Running head: Unit 1-1

Dimitrios V. Siskos
This paper is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Qualiitative Research Methodology-Unit
1-1
SMC University
School of Management
Dr. Albert Widman
March 16, 2013

Table of Contents
DQ#1.. ........................................................................................................................ 3
DQ#2....................................................................................................................................... 4
References .................................................................................................................................. 6

DQ#1
Analyzing the journal Learning by doing: a case study of qualitative accounting research, Hughes
and Berry (2000) are trying to enhance an extensive piece of qualitative research, concerned with the use of
accounting information, in decision-making processes in a banking case study. he paper is separated into
four sections. Similar to Leavy, Saldana, and Beretvas (2011) who inferred that qualitative research is
conducted within and across multiple disciplines such as education, the first two parts of the journal are
concerned with learning how to do research as well as presenting a case study of a qualitative accounting
research project. The other parts of the journal are more exploratory as they offer the potential for
experiential learning focusing on the unique human experience of a given phenomenon (Sun, 2009).
Considering the nature of the study, the rationale for the selection of qualitative research methodology
seems quite logical. First of all, accounting educators need to encourage active rather than passive learning,
something which both grounded theory and discourse analysis, which are mainly used in qualitative research,
are introduced and tackled in pyramid exercises among students (Mason, 2002).
The paper desires to present a pilot case of a bounded system, which will be used as a tool for
accounting educators in order to work with student researchers. Case study, as one of the five approaches of
the qualitative ones (Sun, 2009), is the most suitable to be used in conjunction with the review, exploratory
and application questions in order to illustrate the approach (Hughes and Berry, 2000).
Previous research concerning lending decisions through bankers showed that questionnaire-based
approach led to limitations in understanding the role of accounting information in decision-making. Thus,
interviews were adopted mostly in cases of small business lending, where accounting information was often
not available. Interviews are the main data source in qualitative methodology and are used often to develop a
theory that explains processes, actions, or interactions concerning a phenomenon (Creswell, 2006; Sun,
2009).

The major limitation that derives from the use of qualitative research is the inability to act without
specific limitations of predetermined variables like those in quantitative studies (Sun, 2009). In the journal,
the findings of SPSS as a quantitative research tool were used to provide answers to the questions posed. One
other limitation is that due the fact that the results are tailored to the needs of bank population, it would be
inadequate to generalize them to other greater populations (Sun, 2009). Furthermore, given that qualitative
studies often focus on credibility and utility (Sun, 2009) and each lending decision is heavily dependent on
the researchers subjective opinions than on the actual data (Watt, 2007), an obvious validity issue arises.

DQ#2
Thinking philosophically, reality is a concept that defers between quantitative and qualitative
methodologies. In the ontological assumption and regarding the quantitative paradigm, reality is objective
and independent of human perception (Sale et al., 2002; Slevitch, 2011), while for qualitative one, reality is
subjective and multiple as seen by participants. For example, Rooke, Koskela and Seymour (2007) provided
quantitative architectural drawings with an adequate basis in reality.
Regarding epistemological assumption, the quantitative researcher has no relation with the investigated
object and thus his study could be more subjective. On the opposite, the qualitative researcher interacts with
the investigated object (Slevitch, 2011). For example, Becker and Niehaves (2007) highlight this interaction
in information systems (IS) project, presenting that the researchers who participate in research, result in the
application of the project, too.
From an axiological perspective, Denzin & Lincoln (1994) refer that the relationships among
phenomena for quantitative positivists are measured with a value-free and unbiased attitude, while for
qualitative naturalists things are analyzed on how the researcher interprets them with a biased attitude.
Crotty (1998, p. 8) elaborates a value free example of a tree in the forest is just a tree, regardless of whether

or awareness of its existence, waiting just to be discovered from human beings. This knowledge is absolute
even if it not situated in a political or historic context (Scotland, 2012).
The quantitative process of research in the methodological assumptions includes statistical methods and
techniques (Slevitch, 2011), whereas the qualitative one is inductive and context-bound (Smith & Heshusius,
1986; Slevitch, 2011). Mroz (1987) applies quantitative statistical assumptions in order to estimate married
womens hours of work, providing a more accurate description of the behavioral responses of them.
While quantitative research employ objective tools designed to quantify subjective experiences and
behaviors into numbers (Creswell, 2001; Sun, 2009), in qualitative one the researcher is the primary
instrument of the research. For example, in the previous examined journal of Hughes and Berry (2000),
quantitative tools such as SPSS and Excel were used to convert reality into accounting numbers, whereas
bankers acted as qualitative research instruments.
Qualitative design could fit perfect in a topic where the researcher desires to measure business
performance of companies. Analyzing balance sheets using ratios or examining equity levels that measure
economic strength, enclose high risk as the exclusive use of numbers could be misleading and problematic.
Qualitative research derives information and aspects from business that cannot be measured by numbers, but
still have a significant impact on performance and viability through the financial environment. For example,
in the study of Sinkovics and Alfoldi (2012) the use of qualitative research revealed complex, formal regional
hierarchy between the two subsidiaries of the examined company, acknowledgements which quantitative
research was inadequate to extract.

References
Becker, J. & Niehaves B. (2007). Epistemological perspectives on IS research: a framework for analyzing
and systematizing epistemological assumptions. Info Systems J 17, 197214
Creswell, J. (2006). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd ed.).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research. Sage. pp. 71, 78, 80-83
Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (1994). "Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research." In NK Denzin
and YS Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 1-17). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Hughes, M. & Berry A. (2000). Learning by doing: a case study of qualitative accounting research.
Accounting Education 9(2), 157174
Leavy, P., Saldana J., and Beretvas N. (2011). Fundamentals of Qualitative Research. Oxford University
Press
Mason, O. (2002). Teaching qualitative research methods: Some innovations and reflections on practice.
Psychology Teaching Review 10(1)
Mroz, T., 1987. The Sensitivity of an Empirical Model of Married Women's Hours of Work to Economic and
Statistical Assumptions, Econometrica, Econometric Society, 55(4), 765-99.
Rooke, A., Koskela, L., Seymour D. (2007). Producing things or production flows? Ontological assumptions
in the thinking of managers and professionals in construction. Construction Management and
Economics 25, 10771085
Sale, J., Lohfeld, L., Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: Implications for mixedmethod research. Quality and Quantity, 36, 4353.
Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the Philosophical Underpinnings of Research: Relating Ontology and
Epistemology to the Methodology and Methods of the Scientific, Interpretive, and Critical Research

Paradigms. English Language Teaching; 5(9). Published by Canadian Center of Science and
Education.
Sinkovics, R. & Eva A. (2012). Facilitating the interaction between theory and data in qualitative research
using CAQDAS. In Qualitative organizational research: Core methods and current challenges, Gillian
Symon and Catherine Cassell (Eds.). London: Sage Publications, 109-131.
Slevitch, L. (2011). Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies Compared: Ontological and Epistemological
Perspectives. Journal of Quality Assurance In Hospitality & Tourism, 12(1), 73-81.
doi:10.1080/1528008X.2011.541810
Smith, J. & Heshusius, L. (1986). Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative - qualitative
debate among ducational inquiries. EducationalResearcher, 15, 412.
Sun, T. (2009). Mixed Methods Research: Strengths of two methods combined. SMC University.
Watt, D. (2007). On Becoming a Qualitative Researcher: The Value of Reflexivity. The Qualitative Report
12(1) 82-101