In the past, the focus of the literature concerning the comparison between quantitative and qualitative research has been on the relative warrants of the methodology of each approach. The aim of this essay is to reformulate this argument in terms of paradigmatic perspectives. In this respect, descriptions of the realist paradigm which determines quantitative methods and the constructivist paradigm which determines qualitative methods are laid out. It is shown that these paradigms are essentially incommensurate and direct comparisons are counter-productive. It is, in addition, suggested that the choice of one paradigm over the other is more a distinction between the relative values of research exactitude and research sufficiency and, as such, a question of believability.
