Introduction
There are two methodological approaches in social research namely quantitative and qualitative approach. Quantitative research is a genre which uses a special language which appears to exhibit some similarity to the ways in which scientists talk about how they investigate the natural order of variables, control, measurement, experiment. This superficial imagery reflects the tendency for quantitative research to be under-pinned by a natural science model (Bryman 1995). Quantitative research’s goal is to make use of mathematical data to understand natural phenomena. In some instances Quantitative research allows the use of proxies as temporary replacements for quantities that cannot be directly measured. In contrast, qualitative researchers usually observe from a phenomenological perspective; they immerse themselves in natural environments and watch a situation as a diffuse, ambiguous entity and allow themselves to be struck with certain peculiarities or interesting happenings (Potter 1996). Qualitative research intends to find theories that would explain the relationship of one variable with another variable through qualitative elements or components in research. These qualitative elements do not have standard measures; rather, they are behavior, attitudes, opinions, and beliefs. The qualitative research is described as multi-method in focus, involving an interpretative, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. A qualitative researching procedure acts on studying things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of situations, or interpret events in terms of the meanings people bring to them.
Part 1
The research questions for each article
One often thinks of research as a cumulative endeavor by which bricks of empirical evidence are laid one on top of the other to form a building of knowledge. Long before the building is complete, people often construct theories to predict the building’s looks and functionality, and further research provides additional bricks of knowledge that can be used to confirm, or refine, the theories. Although this architectural analogy may bear a close similarity to how research and theory progress in the natural sciences, people would argue that the analogy is more of an idealization than a reality when dealing with educational research. In many cases, the construction or refinement of a theory is hampered by the very technique used to answer research questions. That is, the techniques and measures used to answer research questions, especially in the early stages of developing a theory, drive both the kinds of research questions one can ask and the refinement of the theory itself. Having a set of well-defined research questions precedes the selection of measuring techniques for investigating them (Kelly & Lesh 2000). For the research on Digital living the main research question focuses on knowing the changing patterns of social innovation of the internet. Other questions include how to understand some of the policy and commercial opportunities the internet presents. For the research on Internet Use and sociability in China the research question focuses on how Internet users deal with their online and offline worlds. Other questions that the paper would touch on include what would happen if one of the worlds of internet user gets affected by the other world.
Methodological approach
Until relatively recently, the verb research was somewhat confined in the methods to choose among, but now the possibilities are highly varied. Contemporary educational researchers can borrow from the methodological advances in the traditional associated disciplines as well as from the newer methodologies that have gained acceptance in the field of education. Previous skepticism about the validity of methods outside the narrow domain of experimental research has given way to a more healthy respect for a wide range of methods which have contributed to the advancement of education. The beginner, however, should beware that the more eclectic approach to educational research presents risk of a decline in research standards (Anderson 1998). The best researchers are experts in the methodology they follow. Those who combine methods and appear to take more licenses, normally have a sound grounding in the separate methods which they use in combinations. The best route to valid research is to learn the various methods systematically and in depth. Whatever the approach one follows, there should be a thorough description of the key ingredients, enabling any other researcher to understand what was done and replicate it if he or she so desires. The precise nature of the information varies according to the method chosen and what follows is a generalized schema with qualifications noted when appropriate (Anderson 1998). The research on Digital living made use of a combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies while the research on Internet use and sociability in China made use of solely quantitative methodologies.
Methods employed
Surveys and experiments are probably the main vehicles of quantitative research. The analysis of previously collected data, like official statistics on crime, suicide, unemployment, health, and so on, can be subsumed within the tradition of quantitative research. Because concepts in the social sciences are frequently believed to be abstract, there is seen to be a need to provide operational definitions whereby their degrees of variation and co-variation may be measured. Data are collected by questionnaires or other data gathering devices. Once the survey or experimental data have been collected, they are then analyzed so that the causal connection specified by the hypothesis can be verified or rejected. The resulting findings then feed back into, and are absorbed by, the theory that set the whole process going in the first place (Bryman 1992).The research on Digital living made use of surveys wherein the sample was randomly selected. In the survey two sets of questionnaires were used. A household questionnaire was completed by the head of household and individual questionnaires were completed by all individuals older than the age of 1. After completing some of the quantitative survey fieldwork, a selection of households were approached for qualitative study. These studies include structured and unstructured interviews, photo records and prompt-based discussions, and repeat visits. The research on internet use and sociability in China made use of surveys. Two data sets are used in that study. Both surveys asked the same questions, they are separately analyzed to account for differences in interview modes and social contexts.
Results of the studies
The main result of the study on Digital living focused on the idea that very few of the changes in time spent on primary and secondary activities can be significantly associated with gaining or losing Internet access at home. The results of the study showed that retirement from a job that involved computer or Internet access at the place of work can trigger home computer ownership and subsequently access to the Internet. The study suggests that changes to an individual’s access to the Internet in his or her home are having very little immediate and significant impact on the time one spends on other activities. The study suggests that social changes may also trigger changes in access to and usage of applications and services delivered via the Internet. The study on internet use and sociability in China found out that age did not appear to be a useful predictor of household socializing time .The study found out that education seems to be a useful predictor of households socializing only in the mainland Chinese sample. Both the mainland Chinese and Hong Kong samples displayed a different pattern in Internet use from that of their U.S. counterparts. Of the different demographic characteristics examined, age stood out to be the strongest predictor of socialization with friends in both mainland China and Hong Kong. Some differences emerged in terms of the relationship between the four other demographic variables and socialization with friends. Education, family income and marital status were not found to be correlated with socializing with friends in either mainland China or Hong Kong samples. The study suggested that Internet usage was found to be unrelated to socializing with friends.
