Hume’s Two Definitions of Cause

Author(s):  
Gary Goertz ◽  
James Mahoney

This chapter examines David Hume's two definitions of cause in the context of quantitative and qualitative research. The two definitions can be found in Hume's quotation from Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding, and Concerning the Principles of Morals: “We may define a cause to be an object followed by another, and where all the objects, similar to the first, are followed by objects similar to the second [definition 1]. Or, in other words, where, if the first object had not been, the second never would have existed [definition 2].” Hume's phrase “in other words” makes it appear as if definition 1 and definition 2 are equivalent, when in fact they represent quite different approaches. The chapter considers how Hume's definition 2, which it calls the “counterfactual definition,” and definition 1, the “constant conjunction definition,” are related to understandings of causation in the qualitative and quantitative research traditions.

Author(s):  
Glyn Winter

The issues surrounding the use and nature of the term 'validity' in qualitative research are controversial and many. In this paper, the author attempts to establish that 'validity' is not a single, fixed or universal concept, but rather a contingent construct, inescapably grounded in the processes and intentions of particular research methodologies and projects. The first section of this work deals with the problems faced in defining 'validity' in both quantitative and qualitative research methods and will briefly review other authors' attempts to categorise it. The work will then proceed to distinguish and compare the claims to 'validity' made by quantitative and qualitative researchers, highlighting similarities and differences as they emerge. Finally, an attempt will be made to establish that an understanding of nature of 'truth' is central to any theorisation of 'validity.' It will become clear that it is the affiliations of methodologies, concerning truth, that generate varying notions of 'validity.'


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-183
Author(s):  
Alfin Zalicha Hilmi ◽  
Toyyibah Toyyibah ◽  
Nur Afifi

This study aimed at: 1) investigating the move and steps found in quantitative and qualitative research articles discussion; 2) investigating the rhetoric structure patterns of quantitative and qualitative research article discussion. This study is a qualitative-research focusing on genre analysis on qualitative and quantitative RA discussions. There were 20 qualitative and 20 quantitative research article discussions of EFL and applied linguistics journals were investigated in this research. Using Yang & Allison’s (2003) framework to analyze the data, it is found that all moves in the framework were employed in RA discussion of both qualitative and quantitative research. However, the number of occurrences of each move were different between discussion section of these two different approaches. Furthermore, the patterns of both qualitative and quantitative RA discussion was not significantly different. There were two types of patterns in RA discussion both in qualitative and quantitative, repetitive pattern and organized pattern. although there were some variations in each of those patterns. The present study provides more evidence of generic structure of RA discussion section as well as proposes some useful insights related to move analysis on research article discussion in ELT and Linguistics area. Limitations and recommendations are discussed in this study.


Author(s):  
Gary Goertz ◽  
James Mahoney

This book concludes by reemphasizing important differences in the nature of qualitative and quantitative research—differences that extend across research design, data analysis, and causal inference. While their differences are considerable, the book argues that both research cultures can complement one another in terms of explaining the social and political world. However, a fruitful collaboration between quantitative and qualitative research—one built around mutual respect and appreciation—is possible only if scholars of both traditions understand and acknowledge their differences. These differences, summarized in tables, come in the areas of individual cases, causality and causal models, populations and data, concepts and measurement, and asymmetry. The book also contends that mixing the qualitative and quantitative cultures will contribute to methodological pluralism in the social sciences.


Author(s):  
Gary Goertz ◽  
James Mahoney

This chapter considers the typical modes of generalization used in the qualitative and quantitative research traditions. Generalization can be descriptive or causal. A descriptive generalization often involves one variable that “describes” some state of affairs within a population of cases. By contrast, a causal generalizations always involves at least two variables, A and B. Causal generalizations ideally specify the form and strength of the relationship between A and B within a population of cases. The two research cultures have trouble seeing and analyzing each other's typical kind of generalization. The chapter first examines generalizations in qualitative research before discussing the use of 2 x 2 tables to present set-theoretic generalizations. It then explains a well-known problem in statistical analysis involving the so-called “perfect predictors” and concludes with an assessment of the statistical significance of control variables.


