Advertisement

Three Types of Communication Research Methods: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Participatory

  • Jan ServaesEmail author
Reference work entry
  • 25 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter presents a brief overview of the three types of communication research methods being applied in development communication settings: quantitative, qualitative, and participatory. This chapter attempts to outline the relative characteristics and merits of these approaches to research and to emphasize some of the philosophical issues which underpin them. It discusses the strengths and weaknesses of each and highlights the benefits of a more normative approach focused on the “poor” in society.

Keywords

Research methodologies Quantitative Qualitative Participatory Triangulation Empowerment 

References

  1. Addo H (1985) Beyond Eurocentricity: transformation and transformational responsibility. In: Addo H, Amin S, Aseniero G et al (eds) Development as social transformation. Reflections on the global problematique. Hodder and Stoughton, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson J, Meyer T (1988) Mediated communication. A social action perspective. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  3. Argyris C, Putnam R, Smith D (1985) Action science. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  4. Berg B, Lune H (eds) (2014) Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Pearson, EssexGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhattacherjee A (2012) Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. Textbooks collection 3. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/oa_textbooks/3
  6. Bogaert MVD, Bhagat S, Bam NB (1981) Participatory evaluation of an adult education programme. In: Fernandes W, Tandon R (eds) Participatory research and evaluation: experiments in research as a process of liberation. Indian Social Institute, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruhn Jensen H (ed) (2013) A handbook of media and communication research: qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Bryman A (1984) The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: a question of method or epistemology? Br J Sociol 35(1):75–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bryman A, Burgess R (eds) (1994) Analyzing qualitative data, Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Burke K (1968) Language as symbolic action. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  11. Chamarik S (1993) Democracy and development. A cultural perspective. Local Development Institute, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  12. Chambers R (2007) Ideas for development. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Chambers R (2008) Revolutions in development inquiry. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Chantana P, Wun Gaeo S (1985) Participatory research and rural development in Thailand. In: Farmer’s Assistance Board (ed) Participatory research: response to Asian people’s struggle for social transformation. Farmer’s Assistance Board, ManilaGoogle Scholar
  15. Christians C, Carey J (1981) The logic and aims of qualitative research. In: Stempel G, Weaver D, Westley B (eds) Research methods in mass communication. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  16. Cooke B, Kothari U (eds) (2001) Participation. The new tyranny? Zed Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. D’Abreo D (1981) Training for participatory evaluation. In: Fernandes, Tandon R (eds) Participatory research and evaluation: experiments in research as a process of liberation. Indian Social Institute, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  18. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) (2005) The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  19. Dervin B (1982) Citizen access as an information equity issue. In: Schement JR, Gutierrez F, Sirbu M (eds) Telecommunications policy handbook. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Dervin B, Huesca R (1999) The participatory communication for development narrative: an examination of meta-theoretic assumptions and their impacts. In: Jacobson T, Servaes J (eds) Theoretical approaches to participatory communication. IAMCR book series. Hampton Press, Creskill, pp 169–210Google Scholar
  21. Ewen S (1983) The implications of empiricism. J Commun 33(3):219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fals Borda O (1988) Knowledge and people’s power: lessons with peasants in Nicaragua, Mexico, and Colombia. Indian Social Institute, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  23. Fals Borda O, Rahman HA (eds) (1991) Action and knowledge: breaking the monopoly with participatory action research. Intermediate Technology Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Farrington J (1988) Farmer participatory research: editorial introduction. Exp Agric 24:269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Friberg M, Hettne B (1985) “The greening of the world”, development as social transformation. Westview, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  26. Fuglesang A (1984) The myth of people’s ignorance. In: Development dialogue. The Dag Hammarskjold Foundation, Uppsala, pp 1–2Google Scholar
