteria ( N  = 34), we compiled information about the corresponding author and their contact information as our sample universe (Robinson, 2014 ). Each corresponding author was contacted via email for participation in a semi-structured interview. There were 32 distinct corresponding authors for the 34 manuscripts, as two corresponding authors led two manuscripts each within our corpus of data. In the recruitment email, we provided corresponding authors with a link to a Qualtrics intake survey; this survey confirmed potential participants’ role as corresponding author on the identified manuscript, collected information about their professional roles and social identities, and provided information about informed consent in the study. Twenty-five authors responded to the Qualtrics survey, with 18 corresponding authors ultimately participating in an interview.

Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom and lasted approximately 45–60 min. The interview protocol began with questions about corresponding authors’ backgrounds, then moving into questions regarding their motivations for engaging in critical approaches to quantitative methods, navigation of the epistemological and methodological tensions that may arise when doing quantitative research with a critical lens, approaches to research design, frameworks, and methods that challenged quantitative norms, and experiences with the publication process for their manuscript included in the scoping review. In other words, we asked that corresponding authors explicitly relay the thought processes underlying their methodological choices in the article(s) from our scoping review. Importantly, given the semi-structured nature of these interviews, conversations also reflected participants’ broader trajectory to and through critical quantitative thinking as well as their general reflections about how the field of higher education has grappled with critical approaches to quantitative scholarship. To increase consistency in our data collection and the nature of these conversations, the first author conducted all interviews. With participants’ consent, we recorded each interview, had interviews professionally transcribed, and then de-identified data for subsequent analysis. All interview participants were compensated for their time and contributions with a $50 Amazon gift card.

At the conclusion of each interview, participants were given the opportunity to select their own pseudonym. A profile of interview participants, along with their self-selected pseudonyms, is provided in Table  1 . Although we invited all corresponding authors to participate in interviews, our sample may reflect some self-selection bias, as authors had to opt in to be represented in the interview data. Further, interview insights do not represent all perspectives from participants’ co-authors, some of which may diverge based on lived experiences, history with quantitative research, or engagement with critical quantitative approaches.

Data Analysis

After identifying the sample of 34 publications, we began data analysis for the scoping review by uploading manuscripts to Dedoose. Both researchers then independently applied a priori codes (Saldaña, 2015 ) from Stage’s ( 2007 ) conceptualization of quantitative criticalism, Rios-Aguilar’s ( 2014 ) framework for quantitative critical inquiry, and Gillborn et al.’s ( 2018 ) QuantCrit tenets (Table  2 ). While we applied codes in accordance with Stage’s and Rios-Aguilar’s conceptualizations to each article, codes relevant to Gillborn et al.’s tenets of QuantCrit were only applied to manuscripts where authors self-identified as explicitly employing QuantCrit. Given the distinct epistemological origin of QuantCrit from broader forms of critical quantitative scholarship, codes representing the tenets of QuantCrit reflect its origins in critical race theory and may not be appropriate to apply to broader streams of critical quantitative scholarship that do not center on racism (e.g., scholarship related to (dis)ability, gender identity, sexual identity and orientation). After individually completing a priori coding, we met to reconcile discrepancies and engage in peer debriefing (Creswell & Miller, 2000 ). Data synthesis involved tabulating and reporting findings to explore how each manuscript component aligned with critical quantitative frameworks in higher education research to date.

We analyzed interview data through a multiphase process that engaged deductive and inductive coding strategies. After interviews were transcribed and redacted, we uploaded the transcripts to Dedoose for collaborative qualitative coding. The second author read each transcript in full to holistically understand participants’ insights about generating critical quantitative research. During this initial read, the second author noted quotes that were salient to our question regarding the strategies that scholars use to employ critical quantitative approaches.

Then, using the a priori codes drawn from Stage’s ( 2007 ), Rios-Aguilar’s ( 2014 ) and Gillborn et al.’s ( 2018 ) conceptualizations relevant to quantitative criticalism, critical quantitative inquiry, and QuantCrit, we collaboratively established a working codebook for deductive coding by defining the a priori codes in ways that could capture how participants discussed their work. Although these a priori codes had been previously applied to the manuscripts in the scoping review, definitions and applications of the same codes for interview analysis were noticeably broader (to align with the nature of conversations during interviews). For example, we originally applied the code “policy/advocacy”—established from Rios-Aguilar's work—to components from the implications section of scoping review manuscripts. When (re)developed for deductive coding of interview data, however, we expanded the definition of “policy/advocacy” to include participants’ policy- and advocacy-related actions (beyond writing) that advanced critical inquiry and equity for their educational communities.

In the final phase of analysis, each research team member engaged in inductive coding of the interview data. Specifically, we relied on open coding (Saldaña, 2015 ) to analyze excerpts pertaining to participants’ strategies for employing critical quantitative approaches that were not previously captured by deductive codes. Through open coding, we used successive analysis to work in sequence from a single case to multiple cases (Miles et al., 2014 ). Then, as suggested by Saldaña ( 2015 ), we collapsed our initial codes into broader categories that allowed us insight regarding how participants’ strategies in critical quantitative research expanded beyond those which have been previously articulated. Finally, to draw cohesive interpretations from these data, we independently drafted analytic memos for each interview participant’s transcript, later bridging examples from the scoping review that mapped onto qualitative codes as a form of establishing greater confidence and trustworthiness in our multimethod design.

In introducing study findings through a synthesized lens that heeds our multimethod design, we organize the sections below to draw from both scoping review and interview data. Specifically, we organize findings into two primary areas that address authors’ (1) articulated motivations to adopt critical approaches to quantitative higher education research, and (2) methodological choices that they perceive to align with critical approaches to quantitative higher education research. Within these sections, we discuss several coherent areas where authors collectively grappled with tensions in motivation (i.e., broad motivations, using coined names of critical approaches, conveying positionality, leveraging asset-based frameworks) and method (i.e., using data sources and choosing variables, challenging coding norms, interpreting statistical results), all of which signal authors’ efforts to embody criticality in quantitative research about higher education. Given our sequential research questions, which first examined the landscape of critical quantitative higher education research and then asked authors to elucidate their thought processes and strategies underlying their approaches to these manuscripts, our findings primarily focus on areas of convergence across data sources; we do, however, highlight challenges and tensions authors faced in conducting such work.

