Matching Data Collection Strategies to a Wondering
There are two main methods of collecting data. The first being quantitative while the second is qualitative. Whereas quantitative methods rely on the use of instruments to collect either random samples or structured data, qualitative methods of data collection provide relevant information that helps in explaining observed results while at the same time assessing changes and making reports (Drennan, 2008). Thus quantitative methods of data are based on empirical evidence which creates results that can be mathematically be compared, summarized and generalized while qualitative methods of data emphasize on analyzing the perception of the researcher accrued from evaluation of survey questionnaires, hypotheses as well as other data collected as quantitative findings. Griffiths, (2008) lists that quantitative methods of collecting data include; experiments, clinical trials, observing and recording defined events, extracting information from management information system and administering surveys through questionnaires, face to face or telephone interviews. Qualitative methods of data collection include in-depth interview, document review and observation methods.
Quantitative data collection methods are the best suited for collecting empirical evidences such as the case in question. Specifically administering surveys through questionnaires, face to face or telephone interviews is the most preferred because it gives practical values enabling the determination of outlier data that is discarded. Administering survey by use of questionnaires is practical because data can be collected using a wide array of tools among them being paper and pencil questionnaires and web based questionnaires (Gauch, 2003). The other advantage of using questionnaires is that they use checklists and rating scales which enable the researcher to indent information that will be discarded. The process of disregarding certain data can further be facilitated by drawing graphical representation of data and introducing a line of best fit whereby the data that is cut along the line is regarded as being useful.
Ethical considerations define both legal and moral boundaries that are binding between a researcher and the interviewer. In this case a researcher is obligated to protect confidentiality of the respondents and only disclose vital information about them after seeking consent of disclosure (Chance & Rossman, 2005). Also there are copyright laws and international conventional liberties that are binding when a researcher issuing secondary sources of data. This research dealing in collection of information using questionnaires is prone to ethical considerations regarding privacy of the respondents. Another ethical consideration concerns truthful answering of questionnaires with utmost openness and in the event that the respondent encounters a sensitive question; they are at liberty to skip it. Among other ethical principles relevant to this quantitative research is the need for preserving confidentiality, ensuring informed consent and lastly managing conflict of interest.
In collecting quantitative data to match up for the wondering, I considered AERA and APA standards into listing potential sources of data. Essentially there are two sources of data namely primary and secondary. Given the dire need to collect firsthand information that will be essential in quantifying the data collected, primary sources ranked higher than secondary sources which came in handy while analyzing the raw data collected from recorded from filled in questionnaires (Arieli & Cohen, 2011). Primary sources of data are preferred because it presents information that has never been collected or analyzed before. Also, primary data is credible if the information was collected in the rightful manner.
Arieli, T. & Cohen, N. (2011). Field research in conflict environments: Methodological challenges and snowball sampling. Journal of Peace Research 48 (4), 2011.
Chance, B. L & Rossman, A. J., (2005). “Preface”. Investigating Statistical Concepts, Applications and Methods. New York: Duxbury Press.
Drennan, R. D. (2008). “Statistics in archaeology”. In Pearsall, Deborah M. Encyclopedia of Archaeology. Elsevier Inc. pp. 2093–2100.
Gauch, H. (2003). Scientific method in practice. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Griffiths, M. (2008). Educational research for social justice: getting off the fence. Doing qualitative research in educational settings. (3rd Ed.) New York: Open University Press.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.[order_calculator]