Proposed and Justified Research Method and Design - Essay Example

Proposed and Justified Research Method and Design Proposed and Justified Research Method and Design Criteria of Selecting Research Methodology In selecting a research method, researchers need to put the research questions into considerations. This is because research methods are used to achieve accurate and credible answers to the study questions of a scientific inquiry (Kraleva, 2011). The methods presented within this paper are justified in line with their appropriateness in meeting the research questions of the proposed study. Kumar (2005) insists that researchers must select research methods and designs, which are most appropriate or suitable in answering the research questions of their studies. If the research questions are not put in mind, in the process of selecting research methods, researchers would fail to meet the purpose of their study. Practical considerations were also highly important in the selection of a research methodology of the proposed study. Researchers must consider whether they have access to specific resources, such as financing, which would allow them execute the study successfully (Myers, 2011). Therefore the resources available to a researcher may limit the type of research methods that are used in the study. The sources of information and their availability were also put into consideration in the process of selecting the specific type of research methods, which are considered to be more suitable for the proposed study. For example, both secondary and primary sources of data or information must be evaluated in order to determine their availability or accessibility (Kraleva, 2011). The availability of resources, such as skills and abilities of the people who undertake the study would also influence the type of research methods that are used in scientific inquiry. A researcher must consider whether the research assistants are competent enough to apply specific research methods. More importantly, the subject under study must be put in mind when determining the kind of research methods that are suitable for a specific study. This is due to the fact that different fields of study appropriately employ specific research designs or methods (Kothari, 2005). Facts and Theory In research, facts refer to the things or events whose existence or occurrence has been proved. Normally, facts are drawn from the experiences of study participants. However, the observation of the researcher can also lead to the gathering of specific facts about the topic under inquiry. Facts are advantageous in research because they represent credible information or data, which is effectively used to make accurate inferences about the topic (Kraleva, 2011). Factual information also allows a researcher to prove a specific hypothesis or theory. However, it may be difficult to differentiate between factual and non-factual information, especially when gathering data from respondents who are considered to be biased (Myers, 2011). Theory describes an idea or a group of ideas, which are used to provide explanations for happenings or occurrences. Theory is often not factual. This means that a theoretical explanation may be based on the opinions and views of the people being interviewed. Theory also refers to suggested possibilities which need to be proven or authenticated. Theories are commonly based on beliefs and general principles. Theories would be useful in gaining a deeper understanding of the topic of the proposed study. However, theoretical information may not be credible or reliable in making conclusions during a study (Myers, 2011). Concepts and Variables In scientific inquiry, a concept describes the overall idea, which motivates a researcher to conduct research in a specific area. Research concepts are often derived from specific occurrences, experiences or instances. The thoughts and notions of the researcher when drafting a research topic, purpose and questions are referred to as research concepts (Kraleva, 2011). A research concept is important for a successful research because it allows the researcher to come up with an effective plan on the execution of the research. Research concepts may also be derived from past researches. It is through a research concept that a researcher begins to gather information in order to determine the various aspects related to the concept. However, some research concepts may not be relevant or useful in solving pressing problems within the society. Within a research, variables represent instances or situations which vary or change. Variables are therefore inconstant. Research variables are important in a study because they help the researcher to formulate a hypothesis for the study. Research variables of the proposed study include both independent and dependent variables. Independent variables are those whose values are manipulated in the process of determining their effect on other variables. Health care policies and standards are examples of independent variables in the proposed study. These variables are also referred to as experimental variables. Dependent variables on the other hand are those which are affected by independent variables. Cost and quality of care are the dependent variables within the proposed study. Theoretical Perspective A theoretical perspective was used in studying the impact of cost on the quality of health care, which is provided to inmates. In research, a theoretical perspective describes a group of assumptions on real life situations, which motivate the questions researchers ask when conducting a study (Kumar, 2005). Therefore, the theoretical perspective determines the kind of responses, which are reached as a result of a scientific inquiry. In the study, theoretical perspectives on health care within prisons, the associated quality