Articulated Motivations in Critical Approaches to Quantitative Research

To date, critical quantitative researchers in higher education have heeded Stage’s ( 2007 ) call to use data to reveal the large-scale perpetuation of inequities in educational processes and outcomes. This emerged as a defining aspect of higher education scholars’ critical quantitative work, as all manuscripts ( N  = 34) in the scoping review articulated underlying motivations to identify and/or address inequities.

Often, these motivations were reflected in the articulated research questions ( n  = 31; 91.2%). For example, one manuscript sought to “critically examine […] whether students were differentially impacted” by an educational policy based on intersecting race/ethnicity, gender, and income (Article 29, p. 39). Others sought to challenge notions of homogeneity across groups of systemically minoritized individuals by “explor[ing] within-group heterogeneity” of constructs such as sense of belonging among Asian American students (Article 32, p. iii) and “challenging the assumption that [economically and educationally challenged] students are a monolithic group with the same values and concerns” (Article 31, p. 5). These underlying motivations for conducting critical quantitative research emerged most clearly in the named approaches, positionality statements, and asset-based frameworks articulated in manuscripts.

Adopting the Coined Names of Quantitative Criticalism, QuantCrit, and Related Approaches

Based on the inclusion criteria applied in the scoping review, we anticipated that all manuscripts would employ approaches that were explicitly critical and quantitative in nature. Accordingly, all manuscripts ( N  = 34; 100%) adopted approaches that were coined as quantitative criticalism , QuantCrit , critical policy analysis (CPA), critical quantitative intersectionality (CQI) , or some combination of those terms. Twenty-one manuscripts (61.8%) identified their approach as quantitative criticalism, nine manuscripts (26.5%) identified their approach as QuantCrit, two manuscripts (5.9%) identified their approach as CPA, and two manuscripts (5.9%) identified their approach as CQI.

One of the manuscripts that applied quantitative criticalism broadly described it as an approach that “seeks to quantitatively understand the predictors contributing to completion for a specific population of minority students” (Article 34, p. 62), noting that researchers have historically “attempted to explain the experiences of [minority] students using theories, concepts, and approaches that were initially designed for white, middle and upper class students” (Article 34, p. 62). Although this example speaks only to the limited context and outcomes of one study, it highlights a broader theme found across articles; that is, quantitative criticalism was often leveraged to challenge dominant theories, concepts, and approaches that failed to represent systemically minoritized individuals’ experiences. In challenging dominant theories, QuantCrit applications were most explicitly associated with critical race theory and issues of racism. One manuscript noted that “QuantCrit recognizes the limitations of quantitative data as it cannot fully capture individual experiences and the impact of racism” (Article 29, p. 9). However, these authors subsequently noted that “quantitative methodology can support CRT work by measuring and highlighting inequities” (Article 29, p. 9). Several scholars who employed QuantCrit explicitly identified tenets of QuantCrit that they aimed to address, with several authors making clear how they aligned decisions with two tenets establishing that categories are not given and numbers are not neutral.

Despite broadly applying several of the coined names for critical realms of quantitative research, interview data revealed that several authors felt a palpable tension in labeling. Some participants, like Nathan, questioned the surface-level engagement that may come with coined names: “I don’t know, I think it’s the thinking and the thought processes and the intentionality that matters. How invested should we be in the label?” Nathan elaborated by noting how he has shied away from labeling some of his work as quantitative criticalist , given that he did not have a clear answer about “what would set it apart from the equity-minded, inequality-focused, structurally and systematically-oriented kind of work.” Similarly, Leo stated how labels could (un)intentionally stop short of the true mission for the research, recalling that he felt “more inclined to say that I’m employing critical quantitative leanings or influences from critical quant” because a true application of critical epistemology should be apparent in each part of the research process. Although most interview participants remained comfortable with labeling, we also note that—within both interview data and the articles themselves—authors sometimes presented varied source attributions for labels and conflated some of the coined names, representing the messiness of this emerging body of research.

Challenging Objectivity by Conveying Researcher Positionality

Positionality statements acknowledge the influence of scholars’ identities and social positions on research decisions. Quantitative research has historically been viewed as an objective, value-neutral endeavor, with some researchers deeming positionality statements as unnecessary and inconsistent with the positivist paradigm from which such work is often conducted. Several interviewed authors noted that positivist or post-positivist roots of quantitative research characterized their doctoral training, which often meant that their “original thinking around statistics and research was very post-positivist” (Carter) or that “there really wasn’t much of a discussion, as far as I can remember as a doc student, about epistemology or ontology” (Randall). Although positionality statements have been generally rare in quantitative research studies, half of the manuscripts in our sample ( n  = 17; 50.0%) included statements of researcher positionality. One interview participant, Gabrielle, discussed the importance of positionality statements as one way to challenge norms of quantitative research in saying:

It’s not objective, right? I think having more space to say, “This is why I chose the measures I chose. This is how I’m coming to this work. This is why it matters to me. This is my positioning, right?” I think that’s really important in quantitative work…that raises that level of consciousness to say these are not just passive, like every decision you make in your research is an active decision.

While Gabrielle, as well as Carter and Randall, all came to be advocates of positionality statements in quantitative scholarship through different pathways, it became clear through these and other interviews that positionality statements were one way to bring greater transparency to a traditionally value-neutral space.

As an additional source of contextual data, we reviewed submission guidelines for the peer-reviewed journals in which manuscripts were published. Not one of the 15 peer-reviewed outlets represented in our scoping review sample required that authors include positionality statements. One outlet, Journal of Diversity in Higher Education (where two scoping review articles were printed), offered “inclusive reporting standards” where they recommended that authors include reflexivity and positionality statements in their submitted manuscripts (American Psychological Association, 2024 ). Another outlet, Teachers College Record (where one scoping review article was printed), mentioned positionality statements in their author instructions. Yet, Teachers College Record did not require nor recommend the inclusion of author positionality statements; rather, they offered recommendations if authors chose to include them. Specifically, they suggested that if authors chose to include a positionality statement, it should be “more than demographic information or abstract statements” (Sage Journals, 2024 ). The remaining 13 peer-reviewed outlets from the scoping review data made no mention of author reflexivity or positionality in their author guidelines.

