QuantitativeDesigns
Quantitative Designs
Jean Berry
Walden University
Quantitative Designs
Being able to determine successfully which research design is most appropriate involves taking into account a variety of factors related to the study. A researcher must consider many things including research questions, the hypotheses, and variables. Making the appropriate choice may seem overwhelming, the features of the study will determine its design (Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 2008). This paper will assess the strengths and weaknesses of correlational and experimental research design. Also, a comparison of the methods and their ethical, legal and socio-cultural considerations will be covered.
Two Designs
Correlational Research
Correlational research is considered an effective form of educational and psychological research (Thompson, Diamond, McWilliams, Snyder, & Snyder, 2005). The purpose of correlational research is to determine the relations among two or more variables. Information is collected from several variables, and correlational statistical methods are employed to gain further information (Thompson et al., 2005). The existence of a correlation does not suggest causation, and there is no manipulation of the variables in correlational research. (Lomax & Li, 2013)
Experimental Research
Experimental research asks the question, what causes something to occur? Sherpis, Young, & Daniels (2010) explain experimental research as attempting to define causality; allowing for the control or alteration of one variable’s effect on others. The control is achieved by researcher’s manipulation of independent variables and measurement of dependent variables (Norcross, Hogan, & Koocher, 2008). Experimental design is often referred to as true experimentation or true experiment design, is considered the “gold standard” in empirical research (Norcross et al., 2008).
Sampling
When drawing a sample population of a larger population for testing, one is sampling (Sherpis et al., 2010). For a
Jean Berry
Walden University
Quantitative Designs
Being able to determine successfully which research design is most appropriate involves taking into account a variety of factors related to the study. A researcher must consider many things including research questions, the hypotheses, and variables. Making the appropriate choice may seem overwhelming, the features of the study will determine its design (Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 2008). This paper will assess the strengths and weaknesses of correlational and experimental research design. Also, a comparison of the methods and their ethical, legal and socio-cultural considerations will be covered.
Two Designs
Correlational Research
Correlational research is considered an effective form of educational and psychological research (Thompson, Diamond, McWilliams, Snyder, & Snyder, 2005). The purpose of correlational research is to determine the relations among two or more variables. Information is collected from several variables, and correlational statistical methods are employed to gain further information (Thompson et al., 2005). The existence of a correlation does not suggest causation, and there is no manipulation of the variables in correlational research. (Lomax & Li, 2013)
Experimental Research
Experimental research asks the question, what causes something to occur? Sherpis, Young, & Daniels (2010) explain experimental research as attempting to define causality; allowing for the control or alteration of one variable’s effect on others. The control is achieved by researcher’s manipulation of independent variables and measurement of dependent variables (Norcross, Hogan, & Koocher, 2008). Experimental design is often referred to as true experimentation or true experiment design, is considered the “gold standard” in empirical research (Norcross et al., 2008).
Sampling
When drawing a sample population of a larger population for testing, one is sampling (Sherpis et al., 2010). For a
References: American Counseling Association (ACA). (2014). 2014 ACA Code of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf Field, A. (2006). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS: Second Edition. London. Thousand Oaks. New Delhi. Sage Publication Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (2008). Research methods in the social sciences (7th ed.). New York: Worth. Lomax, R., & Li, J. (2013). Correlational Research. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/correlational-research/ Norcross, J. C., Hogan, T. P., & Koocher, G. P. (2008). Clinician’s Guide to Evidence-based Practices: Mental Health and the Addictions. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press. Sandelowski, M. (1999, Sept, 10). Focus on research methods: Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(23), 334-340. Sherpis, C. J., Young, J. S., & Daniels, M. H. (2010). Counseling Research Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods (1st ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Thompson, B., Diamond, K. E., McWilliams, R., Snyder, P., & Snyder, S. W. (2005). Evaluating the Quality of Evidence from Correlational Research for Evidence-Based Practice. Council for Exceptional Children, 71(2), 181-194.