Observational Research, Essay Example

The ‘Friendliest’ Friend

Everyone has that friend that justifies everything and “proves” that they are right. In the case study from the text, that friend convinces himself that he is friendly 95 percent of the time, yet his study process (from beginning to end) is fundamentally flawed. To be able to explain this, the nature of these flaws must first be understood and compared against accepted research practice, and better practices must be recommended for any such future study. That friend may soon discover that his gloating, as at least one conversation, is not as friendly as he believed.

Research Methodology

In our text, a variety of qualitative research methods were described. First, both direct and indirect observational methods were discussed in detail; that friend did not choose to utilize these methods in their study. (As the skeptic, our response could include such information in rebuttal, citing archival documentation which proves that the friend was charged with disturbing the peace.) Did the participants respond in one manner and indicate the opposite with their facial expressions or say, “Yeah right!” with a laugh?

Validity

Everyone knows that the friend is, well, full of it. However, supporting this conclusion must be done systematically, because this friend can obviously arrange any gap in reasoning to support their own ends. Through proper sampling, minimalization of bias, and the integration of the scientific method, disproving the friend’s findings is easy.

Sampling

One of the first considerations involves sampling and its direct correlation to validity and reliability. Such methods include representative sampling, time sampling, and situation sampling (Zechmeister, YEAR). In the friend’s “friendliness” study, representative sampling could consist of the typical range of their interactions, time sampling could consist of a certain number of hours, days, months, etc., and situation sampling could consist of observing the same conversational behavior as it would be received at home, at a religious gathering, at work, etc. In the example, the friend chose to close the study after the 50th conversation, excluding the time sampling approach. It is unclear whether the friend’s sampling is representative or situational, because it is not stated whether it was a Saturday and his last 50 conversations were with himself, his cat, or his mother. While this seems a harsh indictment of research practice, this kind of study is more common than most people realize.

Bias

Prior to beginning the study, the friend has already concluded that they are friendly. They have no desire or intent to find otherwise. This is a case of obvious bias for the researcher. Nonetheless, the research itself displays evidence of this intent. For example, the only answer options are Neutral, Friendly, and Very Friendly. The 5 percent of neutral respondents may have answered with the most negative response available, which may not have represented their true feelings about the subject.

Scientific Method

The friend has indeed come up with a theory and a research practice which would undoubtedly ‘prove’ that even people who did not know him would find him friendly—or at least not unfriendly. Current experimental design attempts to integrate the scientific method more completely into the qualitative research design; however, even experimental designs utilize carefully-analyzed guidelines (Tate & Douglas, 2011).

Recommendations

It is impossible to define the parameters of friendly conversation, because various nuances of connotation and denotation, tone, context, personal history, etc. cannot be objectively studied. In such a situation, qualitative research is the most valid option for the study of human behavior and psychology. For sampling, the friend ought to For the actual implementation of the study, the Likert scale would be a more appropriate measure of the range of responses (Massof, 2004). On such a 5-item scale, the responses would consist of options such as Very Unfriendly, Slightly Unfriendly, Neutral, Slightly Friendly, and Very Friendly. This considers degrees of agreement which our friend’s answer choices did not.

Conclusion

Study methodology is not a buffet. Selecting one aspect here and one aspect there does not equal the time-honored approaches of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research, nor do mixed methods studies operate free of careful guidelines (Creswell, 2008). Our friend’s study came to the conclusion that it was rigged for: that the friend is the friendliness, and everyone else is fighting for second place. While the example seems ridiculously simple, many readers do not apply the same critical thinking to their examination of research articles and may accept incomplete, flawed, or clearly biased conclusions which were published by another one of the ‘friendliest’ of friends.

References

Creswell, J. (2008). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA. Print.

Massof, R. W. (2004). Likert and Guttman scaling of visual function rating scale questionnaires. Ophthalmic Epidemiology, 11(5), 381-399. doi:10.1080/09286580490888771

Tate, R., & Douglas, J. (2011). Use of Reporting Guidelines in Scientific Writing: Prisma, Consort, Strobe, Stard and Other Resources. Brain Impairment, 12(1), 1-21. doi:10.1375/brim.12.1.1

Zechmeister, . ( ). Chapter 4: 81-111. Print.