and costs were used to design the research questions and purpose. It is through these theoretical perspectives that the study would be able to determine the correlation between cost and the quality of care that inmates are accorded. Theoretical perspectives often stem from the assumptions of theorists on social systems and institutions (Kraleva, 2011). For instance, the theoretical perspectives of the proposed study are based on the assumption that cost and quality of inmate care are intertwined or interrelated. These theoretical perspectives are based on theories on the differences between care processes in health care systems within and those outside penitentiaries. Theoretical perspectives are advantageous for a study because they provide the frameworks upon which interpretations on observations are based (Kothari, 2005). Validity and Reliability Validity of a research describes the extent to which research concepts, data, methods and inferences correspond to the actual world of the topic being investigated. Validity is achieved when the measuring tools of a study are strong (Myers, 2011). In studying the impact of cost on the quality of care in prisons, the main focus would be to achieve construct validity. Construct validity describes the extent to which a scientific test measures and determines what it purports (Gupta, 1993). Construct validity is advantageous over content and criterion validity because it subsumes these two types of validity (Kraleva, 2011). This implies that it is through construct validity that the overall validity of a scientific inquiry can be determined. Through construct validity, the methods of the study will evaluated in terms of their appropriateness in measuring what the research purports to investigate. Reliability refers to the extent to which research assessment tools are able to produce consistent or stable results (Kumar, 2005). The inquiry into the impact of cost on the quality of health care within prisons will be aimed at collecting reliable data, which would accurately and objectively answer all the research questions. The study will focus at attaining measurement reliability. Therefore the study will focus at ensuring that the data collection and analysis methods would come up with data and information, which would solve possible problems in the quality of care within prisons. The data measurement tools will therefore be evaluated for practicality, accuracy and relevancy to the topic, so that the research data would relied upon by stakeholders within the health sector. The measurement validity is however disadvantageous because it may not overcome the pitfalls of specific study methods and designs, even if they are considered more appropriate for a specific study (Gupta, 1993). Justification of Quantitative Research Quantitative research method is justified for the proposed study because the advantages of this method supersede its disadvantages. Since quantitative research is driven by statistics, it is likely to provide adequate data on the costs associated with health care within prisons. This method is also justifiable for the study because it is the most effective approach through which statistical data can be compiled and presented in form of graphs and charts (Kothari, 2005). Therefore, quantitative research will result in an increased ease of interpretation of the research data. Quantitative research is also justified because unlike other methods, it allows a researcher to evaluate both the dependent and independent variables with increased detail (Kumar, 2005). Though the quantitative research, the study will be more precise. This means that this research method will ensure that the collected data is reliable and conclusions are valid. Quantitative research is suitable in achieving accurate tests for research hypotheses (Myers, 2011). The data gathering processes are easier in quantitative research than qualitative approach. Therefore, a researcher would engage research assistants to conduct quantitative research, without much need for special training. The ease of data collection in quantitative research is also an incentive, which would motivate the participation of research subjects in the study. More results also emanate from quantitative research. This means that this type of research is justifiable for the proposed study because it would result in more comprehensive findings. In return, several recommendations will be presented to the stakeholders within the health care system, for improved quality of care in prisons. Quantitative research is however disadvantageous because it more costly when compared to the non-statistical research approaches (Gupta, 1993). The high costs associated with quantitative research are attributed with the data collection tools, processes and analysis. For instance, quantitative data requires statistical applications or packages in the data analysis process. This also implies that specific skills are required in order for this method of research to be effective. Furthermore, statistics on a specific area of study change often. Therefore, the proposed research may not be able to come up with current data associated to health care processes within penitentiaries, such as cost and quality. It is apparent that quantitative research requires frequent inquiries. This is because statistical research data may not be useful or valid for a long period of time. Justification of Qualitative Research Qualitative research will also be employed in the proposed study. The quantitative research approach is justified because of its benefits. The relevance of the qualitative research also makes it appropriate for the proposed study. The information gathered through qualitative research is more in-depth as compared to the quantitative research approach (Panneerselvam, 2004). This reveals that