In order to examine the importance crf “quantitative” vs. “qualitative” tourism research, similar developments in anthropolo$Q arc examined. In addition, the impact of such thought upon marketing is discussed. ‘I‘hr tradeoffs of choosing “qualitative” or “scientific” techniques arr overtly cunsidcrcd, “scirnce” and “art” in research aw operationally defined, and the strength of each method is juxtaposed and justified. Such an analysis is vital since tourism seeks to build its own distinct rcscarc h tradition. An c.clrctic approach of choosing research methods is recommended in li,ght of the fact that tourism scholars and practitioners deal with complex phenomena and, as a result, rigorous, scientific methods are not always
appropriate for the problems cnwuntered.
In order to examine the importance crf “quantitative” vs. “qualitative” tourism research, similar developments in anthropolo$Q arc examined. In addition, the impact of such thought upon marketing is discussed. ‘I‘hr tradeoffs of choosing “qualitative” or “scientific” techniques arr overtly cunsidcrcd, “scirnce” and “art” in research aw operationally defined, and the strength of each method is juxtaposed and justified. Such an analysis is vital since tourism seeks to build its own distinct rcscarc h tradition. An c.clrctic approach of choosing research methods is recommended in li,ght of the fact that tourism scholars and practitioners deal with complex phenomena and, as a result, rigorous, scientific methods are not alwaysappropriate for the problems cnwuntered.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
