Qualitative vs. Quantitative
In the world of mass communications, much like many other fields, research is done to test theories and hypotheses regarding important questions posed about constructs relating to human communication. These theories are tested by researching using either qualitative or quantitative methods, and the results are used to prove or disprove a theory. The studies that I will look at both used either method, and both contributed valid results and contributions to the field of mass communications.
In the first article, “Time distortion when users at-risk for social media addiction engage in non-social media tasks”, the researchers decided to see if higher social media usage impacts the time that it takes one to do a task that doesn’t involve social media. The measurement, time, is a quantitative research method. The study found that time distortion can exist for those who are considered “at-risk” for Facebook addiction. The second article, “Exploring social media addiction among student Millennials”, used both methods, but for this purpose we will focus on the qualitative method used. This study took college students in the millennial age group and had them abstain from social media for four days, and then take a survey answering questions pertaining to their physical, psychological, and emotional status. Both of these methods are valid in that they use accurate and acceptable ways to measure results, even if they are different in approach.
In terms of clarity and validity, I don’t necessarily find one to be more accurate or valid than the other. Both qualitative and quantitative measurements are great ways to measure your data, depending on the situation. Quantitative is clearly more useful for something that can be measured by a unit of measurement or numerically, and qualitative is preferred for something more subjective, such as how a person is feeling. Both of these methods are integral to research s we know it and are useful in their own ways.
