In-Depth Qualitative Analysis: Critique, Focus Groups, and Importance

This essay provides a comprehensive critique of qualitative analysis, addressing common criticisms such as the lack of scientific correctness, potential for bias, reproducibility issues, and limited generalizability. It contrasts focus groups with one-on-one interviews, highlighting the cost-effectiveness of focus groups for light analysis and the reduced bias and higher potential for insights in one-on-one interviews. The essay also emphasizes the importance of using qualitative data analysis, noting its ability to foster openness, eliminate prejudgment, and incorporate attitudinal factors in detail. The document concludes by referencing key works in the field, underscoring the value and application of qualitative research methods. Desklib offers similar solved assignments and study tools for students.

Running head: QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
Qualitative analysis
Name
Course
Unit
lecturer

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS 2
Critiquing qualitative analysis research
Question 1:
There are many areas where qualitative analysis is receiving several critics. For instance,
in the area of health, the qualitative analysis is criticized for lacking scientific correctness
according to Glaser & Strauss (2017). It is widely seen that when using the quantitative analysis,
several experiments are always necessary before arriving at a conclusion as compared to
qualitative analysis. When applying these critics, it groups the qualitative analysis as a non-
scientific method. The other critics in the qualitative analysis are that qualitative analysis just
shows a one-person impression and seems to be biased due to personalization. Mainly, one
person collects all the data and leaves out the views of many people.
Apart from the above, the other critics are that there is no reproducibility in qualitative
analysis. Many researchers seem to so personal while collecting information using the qualitative
method thus one other researcher may conclude the findings differently. Lastly, there is no
generalizability in the qualitative method. The data from the qualitative is huge within a small
number of findings. These critics seems to be valid because, one idea may not reflect the ideas of
the other many researches, researchers are different.
Question 2:
Focus groups are always less costly as compared to one on one interview. For instance,
when doing only a light analysis of some responses that do not require coding. On the other
hand, one on one interview is not so much biased as compared to the focus groups. Focus groups
are mainly used when confirming the data that had been gathered by the use of other analysis.

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS 3
The data here is the information collected during the survey research, expressions from other
people’s thoughts and in making use of the use case.
However, face to face interview has the advantage of providing high potentials of
insights. In many scenarios, one may only apply focus to ascertain any findings with a wide
range of participants. Contrary, one on one interview provides one capability of exploiting more
than what may have analyzed while using the focus group method.
Question 3:
The importance of using qualitative data analysis is inevitable. The first advantage is that
it provides room for openness where the participants are motivated to give a detailed response on
the information they are providing. Secondly, the qualitative analysis does away with pre-
judgment that one may have on another person due to the ability to explain. Lastly, factors such
as attitude are actively implemented in detail by use of qualitative analysis according to Glesne
(2015).

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS 4
References
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research. Routledge.
Glesne, C. (2015). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Pearson.