of course it is - well, a problem. Not the problem.
and it should be difficult
but it can also be done. I've done it. So have many others.
just to elaborate a bit... in my field, there's still an emphasis on empirical evidence and positivism. Quantifiable. Quantitative data and research.
But that sort of inquiry is not the best means for exploring this question/phenomenon.
And when it is done, it's slower. It's less generalizable. It's tougher to parse and therefore communicate.
I think it's crucial, though. But when it comes to research approval and funding and publication in journals, it's a lot less sexy than tables, charts, statistical significance, etc. So that kind of research doesn't happen enough and when it does, the results aren't easily or often disseminated.
It's much easier to cite statistics and then use those to drive attitudes and assumptions. The result are usually generalizations that, while generally accurate, don't really move beyond that to discussions of causality. Or that causality is legitimated by/through numbers. It can be confusing and convoluted.
But qualitative research has this subjective stigma attached to it that people don't associate with quantitative research because it's numbers and science. That's misleading, though, I think. They can be biased. The methodology can be so poorly conceived and executed or selective, that the results are questionable.
They aren't questioned often enough, though. Because the stats become a truth themselves and whatever they point to is somehow self-evident. For a discussion like this, I think that's dangerous. And that's the easiest route for removing critical thinking from these discussions. There's no need for it because the statistics are Truth, so no further discussion is necessary (one example I've mentioned - the use of drugs b/w blacks, Latinos, whites is about the same for youth offenders. But - statistically - minorities will be arrested and incarcerated for those charges at rates much higher than whites. So someone looks at the statistics about youth incarceration for drugs and the assumption is "Well, minority kids are just more criminal, more likely to do drugs." But that's not necessarily the case).