Inductive and Deductive Approaches in Research-Definition and Differences

Inductive Reasoning vs. Deductive Reasoning

Inductive and Deductive Research Approach

Inductive Reasoning:

Inductive reasoning is the act of using specific scenarios and making generalized conclusions from them.

Deductive Reasoning:

Deductive reasoning is the act of making a generalized statement and backing it up with specific scenarios or information.

Trochim refers to two broad methods of reasoning as the inductive and deductive approaches. He defines induction as moving from the specific to the general, while deduction begins with the general and ends with the specific; arguments based on experience or observation are best expressed inductively, while arguments based on laws, rules, or other widely accepted principles are best expressed deductively. Creswell and Plano Clark say that the deductive researcher “works from the ‘top-down', from a theory to hypotheses to data to add to or contradict the theory”.  In contrast, they define the inductive researcher as someone who works from the “bottom-up, using the participants’ views to build broader themes and generate a theory interconnecting the themes”.  In research, the two main types of analysis typically used are quantitative (deductive) and qualitative (inductive).  Though there seems to be some disagreement among researchers as to the best method to use when conducting research and gathering data, these two methods are not mutually exclusive and often address the same question using different methods. 

 

The major difference between the two methods is centered on how they view the nature of reality.  The quantitative theorists believe “in a single reality that can be measured reliably and validly using scientific principles”, while qualitative theorists “believe in multiple constructed realities that generate different meanings for different individuals, and whose interpretations depend on the researcher’s lens”. It is the relationship between the researcher and the participant that characterizes the disciplines.  In quantitative research, it is believed that researchers should separate themselves from the participants while qualitative researchers are aware that the relationship between the researcher and the participant is important in the understanding of the observable event.  In addition, quantitative researchers believe that “research should be value-free,” while the qualitative researcher understands that “the research is influenced to a great extent by the values of the researcher”.

 

Despite the many differences, Onwuegbuzie and Leech contend that there are many similarities between the two orientations.  They propose replacing the terms qualitative and quantitative with exploratory and confirmatory to more clearly reflect the relationship between the two methodologies. The methods may be different but the goals remain the same and Onwuegbuzie and Leech worry that the separation of the two paradigms can lead students in graduate school to become “one-dimensional with regards to their knowledge of the research process”. They go on to say that “we continue to prepare students for an ‘either-or’ world, a dichotomous world, that no longer exists”.  Onwuegbuzie and Leech suggest that “those who teach social and behavioral research methodology have to stop identifying themselves as qualitative or quantitative researchers”.  The method chosen should depend in large part on what the research question was, what one wants to know, and how they determine they will arrive at that knowledge.  According to Trochim, the context, purpose, and types of research questions asked will define the methodological foundations of a study. Both methods include the use of research questions that are addressed through some type of observation. The observations in either method will lead the researcher to question why what they observed happened. Another similarity is how the two paradigms interpret data. Both use some form of analysis to find the meaning and employ techniques to verify the data.

The intent of the research is typically expressed in the form of a purpose statement or the guiding objectives of the study.  In quantitative research, the intent is usually to test theories deductively searching for evidence to either support or to refute the hypothesis, while qualitative researchers gather information from individuals to identify themes that allow them to develop theories inductively.

For quantitative researchers, the literature review plays a major role in justifying the research and identifying the purpose of the study.  The literature can be used to identify the questions to be asked and to inform the hypotheses.  Literature reviews in quantitative research are more comprehensive and more detailed than is the case in qualitative research.  In qualitative research, the literature review is used to provide evidence for the purpose of the study and to identify the underlying problem that will be addressed by the inquiry.  The literature review is typically brief and does not usually guide the research questions to the same extent as literature reviews in quantitative research do.  This is done to ensure that the literature does not limit the types of information the researcher will learn from the participants.

The intent of a study and the literature review helps to narrow the hypotheses and research questions. In quantitative research, the intent focuses on pointed, close-ended questions that test specific variables that derive from the hypotheses.  The researcher tests these hypotheses in an attempt to support or refute the relationship statements in the theories.  In qualitative research, the intent is to learn from the participants.  Therefore, the questions tend to be open-ended to permit the complexity of a single idea or phenomenon to emerge from the participants’ perspectives.  The researcher often focuses on a single phenomenon to gather as much information as possible about that particular phenomenon.

In quantitative research, data can be collected from many participants at many research sites. Researchers rely on gathering information either by sending or administering testing instruments to participants. Data is usually collected through the use of numbers that can be statistically analyzed. In qualitative research, the words and images of a few participants collected at their respective research sites, are recorded by the researcher.

The quantitative researcher believes in maintaining an objective approach to the experiment by remaining in the background.  Steps are taken to ensure that any preconception is minimized so that the information gathered is not contaminated by the personal beliefs of the researcher.  In contrast, qualitative researchers identify their personal stance with regards to how their experiences and backgrounds shape the interpretations they make through the coding and theme process.

It is important to establish validity regardless of which research methodology is employed. Quantitative research relies on using validity procedures based on external standards, such as judges, past research, and statistics.  Validity does not rely on the participants as much as it relies on the evidence that supports the interpretation of the test scores. Qualitative researchers are interested in the accuracy of the final report. They use various methods, to ensure accuracies such as member-checks (where the participants get to review their comments), or the use of many sources to verify a theme.  Qualitative validity procedures rely on the participants, the researcher, or the reader.

 

Which method to use while conducting Research:

Creswell points to the importance of considering three factors to determine the method of research that is appropriate for any particular study. These are:

1)      Match the approach to the research problem:  a quantitative approach is best suited to problems in which trends or explanations need to be made.  Qualitative problems are those that need to be explored to obtain a deep understanding.

2)      Fit the approach to the audience: it is important to remember who the intended audience is who will read and possibly use the findings from a study.

3)      Relate the approach to the researcher’s experiences: the method chosen must relate to the researcher’s personal experiences and training.  Conducting research in either method requires skills in conceptualizing research, conducting research, and writing the study. A quantitative researcher will have taken some courses or training in measurement, statistics, and quantitative data collection approaches such as experimental, correlational, or survey techniques. Qualitative researchers need experience in field studies in which they practice gathering information in a setting, and learn the skills of observing or interviewing individuals.  Course work or experience in analyzing text data is also helpful.

 

Conclusion

Deductive reasoning uses facts and theories to reach a conclusion. In inductive reasoning, the conclusion is used to make generalizations of facts and theories. Inductive reasoning starts with the conclusion and then considered the specific facts while Deductive reasoning starts with premises and then reaches a conclusion. Deductive reasoning is less as compared to inductive reasoning in the real world in terms of use. In inductive reasoning, the arguments used can be of two types i.e. strong argument or weak argument, while in deductive reasoning, the arguments used can be either invalid arguments or valid arguments. Many scientists conducting a larger research project begin with an inductive study (developing a theory), and the inductive study is followed up with deductive research to confirm or invalidate the conclusion.