it is through qualitative research that more comprehensive information would be gathered and used to determine the correlation between cost and the quality of the heath care, which is provided to inmates. The qualitative research approach employs subjective information in gaining an understanding on the study topic (Mitchell & Jolley, 2010). It is therefore through qualitative research that the observations of inmates on the quality of care given to them can be determined. This approach is justifiable because it would help the researcher to describe cost and quality of care within the context of state penitentiaries. Qualitative research is also argued to be more effective than quantitative research in gathering information from natural settings (Kumar, 2005). Through this approach, the researcher will be able to make observations within natural settings, such as the expressions and attitudes of prisoners towards the quality of the health care that they receive. Qualitative research is also justified because it allows researchers to effectively describe the variables that are being considered in the study (Kothari, 2005). It is therefore through this approach that the variables associated with cost and quality of health care would be described and related to the care, which prisoners receive. More specifically, the interaction of the factors which affect cost of care in prisons and the associated quality of care would be described more effectively through qualitative research. A wide understanding of a situation under investigation is achieved through qualitative research (Creswell, 2009). This method is therefore justified because of its role in achieving a wide understanding of all factors and variables which come into play within the health care systems and processes of state prisons. The fact that qualitative research is more subjective than quantitative research data, it is difficult to establish the level of reliability qualitative data (Panneerselvam, 2004). Therefore the application of the research data and recommendations may not solve the problem that is being investigated. Additionally, it is difficult to determine the validity of the data which is gathered through the qualitative research approach (Gupta, 1993). This is associated with the reality that the study subjects of a qualitative data may be biased in providing research information. For instance, the bad attitudes of some prisoners towards various systems may cause them to provide biased information on the health care system. Researcher induced prejudice may also be experienced during qualitative research (Myers, 2011). This kind of bias is often hard to detect. For instance, the researcher may influence respondents in the process of providing responses to interview questions. The proposed study will however focus at utilizing the benefits of qualitative research and limit its pitfalls. This is necessary in achieving more reliable non-statistical data and information for analysis and discussion. Mixed Research Mixed research described a type of research methodology which combines both the qualitative and quantitative approaches. Since the proposed study will employ qualitative as well as quantitative research methods, it is therefore conclusive that a mixed research method is preferred for achieving comprehensive, accurate, valid and reliable answers to the research questions. A mixed method is preferred for the study because it would expand the scope of the research, to an extent that a single method or approach would not reach or achieve (Mitchell & Jolley, 2010). This means that it is through the mixed approach that more data would be gathered and therefore used to achieve an in-depth understanding on how cost impacts the quality of health care that is given to inmates. It is the combination of observation and statistical data which makes the mixed method of research more comprehensive (Creswell, 2009). Through a mixed approach, more hypotheses can be developed for future or further inquiry into a topic being investigated (Panneerselvam, 2004). Therefore, the comprehensiveness of the mixed research method will influence future debates and studies on health care in prisons, and the associated aspects, such as quality and cost. A variety of answers are achieved when a mixed research method is employed within a scientific investigation (Gupta, 1993). It is therefore apparent that through the mixed method, all the research questions will be answered. The bias which may result from qualitative research is often minimized trough the mixed research method (Myers, 2011). The statistical data, which is obtained in mixed research, is used to authenticate non-quantifiable data, and therefore achieving more objective conclusions. Employing both quantitative and qualitative approaches within the mixed research paradigm would however be very expensive (Kumar, 2005). A large number of data collection and analysis tools are used in implementing a mixed research methodology, and therefore resulting into added costs. Additionally, mixed research is more time consuming as compared to employing a single research approach (Kothari, 2005). This is related to the extensive nature of mixed research. Finding a researcher and research assistants who have knowledge and skills in both the qualitative and quantitative approaches of research is difficult (Mitchell & Jolley, 2010). The abilities or skills of a researcher would therefore limit the applicability of mixed research. Conflicting findings may also emanate from mixed research (Creswell, 2009). Since there is no specific approach for dealing with conflicting research data, a mixed methodology may be problematic in scientific inquiry. Ethical Considerations Conducting research within prisons often results in ethical concerns. Therefore the proposed study