Can qualitative research methods be trusted as scientific?

I believe that Psychology needs to be respected as a science by the academic community, in order for its research findings to have any real impact on the quality of individual’s lives, within society. It is my argument that qualitative research methods cannot be trusted as scientific because they lack the objectivity which I think is essential in order to collect reliable data. I think my view is reflected by the Psychological community, because there is a significantly lower number of studies’ currently being conducted with a focus on qualitative research methods, compared to those using quantitative research methods.  Early psychologists such as Freud used mainly qualitative methods such as longitudinal case studies to gain an in depth understanding of a single participant’s characteristic. One example of this is the case study of Hans, where Hans farther exchanged letters with Freud, describing Hans’s symptoms. Freud also used open ended questions whilst interviewing Hans about his phobia of horses.  Once the data had been collected Freud concluded that Hans had been cured of his phobia and found evidence to support his theory of the Oedipus complex. However, the use of a case study method means that rigorous controls are lacking. This is mainly due to a lack of standardisation and researcher bias. Hans farther had been previously acquainted with Freud before his son participated in the study. Because Freud did not remain impartial when he interacted with Han’s, he may have asked Hans leading questions which may have influenced Hans to give responses which supported Freud’s own theory. On the other hand, bias is less likely to occur in more modern experiments which employ quantitative research methods, such as the lab experiment used by Raine, where participant’s brain activity was measured using a PET scan. Biases are less likely to occur when machines are used to collect data, because they can record physiological measures, such as the brain activity of a participant.  This means that the researcher interacts less with the participants, so they will not be able to influence their results and the data cannot be interpreted differently by other researchers, because physiological measures are objective. Also, quantitative research methods usually consist of numerical data, which makes it easy to compare the results of different studies and to check for reliability between the data collected. Qualitative research methods can undoubtedly be useful because they gain insight into the thoughts of the participant. These thoughts may inspire further research into area which has not been previously considered before and thus, helping to expand our knowledge of Psychology and the link between the human mind and their behaviour. But qualitative methods can lack the fundamental principles, such as such as objectivity and falsifiability, which scientific data is based upon and that is why, overall, I believe that qualitative data cannot be trusted as scientific.

 References: Freud, Sigmund. (1909). Raine, A., Buchsbaum, M. & LaCasse, L. (1997). Introduction to research methods in Psychology third edition by Dennis Howitt and Duncan Cramer.