Ohio Lottery Discussion Replies

Detail the overall research design in the Ohio Lottery case (See Exhibit OL-1). What are the advantages and disadvantages of this design?

            Having an understanding of the research design process and what steps are critical will ensure that time, energy, and money are utilized in the correct space, and that the research that is being conducted is done so with the greatest possible outcome. Schoonenboom & Johnson, (2017), detail how to conduct a mixed method research study, while keeping an emphasis on quality and validity (p. 107). They focus on the seven major dimensions to make a research study successful; “: purpose, theoretical drive, timing (simultaneity and dependency), point of integration, typological versus interactive design approaches, planned versus emergent design, and design complexity” (Schoonenboom & Johnson, 2017, p. 107).

            When evaluating the Ohio Lottery and the research design utilized, it can be seen that the design follows a well-defined research process, such as the one that is laid out by Schindler (2021, p. 30). The firs step was to clarify the research question. In this case study, the question is what is causing the decline in sales of Ohio lottery tickets? To help design the research, the Ohio lottery enlisted the expertise of Marcus Thomas LLC. For the collect and prepare steps, interviews were conducted across different population samples. From there the research companies analyzed and interpreted the data then reported the results and recommendations.

            The disadvantage of the design utilized is the length of time that participants were in interviews. Schindler (2021), stated that each of the interviews were approximately 90 minutes long. That is a long period of time to try and keep the attention of a participant.

Evaluate the MET process (Exhibit OL-2). What are some of the strengths and weaknesses of the MET technique?

            The metaphor elicitation technique, or MET is a powerful technique that utilizes image recognition and association to determine the mental model that people have of a certain topic (Kokko & Lagerkvist, 2016, p. 205). In this context “Mental models are defined as cognitive structures that influence consumer behavior (Kokko & Lagerkvist, 2016, p. 205).

            For the Ohio Lottery case study, implementing the MET process gave them a deeper understanding of the mental model that all four groups of players (or non-players) had in regards to the lottery. The strength behind this is that information could be utilized to change the consumer perception, in a more positive manner, with the hopes of attracting new players. The weakness of this technique is that it requires participants to conduct some work prior to the interviews, and spend more of their time assisting.

What measurement scales are used in the sample questions provided (Exhibit OL-3)? Why might the lottery attitude and lottery importance questions have presented the most challenge to the professional researchers?

            In reviewing the questions shown in Exibit OL-3, it can be seen that question 6A is on a nominal scale because of the frequency distribution and questions 25 and 29 are on the ordinal scale because of the determination of the level of agreeance (Schindler, 2021, p. 238).

            The questions that are asked on an ordinal or Likert scale can be difficult to analyze because it must be assumed that “each step in the ordered response represents an identical difference of degree on the hypothesized latent construct” (McLauchlan et al., 2020, p. 106). If person answers with either a 7 or a 1 (extremes on either side) that causes a shift in the data and shows strong feelings, however, others might not grade as strictly. This is called the error of leniency or error of strictness (Schindler, 2021, p. 262). If the people who were polled leaned more towards the error of strictness and not the error of leniency, it could skew the data in one direction.

Using text Exhibit 12-2, map out the likely quantitative instrument content.

Quantitative or measurement methods are utilized to ensure that what the researchers are utilizing as content is valid in the context of the research (Wynd et al., 2003, p. 516). According to Schindler (2021), there are three categories of measurement questions and multiple non-question sections that make up a proper measurement instrument (p. 301).

Non-question elements

            This section would contain most of the information that lays out the introduction, conclusion, transitions, and instructions (Schindler, 2021, p. 301). For this study, the introduction would have provided relevant information to the participants that the researchers were willing to disclose. The Conclusion would have covered topics such as follow up. The transitions and instructions are there for the person conducting the survey to ensure the flow is adequate.

Administrate questions

            The administrative questions ask for the identity of the participant, interviewer, location of the interview and notes on the conditions of the interview (Schindler, 2021, p. 301).

Target questions

            The target questions are the ones most relevant to the topic at hand. The target questions for this research instrument would center around gaining the desired information that is relevant to the research. Questions such as “How do you know which games are available? How much does advertising help with that” were utilized in the study as target questions (Schindler, 2021)/

Classification questions

            The classification questions seek to record the demographics, economic status, sociological, and geographic information of the participant (Schindler, 2021, p. 301).

