The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods

The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods

Table of Contents

Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457	Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%	Writer Classification: PhD competent
Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago	Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours	Revision: Permitted
Sources: 4-6	Course Level: Masters/University College	Guarantee Status: 96-99%

Instructions  

The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods

Teresa Swain

4 posts

Re:Topic 7 DQ 1

The GCU dissertation template describes several ways to establish reliability research studies. A researcher increases the statistical power of a quantitative study by increasing the sample size. This reduces the chance that a real effect (rather than an apparent effect brought about by sampling variability) will be overlooked.

Does triangulation offer the qualitative methodologist a similar reduction in the likelihood of overlooking important results? Why or why not?

Statistical power is a term used is studies that employ quantitative method of research as it is concerned with measuring events with objective observations and numerical assignments of data especially when a causal relationship is the focus (Golafshani, 2003).  However, qualitative inquiry seeks to understand rather than point to cause or reason.  The focus of this approach is to allow the discovery of phenomenon to unfold naturally so that information uncovered in the process can illuminate other, similar concerns where information may be extrapolated to other scenarios (Golafshani, 2003).

Since the researcher is the “instrument” of measure in this type of inquiry, triangulation of data by using a variety of collection sources such as observations, archives, focus groups, documents, and interviews can help strengthen the integrity of the study (Hatch, 2002). Additionally, the researcher can collect diverse views by collaboration with other researchers, peers, colleagues, and/or those with particular expertise so that alternate explanations can be generated using multiple sources, multiple people to find where ideas converge and diverge.  Therefore, qualitative research demands more than adequate sample-size, it flourishes in inquiry and depth of probe.

References

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-607. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR8-4/golafshani.pdf

Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. Albany: State University of New York Press

Gina Anderson

1 posts

Re:Topic 7 DQ 1

The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods

Triangulation is the use of several methods and/or data sources to have a robust understanding of the phenomenon one is studying (Carter, Bryant-Lukosius, DiCenso, Blythe, & Neville, 2014). Triangulation can confirm data and

 

ensure data is complete by using multiple methods for one study, comparing data from various sources (Houghton, Casey, Shaw, & Murphy, 2013).  Leung (2015) argues that qualitative research is an important part of psycho-

social studies but notes that qualitative research is often criticized for lack of quality valuation and strength. Further, Leung (2015) explains that qualitative research’s equivalent to reliability is consistency. Silverman (as cited in Leung, 2015) proposed five approaches in improving the reliability in qualitative research with the following: “Refutational analysis, constant data comparison, comprehensive data use, inclusive of the deviant case and use of tables.” Since triangulation includes data comparison and comprehensive data use, one could argue that it could be a viable method of showing reliability.

Carter, et al. (2014) describe four different types of triangulation: method, investigator, theory, and data. Method triangulation involves different methods of data collection; investigator triangulation has two or more researchers involved in observations which brings different perspectives; theory triangulation uses different theories to analyze data; and data triangulation involves gathering data from different sources such as different people, families, groups, communities, etc. If these methods give researchers a way to enrich their qualitative studies, arguably strengthening the study as quantitative uses larger sample sizes, then triangulation is a good way to increase reliability.

Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545-547. doi:10.1188/14.ONF.545-547

Houghton, C., Casey, D., Shaw, D., & Murphy, K. (2013). Rigour in qualitative case-study research. Nurse Researcher, 20(4), 12-17

Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4(3), 324-327. doi: 10.4103/2249-4863.161306

Benjamin Garrison

1 posts

Re:Topic 7 DQ 2

The validity of a study refers to the strategies a researcher uses to ensure the data collected are true and certain. What are the steps GCU doctoral learners must take to ensure the validity of a qualitative research study? Give examples.

GCU doctoral researcher should look at multiple aspects to ensure the validity of their qualitative research study. As Lewis-Beck, Bryman and Futing Liao (2004) noted “to say that a study is valid is to say that it is a good study in that the researcher has accurately represented the phenomena or reality under consideration” (p. 1). Validity is the research’s integrity. The research is useless if it is not valid.

Leung (2015) notes that there are several aspects that must be considered to ensure the validity of qualitative research. For instance, confirming “the research question is valid for the desired outcome, the choice of methodology is appropriate for answering the research question, the design is valid for the methodology, the sampling and data analysis is appropriate, and finally the results and conclusions are valid for the sample and context” (Leung, 2015, p. 325). In other words, the research project should be completely in-line to ensure the author is researching what they are intending to research. If something is slightly off in the project, the conclusion may not answer the research question.

Darawsheh (2014) advocates for reflexivity during the research process as a way to increase validity and reliability. He defines reflexivity as the “continuous process of self-reflection that researchers engage in to generate awareness about their actions, feelings and perceptions” and notes that an awareness of feelings and perceptions can help the author avoid injecting their feelings and perceptions into the research project (p. 560). Bias can affect the validity of research. It can also ruin the author’s reputation if they are accused of injecting bias into the conclusions. All of these factors should be considered by GCU doctoral learners. They should take an active role in protecting the validity of their research.

Darawsheh, W. (2014). Reflexivity in research: Promoting rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Therapy & Rehabilitation, 21(12), 560-568.

Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4(3), 324-327. doi:10.4103/2249-4863.161306

Lewis-Beck, M. S., Bryman, A. & Futing Liao, T. (2004). The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods: SAGE Publications Ltd doi: 10.4135/9781412950589

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!