When present, the scoping review revealed that positionality statements varied in form and content. Some positionality statements were embedded in manuscript narratives, while others existed as separate tables with each author’s positionality represented as a separate row. In content, it was most common for authors to identify how their identities and experiences motivated their work. For example, one author noted their shared identity with their research participants as a low-income, first-generation Latina college student (Article 2, p. 25). Another author discussed the identity that they and their co-author shared as AAPI faculty, making the research “personally relevant for [them]” (Article 11, p. 344),

In interviews, participants recalled how the relationship between their identities, lived experiences, and motivations for critical approaches to quantitative research were all intertwined. Leo mentioned, “naming who we are in a study helps us be very forthright with the pieces that we’re more likely to attend to.” Yet, Leo went on to say that “one of the most cosmetic choices that people see in critically oriented quantitative research is our positionality statements,” which other participants noted about how information in positionality statements is presented. In several interviews, authors’ reflections on whether these statements should appear as lists of identities or deeper statements about reflexivity presented a clear tension. For some, positionality statements were places to “identify ourselves and our social locations” (David) or “brand yourself” as a critical quantitative scholar to meet “trendy” writing standards in this area (Michelle). Yet, others felt such statements fall short in revealing “how this study was shaped by their background identities and perspectives” (Junco) or appear to “be written in response to the context of the research or people participating” (Ginger). Ultimately, many participants felt that shaping honest positionality statements that better convey “the assumptions, and the biases and experiences we’ve all had” (Randall) was one area where quantitative higher education scholars could significantly improve their writing to reflect a critical lens.

Some manuscripts also clarified how authors’ identities and social positions reshaped the research process and product. For instance, authors of one manuscript reported being “guided by [their] cultural intuition” throughout the research (Article 17, p. 218). Alternatively, another author described the narrative style of their manuscript as intentionally “autobiographical and personally reflexive” in order “to represent the connections [they] made between [their] own experiences and findings that emerged” from their work (Article 28, p. 56). Taken together, among the manuscripts that explicitly included positionality statements, these remarks make clear that authors had widely varying approaches to their reflexivity and writing processes.

Actualizing Asset-Based Frameworks

Notably, conceptual and theoretical frameworks emerged as a common way for critical quantitative scholars to pursue equitable educational processes and outcomes in higher education research. Nearly all ( n  = 32; 94.1%) manuscripts explicitly challenged dominant conceptual and theoretical models. Some authors enacted this challenge by countering canonical constructs and theories in the framing of their study. For example, several manuscripts addressed critiques of theoretical concepts such as integration and sense of belonging in building the conceptual framework for their own studies. Other manuscripts were constructed with the underlying goal to problematize and redefine frameworks, such as engagement for Latina/e/o/x students or the “leaky pipeline” discourse related to broadening participation in the sciences.

Across interviews, participants challenged deficit framings or “traditional” theoretical and conceptual approaches in many ways. Some frameworks are taken as a “truism in higher ed” (Leo), such as sense of belonging and Astin’s ( 1984 ) I-E-O model, and these frameworks were sometimes purposefully used to disrupt their normative assumptions. Randall, for one, recalled using a more normative higher education framework but opted to think about this framework “as more culturalized” than had previously been done. Further, Carter noted that “thinking about the findings in an anti-deficit lens” comprised a large portion of critical quantitative approaches. Using frameworks for asset-based interpretation was further exemplified by Caroline stating, “We found that Black students don’t do as well, but it’s not the fault of Black students.” Instead, Caroline challenged deficit understandings through the selected framework and implications for institutional policy. Collectively, challenging normative theoretical underpinnings in higher education was widely favored among participants, and Jackie hoped that “the field continues to turn a critical lens onto itself, to grow and incorporate new knowledges and even older forms of knowledge that maybe it hasn’t yet.”

Alternatively, some participants discussed rejecting widely used frameworks in higher education research in favor of adapting frameworks from other disciplines. For example, QuantCrit researchers drew from critical race theory (and related frameworks, such as intersectionality) to quantitatively examine higher education topics in ways that value the knowledge of People of Color. In using these frameworks, which have origins in critical legal and Black feminist theorization, interview participants noted how important it was “to put yourself out there with talking about race and racism” (Isabel) and connect the statistics “back to systems related to power, privilege, and oppression [because] it’s about connecting [results] to these systemic factors that shape experience, opportunities, barriers, all of that kind of stuff” (Jackie). Further, several authors related pulling theoretical lenses from sociology, gender studies, feminist studies, and queer studies to explore asset-based theorization in higher education contexts and potentially (re)build culturally relevant concepts for quantitative measurement in higher education.

Embodying Criticality in Methodological Sources, Approaches, and Interpretations

Moving beyond underlying motivations of critical quantitative higher education research, scoping review authors also frequently actualized the task of questioning and reconstructing “models, measures, and analytic practices [to] better describe experiences of those who have not been adequately represented” (Stage, 2007 , p. 10). Common across all manuscripts ( N  = 34) was the discussion of specific ways in which authors’ critical quantitative approaches informed their analytic decisions. In fact, “analytic practices” was by far the most prevalent code applied to the manuscripts in our dataset, with 342 total references across the 34 manuscripts. This amounted to 20.8% of the excerpts in the scoping review dataset being coded as reflecting critical quantitative approaches to analytic practices, specifically.

Interestingly, many analytic approaches reflected what some would consider “standard” quantitative methodological tools. For example, manuscripts employed factor analysis to assess measures, t-tests to examine differences between groups, and hierarchical linear regression to examine relationships in specific contexts. Some more advanced, though less commonly applied, methods included measurement invariance testing and latent class analysis. Thus, applying a critical quantitative lens tended not to involve applying a separate set of analytic tools; rather, the critical lens was reflected in authors’ selection of data sources and variables, approaches to data coding and (dis)aggregation, and interpretation of statistical results.

