The importance of qualitative research for investigating causation.

Abstract

Causation has been a problematic concept for qualitative researchers ever since the "paradigm wars" of the 1980s. Egon Guba and Yvonna Lincoln rejected the entire concept of causation, and their views had a profound and lasting influence on qualitative research. I argue, drawing on both the philosophical and qualitative research literature, that causation is a legitimate concept for qualitative research, and that qualitative methods are essential for understanding causal processes, as opposed to simply arguing that a causal relationship exists between two variables or events. Two particular strengths of qualitative inquiry are crucial to this task: understanding participants' meanings, beliefs, and values, which play a critical role in explaining their behavior and its consequences, and understanding the effect of social and cultural contexts on these meanings, behaviors, processes, and outcomes.

Response to David Morgan on Triangulation

“…Morgan states that "Complementarity assigns different goals to the qualitative and quantitative portions of a project, according to the strengths each method offers for a particular purpose", but he never discusses what these different strengths are. (I think that this is also true of many mixed methods textbooks).The main strength of quantitative methods is in defining different variables, measuring these, and showing relationships among variables; experimental methods can also provide strong evidence that these relationships are causal, although there are important limitations on this; see Maxwell (2016Maxwell ( , 2021. The main strength of qualitative methods, on the other hand, is in understanding the processes (including mental and cultural processes) through which some events or situations influence other events or situations-showing how these relationships occur.…”

“…389, 391). For a more detailed presentation of the relative strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative approaches to causation, see Maxwell (2020Maxwell ( , 2021.This complementarity of strengths and limitations has major implications for combining the two methods, and challenges Morgan's (and others') division of possible outcomes into…”

“…The main strength of quantitative methods is in defining different variables, measuring these, and showing relationships among variables; experimental methods can also provide strong evidence that these relationships are causal, although there are important limitations on this; see Maxwell (2016Maxwell ( , 2021. The main strength of qualitative methods, on the other hand, is in understanding the processes (including mental and cultural processes) through which some events or situations influence other events or situations-showing how these relationships occur.…”

“…389, 391). For a more detailed presentation of the relative strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative approaches to causation, see Maxwell (2020Maxwell ( , 2021.…”

Introduction to the special section: Questioning established qualitative methods and assumptions.

“…Similarly, the investigation of causal relationships often has been framed as beyond the reach of qualitative methods. Maxwell (2021) examines a riveting line of writing on the role of qualitative research in the investigation of causal processes. A leader in this area, he provides a new reflection that not only supports the claim that qualitative methods can study causality but that describes why these methods are essential in investigations of causally linked processes.…”