Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chapter 1 Lesson 1 Characteristics Stren
Chapter 1 Lesson 1 Characteristics Stren
Chapter 1 Lesson 1 Characteristics Stren
INTRODUCTION
Quantitative research designs use numbers in stating generalizations about a given problem or
inquiry in contrast to qualitative research that hardly uses statistical treatment in stating
generalizations. '
These numbers are the results of objective scales of measurements of the units of analysis
called variables.
Research findings are subjected to statistical treatment to determine significant relationships or
differences between variables, the results of which are the bases for generalization about phenomena.
Weaknesses
1. Quantitative research can be costly, difficult and time-consuming- difficult because most
researchers are non-mathematicians. '
2. Quantitative studies require extensive statistical treatment, requiring stringent standards, more
so with confirmation of results. When ambiguities in some findings surface, retesting and
refinement of the design call for another investment in time and resources to polish the results.
3. Quantitative methods also tend to turn out only proved or unproven results, leaving little room
for uncertainty, or grey areas. For the social sciences, education, anthropology and psychology,
human nature is a lot more complex than just a simple yes or no response.
(https://explorable.com/quantitative-research-design.)
Experimental research design allows the researcher to control the situation. In so doing, it
allows the researcher to answer the question, "What causes something to occur?" This kind of research
also allows the researcher to identify cause and effect relationships between variables and to
distinguish placebo effects from treatment effects. Further, this research design supports the ability to
limit alternative explanations and to infer direct causal relationships in the study; the approach provides
the highest level of evidence for single studies.
Pre-experimental types of research apply to experimental. designs with the least internal
validity. One type of pre-experiment, the single group, pre-test-post-test design, measures the group
two times, before and after the intervention.
Instead of comparing the pretest with the posttest within one group, the posttest of the treated groups is
compared with that of an untreated group. Measuring the effect as the difference between groups marks
this as between-subjects design. Assuming both groups experienced the same time-related influences,
the comparison group feature should protect this design from the rival explanations that threaten the
within-subject design.
Two classes of experimental designs can provide better internal validity than-pre -experimental
designs: quasi-experimental and true experimental (Dooly, 1999).
In a quasi-experimental design, the researcher can collect more data, either by scheduling more
observations or finding more existing measures.
A true experimental design controls for both time-related and group-related threats. Two
features mark true experiments- two or more differently treated groups and random assignment to these
groups. These features require that the researchers have control over the experimental treatment and
the power to place subjects in groups.
True experimental design employs both treated and control groups to deal with time-related rival
explanations.
A control group reflects changes other than those due to the treatment that occur during the
time of the study. Such changes include effects of outside events, maturation by the subjects, changes
in measures and impact of any pre-tests.
True experimental design offers the highest internal validity of all the designs. Quasi-
experimental design differs from true experimental design by the absence of random assignment of
subjects to different conditions. What quasi-experiments have in common with true experiments is that
some subjects receive an intervention and provide data likely to reflect its impact.