The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper 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
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
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!