What are you thoughts on qualitative research? Memes aside, do

>>8987085
you wont get an honest answer here.

[spoiler] and you dont deserve one either[/spoiler]

File: 1497392732252.webm (3MB, 1080x1874px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1080x1874px

>>8987088
Have some more social happening while you think about it twice.

Asians are weird

>>8987085
>>8987094
First off I'm gonna need some sauce on these webm's anon, secondly I've found qualitative research to be a good guiding post to come up with model's with progressively better utility that we can "explain with numbers" this is how marketing works and why it's so damned successful, hell even memes have been the focus of this sort of study and many marketers have been able to capitalize on them, though with varying degrees of success.

>>8987085
>>8987094

Is this Sharon Lee?

>>8987085
sure.
complex social phenomena might be moddeled using dynamical systems theory.
this provides both qualitative and quantitative information once sufficiently accurate.

>>8987094
>>8987085
Why are asian women so lewd?

>>8987085

qualitative research is not science

typical azn woman looking for a white man

>>8987085
Humanitiesfags are mostly brainlets who lack the quantitative abstraction to understand that social phenomena can be quantified, is just that there are WAY more variables at play than with STEM.

>>8988715
Geofags, biofags, ecologists and climatologists also have a shitload of variables but attempt to quantify their fields.

If they can, why can't humanities brainlets?

>>8987310
https://mega.nz/#!e0gUwZQJ!KM69-wh09FCtd-L9QZS4IrjXjE_nWnp44AfNEkZRgsE

cheers

>>8990563
can someone load this in dos and confirm it isnt dolphin porn

>>8987085
qualitative data will always have its place as supplemental to absolute quant analysis

>>8990563
>>8990837
based on the name it should be this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAQduOsJqZo

>>8988710
guy is asian

>Memes aside, do you think we can come up with accurate descriptions/explanations of complex social phenomena using in?
Uhh, we already have...

>>8988715
you're the brainlet if you think that we're capable of quantifying social phenomena

just because it's possible in principle doesn't mean it can be done

of course, we pretend to do it all the time, much to our detriment

>>8991112
Anon, you're the brainlet if you think we can't. Society and culture is directly influenced by biological facts.

Take language for instance; we can categorically say that sounds which are, as a general rule, impossible to make using the physiology of the human vocal tract aren't used in human language. The sounds that can be made can be used.

Now, add a level of physical abstraction: human hearing and perception. If we are physiologically capable of producing a sound, but we can't perceive it, we're not going to use it.

You can further add a level of phonetic abstraction. If a sound can both be produced and perceived, but due to historical circumstances, it's not recognised as a meaningful unit of sound language, it's still not going to suddenly become widespread, but under the right conditions, it may slowly develop in a corner of the community.

Further sociological abstraction suggests that this new development needs proper conditions to spread. Your paranoid, bipolar uncle Burt isn't exactly the type to influence language change, but if some famous rappers start using it, well that's much more fertile grounds for language development and spread.

Sociocultural phenomena are often influenced by physical reality and scientific principles. Sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly but closely associated, and sometimes the relationship is not at all clear, yet that relationship still exists.

In the end, it's all just biology, not some special snowflake bullshit. Plenty of shit in human nature is more deterministic than we like to convince ourselves.

>>8987085
It should be used to guide theory and direct quantitative research

Quantitative research should be used to verify the validity of social theory and/or the existence of social phenomena

Without quantitative social science we'd have no way to actually advance any given dialogue, people would just be yelling at each other without being able to prove anything one way or the other. People still do that, but they're just plebs

>>8987094
clearly a man

>>8987085

The premise of qualitative research is there with good intentions. However, the qualitative researchers are the problem where there is plenty of manipulation with data, results, and design of method. Sure quantitative research has this. However quantitative research is repeatable and has to be honest to a degree incase anyone does check the results.

Accurate descriptions and explanations of complex social phenomena? Using qualitative research we obviously can, however there are a billion issues with that which become obvious once you read the literature. With quantitative? Probably not.

>>8987085
>>8987094
Nice body, ugly face.