Philosophical Differences Between Qualitative and Quantitative Paradigms and Approaches
spmwjbrbrad73
examplepsy635week3discussion.docxWk. 3 Discussion
For this week’s discussion we have been tasked with comparing the characteristics of appropriate research designs and recommend a qualitative research design that would facilitate answering the instructor’s additional questions: : (a) How do their students actually feel about the intervention? and (b) How do students view the influence of the intervention on their learning inside and outside of the classroom (if applicable)?
When it comes to qualitative research methods there are several, however the three most common are participant observation, in-depth interviews and focus groups. Participant observation in a social setting tends to aim to gain a means of better understanding within a given group of individuals, their experiences and observations and collects data. In-depth interviews are utilized for collecting data on individual’s personal history, perspectives, and experiences. This is used particularly with sensitive information. Focus groups allow for data collection through group interview processes and tend to related to specific topics. (Frost, 2011)
In addition to our week two scenario the instructors would like to answer additional questions of how the students actually feel about the intervention as well as how the students view the influence of the intervention on their learning in the classroom as well as outside of the classroom. This relates to the phenomenology research design. Phenomenology focuses on individual thoughts and feelings and its purpose is to dive in and determine what feelings or experiences the students have in relation to the intervention. This method has several different characteristics:
· It seeks to understand how people experience a particular situation or phenomenon.
· It is conducted primarily through in-depth conversations and interviews; however, some studies may collect data from diaries, drawings, or observation.
· Small samples sizes, often 10 or less participants, are common in phenomenological studies.
· Phenomenology is centered on the participants’ experiences with no regard to social or cultural norms, traditions, or preconceived ideas about the experience.
· It focuses on these four aspects of a lived experience: lived spaced, lived body, lived time, and lived human relations.
· Data collected is qualitative and analysis includes an attempt to identify themes or make generalizations regarding how a particular phenomenon is actually perceived or experienced. (CIRT, 2019)
Phenomenological research studies tend to be interested in the life experiences of human and would relate directly to answering the instructors additional research questions. (CIRT, 2019) According to CIRT 2019, “A phenomenological study attempts to set aside biases and preconceived assumptions about human experiences, feelings, and responses to a particular situation. It allows the researcher to delve into the perceptions, perspectives, understandings, and feelings of those people who have actually experienced or lived the phenomenon or situation of interest. Therefore, phenomenology can be defined as the direct investigation and description of phenomena as consciously experienced by people living those experiences.” (pg. 1)
For the scenario we were provided last week by Murphy 2014, I chose the Pretest-Posttest Control-Group Design. This particular design allows the researchers to test for equality of groups on the variable of interest prior to the intervention in order to make sure the experimental design will be able to meet the needs of the study. (Murphy, 2014) This particular philosophical paradigm was utilized in order to randomly assign the students to either the experimental or control group which removed any concern for bias. This process provided the ability to control the variables and see how the posting behaviors were prior to the intervention process offering data prior to the study that is important for further assessing if any changes transpired after the intervention ends. This ultimately answered the hypothesis. The instructors only wanted to determine the effects of the intervention. The additional questions proved this week relate directly to the participants ultimate experience and determining their thoughts related to the intervention which are completely different results than the Pretest-Posttest Control-Group Design chosen for last week. Each design provides specific results depending upon required goals and study requirements. In this scenario incorporating a mixed approach to the research would be beneficial by collecting and analyzing both quantitative (closed-ended) and qualitative (open-ended) data. For this particular scenario by adding the mixed approach to the research process a survey instrument that could be developed to support the appropriate quantitative study that ultimately improves the intervention. The mixed approach provides participants point of view. (Wisdom, & Creswell, 2013)
References
CIRT. (2019). Phenomenology Research Overview. Grand Canyon University, Center for
Innovation in Research and Teaching. Retrieved from
https://cirt.gcu.edu/research/developmentresources/research_ready/phenomenology/phen
_overview
Frost, N. (2011). Qualitative research methods in psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Murphy, P. (2014). PSY635 Week two discussion scenario. Ashford University: San Diego, CA.
Wisdom, J. & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Mixed Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative
Data Collection and Analysis While Studying Patient-Centered Medical Home Models.
Retrieved from https://pcmh.ahrq.gov/page/mixed-methods-integrating-quantitative-and-
qualitative-data-collection-and-analysis-while