Part 2
Utility of the research questions
Before analyzing data researchers must be clear about the question they are trying to answer. This will dictate the broad type of analysis they choose. Once researchers have decided that they need to use a bivariate technique, they will then need to choose between ranges of such techniques. In practice researchers develop and refine their research questions in the process of analysis so they move between univariate, bivariate and multivariate techniques. There are a variety of types of research questions varying from descriptive to more complex explanatory problems. Often these different types of research questions can represent different stages within the one study. Initially researchers might be interested simply in describing a phenomenon, but then the why questions about causes develops. As researchers proceed they might focus on one particular cause and then start asking more complex questions about that particular factor (De Vaus1996). The task of clarifying research questions is a process rather than a once-and-for-all task which is completed at the beginning of a study. The process of focusing a research question requires knowledge of the field, an understanding of previous research, an awareness of research gaps and knowledge of how other research in the area has been conducted (De Vaus1996). The research questions in the first and second study were carefully embedded in the whole study. The research questions for both studies gave clearer direction for the researchers on the focus of the study and the main targets for data gathering and data analysis. The research questions for both studies focused on pointing out the goal of the research method used.
Methodological limitations and issues
Over the past decades methods for the analysis of visual materials, performance approaches, and an understanding of methods as poetics or interventionary narrative have all become important. Students of anthropology, cultural studies and sociology have grappled with ways of thinking about and describing decentred subjectivities and the geographical complexities that arise when intimacy no longer necessarily implies proximity. There is also a developing sense that global flows are uncertain, unpredictable indeed chaotic in the mathematical sense (Law 2004). Research in education and the social sciences has changed dramatically over the past few decades. With few exceptions, the typical research training in universities focused on statistics, measurement, and experimental methods, with little or no attention to other approaches to research. Research methods and theory are often taught separately and portrayed as being different kinds of ideas (DeMarrais & Lapan 2004). Theory is taught as attempts to understand the world that have a history and thus are tentative, historically specific, and ultimately subject to the results of continued research. Research methods are often characterized as the arbiters of theory. As such researchers and students are often left with the understanding that methods are different from theory (DeMarrais & Lapan 2004).
When research is taught as a series of techniques, students learn that there are right and wrong ways to do whatever methodology being taught. The implicit and often explicit lesson is that research methods are not like ideas. As arbiters of theory, methods have a higher status than theory and have explicit rules that separate good from bad ways to know (DeMarrais & Lapan 2004). Research methods are imminently accessible. These methods do not differ qualitatively from people’s everyday practices of observing events and making sense of them (Schwab 1999).Research methods have two advantages for obtaining knowledge, and that these are only advantages when research is appropriately conducted and reported. First, research methods properly conducted address questions systematically. Researchers carefully collect scores from cases using measures that are suitable for the question asked. Analysis of these scores is thoughtfully performed, and results obtained are carefully interpreted; probable limitations are acknowledged. Second, research properly performed is a public process. The methods employed are reported along with the results and interpretations. This second characteristic is desirable so that others may evaluate research results and, if desired, repeat the research under similar or different conditions. Research methods, as well as results, are made available by researchers so that others may critically evaluate the research. This second characteristic of research is important for research reports (Schwab 1999). The methodologies for both studies covered only a small part of the sample. This does not help in gathering the thoughts of the general public and it focused on the smaller aspects of a population. The methodological limitations did not affect the results of the studies and it did not change the results of the studies but it opened up newer needs to study a bigger population with a similar topic.
How could the limitations be resolved?
The limitations could be resolved through widening the scope of topic and choosing a larger population. By doing this a more general consensus would be gathered and more ideas can be gathered.
Conclusion
For the research on Digital living the main research question focuses on knowing the changing patterns of social innovation of the internet. For the research on Internet Use and sociability in China the research question focuses on how Internet users deal with their online and offline worlds. The research on Digital living made use of a combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies while the research on Internet use and sociability in China made use of solely quantitative methodologies. The main result of the study on Digital living focused on the idea that very few of the changes in time spent on primary and secondary activities can be significantly associated with gaining or losing Internet access at home. The study on internet use and sociability in China found out that age did not appear to be a useful predictor of household socializing time. The study suggested that Internet usage was found to be unrelated to socializing with friends. The research questions in the first and second study were carefully embedded in the whole study. The research questions for both studies gave clearer direction for the researchers on the focus of the study and the main targets for data gathering and data analysis. The research questions for both studies focused on pointing out the goal of the research method used.
References
Anderson, G 1998, Fundamentals of educational research,
Falmer, London.
Anderson, B & Tracey, K 2001, ‘Digital living the impact
(or otherwise) of the internet on everyday life’, American
Behavioral Scientist, vol.45, no.2, pp. 456-475.
Bryman, A 1995, Research methods and organization studies,
Routledge, London.
Bryman, A 1992, Quantity and Quality in social research,
Routledge, London.
DeMarrais, K & Lapan, SD (eds.) 2004, Foundations for
research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social
sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
De Vaus, D 1996, Surveys in social research, UCL Press,
London.
Kelly, AE & Lesh, RA (eds.) 2000, Handbook of research
design in mathematics and science education, Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Law, J 2004, After method: Mess in social science research,
Routledge, New York.
Lee, BK & Zhu, JJ 2002, ‘Internet use and sociability in
Mainland China’, IT & Society, vol. 1, no.1, pp.219-237.
Potter, WJ 1996, An analysis of thinking and research about
Qualitative methods, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah,
NJ.
Schwab, DP 1999, Research methods for organizational
studies, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment