Different Types of Research Strategy - Assignment Example

Reflections on Research Methods Which type of research strategy is employed in each study and what is its purpose? (10 marks) According to Bryman(2004, p. 19), many writers on research methods hold that it is useful to classify research strategies into two main types or that we have two distinctive clusters of research strategy: quantitative and qualitative research. According to Bryman (2004, p. 19), research strategy is “general orientation to the conduct of social research”. Quantitative research is a research strategy that employs data collection and analysis involving deductive methods, theory testing, positivism, incorporation of the practices and norms of the scientific method applied on the natural world, and consideration of social reality as merely external and objective reality. In contrast, according to Bryman (2004, p. 19-20), qualitative research is a research strategy that emphasizes words instead of quantification, inductive methods and theory generation, rejection of conventions of the natural scientific methods, and consideration of social reality as a constantly shifting interpretation of the individual on their world. For Strauss and Corbin (1998, p. 11), qualitative research is “any type of research that produces findings not arrived at by statistical procedures or other means of quantification”. Despite the emphasis on theory building, Bryman (2004, p. 20) said that there are also many studies that have used qualitative research to test theories. Thus, for Bryman (2004, p. 20), the fundamental differences between the quantitative and qualitative research strategies are indicated by the following table: Based on the said categories, the work of Gordon et al. (2009) is a qualitative research strategy while the work of Lyons and Schneider (2009) is a quantitative research strategy. The purpose of the Gordon et al. (2009) study was to describe how various forms of power shape organization members’ ethical practices (p. 73). On the other hand, the purpose of the Lyons and Schneider (2009) study was to examine the effect of leadership styles on the individuals’ performance of stressful tasks and “on perceived social support, self-efficacy beliefs, emotions, and stressor appraisals” (p. 737). In addition, the Lyons and Schneider (2009) study also investigated whether the said variables also affected the relationship between leadership style and performance (p. 737). 2. What might the benefits be of using multiple methods of data collection? (15 marks) Multiple methods of data collection provide a way for validating the findings suggested by the other forms of data collection and analysis. Each method of data collection has its own specific set of strengths and weaknesses. Thus, with multiple methods, it is possible for the weakness of one method to address by the strength of another method. If findings are consistent across methods of data collection then we can conclude that the research findings are validated across methods of research. Multiple or mixed methods are relative new in the social and human sciences (Cresswell 2003, p. 209). The use of multiple methods provides multiple triangulation (Denzin 2006, p. 309). In turn, triangulation is used to reduce the possibility of bias and improve validity although the use of triangulation is also criticized (Blaikie 2006, p. 333). 3. Reliability: a. What threats to reliability are inherent in each research design? (7 Marks) Reliability pertains to consistency of findings (Bailey 1994, p. 72). In the study of Lyons and Schneider (2009), the threat to reliability can arise from the sample size as well as the sample used for the study. The use of small samples will likely imply that various studies using the same methodology will yield inconsistent findings. At the same time, results may be highly variable across several types of population, across time, and across cultures. In the case of the study of Gordon et al. (2009), the threats to reliability can arise from the researchers that would undertake the study. It is highly like that in processing the data, the cultural bias and background of the researchers will influence how data would be interpreted. In turn the interpretation of data and processing of data will influence how the findings would be phrased. b. How might threats to reliability be overcome? (8 Marks) In my opinion, on the case of the Lyons and Schneider (2009) study, the threats to reliability can be addressed better by using a larger sample size and limiting to what extent the findings can be generalized. For instance, it can be specified that the findings may be appropriate for a specific population only. Meanwhile, threats to the validity of the Gordon et al. (2009) study can be handled better through focused group discussion in which the subject of the study are mobilized to interpret the nature of their social action. This approach would most likely yield a better description of how “the forms of power” influence ethical practice in New South Wales Police Service. 4. Drawing on each research case, state why is it important to consider epistemology and ontology when undertaking research? (30 Marks) The work of Gordon et al. (2009) proceeds from the epistemological standpoint of critical realism. The fundamental assumption of the work is the power structure can shape how members of an organization would view ethical practices and proceeded to describe how this has been so in the case of the New South Wales Police. An epistemological perspective gave the work of Gordon et al. (2009) the tools for building the appropriate or valid questions to ask and the social items or phenomena from which they may find the appropriate explanations to the questions they have asked. Thus, the Gordon et al. (2009) study explained that ethical change is “deeply embedded in power relations that traverse the scale of social action” (Gordon et al. 2009, p. 73). The work of Gordon et al. (2009) was guided by the ontological position of constructivism. It has assumed in its research that ethical practices are not meanings divorced from social practice but are in fact products of social practice. By doing so, the Gordon was in a position to advance knowledge as early as day 1 of their research because the Gordon et al. (2009) study has focused on the question of HOW. Without the ontological position that they have adopted they may have not focused on such a question and, thus, how the power relationship has shaped the ethical practices of the New South Wales Police could not have been described. In contrast, the work of Lyons and Schneider (2009) proceeded from the epistemological standpoint of positivism. Lyons and Schneider (2009) used a deductive approach. Drawing from the work of B. Bass’ on leadership styles (transactional, laissez-faire, and transformational), Lyons and Schneider (2009, p. 738-740) formulated several hypotheses on their effects on individual performance on a stressful task. Lyons and Schneider also tested them through statistical analysis using MANOVA and found there was significant multivariate effect of leadership condition on the manipulation check scales (Lyons and Schneider 2009, p. 742). They also found that univariate tests indicated that leadership condition significantly influenced the several scales that they have devised (Lyons and Schneider 2009, p. 742). However, the Lyons and Schneider study employed videos to evoke various perceptions of leadership who provided the task instructions (p. 742). Lyons and Schneider interpreted their result to mean that transformational leadership is beneficial not only for performance but also when other variables like social support, efficacy beliefs, negative emotions, and stressor appraisal’s are considered. There was no assessment whether the subjects of the study appropriately associated the videos with the leadership notions of Bass adopted by Lyons and Schneider. It is possible that the videos have meanings for the subject that were not consistent with the categories of Bass. Thus, the work of Lyons and Schneider follows an ontological view consistent with objectivism. According to Bryman (2004, p. 11), epistemology concerns what is or what should be regarded as acceptable knowledge. For example, one epistemological viewpoint is positivism that holds that acceptable knowledge consists of those that can be confirmed by the methods of the natural sciences (Bryman 2004, p. 11). This is the position of positivism. According to Bryman (2004, p. 11), the positivism holds that knowledge must be confirmable by the senses (principle of phenomenalism), theory must be able to generate testable hypotheses (principle of deductivism), knowledge is reached through facts that provide the basis for laws (principle of inductivism), science is value-free, and that we can distinguish between scientific and normative statements. Another epistemological position is that of realism. Other than positivism, Bryman (2004, p. 12-15) said that the other epistemological viewpoints are realism and interpretivism. Realism agrees with positivism that both natural and social sciences should use the same approaches with regard to data collection and analysis (Bryman 2004, p. 12). However, there are two types of realism (Bryman 2004, p. 12). Empirical realism, also known as native realism, hold that there is perfect or near-perfect correspondence between reality and the words used to describe it while critical realism holds that we will be able to understand our social world if are able to identify and change the structures that generate the events and discourse related to them (Bryman 2004, p. 12). Thus, the former is unable “to recognize that there are enduring structures and generative mechanisms underlying and producing the observable phenomena” (Bryman 2004, p. 12). Interpretivism is “an alternative to positivist orthodoxy” and holds that to understanding society and social action a “strategy is required that respects the differences between people and the objects of the natural sciences” and draws from the notions of verstehen, hermeneutic-phenomenological tradition, and symbolic interactionism (Bryman 2004, p. 13). The emphasis of Weber’s verstehen is that social science is an