The survey contained several questions that would alert the researchers that the participant was not taking the research process seriously (see case exhibit OL-3). Is this a good or a poor idea? Why?

            Having questions that alert the researchers if the participant is taking the survey seriously is very important and vital to the research process. By not evaluating this, the researchers run the risk of having statistical data watered down by someone who is there for no apparent reason.

            The need for the interviewer to feel like the participant is taking the survey seriously or that the participant needs to feel that the interviewer is taking them seriously is important for research. Forsberg and Rantala (2020), found that being taken seriously is a key factor in self-empowerment (p. 8).

            By including these types of questions, the interviewer runs the risk of upsetting the participant if they feel that their time is being wasted. In the tail end of Romans 13:7 it states, “respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed” (English Standard Version Bible). Respect and honor need to go both ways in these types of interactions.

Evaluate the MET discussion guide for the Ohio Lottery Research.

            The MET discussion process is great for an in-depth analysis of the thoughts and feelings of individuals. Recent studies have begun to uncover some limitations with this technique. Wan (2011), found that some individuals have an increasingly difficult time developing their own metaphors for this process (p. 262).

            In this example, the process is thorough and seeks to understand the person who is being interviewed. It asks the same question multiple times to gauge if the response will differ. Overall, the layout of this MET discussion is adequate for what the researchers are trying to accomplish, with the assumption that the participants can express themselves in this medium.

References

English Standard Version Bible. (2021). ESV Bible.                                                https://www.esv.org/.

Forsberg, A., & Rantala, A. (2020). The being taken seriously questionnaire—development          and Psychometric Evaluation of a Prem measure for person-centeredness in a high-tech           hospital environment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public            Health, 17(8), 2660. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17082660

Kokko, S., & Lagerkvist, C. J. (2016). Using Zaltman metaphor elicitation technique to map             beneficiaries’ experiences and values. American Journal of Evaluation, 38(2), 205–225.             https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016649054

McLauchlan, J., Browne, M., Russell, A. M., & Rockloff, M. (2020). Evaluating the reliability    and validity of the Short Gambling Harm Screen: Are binary scales worse than Likert   scales at capturing gambling harm? Journal of Gambling Issues, 44.         https://doi.org/10.4309/jgi.2020.44.6

Schindler, P. S. (2021). Business research methods (14th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Schoonenboom, J., & Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design.             KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie, 69(S2), 107–131.             https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1

Wan, W. (2011). An examination of the validity of Metaphor Analysis Studies. Metaphor and the             Social World, 1(2), 261–287. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.1.2.07wan

Wynd, C. A., Schmidt, B., & Schaefer, M. A. (2003). Two quantitative approaches for      estimating content validity. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25(5), 508–518.             https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945903252998

Gentile, C., Spiller, N., & Noci, G. (2007). How to sustain the customer experience: European     Management Journal, 25(5), 395–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2007.08.005

Gilmartin-Thomas, J. F. M., Liew, D., & Hopper, I. (2018). Observational studies and their utility for practice. Australian Prescriber, 41(3), 82–85. https://doi.org/10.18773/austprescr.2018.017

King James Version Bible. (2021). King James Bible Online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

Lu, C. Y. (2009). Observational studies: A review of study designs, challenges and strategies to reduce confounding. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 63(5), 691–697. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02056.x

Punjaisri, K., & Wilson, A. (2017). The role of internal branding in the delivery of employee brand promise. Advances in Corporate Branding, 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-352-00008-5_6

Sassoli de Bianchi, M. (2012). The observer effect. Foundations of Science, 18(2), 213–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-012-9298-3

Shin, J., & Sudhir, K. (2010). A customer management dilemma: When is it profitable to reward one's own customers? Marketing Science, 29(4), 671–689. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1090.0547

Stalker, K., Carpenter, J., Connors, C., & Phillips, R. (2004). Ethical issues in social research: Difficulties encountered gaining access to children in hospital for research. Child: Care, Health and Development, 30(4), 377–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2004.00426.x