■ Common Research Methodologies

General Characteristics and

Action research : A type of applied research that focuses on finding a solution to a local problem in a local setting.
For example, a teacher might investigate whether a new spelling program she has adopted leads to improvement in her students’ achievement
scores. (For example, see Efron & Ravid, 2013; Mertler, 2012; Mills, 2014.)

Case study : A type of qualitative research in which in-depth data are gathered relative to a single individual, program, or event for the purpose of
learning more about an unknown or poorly understood situation. (See Chapter 9.)

Content analysis : A detailed and systematic examination of the contents of a particular body of material (e.g., television shows, magazine
advertisements, Internet websites, works of art) for the purpose of identifying patterns, themes, or biases within that material. (See Chapter 9.)

Correlational research : A statistical investigation of the relationship between two or more variables. Correlational research looks at surface
relationships but does not necessarily probe for causal reasons underlying them. For example, a researcher might investigate the relationships
among high school seniors’ achievement test scores and their grade point averages a year later when they are first-year college students. (See
Chapter 6.)

Design-based research : A multistep, iterative study in which certain instructional strategies or technologies are implemented, evaluated, and
modified to determine possible factors influencing learning or performance. (For exam- ple, see T. Anderson & Shattuck, 2012; Brown, 1992;
Cobb, Confrey, diSessa, Lehrer, & Schauble, 2003.)

Developmental research : An observational-descriptive type of research that either compares people in different age groups
(a cross-sectional study) or follows a particular group over a lengthy period of time (a longitudinal study). Such studies are particularly
appropriate for looking at developmental trends. (See Chapter 6.)

Ethnography : A type of qualitative inquiry that involves an in-depth study of an intact cultural group in a natural setting. (See Chapter 9.)

Experimental research : A study in which participants are randomly assigned to groups that undergo various researcher-imposed treatments or
interventions, followed by observations or measurements to assess the effects of the treatments. (See Chapter 7.)

Ex post facto research : An approach in which one looks at conditions that have already occurred and then collects data to investigate a possible
relationship between these conditions and subsequent characteristics or behaviors. (See Chapter 7.)

Grounded theory research : A type of qualitative research aimed at deriving theory through the use of multiple stages of data collection and
interpretation. (See Chapter 9.)

Historical research : An effort to reconstruct or interpret historical events through the gathering and interpretation of relevant historical
documents and/or oral histories. (See Chapter 10.)

Observation study : A type of quantitative research in which a particular aspect of behavior is observed systematically and with as much
objectivity as possible. (See Chapter 6.)

Phenomenological research : A qualitative method that attempts to understand participants’ perspectives and views of physical or social realities.
(See Chapter 9.)

Quasi-experimental research : A method similar to experimental research but without random assignment to groups. (See Chapter 7.)

Survey research : A study designed to determine the incidence, frequency, and distribution of certain characteristics in a population; especially
common in business, sociology, and government research.
On the surface, quantitative and qualitative approaches involve similar processes—for instance,
they both entail identifying a research problem, reviewing related literature, and collecting and
analyzing data. But by definition, they are suitable for different types of data: Quantitative
studies involve numerical data, whereas qualitative studies primarily make use of nonnumerical
data (e.g., verbal information, visual displays). And to some degree, quantitative and qualitative
research designs are appropriate for answering different kinds of questions.

Let’s consider how the two approaches might look in practice. Suppose two researchers are
interested in investigating the “effectiveness of the case-based method for teaching business
management practices.” The first researcher asks the question, “How effective is case-based
instruction in comparison with lecture-based instruction?” She finds five instructors who are
teaching case-based business management classes; she finds five others who are teaching the
same content using lectures. At the end of the semester, the researcher administers an achieve-
ment test to students in all 10 classes. Using statistical analyses, she compares the scores of
students in case-based and lecture-based courses to determine whether the achievement of one
group is significantly higher than that of the other group. When reporting her findings, she
summarizes the results of her statistical analyses. This researcher has conducted a quantitative
study.

The second researcher is also interested in the effectiveness of the case method but asks the
question, “What factors make case-based instruction more effective or less effective?” To answer
this question, he sits in on a case-based business management course for an entire semester. He
spends an extensive amount of time talking with the instructor and some of the students in an
effort to learn the participants’ perspectives on case-based instruction. He carefully scrutinizes
his data for patterns and themes in the responses. He then writes an in-depth description and
interpretation of what he has observed in the classroom setting. This researcher has conducted a
qualitative study.

Purpose Quantitative researchers tend to seek explanations and predictions that will generalize
to other persons and places. The intent is to identify relationships among two or more variables
and then, based on the results, to confirm or modify existing theories or practices.

