This week’s
theme was quantitative research. It involved reading the paper Physical activity, stress, andself-reported upper respiratory tract infection (Fondell et al., 2010),
selecting a paper where quantitative methodologies were used in a good way, discussing and critically reflecting on quantitative methodologies, their
benefits and limitations.
I believe
that the seminar exercise, where we had to develop a model and show the
relationship between the researched phenomena, was helpful in my understanding
that in quantitative papers, researchers usually look for patterns and relationships between phenomena.
The benefit of quantitative methodologies is that researchers are able to collect statistical data and thus test and prove their hypotheses. If data do not prove the hypothesis, then researchers might be led to interesting insights. The limitations of quantitative methodologies concern the reliability and validity of the data and the results and thus the conclusions of the studies. Another limitation could be the inability to generalize results. Further research is usually necessary.
Similarly,
qualitative methodologies have both benefits and limitations. Researchers might
argue for the use of either qualitative or quantitative methods, but after the
readings and the discussions of this week I realized that all methodologies
have their limitations. Taken this into account, the researchers evaluate the
methodologies and chose the one that they think is appropriate for the specific
topic. During the week I was wondering if a combination of quantitative and
qualitative methodologies would be provide richer results and better insights.
Having
worked with online questionnaires enabled me to understand how demanding a
procedure it is to design a questionnaire, formulate the right questions, send
it out to a representative sample, getting a good response rate, using the right
tools to understand, analyze and interpret the results. Based on my previous
work experience and on discussions about quantitative methodologies during this
week, I came to the following conclusions:
An
important factor of statistical and online surveys is the design of
questionnaires and how questions are formulated. During the lecture we
discussed that questions should be carefully structured and that the
questionnaires should be tested in order to avoid misunderstandings and
mistakes that could affect the data and the results.
During this
week, I confirmed my prior thoughts that it is difficult to generalize results
of a survey. At the seminar we discussed the problem of generalizing results
because the number of participants was considered to be small and because
studies were conducted in specific contexts. Finding a representative sample is
a demanding procedure. And in most of the selected papers, we concluded that further
research is needed and/or that the study should be replicated in different
communities.
Simon
discusses in his blog post, and I agree with him, that interpreting the results
involves statistical knowledge. Interpreting statistical data and explaining
results in the right way is certainly not an easy procedure. It demands
specific knowledge and use of specific programs. I think that weighing data is
an important factor of reliability and validity of results.
During the
seminar, we also discussed the importance of researchers thoroughly explaining
their methodologies. Not only is it important for the peer review process, but
this way readers can also critically reflect on the study and its results.
Plus, future research can use the same methodologies in different environments
and test the hypotheses in different contexts. This might lead to the generalization
of results.
To conclude, I believe that all methodologies have benefits, as well as limitations. I don't think that there is one right methodology. I would rather say that choosing the right methodology depends on the focus of the researched subject.
REFERENCES
Fondell, E., Lagerros, Y. T., Sundberg, C. J., Lekander, M., Bälter, O., Rothman, K., & Bälter, K. (2010). Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(2), 272-279.
Kim, J. and Haridakis, P. M. (2009), The Role of Internet User Characteristics and Motives in Explaining Three Dimensions of Internet Addiction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14: 988–1015. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01478.x
Just as you, i have thought about how to design a questionnaire and how difficult it can be. I think that Olle showed us some very good examples of how easy it can be to formulate a question wrong, so that the answer can be interpreted in several ways and therefore be useless. You might think that a questionnaire is easy to develop and perform but it takes a lot of time to make the questions correct and also you should do a pilot test in order to see if people can understand the questions correctly.
ReplyDeleteFurther on i thought that the excersice with the model on the first seminar was a hard task, which i reflected on in my blog post. I agree with what you say though that with these models, you can easily see how things are connected and what relationships or patterns the paper are trying to investigate.
I agree on you on the fact researchers should explain the methods they used which could give insights for other studies on different studies, thus the easiness with which we came up with new methodologies casts new doubts on how some researches could be wrongly conducted.
ReplyDeleteHej Kat! I really enjoyed reading your blog post as you always describe and reflect what you learned in a very detailed and understandable way. And then I suddenly stumbled upon my name which made me unbelievable proud :D I want to add a small thought on your last sentence where you stated that "the right methodology depends on the focus of the researched subject." I can agree with that but I believe that it is more important to choose your method depending on the purpose of your research rather than on the research subject. But maybe this is what you meant with "focus"? Because the origin of all research is a larger research question. When there is already existing data you could prove your hypothesis with quantitative research. But when you are generally asking the "why" question then the qualitative research would be the right method to choose.
ReplyDeleteYes, you got it right. What I meant is that the right methodology depends on the research question, on what the researchers want to focus on. In this sense, what I meant is the purpose of the research.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDrawing a " map" of an article's structure in an old-school "mind-mapping" way turned out to clarify yet some perspectives that I had not considered before. Establishing links between hypotheses, outcomes and results and marking the paths with possible theories strips an article of all the plus-minus BS that one so often can find in a text, and states how valid and stable the summing of a study is (not in all cases, naturally).
ReplyDeleteYour text was so clear and such a model-example for the seminar. I didnät get all of it at the seminar, but the more I come back to it now the more clear it gets.
Hi Kat,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the best research would probably be a mix of quantitative as well as qualitative methods. That would probably help give a wider and more in depth picture of the problem. However I realize, just like you say yourself, that preparing for each research type is very time consuming, and also expensive, and unless you have a big organization to back you up it might not be feasible to execute.
I also agree with you and Simon that all the statistics behind these studies are an art in itself, and not very easy to follow when you are not up to date with all the terms.