interpretative understanding of social action (Bryman 2004, p. 13). Hermeneutics is “concerned with the theory and method of the interpretation of human action” (Bryman 2004, 13). Phenomenology stresses that the quest for knowledge involves making sense of the world and, thus, interpretative understanding is part of the quest for knowledge (Bryman 2004, p. 13). Mead and Blumer’s symbolic interactionism argue that interaction takes place that individuals are continually interpreting the symbolic meaning of his or her environment and act based on imputed meanings (Bryman 2004, p. 14). Meanwhile, according to Bryman (2004, p. 16), ontology addresses the “question of whether social entities can and should be considered objective entities that have a reality external to social actors, or whether they can and should be considered social construction built upon from the perceptions and actions of social actors” (Bryman 2004, p. 16). One ontological view is objectivism that considers social phenomena as external facts beyond our reach or influences (Bryman 2004, p. 16). Another ontological view is constructionism that holds that social phenomena and their meanings are continually being redefined by social actors (Bryman 2004, p. 16-17). One emphasis of constructionism is that the “categories that people employ in helping them understand the natural and social world are in fact social products” (Bryman 2004, p. 18). 5. What criticisms might you make of each research? (Marks 30) On the work of Gordon et al. (2009), my major criticism revolves on the efficiency of the method used for the research. As discussed by Gordon et al. (2009, p. 78), the method used was ethnography: over a period of two years, a police unit was observed in their everyday work activities. The first three months were spent talking the members of the police command (Gordon et al. 2009, p. 78) and interviews followed ranging from 10 minutes to 3 hours. The data accumulated involved 250 research hours of data covering 34 interviews along with field notes and other data that amounted to 68 documents and 14,840 paragraphs of text data (Gordon et al. 2009, p. 79). The text data were processed using computer software. In my opinion, the study question “how do forms of power shape organizational members’ ethical practices?” might have been addressed better through focused group discussions. Doing a focus group discussion would likely involve less time and would provide instantaneous validation of claims through counterchecks by participants in the focused group discussion itself and by the researcher themselves through follow-up questions. Moreover, the research questions can be directly addressed and the focused group discussion can provide a mechanism to prevent an unwarranted or inappropriate researcher interpretation of data. The focused group discussion can provide the mechanism itself for the study participants to describe “how forms of power shaped members’ ethical practices”. Moreover, the focused group discussion might have been less costly. Further, the ethnography written based on focused group discussion could have used categories that are more faithful to the situation. The methods employed by Gordon et al. (2009) do not provide enough check that would prevent a researcher’s gross misinterpretation of the events that have been narrated to them by the study subjects. In contrast, by constructing good questions, the perspective of subjects to the research questions can be unadulterated even as the researchers provide supplementary or additional interpretations. On the work of Lyons and Schneider (2009), my major concern is that the categories used by Lyons and Schneider like transactional, laissez-faire, and transformational may not be appropriate to the setting of the subjects, especially as only a video was used to approximate the said notions. Further, a research subject’s reaction or response to real life settings may be different from the reactions he or she may have from a video. Thus, the Lyons and Schneider study looks grand but the findings may be invalid. Reference Bailey, K., 1994. Methods of social research. 4th ed. New York: The Free Press. Blaikie, N., 2006. A critique of the use of triangulation in social research. In: de Vaus, D., ed. Research Design Volume 4. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 331-354. Bryman, A., 2004. Social research methods. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Creswell, J., 2007. Qualitative inquiry & research Design: Choosing among five approaches. 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Denzin, N., 2006. Strategies of multiple triangulation. In: de Vaus, D., ed. Research Design Volume 4. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 309-330. Gordon, R., Clegg, S., and Kornberger, M., 2009. Embedded ethics: Discourse and power in the New South Wales Police Service. Organization Studies, Lyons, B. and Schneider, T., 2009. The effect of leadership style on stress outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 737-748. Straus, A. and Corbin, J., 1998. Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Read More