will look at the ethical issues which are likely to emanate from the investigation, and therefore lay effective measures in overcoming ethical misdemeanors during the research process. Ethical requirements are necessary in research processes that involve human subjects, so that their rights are protected and preserved. Correctional facilities are currently characterized by the problem of overcrowding. In return, disadvantaged or vulnerable populations, such as women, racial minorities and the terminally and mentally ill, are among those under correctional supervision. This means that the rights of prisoners would be violated in the process of recruiting them to the study, especially when correctional officers are involved. The ethics of research provide that the participation of human subjects in a study should be voluntary (Panneerselvam, 2004). Participants also have the right of withdrawing from a study whenever they consider appropriate. The ethical concerns, which may emanate from the recruitment of prisoners into the study, will be overcome through engaging correctional officers in ethical processes of recruitment and supervision of the research processes. There are specific restrictions of autonomy and liberty, which face inmates. For instance, the privacy of inmates may be limited. This may result in ethical concerns on the privacy of the information of participating inmates on the quality of care that they receive in prisons. The research will therefore seek to achieve anonymity among prisoners so that they would be encouraged to provide objective and credible information about health care within prisons. The private information of the research subjects who will provide specific information will not be disclosed during the research. The risks associated with the study will be minimized so that they would be encouraged to participate in the study. Lack of proper oversight may cause ethical concerns during the research process. Therefore the adherence of correctional officers to the rights of the study subjects would be monitored through directions from the researcher. Research Designs Non-experimental research designs are those which do not involve comparison groups (Creswell, 2009). These designs are used to evaluate a specific program or system without a control group for comparison. Therefore designs often employ time and series measurements rather than comparisons. Non-experimental designs are advantageous because of their effectiveness in determining and assessing the experiences of study subjects. This means that non-experimental designs are suitable in determining the experiences of inmates on health care provision within prisons. Their experiences on the quality of care would be used to correlate findings with the associated costs. When compared to quasi and experimental designs, non-experimental designs are easy to execute or implement. Therefore they are less costly. However the timing of the study and research measurements influence the soundness or effectiveness of non-experimental study designs (Mitchell & Jolley, 2010). For instance, situations may change automatically over time, and mistakenly attributed to the study. Quasi-experimental designs are similar to non-experimental designs because they also do not involve a control group in the measurement process (Creswell, 2009). Quasi-experimental designs are appropriate in estimating cause and impact of a specific phenomenon. Quasi-experimental designs are therefore suitable in determining the impact of cost impacts on the quality of health care within prisons. Like non-experimental designs, quasi-experiments are easier to implement or execute than experimental designs (Mitchell & Jolley, 2010). In this sense, they are also less costly when compared to actual experiments. However, challenges associated with achieving internal validity, during the study, are experienced in quasi-experimental designs. Experimental study designs describe those researches which allocate participants different groups or conditions (Panneerselvam, 2004). Unlike quasi or non-experimental designs, experimental designs divides study subjects into a control group and an experimental group. In experimental studies, a change is presented to the experiential group but not the control group. Experimental designs are advantageous over quasi and non-experimental designs because they allow participants to take part in only a single condition. Therefore fatigue and boredom is not likely to be experienced by subjects within an experimental design. An experimental study design is likely to be appropriate for the proposed study. This is because of the study involves two main groups. These are inmates and non-inmates. The inmates can be used as the experimental group, while the non-inmates used as the control. In this sense, the quality of health care within prisons would be compared with other health care institutions, and therefore linked to the associated costs. References Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Los Angeles: Sage. Gupta, S. (1993). Research Methodology and Statistical Techniques. New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications. Kothari, C. R. (2005). Research Methodology: Methods & Techniques. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd. Kraleva, N. (2011). Methodology of Scientific Research by Zoran Ivanovic. UTMS Journal of Economics, 2(1), 109-111 Kumar, R. (2005). Research Methodology: A Step-By-Step Guide for Beginners. London: Sage. Mitchell, M. L., & Jolley, J. M. (2010). Research Design Explained. Australia: Wadsworth. Myers, G. T. (2011). Research Methodology by Numbers - A Teaching Tool. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 9(1), 66-77 Panneerselvam, R. (2004). Research Methodology. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Read More