2021 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 244-260
Author(s):  
Barbara L. Voss

This article is the first of a two-part series to analyze current research on harassment in archaeology. Harassment has shaped the discipline of archaeology since at least the late 1800s. Since the 1970s, harassment has been recognized as a significant factor impacting gender equity in archaeology. Recent qualitative and quantitative research has verified that harassment occurs at epidemic rates in archaeology. Archaeologists are primarily harassed by other archaeologists, and harassment occurs not only in field research settings but also in classrooms, laboratories, museums, office workplaces, and conferences. Although women in archaeology experience a higher frequency of harassment, both men and women report harassment at disturbingly high rates. Archaeologists of color, LGBTQIA+ archaeologists, nonbinary archaeologists, and archaeologists with disabilities are also disproportionately harassed. As reflected in the author's own career experiences, harassment creates a cognitive burden for survivors and reduces access to professional opportunities, directly impacting diversity within archaeology. Fortunately, there are evidence-based interventions and policies that can reduce harassment and support survivors. These are discussed in the second article, “Disrupting Cultures of Harassment in Archaeology.”


Author(s):  
Gary Goertz ◽  
James Mahoney

This chapter considers how opposing pairs of categories and typologies are used in the qualitative and quantitative research traditions. It begins with a discussion of the concepts of democracy and authoritarianism to illustrate the symmetric versus asymmetric approaches to conceptual opposites. In particular, it explains the Principle of Conceptual Opposites in qualitative research, which states that the meaning and measurement of a concept and its opposite are not symmetric. It then examines overlapping versus exclusive typologies, focusing on the Principle of Conceptual Overlap. It also describes the importance of semantics when dealing with cases that do not fit available categories if the goal is to have useful nominal categories.


Author(s):  
Gary Goertz ◽  
James Mahoney

This chapter considers two fundamental differences between the quantitative and qualitative research traditions with respect to conceptualization and measurement: these differences are related to the relative emphasis placed on definitions versus indicators in the two cultures. The first difference concerns the relative importance assigned to issues of concept definition versus issues of concept measurement. Qualitative researchers are centrally concerned with definitional issues and the meaning of their concepts, whereas their quantitative counterparts are more interested in the quantitative measurement of latent variables. The second difference concerns error and the coding of cases. The chapter examines how characteristics versus indicators are defined in the qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. It also discusses the relationship between “error,” which is central to all statistics, and “fuzziness,” which is important in qualitative research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Reinaldi Yapari

ABSTRACT  The purpose of this research is to find out the promotion and marketing strategy for steel companies in Indonesia. The research method used in this research is qualitative and quantitative research methods. Qualitative research methods include interviews with resource persons and product users (extreme users and expert users) as well as literature studies of journals related to light steel, promotion, and marketing strategy. The conclusion of this research is the need for a promotion that can be accepted by customers and to be able to promote steel companies in Indonesia.   Keyword: branding, marketing, promotion, customers, steel.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-217
Author(s):  
Rifatolistia Tampubolon ◽  
Hapsari Probowati ◽  
Judith Devi Manutilaa

Background: Preeclampsia is a syndrome in terms of hypertension after 20-week pregnancy referring to a pregnant woman that previously had normal blood pressure, followed by having hypertension, proteinuria, edema and generally occurs in the third trimester of pregnancy. Preeclampsia is one of five main causes of maternal mortality up to 12% in the world as well. Objective: This study was conducted to describe nutritional status of pregnant women with preeclampsia in Aru Islands Regency, Dobo City, Southeast Maluku. Methodology: This study used mix methods, namely, quantitative and qualitative research with Case Study design. Qualitative research was to determine nutritional status of pregnant women with preeclampsia and quantitative research was to record nutrition intake of pregnant women and measure nutritional status of pregnant women with preeclampsia. Results & Discussion: Characteristics of participants with preeclampsia were more than 27 years old, worked as housewife that could be one of stress triggers and had some risk to increase preeclampsia cases because of stress that caused blood pressure increase. Preeclampsia was detected in pregnancy term of participants about 20-30 weeks according to Maternal and Child Health data. Preeclampsia risk was doubly by every increase in body weight (5-7 kg). Participants had body weight increase ranging from 8-25 kg which caused preeclampsia risk increase. Parameters of recommended dietary allowances of pregnant women including energy excess, protein deficit, fat excess, calcium and zinc deficiency were secondary factor of preeclampsia risk increase in Aru Islands Regency, Dobo City, Southeast Maluku.


2017 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen Boeren

An examination of articles published in leading adult education journals demonstrates that qualitative research dominates. To better understand this situation, a review of journal articles reporting on quantitative research has been undertaken by the author of this article. Differences in methodological strengths and weaknesses between quantitative and qualitative research are discussed, followed by a data mining exercise on 1,089 journal articles published in Adult Education Quarterly, Studies in Continuing Education, and International Journal of Lifelong Learning. A categorization of quantitative adult education research is presented, as well as a critical discussion on why quantitative adult education does not seem to be widespread in the key adult education journals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document