Selecting Data Sources and Variables

Although scholars were explicit in their underlying motivations and approaches to critical quantitative research, this did not often translate into explicitly critical data collection endeavors. Most manuscripts ( n  = 29; 85.3%) leveraged existing measures and data sources for quantitative analysis. Existing data sources included many national, large-scale datasets including the Educational Longitudinal Study (NCES), National Survey of Recent College Graduates (NSF), and the Current Population Survey (U.S. Census Bureau). Other large-scale data sources reflecting specific higher education contexts and populations included the HEDS Diversity and Equity Campus Climate Survey, Learning About STEM Student Outcomes (LASSO) platform, and National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen. Only five manuscripts (14.7%) conducted analysis using original data collected and/or with newly designed measures.

It was apparent, however, that many authors grappled with challenges related to using existing data and measures. Interview participants’ stories crystallized the strengths and limitations of secondary data. Over half of the interview participants in our study spoke about their choices regarding quantitative data sources. Some participants noted that surveys “weren’t really designed to ask critical questions” (Sarah) and discussed the issues with survey data collected around sex and gender (Jessica). Still, Sarah and Jessica drew from existing survey data to complicate the higher education experiences they aimed to understand and tried to leverage critical framing to question “traditional” definitions of social constructs. In another discussion about data sources and the design of such sources, Carter expanded by saying:

I came in without [being] able to think through the sampling or data collection portion, but rather “this is what I have, how do I use it in a way that is applying critical frameworks but also staying true to the data themselves.” That is something that looks different for each study.

In discussing quantitative data source design, more broadly, Tyler added: “In a lot of ways, all quantitative methods are mixed methods. All of our measures should be developed with a qualitative component to them.” In the scoping review articles, one example of this qualitative component is evident within the cognitive interviews that Sablan ( 2019 ) employed to validate survey items. Finally, several participants noted how crucial it is to “just be honest and acknowledge the [limitations of secondary data] in the paper” (Caroline) and “not try to hide [the limitations]” (Alexis), illustrating the value of increased transparency when it comes to the selection and use of existing quantitative data in manuscripts advancing critical perspectives.

Regardless of data source, attention to power, oppression, and systemic inequities was apparent in the selection of variables across manuscripts. Many variables, and thus the associated models, captured institutional contexts and conditions. The multilevel nature of variables, which extended beyond individual experiences, aligned with authors’ articulated motivations to disrupt inequitable educational processes and outcomes, which are often systemic and institutionalized in nature. For one, David explained key motivations behind his analytic process: “We could have controlled for various effects, but we really wanted to see how are [the outcomes] differing by these different life experiences?” David’s focus on moving past “controlling” for different effects shows a deep level of intentionality that was reflected among many participants. Carter expanded on this notion by recalling how variable selection required, “thinking through how I can account for systemic oppression in my model even though it’s not included in the survey…I’ve never seen it measured.” Further, Leo discussed how reflexivity shaped variable selection and shared: “Ultimately, it’s thinking about how do these environments not function in value-neutral ways, right? It’s not just selecting X, Y, and Z variable to include. It’s being able to interrogate [how] these variables represent environments that are not power neutral.” The process of selecting quantitative data sources and variables was perhaps best summed up by Nick, who concisely shared, “it’s been very iterative.” Indeed, most participants recalled how their methodological processes necessitated reflexivity—an iterative process of continually revisiting assumptions one brings to the quantitative research process (Jamieson et al., 2023 )—and a willingness to lean into innovative ways of operationalizing data for critical purposes.

Challenging the Norms of Coding

An especially common way of enacting critical principles in quantitative research was to challenge traditional norms of coding. This emerged in three primary ways: (1) disaggregation of categories to reflect heterogeneity in individuals’ experiences, (2) alternative approaches to identifying reference groups, and (3) efforts to capture individuals’ intersecting identities. Across manuscripts, authors often intentionally disaggregated identity subgroups (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender) and ran distinct analytical models for each subgroup separately. In interviews, Junco expressed that running separate models was one way that analyses could cultivate a different way of thinking about racial equity. Specifically, Junco challenged colleagues’ analytic processes by asking whether their research questions “really need to focus on racial comparison?” Junco then pushed her colleagues by asking, “can we make a different story when we look at just the Black groups? Or when we look at only Asian groups, can we make a different story that people have not really heard?” Isabel added that focusing on measurement for People of Color allowed for them (Isabel and her research collaborators) to “apply our knowledge and understanding about minoritized students to understand what the nuances were.” In nearly one third of the manuscripts ( n  = 11; 32.4%), focusing on single group analyses emerged as one way that QuantCrit scholars disrupted the perceived neutrality of numbers and how categories have previously been established to serve white, elite interests. Five of those manuscripts (14.7%) explicitly focused on understanding heterogeneity within systemically minoritized subpopulations, including Asian American, Latina/e/o/x, and Black students.

It was not the case, however, that authors avoided group comparisons altogether. For example, one team of authors used separate principal components analysis (PCA) models for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students with the explicit intent of comparing models between groups. The authors noted that “[t]ypically, monolithic comparisons between racial groups perpetuate deficit thinking and marginalization.” However, they sought to “highlight the nuance in belonging for Indigenous community college students as it differs from the White-centric or normative standards” by comparing groups from an asset-driven perspective (Article 5, p. 7). Thus, in cases where critical quantitative scholars included group comparisons, the intentionality underlying those choices as a mechanism to highlight inequities and/or contribute to asset-based narratives was apparent.

Four manuscripts (11.8%) were explicit in their efforts to identify alternative analytic methods to normative reference groups. Reference groups are often required when building quantitative models with categorical variables such as racial/ethnic and gender identity. Often, dominant identities (e.g., respondents who are white and/or men) comprise the largest portion of a research sample and are selected as the comparison group, typifying experiences of individuals with those dominant identities. To counter the traditional practice of reference groups, some manuscript authors stated using effect coding, often referencing the work of Mayhew and Simonoff ( 2015 ), and dynamic centering as two alternatives. Effect coding (used in three manuscripts) removes the need for a reference group; instead, all groups are compared to the overall sample mean. Dynamic centering (used in one manuscript), on the other hand, uses a reference group but one that is intentionally selected based on the construct in question, as opposed to relying on sample size or dominant identities.

