RESEARCH IN THEOLOGY

Comparison and Assessment of Use and Value of Qualitative and Quantitative Research for Empirical Studies in Theology

[Name of the Institute]Introduction

For the purpose of this research paper, we undertake to assess and evaluate the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods as research tools for empirical studies in theology, followed by a comparison of the two methods for empirical studies in theology. Owing to the scope of this study and the perception of the wider nature of the concept of theology, our discussion will be inclined towards practical theology as opposed to theology on the whole.

Qualitative Research for empirical studies

It is clear that within review of literature most scholars take the view that the field of qualitative research is open-ended and as a result it has the ability to accommodate various perspectives. According to Swinton and Mowat, “it is difficult to tie it down and define,” consequently it cannot be contained within a single definition. Similarly, Silverman concedes that “the notion of qualitative study is fluid and defies definition.” This phenomenon is due to its subjectivity to context and participants involved according to Davies.While acknowledging the difficulty in formulating an acceptable standard definition of qualitative method and for the sake of this paper, we will adapt Hennink's broad approach to the definition difficulties. In his view qualitative research method is “an umbrella term that covers a wide range of techniques and philosophies.” These philosophies may assume shapes of empirical, political, sociological and pastoral. While on the technique aspect it involves ability to collect and analyse data.

The notion of qualitative method hinges on the human experience interpreted within the context of occurrence. Linton and Mowat seemingly concur with Schilderman and observe further that qualitative method as a research tool seeks to explore the meaning people attach to “phenomena and experiences.” Swinton and Mowat correctly observed the narrative framework and stated that the qualitative method is narrative based. Therefore as a research tool, besides underlying assumptions, such as relationship of phenomenon to its context and the concept of perception as opposed to unitary position, qualitative research drives its epistemology from what most literature commentaries have identified as perhaps the single most important question in a field of enquiry. Thus, “how do we know what we know?” The quest of researchers to make sense of this question has led to an understanding, that knowledge gained through qualitative research can assume different classifications. According to Swinton and Mowat, we have three such groups namely, knowledge of the other, phenomena and reflexive. They reiterate that these three have a direct link to any knowledge gained through qualitative research method within a practical theological field. Knowledge about others focuses on the perceptions and reality on the participants. Knowledge of phenomena focus on events such as the manifestation of the Holy Spirit and the last category of reflexive knowledge according to Urquhart is a process of self-reflection on the researcher's biases. In essence reflexive knowledge accords opportunities to the researchers on the basis of their ...