Qualitative researchers tend to seek better understandings of complex situations. Their work is
sometimes (although not always) exploratory in nature, and they may use their observa- tions to
build theory from the ground up.
Process Because quantitative studies have historically been the mainstream approach to research,
carefully structured guidelines exist for conducting them. Concepts, variables, hypotheses, and
methods of measurement tend to be defined before the study begins and to remain the same
throughout. Quantitative researchers choose methods that allow them to objectively measure the
variable(s) of interest. They also try to remain detached from the phenomena and participants in
order to minimize the chances of collecting biased data.

A qualitative study is often more holistic and emergent, with the specific focus, design,
measurement tools (e.g., observations, interviews), and interpretations developing and possibly
changing along the way. Researchers try to enter the situation with open minds, prepared to
immerse themselves in its complexity and to personally interact with participants. Categories
(variables) emerge from the data, leading to information, patterns, and/or theories that help
explain the phenomenon under study.

Data Collection Quantitative researchers typically identify only a few variables to study and
then collect data specifically related to those variables. Methods of measuring each variable are
identified, developed, and standardized, with considerable attention given to the validity and
reliability of the measurement instruments (more about such qualities later in the chapter). Data
are often collected from a large sample that is presumed to represent a particular population so
that generalizations can be made about the population.

Qualitative researchers operate under the assumption that reality is not easily divided into
discrete, measurable variables. Some qualitative researchers describe themselves as being the re-
search instrument because the bulk of their data collection is dependent on their personal
involve- ment in the setting. Rather than sample a large number of participants with the intent of
making generalizations, qualitative researchers tend to select a few participants who might best
shed light on the phenomenon under investigation. Both verbal data (interview responses,
documents, field notes) and nonverbal data (drawings, photographs, videotapes, artifacts) may be
collected

Data Analysis All research requires logical reasoning. Quantitative researchers tend to rely more heavily
on deductive reasoning, beginning with certain premises (e.g., hypotheses, theories)
and then drawing logical conclusions from them. They also try to maintain objectivity in their data
analysis, conducting predetermined statistical procedures and using relatively objective criteria to
evaluate the outcomes of those procedures.

In contrast, qualitative researchers make considerable use of inductive reasoning: They make many
specific observations and then draw inferences about larger and more general phenomena. Furthermore,
their data analysis is more subjective in nature: They scrutinize the body of data in search of patterns—
subjectively identified—that the data reflect.

It is important to note, however, that quantitative research is not exclusively deductive, nor is qualitative
research exclusively inductive. Researchers of all methodological persuasions typically use both types of
reasoning in a continual, cyclical fashion. Quantitative researchers might formulate a preliminary theory
through inductive reasoning (e.g., by observing a few situations), engage in the theory-building process
described in Chapter 1, and then try to sup- port their theory by drawing and testing the conclusions that
follow logically from it. Similarly, after qualitative researchers have identified a theme in their data using
an inductive process, they typically move into a more deductive mode to verify or modify it with
additional data.

Reporting Findings Quantitative researchers typically reduce their data to summarizing statistics (e.g.,
means, medians, correlation coefficients). In most cases, average performances are of greater interest than
the performances of specific individuals (you will see exceptions in the single-subject designs described
in Chapter 7). Results are typically presented in a report that uses a formal, scientific style with
impersonal language.

Qualitative researchers often construct interpretive narratives from their data and try to capture the
complexity of a particular phenomenon. Especially in certain disciplines (e.g., anthropology), qualitative
researchers may use a more personal, literary style than quantitative researchers do, and they often
include the participants’ own language and perspectives. Although all researchers must be able to write
clearly, effective qualitative researchers must be especially skillful writers.

A study by Kontos (1999) provides an example of what a researcher might do in an observa- tion
study. Kontos’s research question was this: What roles do preschool teachers adopt during
children’s free-play periods? (She asked the question within the context of theoretical issues that
are irrelevant to our purposes here.) The study took place during free-play sessions in Head Start
classrooms, where 40 preschool teachers wore cordless microphones that transmitted what they
said (and also what people near them said) to a remote audiotape recorder. Each teacher was
audiotaped for 15 minutes on each of two different days. Following data collection, the tapes
were transcribed and broken into 1-minute segments. Each segment was coded in terms of the
primary role the teacher assumed during that time, with five possible roles being identified:
interviewer (talking with children about issues unrelated to a play activity), stage manager
(helping children get ready to engage in a play activity), play enhancer/playmate (joining a play
activity in some way), safety/behavior monitor (managing children’s behavior), or uninvolved
(not attending to the children’s activities in any manner). Two research assistants were trained in
using this cod- ing scheme until they were consistent in their judgments at least 90% of the time,
indicating a reasonably high interrater reliability. They then independently coded each of the 1-
minute seg- ments and discussed any segments on which they disagreed, eventually reaching
consensus on all segments. (The researcher found, among other things, that teachers’ behaviors
were to some degree a function of the activities in which the children were engaging. Her
conclusions, like her consideration of theoretical issues, go beyond the scope of this book.)

How do you decide whether to use qualitative or quantitative research?