Interview participants also discussed navigating alternative coding practices, with several authors raising key points about their exposure to and capacity building for effect coding. As Angela described, effect coding necessitates that “you don’t choose a specific group as your benchmark to do the comparison. And you instead compare to the group.” Angela then stated that this approach made more sense than choosing benchmarks, as she felt uncomfortable identifying one group as a comparison group. Junco, however, noted that “effect coding was much more complicated than what I thought,” as she reflected on unlearning positivist strategies in favor of equity-focused approaches that could elucidate greater nuance. Importantly, using alternative coding practices was not universal among manuscripts or interview participants. One manuscript utilized traditional dummy coding for race in regression models, with white students as the reference group to which all other groups were compared. The authors explicated that “using white students as the reference [was] not a result of ‘privileging’ them or maintaining the patterns of power related to racial categorizations” (Article 8, p. 1282). Instead, they argued that the comparison was a deliberate choice to “reveal patterns of racial or ethnic educational inequality compared to the privileged racial group” (Article 8, p. 1282). Another author maintained the use of reference groups purely for ease of interpretation. David shared, “it’s easier for the person to just look at it and compare magnitudes.” However, by prioritizing the benefit of easy interpretation with traditional reference groups, authors may incur other costs (such as sustaining unnecessary comparisons to white students). Additionally, several manuscripts ( n  = 13; 38.2%) employed analytic coding practices that aimed to account for intersectionality. While authors identified these practices by various names (e.g., interaction terms, mediating variables, conditional effects) they all afforded similar opportunities. The most common practice among authors in our sample ( n  = 8; 23.5%) was computing interaction terms to account for intersecting identities, such as race and gender. Specifically pertaining to intersectionality, Alexis summarized many researchers’ tensions well in sharing, “I know what Kimberlé Crenshaw says. But how do I operationalize that mathematically into something that’s relevant?” In offering one way that intersectionality could be realized with quantitative data, Tyler stated that “being able to keep in these variables that are interacting [via interaction terms] and showing differences” may align with the core ideas of intersectionality. Yet, participants also recognized that statistics would inherently always fall short of representing respondents’ lived experiences, as discussed by Nick: “We disaggregate as far as we can, but you could only go so far, and like, how do we deal with tension.” Several other participants reflected on bringing in open-text response data about individuals’ social identities, categorizing racial and ethnic groups according to continent (while also recognizing that this did not necessarily attend to the complexities of diasporas), or making decisions about groups that qualify as “minoritized” based on disciplinary and social movements. Collectively, the disparate approaches that authors used and discussed directly speak to critical higher education scholars’ movement away from normative comparisons that did not meaningfully answer questions related to (in)equity and/or intersectionality in higher education.

Interpreting Statistical Results

One notable, albeit less common, way higher education scholars enacted critical quantitative approaches through analytic methods was by challenging traditional ways of reporting and interpreting statistical results. The dominant approach to statistical methods aligns with a null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) approach, whereby p -values—used as indicators of statistically significant effects—serve to identify meaningful results. NHST practices were prevalent in nearly all scoping review manuscripts; yet, there were some exceptions. For example, three manuscripts (8.8%) cautioned against reliance on statistical significance due to its dependence on large sample size (i.e., statistical power), which is often at odds with centering research on systemically minoritized populations. One of those manuscripts (2.9%) even chose to interpret nonsignificant results from their quantitative analyses. In a similar vein, two manuscripts (5.9%) also questioned and adapted common statistical practices related to model selection (e.g., using corrected Akaike information criteria (AIC) instead of p -values) and variable selection (e.g., avoiding use of variance explained so as not to “[exclude] marginalized students from groups with small representations in the data” (Article 23, p. 7). Meanwhile, others attended to raw numeric data and uncertainty associated with quantitative results. The resources to enact these alternative methodological practices were briefly discussed by Tyler through his interview, in which he shared: “The use of p -values is so poorly done that the American Statistical Association has released a statement on p -values, an entire special collection [and people in my field] don’t know those things exist.” Tyler went on to share that this knowledge barrier was tied to the siloed nature of academia, and that such siloes may inhibit the generation of critical quantitative research that draws from different disciplinary origins.

Among interviewed authors, many also viewed interpretation as a stage of quantitative research that required a high level of responsibility and awareness of worldview. Nick related that using a QuantCrit approach changed how he was interpreting results, in “talking about educational debts instead of gaps, talking about racism instead of race.” As demonstrated by Nick, critical interpretations of statistics necessitate congruence with theoretical or conceptual framing, as well, given the explicit call to interrogate structures of inequity and power in research adopting a critical lens. Leo described this responsibility as a necessary challenge:

It’s very easy to look at results and interpret them—I don’t wanna say ‘as is’ because I don’t think that there is an ‘as is’—but interpret them in ways that they’re traditionally interpreted and to keep them there. But, if we’re truly trying to accomplish these critical quantitative themes, then we need to be able to reference these larger structures to make meaning of the results that are put in front of us.

Nick, Leo, and several other participants all emphasized how crucial interpretation is in critical quantitative research in ways that expanded beyond statistical practices; ultimately, the perspective that “behind every number is a human” served as a primary motivation for many authors in fulfilling the call toward ethical and intentional interpretation of statistics.

Leveraging a multimethod approach with 15 years of published manuscripts ( N  = 34) and 18 semi-structured interviews with corresponding authors, this study identifies the extent to which principles of quantitative criticalism, critical quantitative inquiry, and QuantCrit have been applied in higher education research. While scholars are continuing to develop strategies to enact a critical quantitative lens in their studies—a path we hope will continue, as continued questioning, creativity, and exploration of new possibilities underscore the foundations of critical theory (Bronner, 2017 )—our findings do suggest that higher education researchers may benefit from intentional conversations regarding specific analytic practices they use to advance critical quantitative research (e.g., confidence intervals versus p -values, finite mixture models versus homogeneous distribution models).

