On quantitizing revisited

This article builds on the highly cited 2009 article authored by Professor Emerita Margarete Sandelowski and her colleagues by critically reevaluating the process of quantitizing—transforming qualitative data into quantitative forms—a technique that has surprisingly not proliferated in academic rese...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2025-01-01
Series:Frontiers in Psychology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1421525/full
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832590423292379136
author Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
author_facet Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
author_sort Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
collection DOAJ
description This article builds on the highly cited 2009 article authored by Professor Emerita Margarete Sandelowski and her colleagues by critically reevaluating the process of quantitizing—transforming qualitative data into quantitative forms—a technique that has surprisingly not proliferated in academic research, presumably due to a shortage of methodological exploration in this area. This article responds to this shortfall by proposing a comprehensive meta-framework using the 5W1H approach, which outlines why, when, what, where, how, and who should engage in quantitizing, thereby integrating several frameworks and models across both mixed and multiple methods research. Central to this framework is the DIME-Driven Model of Quantitizing, which categorizes quantitizing into Descriptive, Inferential, Measurement, and Exploratory types, each enhancing the utility and precision of quantitizing. This innovative model supports the article's broader advocacy for quantitizing as a crucial methodological tool across diverse research traditions. This article explores the application and value of quantitizing across qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research traditions, demonstrating its broad relevance and transformative potential. It discusses the variable adoption of quantitizing based on differing philosophical perspectives related to ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology. Despite these differences, only a few research philosophies completely reject quantitizing. The article advocates for a balanced use of quantitizing to complement qualitative analyses and to enhance research clarity and applicability without compromising the richness of qualitative data. It serves as a comprehensive resource for understanding the complexities and utility of quantitizing, aiming to inspire researchers to consider this approach to enrich their analytical tools and to enhance the depth and applicability of their research findings.
format Article
id doaj-art-c3b36d290c9949dc927034ab59dd478d
institution Kabale University
issn 1664-1078
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Psychology
spelling doaj-art-c3b36d290c9949dc927034ab59dd478d2025-01-23T18:08:32ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782025-01-011510.3389/fpsyg.2024.14215251421525On quantitizing revisitedAnthony J. OnwuegbuzieThis article builds on the highly cited 2009 article authored by Professor Emerita Margarete Sandelowski and her colleagues by critically reevaluating the process of quantitizing—transforming qualitative data into quantitative forms—a technique that has surprisingly not proliferated in academic research, presumably due to a shortage of methodological exploration in this area. This article responds to this shortfall by proposing a comprehensive meta-framework using the 5W1H approach, which outlines why, when, what, where, how, and who should engage in quantitizing, thereby integrating several frameworks and models across both mixed and multiple methods research. Central to this framework is the DIME-Driven Model of Quantitizing, which categorizes quantitizing into Descriptive, Inferential, Measurement, and Exploratory types, each enhancing the utility and precision of quantitizing. This innovative model supports the article's broader advocacy for quantitizing as a crucial methodological tool across diverse research traditions. This article explores the application and value of quantitizing across qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research traditions, demonstrating its broad relevance and transformative potential. It discusses the variable adoption of quantitizing based on differing philosophical perspectives related to ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology. Despite these differences, only a few research philosophies completely reject quantitizing. The article advocates for a balanced use of quantitizing to complement qualitative analyses and to enhance research clarity and applicability without compromising the richness of qualitative data. It serves as a comprehensive resource for understanding the complexities and utility of quantitizing, aiming to inspire researchers to consider this approach to enrich their analytical tools and to enhance the depth and applicability of their research findings.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1421525/fullquantitizingDIME-Driven Model of Quantitizingmixed methods research1 + 1 = 1 integration approachqualitative datadata transformation
spellingShingle Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
On quantitizing revisited
Frontiers in Psychology
quantitizing
DIME-Driven Model of Quantitizing
mixed methods research
1 + 1 = 1 integration approach
qualitative data
data transformation
title On quantitizing revisited
title_full On quantitizing revisited
title_fullStr On quantitizing revisited
title_full_unstemmed On quantitizing revisited
title_short On quantitizing revisited
title_sort on quantitizing revisited
topic quantitizing
DIME-Driven Model of Quantitizing
mixed methods research
1 + 1 = 1 integration approach
qualitative data
data transformation
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1421525/full
work_keys_str_mv AT anthonyjonwuegbuzie onquantitizingrevisited