What is Inductive / Deductive reasoning in Qualitative Research (it is not just about the analysis!)

[@qualitativeresearcher]

Visit my website and explore the different ways in which I can support you and your study! drkriukow.com/my-services/

[@lalairviana2662]

Thank you for making explanation about deductive vs inductive as simple as

[@qualitativeresearcher]

You are welcome!

[@maryruth4941]

I always enjoy your videos. The information you share is relevant and helpful. You have a way of explaining hard things - easy.

[@qualitativeresearcher]

Thank you! I'm really glad to hear that and appreciate you taking the time to share this!

[@israrahmad1649]

Thank you

[@qualitativeresearcher]

You're Welcome!

[@jackbheth]

Thanks for the video! How would abductive reasoning fit into design, data collection, analysis and conclusions.

[@qualitativeresearcher]

In studies adopting abductive reasoning, which involve generating theories based on observations and then refining these questions as new data emerges, the design will involve methods and methodoloies that are open to evolving interpretations - so, similar to what I said above inductive, they will be much more flexible and open, and less pre-determined. In data collection/analysis stages , abductive reasoning encourages an exploratory approach where researchers would remain open to unexpected findings and willing to adjust their hypotheses or theories in response to new information (so, a lot of back and forth, often referred to as constant comparison method - often described as such in GT studies). Specifically at the data analysis stage, you would be finding new things and then "testing" these theories against the data (sometimes this involves gathering more data to do it, in the process known as theoretical sampling -again, very common in grounded theory), and then the conclusions would again be something that is similar to what I said about induction. Overall, abduction is also characterized by openmindedness and flexibility. Hope this helps!

[@ruphinao7231]

Thank you

[@nourmeriem2241]

Does the subject of the impact of partnership on enhancing the competitiveness of the firm lend itself well to an inductive reasoning approach or should i change the subject or the word enhancing?

[@qualitativeresearcher]

the subject does not really have to do with one or the other, it is about how you structure the study itself

[@nourmeriem2241]

@@qualitativeresearcher I thought that if my topic indicates a prior result, such as improvement or enhancing for example, it means that I must follow positivisme and my reasoning should be deductive

[@qualitativeresearcher]

@@nourmeriem2241 i just don't know enough about your topic. The title itself does not necessarily indicate a prior result, it sounds like you are planning to explore the impact of partnership on enhancing the competitiveness. It does sound like there is an assumption that it does enhance, when I think about it now, but this does not necessarily mean that the study will definitely follow deductive reasoning - like I said, you can still make it inductive if you design the study this way. It is more about how you design your methods, what the aim of the analysis will be, etc.

[@ruphinao7231]

so when is it abductive?

[@qualitativeresearcher]

abduction is something in between essentially, going between deductive and inductive - for example, finding things indictively and then testing these working hypotheses (deductively). There is much more to it though, so I would suggest reading about it separately