Priscila Magossi, the author of New Camming Perspective, explains the difference between quantitative and qualitative research in order to understand how results are achieved.
The “New Camming Perspective” is getting bigger in the scene. It is great to see a more humane approach gaining momentum in the camming industry. Not only that, more people are subscribing to this view. In order to help other researchers, let’s talk about methodology.
There are many ways to carry out research, and none is absolutely perfect. That’s why it is important to put in evidence the differences of quantitative vs qualitative methods. In order to be valid, both of these approaches depend on:
- Experience of the environment
- Objectivity
- Consulting bibliography
- Theoretical perspective
- Concept definitions
The researchers also need the proper knowhow that comes from academic experience; otherwise, the results could be pointless. A clear distinction of the two approaches can be made:
- Quantitative research: Data consists of numbers from a large amount of individuals who are inquired with a survey in order to deliver statistics.
- Qualitative research: The social-cultural context is essential and the focus is on the proximity and subjectivity that the researcher can observe is used to deliver reports.
Since the Renaissance (circa 1500), science as made by Descartes and Newton has been essential to human knowledge. It was especially important in the beginning, at that moment that humanity was contrasting church dogmas with the knowledge that could be derived empirically. The repetition of a phenomenon meant deriving universal laws that helped us overcome the rule of religion on our lives and have trusted science with all its great contributions to our well-being, e.g. our warm showers, advanced medicine, and all those little things that we take for granted. So we call this type of science “Positivism” and certain fields of knowledge really rely on this quantification paradigm to proof their validity.
It is common sense that numbers don’t lie, but the ones who are getting the numbers might make mistakes. It must be understood that the researcher needs to be acquainted with scientific methodology in order to reach meaningful results. On top of that, a survey might be answered unwillingly as an obligation to get something like access to a website, discounts, etc. Thus, people are not really considering the options and trying to finish it as quickly as possible.
Think about your own experience: Haven’t you ever done that—answered something just to get rid of it because you were trying to please someone or get something?
Besides, there are subjectivities that escape the objective limit of perception and will not be assessed if the researcher only uses qualitative methods, that’s one reason we need to go beyond quantities. Many times, statistics, especially those from surveys are not enough or are misleading.
For example, consider a survey that asks men “What size is your penis?” How many guys will say the truth? Not so many. So, you shouldn’t believe any statistics about this measurement that haven’t been obtained by someone who works in health and made their own visual assessment.
Having said that, I would like to give reasons why qualitative research matters:
- The possibility to notice subjectivity in the speech of the subject;
- The possibility to look at people not as numbers but as individuals that represent the greater society;
- Create inductive theories, to build something new that explains a specific object in a comprehensive way.
One of the greatest researchers alive nowadays decided to stop using quantitative research back in the ’70s. David Harvey, who had a best seller (Explanation in Geography), was the vedette of theoretical geography (positivistic) and shocked all his colleagues when he switched to a Marxist approach. He was concerned about producing meaningful insights and considered approaches that looked into the phenomenology of the spirit, such as put forward by Hegel.
The state of the art is the art of producing something meaningful, that can boost earnings, lead to quality of life and point the direction of what the trends are leading the industry to. Charts and graphs are nice and popular because they seem easy to read. But are they really that easy? Are they real and trustful? Everyone can make mistakes, we can’t believe in everything we see. The point I am trying to make is that research should be supported by bibliography too, because no one can discover everything on their own. It can seem boring, long, and subjective, but it can point out issues with more clarity and direct solutions more efficiently, independently if the source were numbers or proximity to the subjects.
Priscila Magossi is a journalist with a master’s degree (2006-2008) and a Ph.D. (2010-2014) in communication and semiotics (PUC-SP/Brazil). Since she has started her journey in the communication field, she has been studying the impacts of the mass media and the cyberculture in the postmodern society, focusing primarily on the social bonds dynamics. For more on her main activities in the camming industry, visit NewCammingPerspective.com.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ADORNO, T. W. Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life. London: Verso. (1951)
DURKEIM, E. Rules of Sociological Method. New York: The Free Press. (1982)
HARVEY, D. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Oxford: Blackwell. (1990)
________. Explanation in Geography. London: Edward Arnold. (1969)
MARX, K. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Vol I. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. (2010)
