Theme 4: Quantitative research PRE

I read this: “Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying”by Larry D. Rosen, L. Mark Carrier and Nancy A. Cheever, published in Computers in Human Behavior (Impact Factor: 2.067) Volume 29, Issue 3, May 2013, Pages 948–9581.

1.      Which quantitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?

As briefly descried as possible the papers main concern was the following question: “How do such technological distractions impact academic learning?”

Method used: Using a study observation form, observers watched participants for 15 min who were told to do important studies. Observers were trained to perform the observation, and picked the participants for the study themselves. Before the observation started, “pre-data” which described the environment were gathered (study location, technologies/devices present at the study location, amount of windows/programs open at a computer). Actual studying was called on-task and distraction/other tasks were called off-tasks. The observer measured the amount of tasks, time spent on each task and what kind of tasks it was. After the min-by-min observation the participants were asked questions from a questionnaire formed by previously acknowledged scales/surveys regarding phone usage, social networking usage, amount of technology distraction present, school performance, preference for task-switching, technology attitudes, and study strategies. At the end they had a qualitative questionnaire (which is irrelevant for this question). However, the combination of a quantitative and qualitative method is interesting, a specific quantitative method, like the observation here, allows for a specific kind of qualitative data at the same time.  

Benefits: Observations are time-consuming, using a study observation form and trained observers makes it less time-consuming and more observations possible. Observations makes it possible for the participant to focus on the actual task without having to worry about forgetting any data. Observers can focus on only gathering data and nothing else, which might make it more accurate. It’s happening in the actual environment in real-time. Another benefit is that the data from the questionnaire and the observations can be measured, compared, and described. Good to support or contradict the hypothesis given.

Limitations: Despite that trained observers are used, the amount of observations are limited. It’s also time-consuming, resulting in 15 min observations in this study, more time would probably have given more accurate and generalizable results. Observers can make mistakes. In this study observers choose participants who they knew, which could affect the result. The participants were aware that they were being observed, which could influence the result as well. It relies on scales/surveys from other sources which themselves have a reliability.

2.      What did you learn about quantitative methods from reading the paper?

Quantitative observations can be made more efficiently with the help of observation-forms and trained observers. It is a good way to check a specific hypothesis. It’s a good way to compare and analyze data, from different groups for example. It can involve many errors which are to be accounted and prepared for.

3.      Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the quantitative method or methods have been improved?

A second observer could’ve observed the observer and so on. If possible, the participant could’ve been observed without knowing it. The observers could’ve chosen people they don’t know which could’ve lead to less or more accurate results. They could’ve been observed for more time and also more participants could’ve been observed. The participants could’ve given more time to answer the questionnaire, maybe by doing it into a web-based survey (which would’ve resulted in other potential errors).  

Fondell, E., Lagerros, Y. T., Sundberg, C. J., Lekander, M., Bälter, O., Rothman, K., & Bälter, K. (2010). Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(2), 272-279.

”Reflect on the key points and what you learnt by reading the text”: I don’t know if it’s the key points concerning the method used or the purpose of the paper. However, the web based questionnaires seems to be a good choice in order to find and compare relationships between different attributes and URTI. For example the study resulted in the conclusion that people with high physical activity reduces the chance of getting URTI, especially for those who feel more stressed. One thing I acknowledge was that they didn’t only look at the numbers from the quantitative data, but presupposed factors influenza seasons which could affect the results etc.

1.      Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?

When you want to use statistics on a large amount of participants/data/variables in order to analyze, compare between groups, find relationships between them. This allows for results that easily can disagree or agree with questions and hypothesis. However you’re bound to numbers, measurable stuff, which makes it harder to investigate further than the numbers let you, a lot can be described in accurate measurable stuff tho. It also allows for objective data and not subjective. The results from quantitative data can be compared to data from other studies to strengthen a theory etc. Depending on the source of data, if it’s random etc, it can be generalized to some level.

2.      Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?

Let’s data be described in other than numbers. The participant can provide with something new to the research when they’re not “being measured”, instead they can express their subjective view regarding the topic. This can result in data containing many different and varying responses. It can also answer to why a different relation between two variables from quantitative data occurred. Qualitative data can be harder to get in greater amounts, compared to quantitative, often because it takes time to gather and analyze. This can affect the generalizability since the amount of data is actually less and can be varying.