Our interviews with higher education scholars who produced such work also fills a need for guidance on strategies to enact critical perspectives in quantitative research, addressing an absence of such from most quantitative training and resources. By drawing on the work and insights of higher education researchers engaging critical quantitative approaches, we provide a foundation on which future scholars can imagine and implement a fuller range of possibilities for critical inquiry via quantitative methods in higher education. In what follows, we discuss the findings of this study alongside the frameworks from which they drew inspiration. Then, we offer implications for research and practice to catalyze continued exploration and application of critical quantitative approaches in higher education scholarship.

Synthesizing Key Takeaways

First, scoping review data revealed several commonalities across manuscripts regarding authors’ underlying motivations to identify and/or address inequities for systemically minoritized populations—speaking to how critical quantitative approaches can fall within the larger umbrella of equity-mindedness in higher education research. Such motivations were reflected in authors’ research questions and frameworks (consistent with Stage’s ( 2007 ) initial guidance). Most manuscripts identified their approach as quantitative criticalism broadly, although there were sometimes blurred boundaries between approaches termed quantitative criticalism, QuantCrit, critical policy analysis, and critical quantitative intersectionality. Notably, authors’ decisions about which framing their work invoked also determined how scholars enacted a specified critical quantitative approach. For example, the tenets of QuantCrit, offered by Gillborn et al. ( 2018 ), were specifically heeded by researchers seeking to take up a QuantCrit lens. Scholars who noted inspiration from Rios-Aguilar ( 2014 ) often drew specifically from the framework for critical quantitative inquiry. While the key ingredients of these critical quantitative approaches were offered in the foundational framings we introduced, the field has lacked understanding on how scholars take up these considerations. Thus, the present findings create inroads to a conversation about applying and extending the articulated components associated with critical quantitative higher education research.

Second, our multimethod approach illuminated general agreement (in manuscripts and interviews) that quantitative research in higher education—whether explicitly critical or not—is not neutral nor objective. However, despite positionality being a key part of Rios-Aguilar’s ( 2014 ) critical quantitative inquiry framework, only half of the manuscripts included researcher positionality. Thus, while educational researchers may agree that, without challenging objectivity, quantitative methods serve to uphold inequity (e.g., Arellano, 2022 ; Castillo & Babb, 2024 ), higher education scholars may not have yet established consensus on how these principles materialize. To be clear, consensus need not be the goal of critical quantitative approaches, given that critical theory demands constant questioning for new ways of thinking and being (Bronner, 2017 ); yet, greater solidarity among critical quantitative higher education researchers may be beneficial, so that community-based discussions can drive the actualization of equity-minded motivations. Interview data also revealed complications in how scholars choose if, and how, to define and label critical quantitative approaches. Some participants struggled with whether their work was “critical enough” to be labeled as such. Those conversations raise concerns that critical quantitative research in higher education could—or potentially has—become an exclusionary space where level of criticality is measured by an arbitrary barometer (refer to Garvey & Huynh, 2024 ). Meanwhile, other participants worried that attaching such a label to their work was irrelevant (i.e., that it was the motivations and intentionality underlying the work that mattered, not the label). Although the field remains in disagreement regarding if/how labeling should be implemented for critical quantitative approaches, “it is the naming of experience and ideologies of power that initiates the process [of transformation] in its critical form” (Hanley, 2004 , p. 55). As such, we argue that naming critical quantitative approaches can serve as a lever for transforming quantitative higher education research and create power in related dialogue.

Implications for Future Studies on Critical Quantitative Higher Education Research

As with any empirical approach, and especially those that are gaining traction (as critical quantitative approaches are in higher education; Wofford & Winkler, 2022 ), there is utility in conducting research about the research . First, in the context of higher education as a broad field of applied research, there is a need to illustrate what critical quantitative scholars focus on when they conceptualize higher education in the first place. For example, is higher education viewed as a possibility for social mobility? Or are critical quantitative scholars viewing postsecondary institutions as engines of inequity? Second, it was notable that—among the manuscripts including positionality statements—it was common for such statements to read as biographies (i.e., lists of social identities) rather than as reflexive accounts about the roles/commitments of the researcher(s). Future research would benefit from a deeper understanding of the enactment of positionality in critical quantitative higher education research. Third, given the productive tensions associated with naming and understanding the (dis)agreed upon ingredients between quantitative criticalism, critical quantitative inquiry, QuantCrit, as well as additional known and unknown conceptualizations, further research regarding how higher education scholars grapple with definitions, distinctions, and adaptations of these related approaches will clarify how scholars can advance their critical commitments with quantitative postsecondary data.

Implications for Employing Critical Quantitative Higher Education Research

Emerging analytical tools for critical quantitative research.

In terms of employing critical quantitative approaches in higher education research, there is significant room for scholars to explore emerging quantitative methodological tools. We agree with López et al.’s ( 2018 ) assessment that critical quantitative work tends to remain demographic and/or descriptive in its methodological nature, and there is great potential for more advanced inferential quantitative methods to serve critical aims. While there are some examples in the literature—for example, Sablan’s ( 2019 ) work in the realm of quantitative measurement and Malcom-Piqueux’s (2015) work related to latent class analysis and other person-centered modeling approaches—additional examples of advanced and innovative analytical tools were limited in our findings. Thus, integrating more advanced quantitative methodological tools into critical quantitative higher education research, such as finite mixture modeling (as noted by Malcom-Piqueux, 2015), measurement invariance testing, and multi-group structural equation modeling, may advance the ways in which scholars address questions related to heterogeneity in the experiences and outcomes of college students, faculty, and staff.