  27. Geertz C (1973) The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Halloran JD (1981) The context of mass communication research. In: Mcanany E, Schnitman J, Janus N (eds) Communication and social structure: critical studies in mass media research. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Harris M (1980) Cultural Materialism: The Struggle for a Science of Culture, Vintage, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Harris M (2001) Cultural materialism: the struggle for a science of culture. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham/OxfordGoogle Scholar
  31. Huesca R (2003) Tracing the history of participatory communication approaches to development: a critical appraisal. In: Servaes J (ed) Approaches to development. Studies on communication for development. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  32. Huizer G (1989) Action research and People’s participation. An introduction and some case studies. Third World Centre, NijmegenGoogle Scholar
  33. Jacobson T (1993) A pragmatist account of participatory communication research for national development. Commun Theory 3(3):214–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jacobson T, Servaes J (eds) (1999) Theoretical approaches to participatory communication. IAMCR book series. Hampton Press, CreskillGoogle Scholar
  35. Kennedy TW (1984) Beyond advocacy: an animative approach to public participation. Dissertation, Cornell UniversityGoogle Scholar
  36. Kennedy TW (2008) Where the rivers meet the sky: a collaborative approach to participatory development. Southbound, PenangGoogle Scholar
  37. Kronenburg J (1986) Empowerment of the poor. A comparative analysis of two development endeavours in Kenya. Third World Center, NijmegenGoogle Scholar
  38. Kuhn T (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd edn, enlarged. University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  39. Lennie J, Tacchi J (2013) Evaluating communication for development. A framework for social change. Routledge Earthscan, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lie R (2003) Spaces of intercultural communication. An interdisciplinary introduction to communication, culture, and globalizing/localizing identities. IAMCR book series. Hampton Press, CreskillGoogle Scholar
  41. Mckee N, Manoncourt E, Saik YC, Carnegie R (eds) (2000) Involving people, evolving behaviour. Southbound, PenangGoogle Scholar
  42. Midgley J (ed) (1986) Community participation, social development, and the state. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. Plaisance PL (2011) Moral agency in media: toward a model to explore key components of ethical practice. J Mass Media Ethics 26(2):96–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. PPDHRRA – Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas (1986) Participatory research guidebook. Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas, LagunaGoogle Scholar
  45. Robson C (1995) Real world research. A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  46. Rockhill K (Fall, 1982) Researching participation in adult education: the potential of the qualitative perspective. Adult Educ 33(1):3Google Scholar
  47. Servaes J (1999) Communication for development. One world, multiple cultures. Hampton Press, CreskillGoogle Scholar
  48. Servaes J (2012) Homo academicus: Quo vadis? In: Silvia N-Z, Karyn H (eds) Global academe: engaging intellectual discourse. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 85–98. 230ppCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Servaes J, Jacobson T, White S (eds) (1996) Participatory communication for social change. Sage, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  50. Tacchi J, Slater D, Hearn G (2003) Ethnographic action research. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  51. Tandon R (1981) Participatory evaluation and research: main concepts and issues. In: Fernandes W, Tandon R (eds) Participatory research and evaluation: experiments in research as a process of liberation. Indian Social Institute, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  52. Tandon R (1985) Participatory research: issues and prospects. In: Farmer’s Assistance Board (ed) Response to Asian people’s struggle for social transformation. Farmer’s Assistance Board, ManilaGoogle Scholar
  53. Tandon R (2002) Participatory research: revisiting the roots. Mosaic Books, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  54. Thayer L (1983) On ‘doing’ research and ‘explaining’ things. In: Gerbner G (ed) Ferment in the Field. J Commun 33(4)Google Scholar
  55. Tuhiwai Smith L (1999) Decolonizing methodologies. Research and indigenous peoples. Zed Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  56. Van Hemelrijck A (2013) Powerful beyond measure? Measuring complex systemic change in collaborative settings. In: Servaes J (ed) Sustainability, participation and culture in communication. Theory and praxis. Intellect-University of Chicago Press, Bristol/ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  57. White R (1982) Contradictions in contemporary policies for democratic communication, Paper IAMCR conference, Paris, SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  58. White R (1984) The need for new strategies of research on the democratization of communication, Paper ICA conference, San Francisco, MayGoogle Scholar
  59. Whyte WF (ed) (1989) Learning from the field. A guide from experience. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  60. Whyte WF (ed) (1991) Participatory action research. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Media and CommunicationCity University of Hong KongHong KongHong Kong
  2. 2.Katholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations