Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Qualitative versus quantitative research
Research design
Qualitative versus quantitative research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Qualitative versus quantitative research
3.3.3 Exploratory Research
Exploratory research is referred to that type of research design, which is concerned with dealing with a problem that is not clearly defined and is intended to be exploring the research questions. It helps in giving the study a new angle or looking from a new theoretical perspective to measure something. Moreover, the research mostly focuses on secondary research that is reviewed literature or data that is available; qualitative approach is also used in this. Furthermore, the prime objective of exploratory research is to identify key variables and key issues. However, the research enables the researcher to focus on broader perspective along with providing definite answers to specific research questions. Nevertheless,
…show more content…
Interviews include Unstructured, Semi-Structured, and Structured interviews. The Unstructured interviews are in-depth interviews. This type of interview enables the holistic understanding of interviewee’s situation and point of view (Dawson, 2002). On the other hand, Semi Structured interviews are the most common in which specific questions are asked but response is detailed. Moreover, it is usually used in a qualitative research (Dawson, 2002). While structured interviews are fixed questions, in which respondents have to tick boxes. It is used frequently, especially in market research (Dawson, 2002).
Questionnaires on the other hand comprise of closed ended, Open ended and mixed questionnaire approach of data collection. The closed ended questionnaires are used in quantitative research for large sample to generate statistics (Dawson, 2002). While the open ended questionnaire is mainly used in a qualitative research so that a brief account of the response are noted for the purpose of the research and the mixed approach is the blend of both closed and open ended questionnaires (Dawson, 2002)
The Secondary data collection method is associated with the data, which has been observed, and analyzed in the previous researches. In this, data collection method, data is obtained from different books, journal articles, and reports (Kottner, Jan, Gefen, & Lahmann, 2011).
3.5 Research
…show more content…
Validity and reliability must be mitigated and for this purpose, reliable data will be used. This data will not be biased, as it will be collected from the management of the clubs. Furthermore, complete information about the topic will be provided to the participants. This will increase the reliability and validity of research in the form of effective consequences. There are two types of validity.
Internal Validity: Internal validity refers to the critical measure that ensures the principle of cause and effect being strictly followed in research design (Gramatica, 2007).
External Validity: External validity refers to see the generalization ability of the study as well as settings, population and variables used in the study.
However, in order to conduct this study authentic sources are used to ensure reliability. In essence, an assessment tool produces consistent and stable results to the degree (Badke, 2004).
3.7 Ethical concerns
As an idea, ethics means as a complex arrangement of qualities, measures and institutional plans that help constitute and direct scientific action. Eventually, research ethics is a codification of morals of science practically speaking. As such, it is taking into account general morals of science, generally as general morals is in view of conventional ethical quality (Nesh,
The sampling procedures that can be utilized in evaluation research is vast. The selected sampling procedure is important in the consideration of external validity. External validity generalizes the findings to individuals in the study sample with characteristics that are alike (DiClemente et al., 2013). Although, not all research studies will require a sampling procedure that would deliver an external validity.
...the data did not involve member checking thus reducing its robustness and enable to exclude researcher’s bias. Although a constant comparative method was evident in the discussion which improved the plausibility of the final findings. Themes identified were well corroborated but not declared was anytime a point of theoretical saturation Thus, the published report was found to be particularly strong in the area of believability and dependability; less strong in the area of transferability; and is weak in the area of credibility and confirmability, although, editorial limitations can be a barrier in providing a detailed account (Craig & Smyth, 2007; Ryan, Coughlan, & Cronin, 2007).
Internal validity, unlike external and construct validity, deals with causal relationships. In other words, the question is whether any additional research that is found is actually associated with the study that is being conducted. The question, again, is whether we can be confident that the outcome of the study is a result of the experiment itself. What this means is that internal validity is the extent to which a change in a given variable is caused by the change in another variable.
Internal validity of a research design is extremely important for the interpretation of results. There are various threats to internal validity in single-case designs (SCD) that Kratochwill (2010) discusses. Three threats of internal validity include selection, history, and maturation. Selection refers to the participants selected for the study. If the participants characteristics are very different than it may affect the internal validity.
A researcher uses an experiment to scientifically test out a hypothesis. In an experiment there are many different factors that are involved. There is the independent variable, which is the cause, it is the one that is being manipulated, and the dependent variable, which is the effect, is the response. When conducting a experiment it is important to make sure that the only thing than can affect the dependent variable is the independent variable. This is known as internal validity. Using random assignment to separate the participants into groups helps eliminate any outside factors, and creates an equal chance for all participants to be apart of the experimental conditions. There are many pros and cons to this type of method. The experimental method creates a strong control of the variables involved in the experiment, which allows an easier determination on cause and effect. If needed, it is fairly easy to replicate an experiment and is less time consuming than other research methods. However there are many downfalls as well. When conducting an experiment the setting of where the experiment is taking place is more artificial which may cause certain behaviors that wouldn’t occur in real life. This is known as external validity, which is the measure of how much the results of a study can be generalized and used in different situations, and people. To improve external validity cover stories are created when conducting experiments so the participants are not aware of what is really going on, or experiments are done in a natural setting as opposed to in a laboratory. However, this creates less control over confounding variables that can affect the experiment, which can create bias results (Aronson,
External success is obtaining success outside of the event itself. This includes fame, fortune, and social achievement. These goods must be limited in quantity and rival, not everyone can have them. Whereas internal goods are intrinsic to the event itself.
The research carried on both quantitative approach and qualitative approach. It began with quantitative approach—questionnaire. Bryman and Bell (2003) asserted that mail or postal questionnaires are most popular forms of questionnaires. Another form—self-completion questionnaire was also common because of the overlap with postal questionnaire to some extent.
#4. Internal validity refers to the correctness of the research inferences concerning the cause and effect while external validity involves ability to generalize findings of the study to the other settings (Cozby & Bates, 2012, p. 69). These are important because threats to the internal validity of experimental procedures affect the researcher’s ability to make a valid conclusion “from the data about the population in an experiment” (Creswell, 2014; p. 174). Also, threat to external validity of the study will influence the ability to generalize the result of the study “beyond the subjects used for the experiment and beyond the laboratory in which the experiment was conducted” (Jackson, 2012; P.239).
It is important to note that high reliability of scores does not guarantee that those scores are a valid representation of the construct they are intended to measure. Reliability does not guarantee validity; however, it does determine how valid scores obtained from an instrument can be. The upper limit of the validity coefficient can be determined by taking the square root of the reliability
Internal validity deals with how well an experiment has been carried out, more specifically by avoiding the effects of more than one independent variable. For an experiment to have higher internal validity, it must have fewer chances for other independent variables affecting the experiment. Internal validity focuses on the degree to which the design of the study can be controlled. Internal validity is determined by exerting the degree of control over potential extraneous variables. It is necessary to control these potentially confounding variables since it helps to reduce the possibility for another explanation for treatment effects to emerge as an alternative and also provides much confidence that the independent variable affects the dependent
Internal validity is concerned with the accuracy of the study’s design. The extent of control applied over potential irrelevant variables decide the position of internal validity. Checking for possibly confusing variables lower the possibility for a different explanation for treatment effects and gives more confidence that effects occur because of the independent variable. There are seven threats for internal validity have been defined: (1) history, (2) maturation, (3) testing, (4) instrumentation, (5) regression, (6) selection, (7) experimental mortality.
This is important because it provides proof that the observed outcome “B” of the test was caused by what the study “A” did. Applying this to the leadership research example being used; internal validity would be that the common traits of intelligence, and credibility were caused by the survey given. Three factors that could have negative affect, or threaten internal validity are: history, maturation, and attrition. History refers to an event has transpired during or before the research testing that change the result of the study.
The study gathers the reliable information and data through the primary sources and secondary sources.
It is important to note that certain research problems may not be fully defined or formulated because the researcher lacks the requisite information to guide him in problem formulation. To remedy such a problem the researcher can embark on an exploratory research. The goal of the exploratory research is to gather preliminary data to shed light on the real nature of the problem and to suggest possible solutions or new ideas.
Striating from the research idea to the culmination of the findings, the research process entails many segments, all of which are imperative. By choosing the research methodology, the researchers can formulate the path to be used in conducting the study and reporting the findings. The methodology helps in the search of literature, development of research questions and the creation of the most suitable study design. It also assists in the interpretation of the results and the publication of the findings in journals.