Traditional quantitative analytical tools have historically highlighted between-group differences that perpetuate deficit narratives for systemically minoritized students, faculty, and staff on college campuses; for example, comparing the educational outcomes of Black students to white students. Emerging approaches such as finite mixture modeling hold promise in unearthing more nuanced understandings. Of growing interest to many critical quantitative scholars is heterogeneity within minoritized populations; finite mixture modeling approaches such as growth mixture modeling, latent class analysis, and latent profile analysis are particularly well suited to reveal within-group differences that are otherwise obfuscated in most quantitative analyses. Although we found a few examples in our scoping review of authors who leveraged more traditional group comparisons for equity-minded aims, these emerging analytical approaches may be better suited for the questions asked by future critical quantitative scholars.

One Size Does Not Fit All

Many emerging analytical tools demonstrate promise in advancing conversations about inequity, particularly related to heterogeneity in subpopulations on college and university campuses. As noted previously, however, Rios-Aguilar ( 2014 ) noted that critical quantitative research need not rely solely on “fancy” or advanced analytical tools; in fact, our findings did not lead us to conclude that higher education scholars have established a set of analytical approaches that are explicitly critical in nature. Rather, our results revealed a common theme: that critical quantitative scholarship in higher education necessitates an elevated degree of intentionality in selection, application, and interpretation of whichever analytical approaches—advanced or not—scholars choose.

As noted, there were several instances in our data where commonly critiqued analytical approaches were still applied in the critical quantitative literature. For example, we found manuscripts that conducted a monolithic comparison of Indigenous and non-Indigenous students and the utilization of traditional dummy coding with white students as a normative reference group. What made these manuscripts distinct from more non-critical quantitative research was the thoughtfulness and intentionality with which those approaches were selected to serve equity-minded goals—an intentionality that was explicitly communicated to readers in the methods section of manuscripts. Just as the inclusion of positionality statements in half of the manuscripts suggests that researcher objectivity was generally not assumed by higher education scholars conducting critical quantitative scholarship, choices that often otherwise go unquestioned were interrogated and discussed in manuscripts.

Cokley and Awad ( 2013 ) share several recommendations for advancing social justice research via quantitative methods. One of their recommendations addresses the utilization of racial group comparisons in quantitative analyses. They do not suggest that researchers avoid comparisons between groups altogether, but rather they avoid “unnecessary” comparisons between groups (p. 35). They elaborate that, “[t]here should be a clear research questions that necessitates the use of the comparison” if utilized in quantitative research with critical aims (Cokley & Awad, 2013 , p. 35). Our findings suggested that—in the current state of critical quantitate scholarship in higher education—it is not so much about a specific set of approaches deeming scholarship as critical (or not), but rather about asking critical questions (as Stage initially called us to do in 2007) and then selecting methods that align with those goals.

Opportunities for Training and Collaboration

Notably, many of the emerging analytical approaches mentioned require a significant degree of methodological training. The limited use of such tools, which are otherwise well-suited for critical quantitative applications, points to a potential disconnect in training of higher education scholars. Some structured opportunities for partnership between disciplinary and methodological scholars have emerged via training programs such as the Quantitative Research Methods (QRM) for STEM Education Scholars Program (funded by the National Science Foundation Award 1937745) and the Institute on Mixture Modeling for Equity-Oriented Researchers, Scholars and Educators (IMMERSE) fellowship (funded by the Institute for Education Sciences Award R305B220021). These grant-funded training opportunities connect quantitative methodological experts with applied researchers across educational contexts.

We must consider additional ways, both formal and informal, to expand training opportunities for higher education scholars with interest in both advanced quantitative methods and equity-focused research; until then, expertise in quantitative methods and critical frameworks will likely inhabit two distinct communities of scholars. For higher education scholars to fully embrace the potential of critical quantitative research, we will be well served by intentional partnerships across methodological (e.g., quantitative and qualitative) and disciplinary (e.g., higher education scholars and methodologists) boundaries. In addition to expanding applied researchers’ analytical skillsets, training and collaboration opportunities also prepare potential critical quantitative scholars in higher education to select methodological approaches, whether introductory or advanced, that most closely align with their research aims.

Historically, critical inquiry has been viewed primarily as an endeavor for qualitative research. Recently, educational scholars have begun considering the possibilities for quantitative research to be leveraged in support of critical inquiry. However, there remains limited work evaluating whether and to what extent principles from quantitative criticalism, critical quantitative inquiry, and QuantCrit have been applied in higher education research. By drawing on the work and insights of scholars engaging in critical quantitative work, we provide a foundation on which future scholars can imagine and implement a vast range of possibilities for critical inquiry via quantitative methods in higher education. Ultimately, this work will allow scholars to realize the potential for research methodologies to directly support critical aims.

Data Availability

The list of manuscripts generated from the scoping review analysis is available via the Online Supplemental Materials Information link. Given the nature of our sample and topics discussed, interview data will not be shared publicly to protect participant anonymity.

American Psychological Association. (2024). Journal of Diversity in Higher Education. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/dhe

Anguera, M. T., Blanco-Villaseñor, A., Losada, J. L., Sánchez-Algarra, P., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2018). Revisiting the difference between mixed methods and multimethods: Is it all in the name? Quality & Quantity, 52 , 2757–2770.

Article   Google Scholar  

Arellano, L. (2022). Questioning the science: How quantitative methodologies perpetuate inequity in higher education. Education Sciences, 12 (2), 116.

Arskey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8 (1), 19–32.

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25 , 297–308.

Google Scholar  

Bensimon, E. M. (2007). The underestimated significance of practitioner knowledge in the scholarship on student success. The Review of Higher Education, 30 (4), 441–469.

Bensimon, E. M. (2018). Reclaiming racial justice in equity. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 50 (3–4), 95–98.

Bierema, A., Hoskinson, A. M., Moscarella, R., Lyford, A., Haudek, K., Merrill, J., & Urban-Lurain, M. (2021). Quantifying cognitive bias in educational researchers. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 44 (4), 395–413.

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In J. Karabel & A. H. Halsey (Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487–511). Oxford University Press.

Bronner, S. E. (2017). Critical theory: A very short introduction (Vol. 263). Oxford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Byrd, D. (2019). The diversity distraction: A critical comparative analysis of discourse in higher education scholarship. Review of Higher Education, 42 , 135–172.

Castillo, W., & Babb, N. (2024). Transforming the future of quantitative educational research: A systematic review of enacting QuantCrit. Race Ethnicity and Education, 27 (1), 1–21.

Cokley, A., & Awad, G. H. (2013). In defense of quantitative methods: Using the “master’s tools” to promote social justice. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 5 (2), 26–41.

Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39 (3), 124–130.

Espino, M. M. (2012). Seeking the “truth” in the stories we tell: The role of critical race epistemology in higher education research. The Review of Higher Education, 36 (1), 31–67.

Garcia, N. M., López, N., & Vélez, V. N. (2018). Race, ethnicity, and education: Vol 21, No 2. QuantCrit: Rectifying quantitative methods through critical race theory . Routledge.

Garvey, J. C., & Huynh, J. (2024). Quantitative criticalism in education research. Critical Education, 15 (1), 74–90.

Gillborn, D., Warmington, P., & Demack, S. (2018). QuantCrit: Education, policy, ‘Big Data’ and principles for a critical race theory of statistics. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21 (2), 158–179.

Hanley, M. S. (2004). The name game: Naming in culture, critical theory, and the arts. Journal of Thought, 39 (4), 53–74.

Hesse-Biber, S., Rodriguez, D., & Frost, N. A. (2015). A qualitatively driven approach to multimethod and mixed methods research. In S. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. Oxford University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Jamieson, M. K., Govaart, G. H., & Pownall, M. (2023). Reflexivity in quantitative research: A rationale and beginner’s guide. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 17 (4), 1–15.

Kimball, E., & Friedensen, R. E. (2019). The search for meaning in higher education research: A discourse analysis of ASHE presidential addresses. The Review of Higher Education, 42 (4), 1549–1574.

Kincheloe, J. L., & McLaren, P. L. (1994). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 138–157). Sage Publications Inc.

Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O’Brien, K. K. (2010). Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5 , 69.

López, N., Erwin, C., Binder, M., & Javier Chavez, M. (2018). Making the invisible visible: Advancing quantitative methods in higher education using critical race theory and intersectionality. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21 (2), 180–207.

Magoon, A. J. (1977). Constructivist approaches in educational research. Review of Educational Research, 47 (4), 651–693.

Martínez-Alemán, A. M., Pusser, B., & Bensimon, E. M. (Eds.). (2015). Critical approaches to the study of higher education: A practical introduction . Johns Hopkins University Press.

Mayhew, M. J., & Simonoff, J. S. (2015). Non-White, no more: Effect coding as an alternative to dummy coding with implications for higher education researchers. Journal of College Student Development, 56 (2), 170–175.

McCoy, D. L., & Rodricks, D. J. (2015). Critical race theory in higher education: 20 years of theoretical and research innovations. ASHE Higher Education Report, 41 (3), 1.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook . Sage.

Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review of scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18 , 1–7.

Renn, K. A. (2020). Reimagining the study of higher education: Generous thinking, chaos, and order in a low consensus field. The Review of Higher Education, 43 (4), 917–934.

Rios-Aguilar, C. (2014). The changing context of critical quantitative inquiry. New Directions for Institutional Research, 158 , 95–107.

Robinson, O. C. (2014). Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11 (1), 25–41.

Sablan, J. R. (2019). Can you really measure that? Combining critical race theory and quantitative methods. American Educational Research Journal, 56 (1), 178–203.

Sage Journals. (2024). Teachers college record: The voice of scholarship in education. https://journals.sagepub.com/author-instructions/TCZ

Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers . Sage Publications.

Stage, F. K. (Ed.). (2007). New directions for institutional research: No. 133. Using quantitative data to answer critical questions . Jossey-Bass.

Stage, F. K., & Wells, R. S. (Eds.). (2014). New directions for institutional research: No. 158. New scholarship in critical quantitative research—Part 1: Studying institutions and people in context . Jossey-Bass.

Stewart, D. L. (2022). Spanning and unsettling the borders of critical scholarship in higher education. The Review of Higher Education, 45 (4), 549–563.

Tabron, L. A., & Thomas, A. K. (2023). Deeper than wordplay: A systematic review of critical quantitative approaches in education research (2007–2021). Review of Educational Research, 93 , 756. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221130017

Torgerson, D. J., & Torgerson, C. J. (2003). Avoiding bias in randomised controlled trials in educational research. British Journal of Educational Studies, 51 (1), 36–45.

Wells, R. S., & Stage, F. K. (Eds.). (2015). New directions for institutional research: No. 163. New scholarship in critical quantitative research—Part 2: New populations, approaches, and challenges . Jossey-Bass.

Wofford, A. M., & Winkler, C. E. (2022). Publication patterns of higher education research using quantitative criticalism and QuantCrit perspectives. Innovative Higher Education, 47 (6), 967–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-022-09628-3

Zuberi, T. (2001). Thicker than blood: How racial statistics lie . University of Minnesota Press.

Zuberi, T., & Bonilla-Silva, E. (2008). White logic, White methods: Racism and methodology . Lanham.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant from the American Educational Research Association, Division D. The authors gratefully thank Dr. Jason (Jay) Garvey for his support as an early thought partner with regard to this project, and Dr. Christopher Sewell for his helpful feedback on an earlier version of this manuscript, which was presented at the 2022 Association for the Study of Higher Education meeting.

This research was supported by a grant from the American Educational Research Association, Division D.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Counseling, Higher Education Leadership, Educational Psychology, & Foundations, Mississippi State University, 175 President’s Circle, 536 Allen Hall, Mississippi State, MS, 39762, USA

Christa E. Winkler

Department of Educational Leadership & Policy Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

Annie M. Wofford

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christa E. Winkler .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors have no competing interests to declare relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 26 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Winkler, C.E., Wofford, A.M. Trends and Motivations in Critical Quantitative Educational Research: A Multimethod Examination Across Higher Education Scholarship and Author Perspectives. Res High Educ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-024-09802-w

Download citation

Received : 25 June 2023

Accepted : 14 May 2024

Published : 04 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-024-09802-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Critical quantitative
• Quantitative criticalism
• Scoping review
• Multimethod study
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research